Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube
Home Blog Page 8597

NCR wholesale price of construction materials rises in December

WHOLESALE PRICES of construction materials in Metro Manila grew at a faster pace in December, while retail price growth slowed, according to the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA).

The PSA said Wednesday that the construction materials wholesale price index (CMWPI) rose 1% year on year in December from a rise of 0.8% in November.

Growth in the construction materials retail price index slowed to 1.4% in December from 1.7% the previous month.

The acceleration in CMWPI growth was driven by sand and gravel (2.9% from 0.9%), galvanized iron sheets (1.2% from 0.9%), electrical works (1.6% from 1.4%), and PVC pipes (4.8% from 4.4%).

Price growth eased in concrete products and cement (1% from 1.1%) and hardware (2.6% from 3.4%).

Year-on-year declines were observed in plywood (-0.1%), reinforcing and structural steel (-0.8%), plumbing fixtures and accessories/waterworks (-1.4%), and fuel and lubricants (-8.1%).

Wholesale price movements in the following construction materials were unchanged during the month: lumber (3.7%); tileworks (14.4%); glass and glass products (7.1%); doors, jambs, and steel casements (0.2%); painting works (0.7%); asphalt (0%); and machinery and equipment rental (0%).

At the retail level, slower price increases were noted in masonry materials (1% from 1.4% in November), painting materials and related compounds (1.5% from 1.8%), tinsmithry materials (2.8% from 2.9%), and miscellaneous construction materials (1% from 1.6%).

Only plumbing materials saw an acceleration in price growth of 0.7% from 0.6% previously.

Price growth in carpentry and electrical materials was unchanged at 1.4% and 0.8%, respectively.

Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. Chief Economist Michael L. Ricafort attributed the acceleration in wholesale prices to the seasonal pickup in business and consumer spending, which caused increased demand.

“However, the softer economic conditions largely due to the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, as well as some slowdown in infrastructure spending as delayed by restrictions on public transportation and in some industries, and may have still led to the deceleration in the retail prices in construction materials,” Mr. Ricafort said in a mobile message.

The economist expects increased government spending for infrastructure to be one of the “offsetting positive factors” that could lead to a pickup in the demand for construction materials, adding that the preparations for next year’s national elections may require “expeditious completion of various government projects.”

“Near-record low interest rates would also help stimulate loan demand for investments, construction activities, and financing to purchase real estate by businesses, individuals, and households,” Mr. Ricafort said. — B.A.D. Añago

SSS contribution hike – beneficial or burdensome?

At the height of the pandemic and economic hardship, another threat to take-home pay has emerged: the hike in the mandatory social security contribution. Although these adjustments will further reduce an individual’s taxable income, is this the new regulation’s only silver lining?

Under Republic Act No. 11199, otherwise known as the Social Security Act of 2018, which was signed in February 2019, the Social Security System (SSS) implemented a contribution rate hike from the current 12% to 13%, and issued the new schedule of contributions for employers and employees effective Jan. 1, 2021.

In the new schedule, the minimum Monthly Salary Credit (MSC) increased to P3,000 and the maximum MSC to P25,000. For employees with the minimum MSC of P3,000, the increase in the monthly contribution amounts to P55 (i.e., a new rate of P135 as compared to the old rate of P80). For employees with the maximum MSC, on the other hand, the additional monthly contribution is P325 (i.e., a new rate of P1,125 versus the old rate of P800).

When every centavo counts during this crisis, the increase could understandably provide an occasion for ranting.

It is important to note that contributions to the new SSS Provident Fund, known as the Workers Investment and Savings Program (WISP), require active membership in the regular SSS program with an MSC of P20,000, i.e., with salary brackets of P20, 250 and above. Under the implementing guidelines (SSS Circular No. 2020-032), WISP contributions are integrated into the regular SSS program contributions to be shared proportionately between the employer and the employee. The funds will be managed, invested, and the realized earnings distributed proportionately based on the member’s contribution.

WISP is a defined-contribution plan that allows employers and employees to contribute and invest over a period of time to save more for retirement, disability, or death. This savings plan is compassionate as a portion of the savings is funded by the employer.

However, employees with a salary rate below P20,250 are excluded from the WISP’s coverage and are thus unentitled to the program’s additional benefits.

Benefits arising from the WISP are paid out either in a lump sum or by installments for retirement, total disability, and death survivorship, together with the SSS regular benefits. The WISP benefits are processed automatically when the member or beneficiaries file their benefit claim under the regular SSS program. The basis will be the total accumulated account value of the member from the time of approval of the claim.

