Facebook Instagram Linkedin Twitter Youtube
Home Blog Page 12825

PLDT Enterprise partners with Cignal

PLDT, Inc. said its business unit PLDT Enterprise inked a partnership with sister company Cignal TV to deliver Pay TV content to commercial establishments.

In a statement, PLDT said it extended the Internet Protocol television (IPTV) service, which allows broadcast of Cignal TV programs via the Internet, using its broadband Fibr, and iGate, its dedicated Internet access service, to enterprise customers.

“This collaboration with Cignal TV truly enhances our significance as a partner for businesses not just to deliver fixed and wireless services, but to become a more valuable technology solutions provider. With this added service, we are able to deliver premium entertainment and other popular shows and programs in high definition or HD over Fibr to our enterprise customers,” said PLDT/Smart Chief Revenue Officer and EVP Ernesto R. Alberto said in a statement.

With the partnership, commercial establishments, hotels, resorts and hospitals can access Cignal TV channels through PLDT.

“This partnership between the Philippines’ premier Pay TV provider and the country’s largest home and enterprise network is not only good for the group’s enterprise client base, but is also a logical next step in bringing together unparalleled access and quality content to as many Filipinos as possible,” Jane J. Basas, CEO and president of Cignal TV was quoted as saying in a statement.

Cignal TV, a subscription-based direct-to-home satellite TV provider, is owned by Cignal TV, Inc., which is a wholly owned subsidiary of MediaQuest Holdings, Inc., a PLDT Beneficial Trust Fund subsidiary.

PLDT said it is already partnering with several upcoming hotels in Metro Manila to include IPTV solutions for their connectivity requirements.

Hastings Holdings, Inc., a unit of PLDT Beneficial Trust Fund subsidiary MediaQuest Holdings, Inc., has a stake in BusinessWorld through the Philippine Star Group, which it controls.

Energy dep’t stance on nuclear power due by year’s end

THE Department of Energy (DoE) has committed to come up with a national position on nuclear energy before the end of the year, an official of the agency said on Monday.

“It’s a national position not a national policy,” Energy Undersecretary Donato D. Marcos said in a press conference at the DoE headquarters on Monday.

He said the country’s stand would include whether the Bataan nuclear power plant is to be rehabilitated, or if not, an advice on the “best use” for the facility.

Mr. Marcos is the designated chairman of the DoE’s Nuclear Energy Program Implementing Office (Nepio), which was set up specifically to come up with the country’s policy on nuclear energy.

Nepio is also expected to come up with the department’s stand on whether to allow the building of a nuclear plant in the Philippines.

Mr. Marcos said the national position is a product of consultations with experts, including those coming from Russia and Slovenia, which made a preliminary assessment of the possibility and viability of rehabilitating the Bataan nuclear power plant.

Together with the Philippine Nuclear Research Institute and the National Power Corp., Mr. Marcos brought representatives from Russia’s Rosatom State Atomic Energy Corp. and Slovenia’s Gen Enerjia to the “nuclear village” in Bagac, Bataan. Australian energy engineering form WorleyParsons Ltd. also joined the inspection of the facility.

He has said that the activity will define the scope of work for the pre-feasibilty study of the possible rehabilitation of the nuclear plant.

The DoE said the feasibility study to be conducted by Rosatom is free of charge as part of the cooperation between the Philippines and Russia.

The Bataan plant’s construction began in 1976, but was stopped after the Three Mile Island accident in the US in 1979. — Victor V. Saulon

Mindanao-based Davao Aguilas FC holds successful youth football day with LA Galaxy’s Wes Meadows

MINDANAO-based Davao Aguilas Football Club (DAFC), along with LA Galaxy coaches Wes Meadows, Job Quevedo and Chris Howe, had their first Youth Football Day at McKinley Stadium, at Bonifacio Global City (BGC), last weekend.

Over 100 kids, with ages ranging from 8-16, got to participate in the free event hosted by Davao Aguilas FC. The kids represented various schools in Metro Manila such as Don Bosco Tech Institute Makati, Letran Manila, Paco Catholic School, PAREF Woodrose School, Saint Pedro Poveda College, San Beda College Alabang, East Rembo Elementary School, Global Leaders International School, St. Anthony School Manila and La Salle Greenhills.

The LA Galaxy coaches, along with Davao Aguilas FC coaches and players Marko Trkulja, Matthew Hartmann, Jordan Jarvis, Gerald Layumas, Princeton Josue, Stephen Burda, Kim Versales, Brad McDonald, Richard Talaroc and Andy Esswein, ran the said event.

Head Coach Marlon Maro, who is currently in Taiwan for the CTFA International Tournament, says, “It is a good start for Davao Aguilas FC to develop international cooperation with a big club like LA Galaxy. At the same time, helping Philippine football in the development of young footballers.”

Maro continues, “Events such as this one also showcases the technical capability of the club in finding future footballers in the country.”

