Multi-response vessel #10
The BRP Cape Engaño, the last of 10 multi-role response vessel (MRRV) to be turned over by the Japanese government to the Philippines, arrives at Pier 13 in Manila on Aug. 20.
The BRP Cape Engaño, the last of 10 multi-role response vessel (MRRV) to be turned over by the Japanese government to the Philippines, arrives at Pier 13 in Manila on Aug. 20.
A PARCEL containing P25 million worth of the party drug ecstasy was seized at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) on Aug. 17, and the claimant was nabbed upon pick-up of the package. Bureau of Customs-Port of NAIA officers identified the claimant as Joan Loteia Reynoso, 42, a resident of Cavite City. The parcel from France was consigned to James Stanly and was sent by a certain Robeto Stanly. The 14,720 pieces of ecstasy were concealed inside the central processing unit of a desktop computer, which arrived at the Central Mail Exchange Center in Pasay City on Aug. 4. The illegal drugs and the claimant will be subjected to legal proceedings and will be turned over to the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency for further investigation.
A statue of Benigno Simeon “Ninoy” Aquino Jr., who was assassinated at the Manila airport now named after him 35 years ago today, was unveiled on yesterday at the Heroes Park in San Fernando, Pampanga. The unveiling ceremony was led by Senator Paolo Benigno A. Aquino IV, his nephew. The late Aquino’s murder prompted a series of events that eventually led to the end of the Marcos martial law era.
BUSINESSMAN PETER Go Lim was not at his known residence in Cebu City when officers of the Mabolo police station and the police Criminal Investigation Branch served the warrant for his arrest yesterday, Aug. 20. CIB Deputy Chief Henrix P. Bancoleta said they will continue to monitor the house as well as other places registered to Mr. Lim, who is facing charges for his alleged involvement in the illegal drug trade. The arrest warrant was issued by the Regional Trial Court Branch 65, Makati City on Aug. 14. — Reports from The Freeman
THE CONTROVERSIAL P18-billion integrated resorts and casino project on Kawit Island will break ground on Aug. 25, Cebu City Executive Assistant to the Mayor Francisco “Bimbo” L. Fernandez said in an interview with the media yesterday. The project will be undertaken by the Gokongwei-led Universal Hotels and Resorts, Inc., (UHRI), which signed a Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) with the city government last Aug. 17. Opposition city council members have filed a case seeking to void the resolution authorizing Cebu City Mayor Tomas R. Osmeña to enter into a JVA with UHRI as well as a temporary restraining order on the project. — The Freeman
>> See related story on https://goo.gl/EYSS7u

THE DAVAO City government is looking at more partnerships with Israeli non-government organizations and other groups after last week’s signing for an education project that will provide capacity-building training to local teachers. Mayor Sara Z. Duterte-Carpio on Sunday said she has been discussing with both government and private representatives of Israel on what other sectors they can initiate cooperation. Initially, she said, “they (Israeli groups) would assist us in coming up with the green building for the city hall.” The city government has been planning to build a new structure beside the existing one. — Carmelito Q. Francisco
News stories from across the nation. Visit www.bworldonline.com (section: The Nation) to read more national and regional news from the Philippines.
Under the GOCC Governance Act, the corporate governance standards for directors/trustees and officers of GOCCs have by expressed statutory imprimatur far exceeded those for the directors/trustees and officers in PHCs under the Corporation Code, the Securities Regulations Code, and the SEC Code of Corporate Governance, as follows:
(a) Where the Corporation Code and the SEC Code of Corporate Governance provide for the “duty of diligence” the standard of “due diligence” and would make directors and officers liable only for “gross negligence,” “malice” or “bad faith,” in turn R.A. 10149 imposes on Directors and Officers of GOCCs the duty to act “with extraordinary diligence,” and with “utmost good faith,” as to amount to “[s]uch degree of diligence requires using the utmost diligence of [a] very cautious person with due regard for all circumstances.”
(b) Where the Corporation Code and the SEC Code of Corporate Governance imposes merely a duty of loyalty on directors and officers, R.A. 10149 in addition characterizes the position of Directors and Officers to be “fiduciaries of the State” in the conduct of the business of the GOCC and declares them as “trustees” with respect to the properties, interests and monies of the GOCC.