The installments are given in the form of a fixed amount of monthly pension equal to the member’s total accumulated account value divided by 180. The pension is paid until the member’s account value is fully exhausted, covering at least 15 years. Upon the death of a WISP pensioner, any remaining balance in the accumulated account value is paid to the member’s beneficiary in a lump sum.

Overall, the increased contributions will make way for a better member benefits package and a more viable welfare fund for the future generation.

If the WISP provides additional benefits to members, why is it only mandatory for employees with higher MSCs and not all employee members? From my observations, those employees earning lower salaries are more in need of these additional benefits for unforeseen contingencies that threaten their financial capacity; comparably, higher-income earning employees can afford insurance to cover these risks. I wonder if the agency considered that.

It is possible that what the agency primarily considered is the burden that the additional contribution to the WISP will bring to the lower-income earning population, hence the decision to require it only from employees with higher MSCs.

Alternatively, to accommodate all members, the additional contribution can be reasonably proportioned between the employee, employer, and the government sharing to cover the deficiency, similar to other countries in Asia and the Pacific. Or, similar to the Pag-IBIG’s MP2 Savings Program, coverage may be optional, so members get to decide whether or not they want to avail of the WISP.

Currently pending before Congress is House Bill No. 8317, authorizing the President to suspend scheduled increases in SSS contributions. The proposed intervention is due to misgivings regarding the cost implications of the new contribution schedule. With the deliberations still underway, we can expect changes in policy direction once the suspension is implemented. It might be a good idea for Congress to also consider adding a provision about the government share in the contributions rather than just suspending or deferring the hike.

In my opinion, the long-term benefits of this additional contribution due to the new mandatory provident fund or the WISP outweigh the short-term burdens. The increased amount will help secure the employee’s lost income due to unforeseen contingencies. That said, it may also be equally important to address the current issue of reduced pay and increasing prices. Perhaps stricter policy implementation and monitoring of prices of basic goods is needed.

I hope a final directive will be released soon, allowing both employers and employees space to manage their expectations and time to comply accordingly.

The views or opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Isla Lipana & Co. The content is for general information purposes only, and should not be used as a substitute for specific advice.

 

Bernadette R. Fama-Absolor is a Manager at the Client Accounting Services group of Isla Lipana & Co., the Philippine member firm of the PwC network.

+63 (2) 8845-2728

bernadette.r.fama@ph.pwc.com

The big barriers to global vaccination

Patent rights, national self-interest, and the wealth gap

We will not be able to put the COVID-19 pandemic behind us until the world’s population is mostly immune through vaccination or previous exposure to the disease.

A truly global vaccination campaign, however, would look very different from what we are seeing now. For example, as of Jan. 20, many more people have been immunized in Israel (with a population less than 10 million) than in Africa and Latin America combined.

Notwithstanding recent questions about the effectiveness of the initial single dose of the vaccine, there is a clear disparity in vaccine rollouts internationally.

That is a problem. As long as there are still existing reservoirs of a propagating virus it will be able to spread again to populations that either cannot or would not vaccinate. It will also be able to mutate to variants that are either more transmissible or more deadly.

Counterintuitively, an increase in transmissibility, such as has been found with the new UK variant, is worse than the same percentage increase in mortality rate. This is because increased transmissibility increases the number of cases (and hence the number of deaths) exponentially, while an increase in mortality rates increases only deaths, and only linearly.

Evolutionary pressure on the virus will inevitably favor mutations that make the disease more transmissible, or the virus itself more vaccine-resistant. It is clear, therefore, that every nation’s interest is in universal vaccination. But this is not the trajectory we are on.

POLITICS AND PROFITS
Fortunately, in the countries already vaccinating, the vaccine is (mostly) not allocated by wealth or power, but by prioritizing those facing the highest risk. At a country level, however, national wealth is determining vaccine rollout.

Yet in the past, we have managed to eradicate diseases worldwide, including smallpox, a viral infection with much higher death rates than COVID-19.

There are two barriers that prevent us from rapidly pursuing a similar goal for the current pandemic:

• big pharma is profit-driven and therefore keeps a tight lid on the intellectual property it is developing in the new vaccines

• countries find it difficult to see beyond their national interest; not surprisingly, politicians are committed only to their own voters.

At this point, we don’t have a global system to confront either of these problems. Each vaccine’s patent is owned by its developer, and the World Health Organization (WHO) is too weak to be the world’s Ministry of Health.

THE POLIO VACCINE MODEL
Overcoming big pharma’s profit motive has been achieved before, however.

In 1955, Jonas Salk announced the development of a polio vaccine in the midst of a huge epidemic. The news initially met with skepticism. Even employees of his own laboratory resigned, protesting that he was moving too fast with clinical experimentation.