LA Galaxy Coach Wes Meadows on the other hand says, “It has been great to partner up with Davao Aguilas, their staff, and players as well. Obviously for us, with 100 kids being here, we needed additional staff, and they have been very accommodating. It is great to work out and have this activity with a club here locally.”

As for the participants, Coach Meadows had this to say, “The kids have been great. And for us, LA Galaxy, we are fortunate to travel all over the world, and domestically, be able to see a lot of players. I think here in the Philippines, there’s a lot of potential here. Overall, we are certainly pleased with the level.”

Before arriving in Manila, the LA Galaxy coaches came from Korea, where they had tryouts for their second team for 10 days, before stopping in Guam for another youth football event there.

With the success of its first Youth Football Day, Davao Aguilas FC thus intends to hold similar events in other parts of the country in the near future.

Revisiting the fiduciary duties of the board of directors and management

Part III

Prior to the promulgation by the SEC of the original Code of Corporate Governance, corporate governance literature abounded with championing the “Maximization of Shareholders Value” against the “Stakeholders Theory” and “CSR,” on the primary grounds that: (a) to use corporate resources for certain segments of the public would be contrary to the fiduciary duties of the Board and Management to employ corporate assets for the benefit of stockholders who are clearly the legal beneficiaries of such relationship of trust; and (b) that both the latter doctrines did not provide a proper “equilibrium” upon which regulating agencies and the constituencies entitled to benefit could determine whether the Board and Management were properly complying with their fiduciary duties.

In 2000, the Securities Regulation Code (SRC) expanded the corporate governance regime in publicly held companies, as it began to expand the duties of transparency, responsibility and accountability beyond the realm of stockholders, but included the members of the public who held all forms of “securities” in such companies. The SRC also formally instituted the system of Independent Directors, who would be elected into the Boards of such companies essentially to represent public interests, exercising business judgment “independent” of directors who represented the controlling stockholders.

It would be imprudent to conclude that the SRC formally instituted the “Stakeholders Theory” in publicly held corporations, for indeed the standing of “constituencies” was expanded to include only creditors who held the debt-securities issued by said covered corporations. There is no mention under the SRC of owing duties of transparency, accountability or responsibility to stakeholders beyond the members of the public who held the equity and debt securities issued by said covered corporations.

Even independent directors, who in theory were meant to represent the public interests, were not formally mandated to represent the interest of stakeholders other than the stockholders and debt-security holders of the covered corporation. Moreover, aside from disclosure obligations required under the SRC, the duties and obligations of directors of publicly held corporations continued to be governed by the Corporation Code, which by its legal structure provides for the “Maximization of profits” as the primary duty of the Board and Management.

Chronologically, it was the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP), through the exercise of its quasi-legislative powers in 2001, that introduced formally the “Stakeholders Theory” to the Philippine banking industry when it promulgated a series of memorandum circulars beginning with BSP Memorandum Circular No. 283, s. 2001, where it provided that —

The position of a bank/quasi-bank/trust entity director is a position of trust. A director assumes certain responsibilities to different constituencies or stakeholders (e.g. the bank/quasi-bank/trust entity itself, its stockholders, its depositors and other creditors, its management and employees, and the public at large). These constituencies or stakeholders have the right to expect that the institution is being run in a prudent and sound manner.

It should be noted that the formal regulatory adoption of the “Stakeholders Theory” into the banking industry by BSP was preceded by jurisprudential development of the theory under the aegis of our Supreme Court, which held that the banking industry is vested with public interests, and that consequently the degree of diligence that must be exercised by the banks and their officers should be more than just the diligence of a prudent person but must be of the highest form of diligence (extraordinary diligence) and recognized that bank directors and officers owed a fiduciary duty of diligence not only to depositors (i.e., creditors), but in all their dealings with the public.

In other words, the formal introduction of the “Stakeholders Theory” into the banking industry by BSP operated within a regulatory framework that has already evolved through the various decisions of the Supreme Court already providing for the hierarchical resolution of the fiduciary duties of diligence that is owed by banking institutions to their various stakeholders, i.e., stockholders, depositors, borrowers and other members of the public that they deal with.

In 2002, the SEC formally adopted into the realm “publicly held companies” the “Stakeholders Theory” under the original Code of Corporate Governance, through:

• Formally defining “Corporate Governance” as “a system whereby shareholders, creditors and other stakeholders of a corporation ensure that management enhances the value of the corporation as it competes in an increasingly global marketplace.

• Granted legal “stakeholders” standing to creditors, employees, managers, and the community who are affected by the corporate enterprise, and thereby expands considerably the constituencies to whom the Board of Directors owe certain fiduciary obligations; and

• Expanded the objective of the Board of Directors from one of “maximization of profits,” itself an objective that can be gauged from a corporation’s financial statements, to “enhancing the value of the corporation” to make it more competitive in the long run, and best suited to protect the varied interests of all stakeholders.