(c) Where the Corporation Code and the SEC Code of Corporate Governance merely locates within the “business judgment rule” the power of the Board to appoint corporate officers, R.A. 10149 makes it an integral part of the corporate governance principle for GOCC Governing Boards to be bound by the principle of “command responsibility” for the skills, qualifications and actuations of the Officers and Management of the GOCC.
(d) Where in the private sector the violation of the fiduciary duty of loyalty subjects the culprit director or officer to the civil liability of disgorgement or remitting to the company the profits or property that may have been the object of the breach of duty, in the GOCC Sector, R.A. 10149 in addition makes it a criminal offense for a Director or Officer to fail to make restitution of properties or monies belonging to the GOCC pursuant to a final COA finding.
If corporate governance principles, and fiduciary duties and obligations are highest in the public corporate sector when compared to the private corporate sector, then why is there a public perception that corporate governance practice is much higher in the private sector? Why are directors, trustees, officers and even employees in the public corporate sector not scared to death of committing corporate wrongs?
Perhaps it is because it is a matter of perception, when public officials violate their fiduciary duties, the public is the offended party and they take offense; whereas, in the private sector, it is generally a private wrong that affects a limited number of people. More so, in the private sector such mal-governance provides a private relief of making the culprits civilly liable; whereas, the same act in the public corporate sector would be sensationally a criminal offense that comes under the generally notorious norms of “graft and corruption.”
But going into the substance of the matter, rather than perception, in addition to the avarice of humans as the main culprit (which equally applies anyway in both the public and private sectors), I offer the following reason on why in spite of the high standards of corporate governance in the public corporate sector, there is a propensity to governance malpractice, which I refer to as “Theory of Absence of Direct Proprietary Interest,” which I described in a published work as follows:
“One of the reasons that may be given for such seeming irony is that unlike in the private sector where the main stakeholders are the stockholders who, by reason of certain selfish motives to have the best return for their investments, really monitor the performance of the Board and Management (through the function of the stock market and profit results), corporate governance tends to be more disciplined. In others, it is in consonance with the old adage, that the market is by its very nature an unforgiving and disciplining force. Likewise, as the saying goes, nobody can better protect a property other than the owner himself.
“On the other hand, when it comes to the public sector in general, and the GCs in particular, the direct owner would be the Republic, a juridical entity — a medium, nay a mere concept — which on its own has no power to demand accounting; it operates through its agents, which in the world of GCs would be the public officers who serve as members of the Board and Management — hence, you have a high “agency cost.” This agency cost in GCs is highest in the form of outright graft, or by abuse of the remuneration mechanism provided for GC Boards and Management, because technically speaking, members of the GC Board and Management occupy two hats when they perform their public corporate governance functions: they are agents of the Republic which they represent, but at the same time they know that the Republic merely represents the citizenry, and that members of the GC Boards and Management, are also members of the citizenry. Human nature as it is, given the reins of power in a conflict-of-interest situation, then members of the GC Boards and Management often decide, and exercise their business judgment, serving themselves first as members of the public.
“This perverse way of looking at things, comes in the form of many justifications heard through the media when public officers have been caught with their hands in the cookie jar:
‘There is no such thing as ‘stealing from the government,’ since I cannot be guilty of stealing from myself!’
— or —
‘Since government resources are intended for the public, then members of the public have the right to partake of it, but we must take turns in doing so in an orderly fashion (i.e., it is our turn now because we won the elections).’
“This is certainly not to say that every citizen in public office is of the same mold — for indeed many public officers serve and live heroic public and private lives in consonance with the constitutional precept that “Public office is a public trust.” But the reason why there seems to be so much abuse of governance power in GCs seems to emanate from the situation where appointment to the GC Board and/or Management is based on political considerations; and that there is no real sense of the appointees being accountable to the Owner (the Republic) of the GC, when many of the very representatives of the people — the highest officials in the Government — partake for themselves of the largesse of the public coffers in various forms of justifications, such as “pork barrel funds,” “intelligence funds,” and so on. Ultimately, nobody in authority is left to demand responsibility in the public sector.”
It is ironical therefore to this observer that it is precisely the doctrine of maximization of shareholders’ value that has kept corporate governance at its highest adherence in the private corporate sector.