When a huge placebo — controlled clinical trial involving 1.6 million children proved him right, however, he declared that in order to maximize the global distribution of this lifesaving vaccine his lab would not patent it. Asked who owned the patent, he famously replied:

“Well, the people I would say. There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?”

In an echo of the current moment, Israel (then a new state) was also experiencing a rapidly spreading polio epidemic. Efforts to purchase vaccines from the US were unsuccessful, as not all American children were yet vaccinated. So a scientist named Natan Goldblum was sent to Salk’s laboratory to learn how to make the new vaccine.

No lawyers were involved and no contracts signed. The young Dr. Goldblum spent 1956 setting up manufacturing facilities for Salk’s vaccine in Israel and by early 1957 mass vaccination was underway.

SUSPEND PATENT RIGHTS
Israel, a small and relatively poor country in the 1950s, became the third country in the world (after the US and Denmark) to produce the vaccine locally and eventually eradicate polio. It took a handful of scientists, a modest budget, and, most importantly, no patenting.

Like Salk, Goldblum was aware viruses have complete disregard for political borders. He was also involved in a very successful Palestinian polio vaccination campaign in Gaza.

More recently, a highly successful international campaign in the early 2000s saw AIDS treatments distributed in poorer countries. Pharmaceutical companies that owned the patented drugs were forced to supply them at cost or for free, not at market prices set in the rich countries. This was achieved through public pressure and the willingness of governments to support the required policies.

A temporary withdrawal of the patenting rights to the successful COVID-19 vaccines, with or without compensation for the developers, seems a small price to pay for an exit strategy from this global and incredibly costly crisis.

ACT LOCAL, THINK GLOBAL
Overcoming national interest is perhaps more complicated. Clearly, countries have an interest in vaccinating their most vulnerable populations first. But at some point, well before everyone is vaccinated, it becomes more efficient for countries to start vaccinating their neighbors (the countries they are most exposed to through movements of people and trade).

Disappointingly, rich countries today behave as though they will reach 100% vaccination rates before they give away a single dose, with many having bought well in excess of what is needed for 100% coverage.

The COVAX plan to distribute vaccines in poorer countries has so far been an underfunded effort that has not yet delivered a single dose of vaccine. Even if COVAX were to be fully funded, it mostly aims to donate an insufficient number of vaccine doses to the poorest countries, rather than really bring about a universal vaccination program.

Nevertheless, overcoming the profit-maximizing interest of big pharma and the national focus of governments is not a pipe dream. The world has done it before.

 

Ilan Noy is Professor and Chair in the Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Te Herenga Waka–Victoria University of Wellington Ami Neuberger is Clinical Assistant Professor, Technion–Israel Institute of Technology

Training for the jobs of the future

As we start 2021, COVID-19 is still with us, along with the many changes it has prompted in the way we do things. Many parents are still working from home, as children are also learning from home. Public transportation is still limited, and people are still encouraged to just stay home unless in need of essential goods or services. Many places and businesses have remained closed.

The focus now is on the acquisition of COVID-19 vaccines, with the national government as well as numerous local governments all looking for ways and means to bring them in. But given financial and logistical concerns, at best, a semblance of a mass vaccination program will probably start only towards the end of the year. Meantime, life goes on for many of us.

What the future holds, nobody really knows. But, judging from what has occurred so far, and the possibility of other pandemics in the future, it is interesting how some analysts now view the future of work. I came across recently a blog published by the International Monetary Fund, which highlighted The Jobs of Tomorrow report by the World Economic Forum (WEF).

Presented by Saadia Zahidi, managing director at WEF and head of its Center for the New Economy and Society, the report discussed what jobs will emerge and which ones will go in the future, in light of the “effect of pandemic-related disruptions placed in the broader context of longer-term technology trends.”

The report “maps the jobs and skills of the future, tracking the pace of change based on surveys of business leaders and human resource strategists from around the world,” Its five key findings for its Winter 2020 report were as follows:

• The workforce is automating faster than expected, displacing 85 million jobs in the next five years.

• The robot revolution will create 97 million new jobs.

• In 2025, analytical thinking, creativity, and flexibility will be among the most sought-after skills.

• The most competitive businesses will focus on upgrading their workers’ skills.

• Remote work is here to stay.

The report forecasts increasing demand for data analysts and scientists, AI (artificial intelligence) and machine learning specialists, big data specialists, digital marketing and strategy specialists, and process automation specialists. Decreasing demand is seen for data entry clerks, administrative and executive secretaries, accounting and bookkeeping and payroll clerks, accountants and auditors, and assembly and factory workers.