It should be noted, however, that the original SEC Code on Corporate Governance failed to provide a “equilibrium formula” required by Boards in exercising their business judgment in situations where the conflicting interests of the stockholders and other stakeholders are to the properly addressed in the exercise of their business judgment. In fact, a close reading of the original CG Code gives an impression that the commercial success of the company was a central fiduciary responsibility owed by the Board primarily to the stockholders, and only the duty to inform how the company operations would affect other stakeholders was the primary duty owed by the Board to stakeholders other than the stockholders. To illustrate, under the original CG Code, the central obligation of the Board “to foster the long-term success of the corporation and secure its sustained competitiveness is a manner consistent with its fiduciary responsibility,” was to be exercise for “the best interest of the corporation and its shareholders,” without referring to other stakeholders. In fact, the original CG Code provided for a parallel, but separate communication policies between stockholders on one hand, and other stakeholders on the other, thus:

iv. Identify the corporation’s major and other stakeholders and formulate a clear policy on communicating or relating with them accurately, effectively and sufficiently. There must be an accounting rendered to them regularly in order to serve their legitimate interests.

Likewise, an investor relations program that reaches out to all shareholders and fully informs them of corporate activities should be developed. As a best practice, the chief financial officer or CEO should have oversight of this program and should actively participate in public activities.

When it came to the area of “Accountability and Audit,” the original CG Code limits their application to the stockholders, thus: “The Board is primarily accountable to the shareholders and Management is primarily accountable to the Board. The Board should provide the shareholders with a balanced and understandable assessment of the corporation’s performance, position and prospects on a quarterly basis. x x x ”

Indeed, the original CG Code reiterates and expands on the rights of stockholders as already provided for in the Corporation Code, in specific areas such as voting rights, preemptive right, power of inspection, right to information, right to dividends, appraisal right, etc., and does not define clearly what may be the rights of the other stakeholders that it has recognized in defining the term “corporate governance.” It did not provide for a listing of what rights stakeholders other than stockholders were entitled to demand from the Board and Management of publicly held companies in the exercise of their fiduciary duties.

The lack in SEC’s original Code of Corporate Governance (SEC Memo Circular No. 2, s. 2002) of a clear delineation of what particularly are the metes and bounds of a director’s fiduciary obligations to stakeholders other than stockholders, and what would be the proper resolution when the legitimate interests of the various stakeholders collided with one other, had brought much uncertainty in corporate governance practice in publicly held companies. Unfortunately, before the sphere of public companies had been able to work out developing the hierarchical system of evaluating the legitimate interests of the stockholders and other stakeholders in the realm of publicly held companies, the SEC pulled the plug on “Stakeholders Theory” when it issued in SEC Memo Circular No. 6, s. 2009, deleting all provisions in the original CG Code having to do with “stakeholders” and limiting its operations to stockholders.

In the meantime, the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) formally adopted Corporate Governance Guidelines which placed at center stage the maximization of shareholders’ value as the primary obligation of the Boards of publicly listed companies, but with “due regard to their stakeholders.” (No. 1 Guideline: Shareholder return is optimized through a sound and well-executed strategy). Under Guideline 8, the Boards of publicly listed companies are mandated to “respect and protect the rights and interests of its employees, community, environment, and other stakeholders.” In brief, therefore, the PSE CG Guidelines, did not seek to recognize a new right or standing of stakeholders of the company, but merely enjoined the Boards of publicly listed companies to “give due regards” (an ethical management guide, not a legal duty or obligation), to its stakeholders, and to respect whatever rights and interests such stakeholders have been granted, if any, under existing laws.

Under the leadership of Chairperson Teresita J. Herbosa, the SEC in 2014 reinstated the stakeholder provisions of the original CG Code under SEC Memo Circular No. 9, s. 2014. However, the reinstatement of the “Stakeholders Theory” for publicly held companies merely reignited the long-drawn debate on what under such corporate governance regime is the equilibrium formula that should be relied upon by the Board and Management to determine whether the corporate resolution or decision they arrive at fulfills their fiduciary duties to the various stakeholders of the company: How can they determine that by seeking the maximization of shareholders’ value, which is their primary duty when serving a publicly listed company, they do not undermine the conflicting or opposing interests of other stakeholders?

During those debates, the writer had always proposed that responsible Boards for publicly held companies did not have to fear the “lack of equilibrium” feature of the “Stakeholders Theory,” since the original CG Code itself had provided the key to allow the Board of each publicly held company the ability to answer to the such query. It will be recalled that the original CG Code made it mandatory for covered corporations to adopt formally their company manual of corporate governance to be formally approved by the SEC.

The key provision in the original CG Code, which this writer thought was a stroke of genius, was the one which mandated that the Board of covered corporations shall “Identify the corporation’s major and other stakeholders and formulate a clear policy of communicating or relating with them accurately, effectively and sufficiently. There must be an accounting rendered to them regularly in order to serve their legitimate interests.” Therefore, the Board of every publicly held company had the legal ability to determine in the provisions of its manual of corporate governance, who the stakeholders of the company are, and provide for their “legitimate interests,” and finally to then work out in the manual provisions the hierarchical placement of such legitimate interests.

