Wooing the super-rich (from BT)

last SG · 2007-05-10T13:25:26+00:00

The corollary negative effects are likely to be rising property prices and a higher cost of living. - Wee Piew CEO HG Metal Manufacturing Ltd The downside...

maurizio13 SG

Be kind to dogs and animals, especially gazelles.

Hehehe

walesa SG

Originally posted by snow leopard:

As long as the influx of super-rich will trigger the creation of new jobs and opportunities, I think that will be healthy.

I suppose it must be good, if the long-term sustained impact of this (through measures like reducing corporate tax to attract foreign investors who will, in turn, create more new jobs) is to chalk up budget deficits.

If that were true, I bet Ronald Reagan's brand of Reaganomics must have superceded Bill Clinton's Economic Plan in terms of propelling the growth of the world's largest economy, eh?

maurizio13 SG

A Gazelle is not that much different from a Jackass, afterall they share some common genes.

Gazelle SG

I think there is a difference stating facts and speculating.

Again you are making the assumption that.

a) All Chinese are making the same amount of money.
b) Out of the 1.3b population, there are not enough well to do Chinese to fill up the 150,000 seats

There is a link stating that Shanghai managed to sell ALL of the 150,000 seats at average price of USD240 each. Surprise?

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-09/18/content_375551.htm

Again you are making the assumption, only Malaysian earning riggits will visit Sepang race. And just because you find it hard to part with that kind of money, that doesnt mean that F1 fans will feel the same.

Again, contrary to what you said, Sepang has hit a record attendance this year. http://www.malaysiangp.com.my/news.asp?nid=541

Facts with capital "F"? I think more like F = Full of crap.

Gazelle SG

You must be really pathetic to be quoting this article. You know why?

a) JS is someone who have direct interest in Silverstone as he negotiate the deal with BE.

b) Silverstone is one of the oldest and most run down circuit in the current F1 season, and of course it will be in JS interest to spend as little as possible to continue hosting F1.

c) Part of the reasons for the poor turn out at Silverstone is TRAFFIC JAM, the lousy performance of English drivers over the last few years, expensive sterling pound for tourist. However I can bet with you that Silverstone will see a strong turn out this year because of Lewis Hamilton.

You call these facts? Or just your own interpretation?

Gazelle SG

Atobe, a couple more BS to add to your credit.

1) You claim that Singaporeans will not benefit from the IRs
2) You claim that the whole objective of IRs is for the government to collect gaming taxes.
3) Just because we have F1, Singapore economy to will become Monaco.
4) the reason why genting won the IR bid is because of PM Badawi
5) You are comparing the rich people attracted to singapore to Singaporeans going to JB to buy cheap grocery and food.
6) You claim that Mcdonald market strategy is to get kids addicted to their burger and fries and they will eat till they die.
7) You claim that MICE activities in Singapore will not benefit Singaporeans.
You claim that when visitor comes Singapore, they will only do 2 things. spend money at Marina Bay Sands and RWS
Countries like Malaysia and Shanghai are losing money hosting F1
9) Sungei Bersi toll is becoming a tourist attraction because Atobe use that as an indicator to calculate the time to travel from KL city to Genting Highland.
10) there were multiple PM Badawi visits to Singapore before and after the Sentosa IR announcement.
11) Chinese cant afford to watch F1
12) Malaysians earning in Ringgit cannot afford to watch F1.

Atobe SG

Originally posted by Gazelle:

I think there is a difference stating facts and speculating.

This is a refreshing change with the beginning of your statement indicating - 'I think'.

You think.... ? Thinking is dangerous, as it needs 'Ideas' - which you find unnecessary as 'FACTS' are all that you need.

Without fully appreciating the need for 'Ideas' - can you even know how and where to begin to 'speculate' ?

What is the basis of all the researches for knowledge and information if not from the beginning of the seed of an 'IDEA' that continue to be developed by 'speculative search and deductions', and concluding with the establishing of the 'Facts' ?

The difference between stating facts and speculating is that 'speculating' is the journey between an 'IDEA' to the end result of confirming it with 'FACTS'. This interim journey between the two ends is the 'SPECULATIVE SEARCH PROCESS'.