“Automation, in tandem with the COVID-19 recession, is creating a ‘double-disruption’ scenario for workers. Companies’ adoption of technology will transform tasks, jobs, and skills by 2025… Five years from now, employers will divide work between humans and machines roughly equally,” the report says. It notes that businesses are set to reduce their workforce because of technology integration and expand their use of contractors for task-specialized work.

The WEF report also says “new roles will emerge across the care economy in technology fields and in content creation careers. The emerging professions reflect the greater demand for green economy jobs; roles at the forefront of the data and AI economy; and new roles in engineering, cloud computing, and product development.”

It adds, “The up-and-coming jobs highlight the continuing importance of human interaction in the new economy through roles in the care economy; in marketing, sales, and content production; and in roles that depend on the ability to work with different types of people from different backgrounds.”

Of course, one can only wonder whether these forecasts will actually come through. After all, COVID-19 has taught us that the world can suddenly change, practically overnight. And there is no telling if another pandemic, or similar world-changing event, will hit us again in the next few years. However, there are signs that changes to the workforce are inevitable.

Based on WEF’s survey of businesses, an overwhelming majority says they are “set to rapidly digitalize work processes, including a significant expansion of remote working,” and that there is “potential to move 44% of their workforce to operate remotely.” But most businesses are also bracing for negative impact on worker productivity, and will thus help workers adapt.

WEF also says the “relative importance of skills sets is evolving,” and that employers are seen to favor or prioritize critical thinking and analysis, problem-solving, self-management, and technology use and development over physical abilities, core literacies, and management and communication of activities.

WEF also notes that even in past surveys, employers already noted the “growing importance” of critical thinking, analysis, and problem-solving. But now, they also see the significance of “self-management, active learning, resilience, stress tolerance, and flexibility.” Ever-changing and dynamic business conditions are obviously driving these changes in skill sets.

What is crucial, moving forward, is how businesses — and perhaps government — can help people adapt to these changes and capably address the needs and demands of the times. As WEF notes, businesses must invest in upgrading their people’s skills if they wish to remain competitive. The report notes that “for workers set to remain in their roles over the next five years, nearly half will need retraining for their core skills.”

“The public sector [also] needs to provide stronger support for reskilling and upskilling of at-risk or displaced workers… [It] must provide incentives for investment in the markets and jobs of tomorrow, offer stronger safety nets for displaced workers during job transitions, and tackle long-delayed improvements of education and training systems,” WEF adds.

This, I believe, is something that policy makers should start looking into urgently. What we have programmed thus far may not be enough. While we can pour more public money into reskilling, perhaps it will be more practical for the state to instead incentivize businesses to invest in reskilling their people, and to put more capital into the education and training of people for the jobs of tomorrow.

 

Marvin Tort is a former managing editor of BusinessWorld, and a former chairman of the Philippines Press Council

matort@yahoo.com

Big Tech’s swift reaction to Capitol rioters reveals new face of corporate political power—and a threat to American democracy

Big Business and Big Tech both reacted swiftly to the insurrection at the US Capitol, punishing and condemning those they deemed responsible for the riot or for creating the conditions that led to it.

But there was a big difference in how each group acted.

Dozens of US companies as diverse as Walmart, General Motors, McDonald’s, and Nike at least temporarily shut off the cash spigot to politicians who voted against certifying the results of the presidential election. While the reaction was unprecedented, the next congressional election is almost two years away, leaving erstwhile donors the option to change their minds.

Big Tech, however, responded more directly and consequentially. Twitter and Facebook banned President Donald Trump, Apple and Google removed Parler — the preferred platform for many of his followers — from their app stores, and Amazon stopped hosting the service. The results were immediate: Trump lost his dominant means of communication for the rest of his time in office, and prospective insurrectionists lost an important venue to plan what comes next.

As a scholar who studies how technology shapes new forms of corporate organization, I have been examining how information and communication technologies change the sources and uses of corporate power. From my perspective, while the decisive actions taken by tech firms may have limited the potential threats to democracy during the presidential transition, the fact that a handful of executives had the power to do so reveals the dangers posed by their concentrated power.

BIG BUSINESS VS BIG TECH
For most of the twentieth century, large companies engaged in politics through financial contributions, lobbying, and a revolving door of high-level personnel.

Through business groups such as the Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the Business Roundtable, businesses coordinated their voices to push common interests. Their preferred tool of influence was cash, typically in the form of campaign contributions. Seeking low taxes and light regulation, corporate donors unsurprisingly tilt conservative and broadly favor Republican candidates. But large corporations routinely contribute to both sides of the aisle to maintain access to incumbents.