The SEC recognized under the original CG Code, that it is the Board of publicly held companies, rather than for the SEC, which are in a better position to determine who the various stakeholders of the company are, their legitimate interests, and to work out a hierarchical valuation of their varying, if not conflicting, interests. Such company-centered formulation of the implementation of “Stakeholders Theory” within the company would form an integral part of the company charter once the manual is formally approved by the SEC.

Unfortunately, when the “Stakeholders Theory” was reinstated in the Revised Code of Corporate Governance, SEC Memo Circular No. 9, s. 2014, provided for a watered-down version of the stakeholders-identification clause which read: “Identify the corporation’s stakeholders community in which the corporation operates or are directly affected by its operations, and formulate a clear policy of accurate, timely and effective communication with them.” Under the present version, the Revised CG Code merely recognizes that stakeholders are entitled to only “a clear accurate, timely and effective communication” of matters of corporate affairs that affect them. This is the same situation under the PSE Guidelines which mandates that in pursuing company affairs, the proprietary interests of stockholders is foremost in the exercise of business judgment, but only with “due regards” to the interests of other stakeholders. In fact, under Article 5 on “Accountability and Audit” section of the Revised CG Code, it is expressly provided that “The board is primarily accountable to the stockholders,” without any reference at all to other stakeholders.

With the recent promulgation of the CG Code for PLCs, the question that must be answered is “What is the corporate governance doctrine that prevails under the Code of Corporate Governance for Publicly Listed Companies?” The brief answer is: A hybrid system of corporate governance that has put together the best features of the “Doctrines Maximization of Shareholders’ Value,” “Stakeholders Theory,” and the “CSR Doctrine.”

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 M.A.P.

 

Cesar L. Villanueva is a member of the Management Association of the Philippines (M.A.P.), the former Chair of the Governance Commission for GOCCs and the Founding Partner of the Villanueva Gabionza & Dy Law Offices.

cvillanueva@vgslaw.com

map@map.org.ph

http://map.org.ph

Japan’s biggest builder Mori bets on luxury condo demand in Tokyo with Toranomon project

TOKYO — Mori Building Co. has started work on a luxury residential development in Tokyo that will include units priced from ¥1 billion ($9 million), betting there is untapped demand for the most upscale apartments in the city.

Japan’s biggest privately owned developer is constructing three buildings at a cost of about ¥400 billion in the central district of Toranomon, home to many of the capital’s office towers and embassies, Executive Managing Officer Hideto Oba said in an interview. The development, which includes a 54-level structure, is scheduled for completion in about 2020, he said.

“We see expansion in the market for residences that will satisfy the needs of wealthy individuals from Japan and overseas,” said Mr. Oba. “The stock of the kind of homes that rich people want to purchase is limited in Tokyo.”

Mori Building’s competitors Nomura Real Estate Holdings, Inc. and Mitsui Fudosan Co. are also developing high-end apartments as foreign interest in Japanese property rises. Tokyo’s market for luxury residences lags behind other major global centers by both supply and price, although that’s beginning to change, according to consultancy Jones Lang LaSalle, Inc.

“In terms of pricing, Tokyo is finally catching up to London,” said Koji Naito, a director for Japan capital markets research at Jones Lang LaSalle in Tokyo. “Luxury condo prices have arguably been appreciating in the past several years and it is expected that the current trend will continue.”

Mori Building will supply 550 units, 160 of which it will market as fully furnished serviced apartments and the rest for sale or rent. Mr. Oba said the luxury units will sell from ¥1 billion and rent for more than ¥1 million a month. A “considerable number” will be priced at this level, he said, declining to provide a specific figure.

Mr. Oba said the Toranomon property will be more upscale than Roppongi Hills, the Tokyo complex completed by Mori in 2003.

Foreigners may drive demand for the apartments, said Megan Walters, head of Asia-Pacific research at Jones Lang LaSalle. “With the Tokyo Olympics coming up and just the rise in Tokyo and inbound tourism, there’s every potential that the units could get absorbed simply because of the demand from overseas buyers,” she said.

Nomura Real Estate began selling a luxury complex in Roppongi in June last year, and one apartment sold for ¥1.4 billion, the company’s most expensive since 2002, spokesman Yujiro Onuma said. Mitsui Fudosan began selling ¥1.5 billion-units in upmarket Aoyama in October 2016 and ¥800-million apartments in Yokohama last month. — Bloomberg

Tugade, transport groups set for Senate meet

TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY Arthur P. Tugade is expected to face off with irate transport groups at a public hearing on the planned modernization of public utility vehicles on Monday, Dec. 11, according to Senator Grace Poe, chair of the Senate committee on public services. Ms. Poe announced yesterday, Dec. 4, that she decided to postpone the hearing originally scheduled on Thursday this week to give Mr. Tugade himself a chance to explain to the transport sector the government’s plans and possible safety nets for drivers and operators when the jeepney modernization rolls out next year. — Arjay L. Balinbin

Tetangco joins Belle board as independent director

FORMER Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) Governor Amando M. Tetangco, Jr. is joining the board of Belle Corp. as an independent director.