(The article reflects the personal opinion of the author and does not reflect the official stand of the Management Association of the Philippines or the MAP)
Cesar L. Villanueva is the Vice Chair of the Corporate Governance Committee of the Management Association of the Philippines (MAP), the Founding Partner of the Villanueva Gabionza & Dy Law Offices, and the former Chair of the Governance Commission for GOCCs.
cvillanueva@vgslaw.com
map@map.org.ph
http://map.org.ph
When Social Welfare Secretary Judy Taguiwalo sent to Congress a position paper opposing an administration proposal to lower the minimum age of criminal liability, Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez said that Cabinet members who do not agree with the President’s policies or directives must resign. He said, “I just reminded the secretaries that they are the alter ego of the President. Now, if they don’t agree with the President, they might as well tender their resignation. Because as Cabinet secretaries, you cannot contradict the views of the President,”
When Finance Secretary Carlos Dominguez and NEDA Director-General Ernesto Pernia told the Senate that a shift to federalism could wreak havoc on the Philippine economy, Consultative Committee member Fr. Ranhilio Aquino said, “[I]f [Duterte] favors federalism let him sack Dominguez and Pernia or command them to keep their traps shut. Freedom of expression does not apply to Cabinet officials in respect to policy.”
Ms. Taguiwalo chose to disregard Mr. Alvarez’s opinion and Mr. Dominguez got back at Fr. Aquino by stating that “such attitude would not enrich the level of discourse on the proposed Constitution.” None of the three Cabinet secretaries would be a toady of the President. They considered it their duty to always give the President their best advice, especially if he has an opposite view, bearing in mind that their loyalty to the President matters less and their responsibility to country counts even more. After all, they were not placed in their high-ranking positions because of their personal relationship with the President.
While Mr. Dominguez is both a townmate and former classmate of Mr. Duterte, Ms. Taguiwalo and Mr. Pernia were not known personally by the President when they were appointed department secretaries. All three were chosen for their respective positions because of their expertise in their areas of responsibility, expertise gained through intensive training and extensive experience.
Ms. Taguiwalo eventually lost her Cabinet position because she clung to her beliefs. Will Messrs. Dominguez and Pernia cling to their beliefs or will they cling to their positions by changing their stand on federalism?
There is a Chinese idiom, “Ride a tiger,” which means that once one finds himself in a dangerous situation, getting out of it can be detrimental to his career or aspirations, even threatening to his life. It comes from the phrase “he who rides the tiger is afraid to dismount or finds it hard to get off it.”
There were those who, in the mistaken belief they would retain their influence, chose to ride the tiger by hanging on to President Joseph Estrada even when his extensive involvement in illegal gambling had been exposed. History branded them the Craven Eleven, most of them suffering the end of their political life when Erap was chased out of Malacañang. In contrast were the Hyatt 10, the intrepid men and women who broke away from Gloria Arroyo when her attempt to influence the results of the 2004 presidential election was exposed. They retained the respect of the people.
There are many individuals in the Duterte Cabinet who serve at the pleasure of the President, having been appointed to their positions simply because they were classmates, dormmates, provincemates, or whatever. Either they openly hail the President’s policies and programs or hold their peace, as Mr. Alvarez and Fr. Aquino suggest, to remain in the Cabinet. They go along with the President lest they draw the wrath of a man with the reputation of a cold-blooded punisher. In the words of President John F. Kennedy, “those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.”
In his third State of the Nation Address, President Duterte admitted that it was hard for him to let go of his friends. He said he values friendship but it also has limits. “I have friends and political supporters whom I appointed to public office and then dismissed or caused to resign.” But the President said that in reference to his friends who have been tainted with corruption.
However, he also called on his friends to help him in his cause to maintain their friendships.”This is a lonely place I am hemmed in. Do not make it lonelier by forcing me to end our friendship because you gave me the reason to end it. It pains me to end the loss of friendships,” he said. Does contradicting the views of President Duterte or opposing him in respect to policy also give him reason to end his friendship with the dissenting official?
It would cause the President no pain if he eases out of government chief economic manager Pernia but it would inflict intense pain if Mr. Duterte ends his lifelong friendship with Secretary Dominguez. But in order to spare President Duterte pain, Secretary Dominguez can resign. To spare himself the dishonor of being fired, Mr. Pernia can resign with Mr. Dominguez for reason of fundamental difference with the President. Executive Secretary Rafael Salas parted ways with President Ferdinand Marcos for the same reason. So did Assistant Defense Secretary Ruben Carranza with President Joseph Estrada and Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo with President Gloria Arroyo.