After the Capitol riot, Big Tech companies suspended their political contributions just as traditional businesses did, but their bans and actions against Parler went much further, and the impact was more potent and profound.

I believe there are three reasons for this.

THEY CONTROL THE PLATFORMS
Tech companies, particularly the big five — Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft —  control the information infrastructure used in business and politics.

Politics and business are both built on information, and thus information and communication technologies are an essential intermediary. Our knowledge of the world, the tools we use to connect, and how we mobilize politically are all mediated by the internet. That leaves the gatekeepers of the internet with unprecedented power. The tools that they provide are, in many cases, irreplaceable.

Cash, in contrast, is easily substitutable. If the cash flow from corporate America is closed, Republican lawmakers can turn to other sources of funding, such as conservative billionaires like Dick Uihlein and Jeffrey Yass.

So while a politician can always find a new piggy bank, individual companies such as Twitter and Facebook control their access to millions of people.

CONCENTRATED POWER
The power of big technology companies is far more concentrated than traditional companies, making it easier to coordinate their political activity.

The fact that Apple and Google effectively control the distribution channel for phone apps, giving them the ability to cut off Parler in a day, is unprecedented. The aforementioned big five, along with Tesla, account for nearly 25% of the value of the Standard & Poor’s 500.

And while big business has lost many of the tools it formerly had to act collectively, Big Tech today faces common threats of regulation that might make it easier to coordinate on common interests.

Silicon Valley companies already have a history of collaborating to hold down wages through anti-poaching agreements.

INCENTIVES TO ENGAGE
Finally, tech companies have both a key incentive to engage politically and lack an important disincentive.

Although they don’t employ a lot of people relative to traditional companies, tech businesses are far more dependent on their workers, and these employees increasingly are engaging in political activism at work.

Indeed, hundreds of Twitter employees militated to de-platform Trump in the wake of the Capitol uprising — against the misgiving of CEO Jack Dorsey. Facebook employees staged a virtual walkout last summer over the company’s handling of Trump posts that they saw as inciting violence. And employee activism at Amazon helped get Parler booted.

Such socially oriented activism is rare in big business but increasingly common in Big Tech, where skilled workers can easily move to an employer that better suits their values.

In addition, conventional business leaders who take political stands have reason to fear the reactions of their shareholders, while many tech companies are led by dominant founders such as Mark Zuckerberg at Facebook, who are less susceptible to Wall Street pressures due to their control of votes and the board. Thus, tech CEOs typically have far more discretion to engage politically.

‘UNCHECKED POWER’
In short, decisions at a handful of corporations rapidly shut down the communications infrastructure of the Trump movement, with little means of recourse, leaving its constituents scrambling to find alternative means of finding each other.

This degree of corporate political power is very problematic for American democracy.

Conservatives are of course crying foul about decisions to ban Trump and others from social media, but many liberal groups find it worrying, too. As a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) put it: “It should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions — especially when political realities make those decisions easier.”

The exercise of such overt political influence on the workings of US democracy — with almost no room for oversight, by shareholders or anyone else — requires a new set of regulatory tools for a new form of corporate power.

 

Jerry Davis is a Professor of Management and Sociology at the Ross School of Business, University of Michigan

Flying off the handle

NSEY BENAJAH/UNSPLASH

WHAT FLIES OFF the handle is a loose ax head getting detached from its place, sailing dangerously into the air and hitting an unintended target. The phrase denotes a burst of uncontrolled temper.

A recent incident (have you forgotten already?) involving loss of control led to the shooting down of an unarmed pair of mother and son for being… well, irritating. (I just lost it, Sir.) The perpetrator’s chief calmly invoked the need for seminars on anger management for the police force. Which is about as sound a reaction as prescribing a cold shower to control a serial rapist.

Anger management may indeed be prescribed for less violent tantrums, even if not necessarily involving dead bodies.

You don’t like having lunch with a person with a short fuse. He asks for multigrain bread for his tuna salad sandwich. And the waiter brings him whole wheat bread. (Sir, we don’t have multigrain today.) The server is berated in a loud voice as you try to pacify your now raging companion with the offer to eat his wheat bread since you are on the South Beach Diet. He can order something else, or just scrape off the tuna from the sandwich — ha, ha, ha.

The harder you try to pacify your out-of-control lunch mate, the louder his voice gets as he turns on you — stay out of this you Son of a South Beach, and just chew on your carrot stick.