In a disclosure to the stock exchange on Monday, the listed firm said Mr. Tetangco was elected as independent director, alongside former Social Security System President and Chief Executive Officer Emilio S. de Quiros, Jr., who was elected as non-executive director.

Mr. De Quiros has also served as the company’s director from September 2010 to March 2017. 

Prior to holding this position, Mr. Tetangco served two six-year terms as BSP governor from July 2005 to July 2007.

“Under his leadership, the BSP initiated bank regulatory reforms such as on risk management, capitalization increase, asset quality among others,” the company noted in his profile.

Belle has an operating agreement with Melco Crown Entertainment Ltd. that gives it a share of gaming revenues at City of Dreams Manila. Other than this, the company also has upscale property developments in Tagaytay City and Batangas such as Tagaytay Highlands Golf Club and The Parks at Saratoga Hills, among others.

Bell recorded a 37% increase in its attributable profit to P2.17 billion in the nine months ending September, following a 33% jump in revenues to P6.12 billion for the period. Shares in Belle were unchanged at P3.66 apiece at the stock exchange on Monday. — Arra B. Francia

The Aronian year

Palma de Mallorca Grand Prix
Palma de Mallorca, Balearic Islands, Spain
Nov. 16-25, 2017

Final Standings

1-2. Levon Aronian ARM 2801, Dmitry Jakovenko RUS 2721, 5.5/9

3-9. Hikaru Nakamura USA 2780, Ding Liren CHN 2774, Peter Svidler RUS 2763, Teimour Radjabov AZE 2741, Penteala Harikrishna IND 2738, Evgeny Tomashevsky RUS 2702, Richard Rapport HUN 2692, 5.0/9

10-12. Maxime Vachier-Lagrave FRA 2796, Pavel Eljanov UKR 2707, Ernesto Inarkiev RUS 2683, 4.5/9

13-15. Anish Giri NED 2762, Li Chao CHN 2741, Francisco Vallejo Pons ESP 2705, 4.0/9

16. Alexander Riazantsev RUS 2651, 3.5/9

17-18. Boris Gelfand ISR 2719, Jon Ludvig Hammer NOR 2629, 3.0/9

Time Control: 100 minutes for the first 40 moves, 50 minutes for the next 20 moves, and then 15 minutes play-to-finish with 30 seconds added after every move starting move 1.

Many of our BW readers are familiar with the so-called “Rubinstein Year.” The Polish GM Akiba Rubinstein (born Dec. 1, 1880 passed away March 14, 1961), reputedly the strongest player never to become world champion, won five consecutive major tournaments: San Sebastian, Pistyan, Breslau, Warsaw and Vilnius. Considering that back in those days there weren’t that many tournaments to begin with, this feat established his claim to the world championship. This match against the reigning titleholder Emanuel Lasker was actually scheduled to take place in 1914 but it was canceled due to the outbreak of World War I. Rubinstein was unable to recapture his formidable form after the war and in later years mental illness set in.

In like manner I’d like to declare 2016 as the “Wesley So year.” To recap, he warmed up for 2016 by winning the Bilbao Chess Masters Final in November 2015. Then everything started to happen. In March 2016 he was awarded the Frank P. Samford, Jr. Chess Fellowship, a fund set up by Mr. Samford to advance the game he loved by identifying and assisting the most promising young chess masters in the United States. This is no small matter — the value of this fellowship is around $42,000 per year.

In August of that year Wesley won the 2016 Sinquefield Cup and in December the London Chess Classic, two of the strongest tournaments in history. This, together with his second place finish in the Leuven rapid and blitz tournament, won for him the 2016 Grand Chess Tour, not a trivial award either — Wesley’s winnings from the tour for 2016 totaled around $300,000.

To top all of that off Wesley played 3rd board for the United States in the 2016 Baku Chess Olympiad and won the gold medal on 3rd board (as all of you know silver medal on that same board went to the Philippines’ Eugene Torre). He contributed heavily to the American cause and the USA came out champions in the Olympiad.

From July 2016 up to April 2017 Wesley So had an undefeated streak of 67 games played against the world elite. Former world champion Mikhail Tal has the longest streak at 93 and the second longest streak at 86, but his opposition was mixed. I guess the most impressive is the 82-game undefeated streak of Vladimir Kramnik, although it actually hurt him as he later got so obsessed with maintaining that streak that he forgot to play to win. Wang Yue (China) and Milan Drasko (Montenegro) also have their claims at the record with 82 and 84 games, respectively, but that is laughable. Surely you cannot compare games with local masters with the super GM opposition that Wesley So faced.