When the story on the Duterte presidency is written, I wonder if there would be a unit known as the Dissenting Duo in reference to the two economic managers who resigned from the Duterte Cabinet because they would not go along with the President’s cause.
Oscar P. Lagman, Jr. is a member of Manindigan!, a cause-oriented group of businessmen, professionals, and academics.
oplagman@yahoo.com
By Regine Ong
REBUILDING after disasters and wars can be a tricky business even for seasoned politicians. It can be a source of rents, but it can as easily erode trust among citizens and destroy political careers. When President Rodrigo Duterte promised to rebuild the war-torn city of Marawi in the southern Philippines, “or else he will forever be the bad guy,” he was surely aware of the enormous social and political costs of reneging on his commitment.
A year later and the reconstruction has yet to begin. The debris has not been cleared, and residents are still barred from returning to their homes. Worse, Duterte barely spoke of the war and the progress of the rehabilitation during his recent State of the Nation Address, though he checked other boxes on his priority list: the war on drugs, the signing the Bangsamoro Organic Law, and the establishment of the Coconuts Farmers’ Trust Fund. He neither spoke of any compensation for lives lost nor properties destroyed.
So, will the recovery of Marawi become another unfulfilled promise?
The rehabilitation of Marawi is not a simple process of rebuilding physical structures. The government needs to ensure that affected communities are resilient and that future conflict can be prevented. The recovery should simultaneously rebuild and address concerns like poverty, education, and the rebuilding of relationships. Actions that fall short will spell neither growth nor peace in Marawi.
The government’s Bangon Marawi Comprehensive Rehabilitation and Recovery Plan is one such limited exercise. The Task Force’s Post Conflict Needs Assessment talks of social resilience but is purely focused on rebuilding vital infrastructure, which they calculate will cost around P17.8 billion for damage to public and private infrastructures within the affected areas.
A cursory assessment shows that the numbers don’t add up, even if we only accounted for the rebuilding of physical structures. Residents in the 24 most affected barangays claim that their lots account for only 25 to 30 hectares. However, the Bangon Marawi Comprehensive Rehabilitation and Recovery Program reports that the most affected areas total 250 hectares, of which one square kilometer or 100 hectares was completely destroyed.
By using construction-based estimates, we find that the rebuilding costs on 100 hectares range from a conservative P16.6 billion to P29.2 billion. Adding the cost of utilities such as power, water, and sanitation, plus the other destroyed or damaged structures in the Greater Marawi Area will surely increase these costs.
There is no adequate explanation behind the government’s calculations, and further delays will make it more difficult to know the true cost of war. In the absence of a more detailed report, let’s try to approximate the costs by using average construction costs per square meter. The key is to ascertain the cost of building a similar structure, and not the prewar cost of the structures, depreciation and all. We then combine the ensuing construction estimates with an accounting of Maranao dwelling styles and local building practices.
For instance, most families typically reside in mixed-use buildings where the physical structure acts as both a commercial and residential space. This type of development requires a more stable foundation and costs more than a simple residential structure. Because of their multiple purposes, these buildings were typically two or more levels aboveground.
Let’s use a conservative estimate of only 60% of the buildings with two-stories to extrapolate the cost of damages. Since two-story buildings have bigger foundations, bigger columns, and suspended beams and slabs, they increase the basic cost of construction by about 10-15%. This along with its multi-functionality makes the calculations more complex because we cannot imply that the whole structure is solely residential or solely commercial. By adding a margin of 10-15% above the projected commercial cost, while accounting for the type of materials used for construction, we arrive at a reliably close range of cost estimates for rebuilding the destroyed part of the city.
In addition, the Maranao live in conglomerates of tightly connected structures, where buildings are directly connected or located very close to each other. Let’s assume that the gap between structures is negligible and compute the cost of rebuilding on the entire 100 hectares.
Our calculations show that 100 hectares of low-cost structures will cost from P16.6 to P16.9 billion. At mid-cost the estimated amount will range from P18.9 to P20.8 billion. Finally, the cost of building a strong, stable, and modern structure can reach up to P21.2 billion to P29.2 billion.