Hotheads have a low tolerance for frustration. This can manifest itself in aggressive behavior like sometimes yes, pulling a loaded gun in your face. The trigger event (pun intended) need not be caused by human aggression, like being cut and overtaken by a motorcycle in road rage.

Such aggressive behavior is unacceptable in the workplace even for the boss. Corporate legends are replete with tales of monumental tempers. It is not unusual for those who have worked too long with a known subordinate-beater to consider it a badge of honor to have been singled out for a blowup. This bizarre distinction is an occasion for bragging — he only hurts the ones he loves.

A display of condescension, sarcasm, and arrogance in a leader is always disconcerting. It is visited on critics and those who ask for reactions to such criticism. Can invectives and ax-heads flying in all directions be far behind?

Anger management is a psychological discipline to address short fuses. The patient is asked to take a deep breath, count to 50, and think happy thoughts, as when one used to collect stamps.

Psychologists allow that some dissatisfaction over unacceptable situations can be healthy. Suppressing anger at all times can be stressful. Good mental health lies in aiming for reasonable assertiveness. Logic can defeat anger since it tries to isolate a problem and look for possible solutions.

Criticism of one’s work, for instance, is not necessarily an attack on your personality, even if it seems that way especially if it’s the same critic doing it twice a day.

One egregious trait of overseas Filipinos on short home visits is their constant whining. Their threshold of dissatisfaction has been lowered by their exposure to First World efficiency. When everything works back home, any inconvenience experienced in their visit falls in the category of a minor disaster. (The quarantine hotel was dirty.) Such foreigners are candidates for anger management sessions, focusing on home visits.

The stress of hosting such characters, even for just a week, can strain the bonds of hospitality and reduce the host into an apology machine calming down his guests. (Just ignore the beggar knocking on your car window selling face towels, please.)

This cultural trait of passive acceptance of even the most outrageous situation, like the need for a security guard for every establishment, bewilders the foreigner. Why are we so accepting of even unacceptable situations?

Having a high tolerance for frustration is a defense mechanism for Third World inhabitants. It is sometimes referred to as “resilience.” Getting angry each time things don’t work can be too frenetic. Still, the danger of extreme agreeableness means the acceptance of mediocrity.

Now and then, even highly tolerant people need to be jolted out of their complacency and get angry. Sometimes holy anger is called for. After all, only unreasonable people can become true change agents.

 

Tony Samson is Chairman and CEO, TOUCH xda

ar.samson@yahoo.com

FIBA fines no-show countries in ACQ second window in Nov.

By Michael Angelo S. Murillo, Senior Reporter

THE disciplinary panel of world basketball governing body International Basketball Federation (FIBA) moved to fine countries which failed to participate in the second window of the Asia Cup Qualifiers (ACQ) last November.

In a decision released on Tuesday night, FIBA said sanctions were to be handed down on the national federations of Korea, China, and Chinese Taipei for their squads’ no-show in the calendared leg of the qualifiers.

Korea, which plays in Group A along with the Philippines, decided not to send a team in Manama, Bahrain, for the second window, citing concerns over the coronavirus pandemic.

It was the lone team in the group which failed to show up, with the Philippines, Indonesia, and Thailand all managing to send their nationals.

Korea was supposed to play twice in the second window, first against the Philippines and then Indonesia.

China and Chinese Taipei were also unable to send their teams in Group B, forcing the cancellation of the second window matches in the group altogether.

For their no-show, Korea, China, and Chinese Taipei were slapped a disciplinary fine of 160,000 Swiss francs (P8.6 million), half of it (80,000 Swiss francs) will be deferred to each national federation fully complying with its participation obligation in the next FIBA official competition.

Also, they will be given a two-point deduction in the FIBA Asia Cup 2021 Qualifiers, half of the sanction — one-point deduction — will be given to each national federation playing in the next window.

For Korea (2-0), that means the four points it got for its two victories will be slashed by half to two points with one point each being given to the Philippines (3-0), Indonesia (1-2), and Thailand (0-4).

The Koreans will have a chance to regain some ground in the qualifiers in the third and final window to be held at Clark City in Angeles, Pampanga, next month.

They play four matches — two against the Philippines (Feb. 18 and 22) and one each versus Indonesia (Feb. 19) and Thailand (Feb. 20).

Clark will also host matches in Group C, composed of New Zealand, Australia, Guam, and Hong Kong.

Gilas Pilipinas has started preparation for said competition, sending a pool of cadet members and Philippine Basketball Association players to the INSPIRE Sports Academy in Calamba, Laguna, to begin their “bubble” training.

China and Chinese Taipei, along with Japan and Malaysia, meanwhile, will play in Tokyo, which will host the third window for Group B.