OK, having settled naming rights over 2016, for the current year 2017 I don’t think anyone will dispute that it should henceforth be called the “Aronian Year.” The highlights:

April 2017 Grenke Chess Classic (average rating of 2729, category 20). Aronian won this with a round to spare against Caruana, Carlsen, Naiditsch, Hou Yifan, Vachier-Lagrave, Bluebaum and Meier. He drew with Caruana, Carlsen and Meier and won the rest of his games. An amusing highlight of this tournament was that Magnus Carlsen lost control of his eyes (for the first time he had to wear glasses) and his hair (something to do with the hot springs).

June 2017 Altibox Norway Chess (average rating of 2796, category 22). Aronian humiliated Magnus Carlsen in front of his hometown crowd by both defeating the world champion and then finishing ahead of him. Other competitors were Nakamura, Kramnik, Caruana, Wesley So, Anish Giri, Vachier-Lagrave, Anand and Karjakin.

August 2017 St. Louis Rapid and Blitz. Aronian placed 2nd in the Blitz portion (behind Karjakin) and 1st in the Rapid to finish 1st in the overall standings. Former world champion and living legend Garry Kasparov came back to play his first officially rated game since he retired 12 years ago. He wasn’t one of the top finishers but still showed some flashes of his old self. Other participants were Nakamura, Leinier Dominguez (a former world blitz champion himself), Nepomniachtchi, Anand, Navara, Le Quang Liem (another former world blitz champion) and Sergei Karjakin.

FIDE World Cup (Tbilisi) in September. The biggest chess event of the year. 128 of the top players of the world congregated in Tbilisi, Georgia to determine the World Cup champion and also to qualify two players to the Candidates’ Tournament to be held in March 2018. Aronian defeated Daniel Cowdery (2-0), Hou Yi Fan (4-2), Maxim Matlakov (4.5-3.5), Daniil Dubov 1.5-0.5), Vassily Ivanchuk (1.5-0.5), Maxime Vachier-Lagrave (5-4) and finally Ding Liren (4-2) to win the World Cup title for the 2nd time, the first player ever to do so.

At the end of September 2017, Levon Aronian married his long-time girlfriend WIM Arianne Caoili of the Philippines (she is the daughter of former Deputy Minister of Agriculture Arnold Caoili). Aside from her chess credentials, Arianne also has a PhD in Russian foreign policy and its economic and business relations with Armenia. Currently she is an Advisor to the Prime Minister of Armenia.

And now Palma de Mallorca, the final leg of the FIDE Grand Prix. An amazing year for GM Levon Aronian! In the following game from Palma he puts down the “invincible” Anish Giri.

Aronian, Levon (2801) — Giri, Anish (2762) [A16]
FIDE Grand Prix Palma 2017 Palma de Mallorca (4), 19.11.2017

1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.d3

Nowadays the caveman move 5.h4 is popular. It was even used in the World Cup: 5…Bg7 6.h5 Nc6 7.g3 Bg4 8.h6 Bxc3 9.dxc3 Qd6 10.Bg2 0–0–0 11.Ng5! with a very unclear position. Ding,L (2782)-Wei,Y (2734) Baku World Cup 2015 1–0 39.

5…Bg7 6.Bd2 0–0 7.g3 c5 8.h4!?N

The “Caveman Move Deferred!” GM Alex Yermolinsky, someone whose positional feel I have great respect for, commented that Giri’s 7…c5 did not do anything and perhaps Aronian thought that with the extra tempo he could run over Black’s position?

8…Nc6 9.h5 Nxc3 10.bxc3 c4!

You remember the rule of the thumb that a flank attack is best met by attacking the center, right?

11.hxg6

After 11.dxc4 Black will continue with …Be6, …Qa5, ….Rd8, etc.

11…hxg6 12.Qa4 Na5?

[12…Qd5 is better as now the Black knight gets shut out of the game]

13.d4 b6 14.Bg2 Bb7 15.Qc2

If now Black returns his knight to c6 Aronian can go for mate along the h-file with Qc2–e4–h4.

15…Qd5 16.Nh4 Qd7 17.e4 e5 18.d5!

Correctly closing the center. White is clearly going for a kingside mate while it is not clear what Black should be playing for.

18…Bc8 19.f4 Qe7

Yermolinsky points out that 19…Qg4 is met by 20.Bf3! Qxg3+ 21.Ke2 and Black’s king and queen are both in big trouble.

20.f5! g5 <D>

[20…gxf5 21.Bh3! fxe4 22.Bxc8 Raxc8 23.Nf5 Qd7 24.Qxe4 Black’s king cannot escape]

POSITION AFTER 20…G5

21.Qd1! gxh4 22.Rxh4 Rd8

After 22…f6 White will play 23.Qh5 with the idea of Qh7+ Kf7 Qg6+ Kg8 and then Ke2! making way for his other rook to join in the attack.

23.Qh5

How should Black defend? If 23…f6 then 24.Qh7+ Kf8 25.Rg4 followed by 26.Rxg7 Qxg7 27.Bh6. If on the other hand he plays 23…Qd6 then 24.Qh7+ Kf8 25.Bh6 Bxh6 26.Rxh6.