The figures above do not include the cost of repairs or rebuilding of roads and bridges destroyed or severely damaged by the war. The figures do not include the rebuilding of destroyed educational and health facilities. For example, the publicly available data from the Department of Public Works and Highways shows an additional cost of P155 million to P176 million only for bridge repairs. This increases our estimated cost to P16.8 billion to P29.3 billion.
To be sure, the government’s estimates are not widely off the mark. However, we should note that these figures totally ignored those areas severely damaged in the Greater Marawi Area. We included neither large structures like hospitals and mosques nor foregone income resulting from destroyed businesses.
Recognizing the magnitude of conflict requires an honest and empirical estimate of the true costs of war. The State must be realistic, responsible, and credible in its rebuilding plans and estimates. It cannot risk further delays in the reconstruction process or, worse, jeopardize the full restoration of the city.
One would hope, in a time of pain and suffering, that the government would quickly help those in need. But that is not what we see. Having their homes and businesses destroyed, their savings looted, and their livelihoods at risk, the victims of Marawi have received most of their aid from private agencies as they wait for the support the government had promised earlier.
A compensation bill proposed earlier this year promises financial compensation to enable the residents of Marawi to immediately recover from the damage and destruction of their property. Similar bills have been filed since then, but neither the President nor Congress has voiced support for it. Facilitating the compensation bill will manifest the government’s sincerity to rebuild the city of Marawi and lay to rest growing fears about a resurgence of violent extremism.
As a first step, the government should do better and allow transparency in its methodology and accounting of the real costs of war, reevaluate its cost assessments, and see through its promise of rebuilding back and better.
Regine Ong studies economics and mathematics at Wellesley College and is currently on an academic internship with International Alert Philippines. Her research interests include development economics, income inequality, and applied econometrics.
By Raju Mandhyan
THE other day at a business gathering someone asked me, “Raju, what, according to you, has changed in sales and selling over the decades?” Slightly offended by the inclusion of the word decades in the question I quickly brushed it aside by saying “nothing has changed” and moved on. Late at night, I lay wondering and thinking about my experiments and experiences in selling.
At my first honorary job with my father, which was to run errands and try selling for his small school-bag making business, I’d sell nothing at every interaction. I’d walk into his customer’s shops and stand against the wall; tongue-tied praying the shop-owner would leap out from behind his glass counter and beg me to send him school bags. That never happened. I sold zilch. Dad lost hair worrying about my future as a business person.
At my second job, after making it as an engineer, I was assigned to sales. Sales in the engineering company I worked for meant filling up a large wad of papers with numbers, descriptions and a covering letter called proposals. There were templates to follow, listed prices to tally up but there was barely any people to people interaction. The wheeling, dealing and the closing was done by those big-bellied guys called bosses.

At my third job selling futures in pork-bellies, orange juice, barley, copper and gold my then balikbayan boss Ricky Ho saw me suffer at selling and called me aside and said, “Hey Raju, recognize this, people sell for two reasons: one to get rid of something and two to make a profit. What do you want to do?” I owned nothing and thus nothing had to be gotten rid of, so I supposed I’d had to make a profit. After that epiphanous moment I learned to sell. The need to survive taught me how to make cold calls, how to qualify, analyze, integrate, pitch, offer, present, solve, offset objections, sooth, meander, negotiate, upsell, cross-sell, resell, negotiate, close, re-open, serve with maximum subtlety and suaveness.
Thus, decades ago, uh-oh, there is that word decades again. Decades ago, or before the turn of the century, selling meant, as Alec Baldwin screamed in the 1992 movie Glengarry Glen Ross (adapted from David Mamet’s Pulitzer drama), “Always Be Closing.” But as the previous century began to wind up entered the “internet of things,” and Alibaba, and explosions of access to all avenues of humongous information. The days of just selling to get rid of something or make a profit out of something began to slowly and steadily be replaced by terms like relationship selling, consultative selling, solution selling, ethical sales, selling to serve, selling to solve, selling to not just create value but to co-create value. Sales and selling had merged into resolving needs and serving customer desires. No, it really had moved beyond finding solutions and serving needs. The seller and the buyer had to tear down walls of privacy and secrets between themselves. It wasn’t just one against another but both, together, towards a faster, better and a cheaper world.