In the qualifiers, the top two teams for each group in the end book an outright spot in the Asia Cup later this year in Indonesia.

Filipino fighter Rolando Dy stays with Bahrain-based Brave Combat Federation

THE reigning Brave Combat Federation (CF) Fighter of the Year will stay in the promotion after Rolando “Dy Incredible” Dy of the Philippines signed a new deal with the Bahrain-based group.

Coming off a strong showing in 2020, despite the challenges presented by the coronavirus pandemic, Mr. Dy (14-9) said he appreciates the confidence that Brave has given him and that he is looking forward to progressing in the new year and beyond.

“This organization took care of me when I was at the lowest point of my career as a professional fighter. Without hesitations, they gave me the opportunity to write a new chapter in my story as a combat sports competitor. Here I am today, one of the best fighters on their roster and in the world,” said Mr. Dy, son of Filipino boxing legend Rolando Navarette, in a release announcing his stay with Brave.

“It’s an honor to represent this organization on the global stage of this sport. I will surely do my best to give the fans and my supporters a performance to remember every time I step inside the cage,” he added.

Mr. Dy finished 2020 strong after months of limited activity because of the restrictions forced by the pandemic.

He had two straight victories in September and November en route to willing himself as one of the noteworthy fighters in Brave.

Mr. Dy first edged Polish knockout artist Maciej Gierszewski via a split decision then dominated John Brewin of New Zealand en route to a unanimous decision victory.

His efforts did not go to waste as he was named Brave Fighter of the Year and is considered one of the title contenders in the lightweight division.

Mr. Dy made his Brave debut in 2017 and did the rounds of different promotions after.

In 2020, he moved up to the lightweight division, from featherweight, and it is paying dividends for him so far.

For the new year, Mr. Dy said one of the goals for him is to get a shot at the lightweight title currently held by Amin Ayoub of France just as he expressed readiness to whomever the promotion lines him up with.

 “I want that title shot in 2021. But if Brave CF thinks I have to prove it again, then so be it. I really don’t mind. Line them up and I will keep knocking them down.” — Michael Angelo S. Murillo

Karate team also has SEA Games in mind in ‘bubble’

WHILE qualifying for the rescheduled Olympic Games is foremost for the national karate team as it begins its training “bubble,” it also has its sights on the Southeast Asian (SEA) Games later this year.

Speaking at Tuesday’s online Philippine Sportswriters Association Forum, Karate Pilipinas Sports Federation, Inc. President Richard Lim shared that apart from the Olympics, they also have their eyes on the SEA Games in November in Vietnam.

“November may still be far, but for an athlete preparing for the SEA Games, that’s near,” said Mr. Lim, who was one of the guests in the forum along with Philippine Sports Commission (PSC) National Training Director Mark Velasco.

They will try to improve on their fifth-place finish in the 2019 edition of the Games held here where they hauled a total of 12 medals — two gold, one silver, and nine bronze medals.

The country’s karatekas are one of the groups currently holed up at the INSPIRE Sports Academy in Calamba, Laguna, where they will stay for the next couple of months as they train and prepare for various international competitions, including Olympic qualifiers.

National karatekas in the bubble are SEA Games gold medallist Jamie Lim, Sharief Afif, Alwyn Batican, Jason Macaalay, and Ivan Agustin. They will be joined later by Junna Tsukii and Joan Orbon, who are both coming from abroad.

Also at the facility are the boxing and taekwondo teams, as well as the Gilas Pilipinas basketball team preparing for the third and final window of the FIBA Asia Cup Qualifiers in February.

Mr. Lim said that their team welcomes the chance to once again train as a group face-to-face after training under such a setup was sidelined by the coronavirus last year.

The karate official admitted doing things under a bubble has many challenges but expressed their readiness to comply with all the health and safety protocols put up by the PSC to ensure that the undertaking is a success.

“We have to prioritize the safety of everybody… Health [of the participants] is our primary concern,” Mr. Lim said.

The karatekas are eyeing the last Olympic qualifier in Paris, France, in June. They are also set to train abroad after the bubble. — Michael Angelo S. Murillo

Barça’s Messi given 2-game ban for Super Cup red card

BARCELONA — Barcelona captain Lionel Messi has escaped a lengthy ban for lashing out at Athletic Bilbao’s Asier Villalibre in Sunday’s Spanish Super Cup final defeat and will only serve a two-game suspension.

The Spanish soccer federation (RFEF) said on Tuesday, Messi had been banned for two matches, meaning he will miss Thursday’s Copa del Rey last-32 tie at Cornella and Sunday’s La Liga match at Elche. He is set to return to face Bilbao in the league on Jan. 29.