23…Kf8 24.Rg4 Bf6?

Loses. It is hard to find, but 24…Qd6! keeps the game live. After 25.Rxg7! Kxg7 26.Qg5+ Kf8 Black is a rook up but White has Kf2 followed by Rh1 and the attack should be strong enough to win.

25.Bh6+ Ke8 26.Rg8+ Kd7 27.d6! 1–0

[27.d6 Kxd6 (not 27…Qxd6 28.Rd1) 28.Rd1+ Kc7 29.Rgxd8 the end]

Maybe soon we will be assigning years to Fabiano Caruana and Magnus Carlsen, in fact perhaps Magnus should have more than one year. Anyway, when this whole thing snowballs and they start assigning the years to the players, everyone should remember that we got dibs on 2016 and 2017!

Bobby Ang is a founding member of the National Chess Federation of the Philippines (NCFP) and its first Executive Director. A Certified Public Accountant (CPA), he taught accounting in the University of Santo Tomas (UST) for 25 years and is currently Chief Audit Executive of the Equicom Group of Companies.

bobby@cpamd.net

All my shirts are blue

The emotional investment on the results of the UAAP Finals Game 3 for the sea of blue and green, all 22,000 of them inside the dome, plus millions more outside is comparable to the first job interview, finishing off the amortization on the house, seeing your stock portfolio value halved (it’s only money), first trip to Paris, getting a promotion, seeing a sunrise with a flock of birds taking wing, and a perfectly cooked adobo flake pandesal sandwich.

The highs and lows of following the team in its total of 19 games this season (16 wins to three losses) were a roller coaster ride without seat belts. All emotions were of the heart: heart-breaking, heart-stopping, heart-rending, heartwarming, and in the end, heart-swelling.

Yes, Virginia… college basketball is more than just a game. It’s something else.

The Blue Eagles (just to alert the reader on how biased this piece will be) in season 80 seemed to prefer the longer trip, the scenic route. (This makes the season ticket more cost-effective.) On the brink of a sweep with 13-0 to allow them some rest and go straight to the finals, as the step-ladder works its way up, it narrowly lost game 14 to throw them into the traditional F4 format still at the top, with a twice to beat advantage.

In game 1 of the semis, the Eagles again lost their advantage. And for the second must-win game, it looked like it was going to be a wasted season with three points down in the closing seconds, needing a tie-breaking triple to push the game into overtime and the second finals seat.

Here are four things to remember about the amazing Blue Eagles and Season 80:

1) In all but one game in the first round of eliminations, the team’s winning margin was in the double digits. But what was unusual about these wins was the rotating hero for each game — Vince, Anton, Thirdy, Matt, Isaac, Chiz. The shared ball and unselfish passing to the high-percentage shooter made this happen. It’s as if the team drew straws to pick the top scorer for a particular game. But it’s just the longer rotation of the team, going for at least 10 players, sometimes even 14. Who keeps track of their minutes?

2) At the beginning of the season, the fans were curious about the competitiveness of the team, with at least three stars moving out to other rival teams, and a fourth one who didn’t even suit up and became MVP in the other college league. The initial ambition of the Blues was modest — let’s just hope for the F4, maybe last place? Of course, after every win, this goal kept moving up. After winning Game 1 of the Finals — why not the trophy? Never mind what you guys were thinking after Game 2. (Admit it — your faith wavered.)

3) Could this team survive a close game? This was the question after the second round loss to the number 2 team. Did the Blue Eagles have what it took to survive a one-possession lead? Could the players take the body banging and non-calls and play through these? Doubts lingered up to the last two minutes of the final Game 3. That the odds-makers always put the top seed as the underdog needing a plus 3 or 5 for presumed bets seemed to have accepted this lack of toughness at the end game. Well, that question was finally settled this Sunday.

4) Did the team have a deep bench? That only seemed to be the case as even the second team was capable of stretching the lead, but not always defending it. The collapse of a 21-point lead is proof that mayhem works. The frenzy of the mayhem approach can disrupt ball movement. As an aside, the word “mayhem” literally refers to needless and willful damage; to injure, wound, mutilate and cripple. It comes from the same root word as maim. Enough said on this subject. But body banging, taunting, pinching of body parts and elbow-swinging are all guaranteed to distract a ball handler.

The word “overachieve” may be overused in describing Cinderella runs of teams that none of the supposedly savvy analysts picked as contenders at the start. The talk was just about the reigning regular season MVP and how he dwarfed all the other pretenders. This gospel truth was accepted by everyone, yes, including the folks reading this. (Come on, you know that’s true.) But basketball is still a team sport for five players.

The season is over, and there is a new coach riding the shoulders of the victorious team. And the side that was shouting hysterically and screaming to be heard was all in blue. It was a joyous catharsis of relief. Even in the last two minutes of the last game, the momentum seemed to go the way of Game 2… which for sure, the folks in blue will no longer be talking about.