Individuals and companies that did not adapt to this reset got covered in cobwebs and then in white sheets. Rest in peace names like Kodak, IBM, Mattel, Tower Records, Sears, etc.
Yet there was a certain element of truth to my response to the question, “Raju, what, according to you, has changed in sales and selling over the decades?”
Yes, the sales environment has changed. Yes, the rules of the game in the marketplace are different. Yes, the tools of the trade are niftier and swifter. Yes, even the attitude has taken a turn and is still transforming for the better. What hasn’t changed is that every transaction whether it is to get rid of something, to make profit out of something or to serve a need and find mutually beneficial solutions, is that all of them require trust.
The oldest profession in the world requires a certain element of trust. The used car salesman, no matter how sleazy, requires to become worthy of trust. Ricky Ho, my former boss, needed to earn a lot of trust to sell bellies of pork upon which his big-time investor never laid eyes upon. The guy who sells Boeing airplanes to national airlines needs to acquire trust and so does every other sales and service professional who sits behind a monitor and hacks away at a keyboard to sell unseen products to unmet customers.
The why and the how of earning trust from one to another hasn’t changed and might never change till the end of time.
The prelude into earning trust is authenticity. Here, not just the salesperson but every person and every leader needs not just to have an attitude but believe and act out of a hutzpah made out of originality, honesty, openness, courage and vulnerability. A person with that kind of a hutzpah stands out because he stands up and steps in the right direction consistently. He now becomes trustworthy. To earn trust he needs to blend consistency with competence and compassion for the customer, for the stakeholders. Overtime such a leader becomes a champion at earning trust.
The obvious postlude to trust is that your people, your followers, your partners, customers gently and surely move in the right directions that you and they take together. That is influence.
In the coming decades and eons all that we see and hear as innovation may innovate further, but the backbone of all growth and positive change in sales or any service will always be authentic influence.
Raju Mandhyan is an author, coach, and trainer.
www.mandhyan.com
Unleashing Inherent Excellence!
http://twitter.com/RajuMandhyan
The prelude into earning trust is authenticity. Here, not just the salesperson but every person and every leader needs not just to have an attitude but believe and act out of a hutzpah made out of originality, honesty, openness, courage and vulnerability.
By Michael Angelo S. Murillo
Senior Reporter
THE Philippine Basketball Association-powered national team shoots for direct entry into the quarterfinals of the 18th Asian Games in its game today against China at the Gelora Bung Karno Basketball Hall in Jakarta, Indonesia.
Set for 5 p.m. (Manila time), the Philippines looks to build on its big 96-59 victory over Kazakhstan in their preliminary Group D match on Thursday to book its place in the next round.
Despite having limited time to prepare for the Games in the lead-up, the Yeng Guiao-coached squad of PBA players showed up well in its opener, leading from wire-to-wire to run away with the victory over Kazakhstan.
Guard Stanley Pringle of NorthPort Batang Pier was impressive on his 5-on-5 debut for the national team, finishing with 18 points to lead a balanced attack by the Philippines.
Christian Standhardinger finished with 15 points while James Yap and Paul Lee added 12 and 10 points, respectively.
For today’s game against China, the Philippines will welcome Filipino-American National Basketball Association player Jordan Clarkson of the Cleveland Cavaliers to the fold.
Got a last-minute approval from the NBA to play for the Philippines, Mr. Clarkson, who served as the flag-bearer of the country in the opening ceremonies on Saturday, is expected to soup up the Philippine basketball team against China, itself featuring NBA players in Houston Rockets center Zhou Qi and Dallas Mavericks forward Ding Yanyuhang.
Mr. Clarkson tried to make it to the Philippines’ game against Kazakhstan on Aug. 16 but arrived in Indonesia with the game about under way, postponing his debut to today.
He said he is excited to play with the Philippine team with its fast-paced style of play.
For Mr. Guiao, the arrival of Mr. Clarkson should provided added dimension to their team.
“I think we have a better chance against China with him [Clarkson] around. China is still the favorite but Clarkson with his skills can help in drawing the defense to him and freeing up opportunities for his teammates,” Mr. Guiao was quoted as saying during their preparation for today’s game against China.
In the event the Philippines wins today, it avoids an early encounter with the top team in Group A, which could be Korea, in the quarterfinals.
The Philippines-China match will be broadcast live over ESPN5.