Barça said they will appeal the ban.

The Argentine was sent off at the end of extra time in the Super Cup final, which Barça lost 3-2, for striking Villalibre in the face.

He would have faced a sanction ranging from four to 12 matches had the RFEF’S competition committee described the incident as aggression, but it was instead reported as “violence during play,” which is punished with a two to three game ban.

It was the first time in 754 matches that Messi had been sent off for Barcelona. He has received two red cards while playing for Argentina, including on his debut back in 2005. — Reuters

Mitchell pours in 28 as Jazz top Pelicans

DONOVAN Mitchell scored 28 points and the Utah Jazz blew open a close game in the third quarter to cruise to their sixth win in a row, 118-102 over the New Orleans Pelicans on Tuesday in Salt Lake City.

Mitchell was one of six Jazz players with multiple 3-pointers, hitting four of Utah’s 21 treys.

Joe Ingles (five), Jordan Clarkson (four), Bojan Bogdanović (three), Royce O’Neale (two), and Georges Niang (two) also had more than one triple for Utah, which shot 50.6 percent overall and 44.7 percent from beyond the arc.

The Pelicans, who lost for the sixth time in seven games, only made six of 26 3-point attempts (23.1%) and 45.3% from the floor overall.

New Orleans star Zion Williamson had another strong showing but didn’t get enough help. Williamson finished with 32 points and five rebounds. Brandon Ingram was the only other New Orleans player in double figures, contributing 17 points.

Clarkson scored 18 off the bench for the Jazz. Ingles added 15 in his return from a three-game absence caused by an Achilles injury, and Rudy Gobert amassed 13 points, 18 rebounds and three blocked shots.

The Jazz led for most of the first half, but the Pelicans took a 47-46 lead as Ingram capped an 11-0 run.

Clarkson hit a 3-pointer to snap Utah’s scoreless skid, and the Jazz finished the half on a 9-2 run for a 55-49 lead.

Utah busted the game open in the third quarter, outscoring the Pelicans 36-20.

After missing three games with a knee injury, New Orleans guard Lonzo Ball scored seven points on 3-of-10 shooting in 23 minutes. He missed all six of his 3-point attempts. However, Ball was the only Pelicans starter with a positive plus-minus rating (plus-6).

Gobert got things going for Utah in the decisive third quarter with a dunk. The Jazz kept the pressure on New Orleans on the defensive end, and Utah surged on offense, ending the period on a 9-0 run thanks to three points by Gobert and 3-pointers from Clarkson and Ingles. — Reuters

Leicester City go top of Premier League with 2-0 win vs Chelsea

LEICESTER, England — Leicester City beat Chelsea 2-0 on Tuesday to go top of the Premier League, for 24 hours at least, thanks to goals from Wilfred Ndidi and James Maddison.

Leicester have 38 points from 19 games but Manchester United, on 37 points, can return to the top with a victory at Fulham on Wednesday.

Chelsea’s fifth defeat in eight matches dropped them to eighth place, nine points behind the leaders.

While Chelsea had 65% possession, it was the home side, champions in 2016, who looked the more dangerous throughout the game.

Leicester took a sixth-minute lead when a short-corner, which caught the visitors by surprise, was mishit by Harvey Barnes and fell to Ndidi on the edge of the box, whose shot flew in off the inside of the post.

Chelsea were awarded a penalty in the 38th minute when Jonny Evans brought down Christian Pulisic, but after a VAR review, the challenge was ruled to have occurred just outside the area and Mason Mount blasted the free kick over the bar.

Within three minutes, Frank Lampard’s side went from the brink of an equaliser to being 2-0 down when Chelsea’s defence failed to deal with a high ball from Marc Albrighton, which fell to an unattended Maddison whose composed finish gave Édouard Mendy no chance.

Chelsea substitute Timo Werner had an effort ruled out for a narrow offside in the final stages, but the Foxes were good value for their win — the first Leicester manager Brendan Rodgers had managed in 16 matches against Chelsea.

“Sounds nice to say we’re top of the league — probably for about 24 hours, but it’s a good one psychologically because we’ve worked really hard it’s a great achievement for us and I don’t think you’ll see a better team performance from us this season so far,” said Maddison, who was outstanding for City.

“It had a bit of everything, bit of tactical nous. I thought we were brilliant today,” he said.

Lampard said his side had been beaten by the better team on the night. — Reuters

1...8,5968,5978,598...14,250Page 8,597 of 14,250
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
© 2024 BusinessWorld Publishing.
All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines
Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube