DBS' $2 Bombshell: Hey VNG, Plese read again carefully .
-
If you have the urge to blame it on ... or the Chairman of DBS, or the Government or its ministers, please don't? Why? Think again.
Why not blame it on the one unfortunate defect of the system, the "greed" in the financial sector?
The people in the financial sector have been having it far too easy and good for far too long because of the somewhat "monopoly" condition provided by the system? They know only that "little" adds up to "a lot"? They don't need to know about the goodwill and loyalty of their customers who have made it possible for them to make easy money, they don't have to fight for customers, they always seem to think they are doing their customers a favour, not the other way round, most probably because they have yet to learn about competition and the necessity and importance of the goodwill and loyalty of their customers? Whoever learn that fast will be the winners in the future!
There are good benefits to monopoly and there are bad side effects of monopoly. The one bad side effect of monopoly is: the people have become weaklings and don't seem to be able to manage properly and consumers have to pay unduly heavy prices. That is what is all about the anti-trust law case that is now going on in that most powerful country in the world. Some have said anti-monopoly will inhibit innovation and progress but the opposite may well be the stark reality. Nearer home just look at the one fine example of how strong SIA is. She has had to work real hard in the world market and has succeeded quite well. Singtel, whether Siing and Tell, has woken up to the fierce competition that lies ahead. Just look at the benefits of competition so far. I also believe that Singtel will also succeed provided she works extra hard to ensure that she has the right people
doing the right thing at the right time and a proper philosphy and mission. She already has the organisation and history. The bottomline is "people"! SIA has succeeded, there is no reason why Singtel cannot succeed whatever that wise old man had said recently. I have a lot of admiration and respect for that man particularly his guts to speak up
his mind but he had gone a bit too far off steps this time I believe; he had just shot himself at the foot so to speak but most probably hasn't realised it, at least not just yet I think? And there shouldn't be pessimism following Singtel's setback on the two recent attempted acquisitions. What Singtel needs are good products, good products and good products. And well-trained staff, good intelligent policies and procedures and good caring services. Singtel should not be afraid to take risks, of course well thought through calculated risks, to spend money to make money. At the first news of Singtel's
attempt at HKT my immediate reaction was that Singtel most probably would not be able to get it judging from the character of the Hongkongers and furthermore Telco and Dotcom are important issue involving national politics. At the news of the Malaysian attempt, my
reaction was "why waste time" but I could well understand why Singtel did it.
Fortunately, not all is lost; globalisation, liberalisation and competition will take good care of it. There is always a time and space for everything! But at the same time it is also important not to throw away the baby with the water!
What DBS has done is not so wrong entirely imho, as most if not all the other financial organisations have been doing it all along in Singapore only with even much higher and higher charges.
And it seems to me there has been an on-going cycle. They will spend tons of money, time and effort to get new accounts, never mind big or small, and soon thereafter they will start to spend more money, time and effort again, to get rid of the "small accounts" on all sorts of excuses of costs etc. But have they defined or how they defined costs
in this IT age? I've often wondered what if they have just saved those somewhat heavy expenditure of their on-going cycle to get new accounts and then impose higher and higher charges to get rid of the "small" accounts soon thereafter ...? ??
What's not so right in this DBS case I believe is that this is a very different situation. This involves the "Peoples' Bank" as some have called POSB. DBS' main fault I believe, is that what she might have forgotten or not bothered is that there was a trememdous outcry not so very long ago on the sudden take-over of POSB by DBS and what she had promised the people at the time. Why impose this small charge so soon
before the words even get cold ...? Why couldn't she think of sacrificing this small amount in order to repair the ill-feeling brought about by the take-over? Or why can't she wait for another few years? After all POSB have so far given DBS quite a big nice timely additional profit in this difficult period... no? And POSB had never imposed this charge but was quite successful. Why?
This unfortunate incident will take a long time for DBS to rebuild their reputation which is so important now in this difficult and highly competitive world environment imho. She could have avoided this painful episode! Don't just think of big big accounts, think also of the small small accounts. Think what will happen if her two or three biggest accounts get into trouble if she doesn't have many many small accounts. Think of the many many small accounts from POSB. Small is beautiful in a way! And number and unity are strength!
But don't worry too much lah. Damaging loud noise and bad publicity can be turned into good A&P. I may be wrong but I have strong belief they will find an amicable solution to the issue. This is how Singapore has survived all these years. Find a good solution to a
problem quick and move on. CPF is not the solution, otherwise there will be another outcry and another headache and more problems and may backfire again. But don't be surprised of a surprised amicable solution. And don't come back and tell me to wait long long. Just wait and see, be patient.
Have a pleasant vng day,
Aldragon.11 -
The people in the financial sector have been having it far too easy and good for far too long because of the somewhat "monopoly" condition provided by the system? They know only that "little" adds up to "a lot"? They don't need to know about the goodwill and loyalty of their customers who have made it possible for them to make easy money, they don't have to fight for customers, they always seem to think they are doing their customers a favour, not the other way round
Regarding this, it is the main objective of all business entity to make profits. Of coz no one will mind to have more money. It is the duty of those ppl to think of ways to make more money out of their already huge supernormal profits. -
It is not true that they do not fight to maintain loyalty customers (savers). They had already done so in the past and had indeed formed a bond between the public and themself. This evident can be found by responds of the general public who cried out that POSBank is no longer the people's bank
Since they had already instill this loyalty into people's mind, don u think that it is time for them to strike while the iron is hot?
Hence, this is the time for them to impose this charge. If you were a businessman facing such circumstances, would you do likewise? -
I tnk many of us made a fuss bcoz we are directly affected. Those who gave reasons as to defend the poor is probably using it as an added argument to support their stand. Of coz there are some who are truely concern abt the impact on the poor and indeed this is a case which the GOV should look into.
As for myself, i might seems to support DBS move. But the fact is, i am also a victim. But just put yourself and think in a different perspective and you would understand the logic behind such a policy and what had caused it to be initiated.
--------------
Don't worry, be happy~!