There’s no problem what to wear for the celebrations. Anyway, all my shirts are blue… and white.

 

A. R. Samson is chair and CEO of Touch DDB.

ar.samson@yahoo.com

Work halts at New York City condo tower after council rules it’s too tall

NEW YORK — Workers building a Manhattan condo tower were in the middle of pouring concrete Thursday afternoon when the city’s building department came to shut everything down.

Fifteen minutes earlier, the New York City Council voted to rezone the neighborhood along the East River where the Sutton 58 development is located, capping the height of all new buildings in the area. Gamma Real Estate’s project, slated to rise 799 feet (244 meters), was suddenly illegal.

“The council vote occurred at 4:10 and we were stopped at 4:25 — that is a display of the craziness that has been thrust upon us,” Jonathan Kalikow, president of Gamma Real Estate, said in an interview Friday.

Gamma had been racing to finish foundation work ahead of the zoning change, which would require the planned 67-storey tower to be cut by about half. If the foundation had been completed before the ruling, the building would have been exempt from the restrictions.

Council members voted to approve the rezoning, covering the areas from 52nd to 59th streets, east of First Avenue and to the edge of the East River. At the time of the vote, Gamma was 10 work days away from completing the foundation, or about 95% done, said Mr. Kalikow, whose firm plans to seek a reprieve from the Board of Standards and Appeals.

NEIGHBORHOOD ALLIANCE
The council’s decision fulfilled a years-long push by the East River 50s Alliance to preserve the character of the neighborhood’s quiet residential side streets, Alan Kersh, the group’s president, said in a statement. “This is an unprecedented victory for a community-led effort.”

The new zoning designation requires builders to spread wider, rather than higher. As much as 50% of their allowed square footage must be built in a structure that is no taller than 150 feet. The remaining square footage can be used to build vertically, atop that base, according to Mr. Kersh.

With his foundation nearly complete, and a full building permit secured, the Sutton 58 site meets criteria for getting relief from the rule change, according to Mr. Kalikow. The city planning commission took a similar view last month when it approved the rezoning but exempted Gamma’s project. The council removed that exemption from what it approved.

In the meantime, crews are securing the property for a shutdown over the winter months, putting in protections against water accumulation or other weather damage, Mr. Kalikow said.

“There is zero probability that we will not be grandfathered,” he said. “It will take time, but we are absolutely building this building.” — Bloomberg

Malacañang optimistic House, Senate will find budget middle ground

THE ADMINISTRATION is optimistic that the House of Representatives and the Senate will find a middle ground on the 2018 proposed P3.7-trillion budget and pass it before the end of this year. On Friday, House Speaker Pantaleon D. Alvarez said there is a possibility of a reenacted budget due to some disagreements between the two legislative chambers, including the Senate’s P50-billion cut on the Department of Public Works and Highways allocation and realignment of the Philippine National Police’s P900-million drug campaign budget to housing for cops and soldiers. “I can’t comment on a purely speculative matter. I cannot believe that the House and the Senate cannot agree on next year’s budget,” Mr. Roque said. “I have all the confidence, the Palace has all the confidence that we will have the budget pursuant to the request made by the Palace because this budget is crucial to the Build, Build, Build program of the government intended to alleviate poverty in this country,” he added. — Rosemarie A. Zamora

Trap and Dubstep artist Ookay at Chaos

CHAOS nightclub at City of Dreams Manila presents international DJ/Producer Ookay on Dec. 8. Paving the way for the trademark bass-laden Trap and Dubstep tunes of Ookay are Chaos resident DJs MVRXX and Jet Boado together with MC Ronthug who will kick start the party. Ookay is the stage name of San Diego-based Abraham “Abe” Laguna, who is best known for his heart-pounding and heavy-handed tracks synthesized with dub and trap beats. His signature style is evident in his latest smash hit “Bouncer” with EDM duo Showtek, which topped the Beatport EDM music chart following its release. In 2016, Ookay’s self-released original titled “Thief,” was listed in Spotify and quickly went viral in the US and global charts with over 3 million online streaming listeners. The Sirius Electric Area program by Sirius XM Radio Station which is broadcasted across the US and Canada named “Thief” as the most played song on its first month of release. Ookay’s releases including remixes of Congrorock’s “Bless Di Nation Ft. Sean Paul” and Steve Aoiki, and Chris Lake & Tujamo’s “Boneless.” He seamlessly combines EDM and Hiphop influences, while creating a musical style all his own. His collaboration with EDM superstar Diplo to remix Avicii’s “You Make Me” is also considered as one of his best works. For Chaos VIP table reservations, guests can contact 0917-886-3678. Door charge is priced at P1,000 inclusive of one drink.

1...12,82412,82512,826...13,729Page 12,825 of 13,729
© 2024 BusinessWorld Publishing.
All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines
Facebook Instagram Linkedin Twitter Youtube