Are the Knives Out for Pervez Musharraf?

As voting gets underway in Pakistan, a question to be asked is how popular its head of state, Musharraf is. According to the International Republican Institute (IRI), Musharraf’s approval rating is just 15%, a 50 percentage-point drop since November 2007. Seventy-five per cent of respondents think Musharraf should resign, while 62% think his government had a say in Benazir Bhutto’s assassination. A [George W.] Bush protege, Musharraf’s loyalty to the US govt following 9/11 has seen his administration rewarded with $ 10 b in American aid. To add to Bush’s woes, some sources put down 89% of Pakistan’s 165 m-strong population, as opposed to any participation in America’s “war on terror”. Party-wise, how is Musharraf’s own Pakistan Muslim League (PML-Q) expected to fare? It is projected that the major winners will be Nawaz Sharif’s PML-N (Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz) and the PPP (Benazir Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party), both of which are set to get around three-quarters of the vote. Musharraf’s PML-Q is projected to get a dismal 14 per cent.

The Haves and Have Nots of Club Soccer

This is Deloitte and Touche’s (2006/07) latest list of richest football clubs:

1) Real Madrid: £236.2m
2) Man United: £212.1m
3) Barcelona: £195.3m
4) Chelsea: £190.5m
5) Arsenal: £177.6m
6) AC Milan: £153m
7) Bayern Munich: £150.3m
8) Liverpool: £133.9m
9) Inter Milan: £131.3m
10) AS Roma: £106.1m

The list shows that at the upper end, the game’s riches continue to be monopolized by the same group of clubs, with only one change in the top ten from the previous season. Between them, the collective revenue of the top 20 clubs – which are all European – grew by 11% to £2.5bn in 2006/07, the highest rate of growth since 2002/03. Deloitte says the new TV money could help more English clubs into the top 20 in a year’s time. Harry Philp, director of sports finance and advisory firm Hermes Sports Partners, said: “The top seven or eight clubs tend to usually be the same, and generally drawn from the big English, Spanish and Italian clubs. Deloitte’s figure takes into account income from ticket sales, merchandising and broadcasting contracts but do not include transfer revenues and does not calculate profitability.

Just a thought.

Is it time clubs had their finances checked (by whatever authority) a little, and some sort of Robin Hood kind-of-tax imposed to help out the smaller fry? To me the objective is putting a cap on the greed in the modern game. There is a lot of money – just like the haves and have nots – but is it truly trickling downwards? In the English Premier League (Premiership) the rich still keep getting richer by the day. It seems that fiscal disipline alone isn’t enough.

Do you think the re-introduction of true fans of the clubs, whether at owner or player level will help out in curbing such trends as rich billionaires of dubious reputation gobbling up all available football clubs? By true fan I have in mind the likes of David Moores, Ken Bates, Allan Sugar, among owners; and Alan Smith, Carragher, Francesco Totti and Paolo Maldini among players. These kind of individuals grew up supporting these clubs and achieved their dream of owning or playing for them.

There is, to me, an unhealthy obsession with boosting of profits and accumulating a massive war chest to play with the ‘big boys.’ Where does that leave the rest of the football world? Is it possible, however controversial, to introduce some sort of salary caps in wages, expenditure and such-like activities? I see that as the reason why leagues such as the SPL and Bundesliga fool. Liquid clubs like the Old Firms and Bayern Munich are light years ahead of the likes of Motherwell and Nuremberg. They can never compete. Once in a while we see surprise packages like Rosenborg emerge but their short-term success is unsustainable due to lack of depth. In the Premiership, Man U and the ‘Big 4′ have very deep squads as compared to Aston Villa – a founder member of the top flight league!

It provides an interesting point to debate on. I’m not naive on one thing, modern football is far more complex than in the days of Bill Shankly (ex-Liverpool coach). Without money it becomes impossible to even show up sometimes.

The actual article appears here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7242490.stm

What do you think?

Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWVs) – A danger to the US economy?

Apparently, the world’s largest economy is concerned about billions of dollars injected to rescue major Western banks ailing from the sub-prime mortgage crisis. Most of that money has come from China, Kuwait and Singapore, through state-owned funds. The chief worry, it seems, is that countries like China and Russia invest with strategic or political motives, and there is a danger of subtle control of the American economy. The top funds in America are:

1. Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (UAE) – $ 250-875 b
2. Government Pension Fund – Global (Norway) $ 315 b
3. China Investment Co. Ltd – $ 200 b
4. Central Huijin Investment Corp (China) – $ 60-100 b
5. Kuwait Investment Authority – $ 213 b
6. GIC/Temasek (Singapore) – $ 208 b
7. Future Fund (Australia) – $ 40 b
8. Qatar Investment Authority – $ 30-40 b
9. Alaska Permanent Reserve Fund (USA) – $ 37-40 b
10. Brunei Investment Authority (Brunei) – $ 30 b
11. National Welfare Fund (Russia) – $ 19 b
12. Development Bank (Russia) – $ 10 b

Says Marcy Kaptur, Ohio Democratic Representative: “Instead of rescuing our economy, these investments only deepen America’s insecurity, forcing the US further into debt to foreign interests.” The words were uttered before the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission. She added, “More often than not, these deals are presented as purely financial when they are in fact, political and strategic.”

To Virginia Senator, Jim Webb (D): “We cannot keep selling off our country. We cannot continue our excesses of spending and borrowing.”

While sharing questions regarding the motive(s) of previously rogue states (based on their rivalry and mistrust by the USA), such as China and Russia, do these words adequately take into consideration the effects of globalization of the local economies? Isn’t such a phenom not going to lead to more movement of money and people from one country to the next? In fact, isn’t such ‘buying’ into local economies basically inevitable, much the same way as dinosaurs had to die from an ice age they couldn’t cope with?

Tanzania: Example of political goodwill in fighting graft

Tanzania’s president, Jakaya Kikwete, dissolved his Cabinet following the resignation of Prime Minister Edward Lokassa over a parliamentary probe into an emergency power generation contract. This follows the PM’s influencing the award of a contract to Richmond Development Company LLC (USA), to supply 100 megawatts of electricity at a cost of Tshs 172.9 billion. The contract was awarded in 2006.