Can you know even the difference when you can only appreciate 'FACTS' but not the 'IDEAS' ?

Depending only on ONE end of the business only, and not concerned with the OTHER end, leaves it to others with 'IDEAS' to establish the 'FACTS' as they see it, and you simply swallow it.

This is the brilliant product of LKY's education system which you are a product of.

Read my thread 'A Blast from the Past - An Assessment for the Future'.

Originally posted by Gazelle:

Original post by Atobe:

The Shanghai Formula ONE tickets range from USD93 to USD534, with the kind of wages that the China workers earn, how many can afford ticket prices at these levels ?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again you are making the assumption that.

a) All Chinese are making the same amount of money.
b) Out of the 1.3b population, there are not enough well to do Chinese to fill up the 150,000 seats

There is a link stating that Shanghai managed to sell ALL of the 150,000 seats at average price of USD240 each. Surprise?

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-09/18/content_375551.htm

Unfortunately it is you who are making all these assumptions of these statements that you are disingeniously attritibuting to me.

I am surprised that you have even made an attempt to substantiate your earlier statements. However, merely accepting it as 'FACTS' require you to have some 'IDEAS' as to how to use these information as your version of what you wish are 'FACTS'.

Ticket sales for F1 Shanghai debut soar
(Xinhua)
Updated: 2004-09-18 01:28

Revenues from tickets of China's first-ever Formula One event, to be held in Shanghai on September 24-26, exceeds US$36 million.

Organizers told a Chinese F1 development forum here on Friday that more than 300 million yuan (US$36 million) has been gained with all the 150,000 tickets sold out.

"It's a decent sum, which shows our work has begun to get paid, " said Yu Zhifei, deputy general manager of the Shanghai circuit.

Yu, however, evaded questions on the total cost and the anticipated income from this year's Chinese Grand Prix.

"It's really hard to give a figure. All I can say is that Shanghai will make great achievement through the event," he said.

The tickets, in nine categories, went on sale in the middle of March. Prices ranged from 370 yuan (US$45) to 3,700 yuan (US$450).

The Chinese economic hub has built a 5.45-kilometer race circuit at a cost of 240 million dollars, with capacity for up to 200,000 spectators.

You have made too many assumptions beginning with your beliefs that mega-events such as Olympics and F-1 will benefit the host country - when I had already shown you the a May 2006 Report - 'Scary Economics of Mega Events'.

Your referenced post merely showed a report dated 2004 based on the First FORMULA ONE race in China.

As matters stand, have you any further data on ticket sales for the subsequent 2005 and 2006 series, or MORE IMPORTANTLY your data that the Formula ONE series had benefitted any host nations ?

Considering that the China Formula ONE organiser has a contract with Formula ONE to host the series from 2004 to 2010, and that they have spent about US$3 Billion to build the Formula ONE facilities, and US$20 Million annually to maintain it, and with the gate receipts for 150,000 tickets bringing a revenue of US$36 Million from the 2004 race - it will be brilliant mathematics to find this event to produce any net gain for the Organiser, and China.

The only beneficiay - like all your useless foreign owned mega-events - will be the Foreign Owner of the licensing and franchise dispensing of the various mega-events and entertainment 'IDEAS'

continue below

Atobe SG

continue from above

What do you expect to hear from the Malaysian Organisers of the Formula ONE at the Sepang Circuit ?

What figures has he produced that can substantiate your position that the Formula ONE mega-event has been beneficial to Malaysia, let alone proven its profitability to the Owners that justify the amount spent in building and maintaining the Sepang Circuit ?

Try digesting the following from an independent source :

If you have no IDEA how to find a single word for one alphabet F, and can only think one out of three words to fit this alphabet, you are already a confirmed FAILURE.
You simply have no IDEA how to begin thinking, as you have resisted accepting any [B]IDEAS[/b], but only FACTS it is simply too late for you to begin learning how to think.

If you cannot accept what I have offered concerning the 'Scary Economics of Mega Events', show me how profitable the Malaysian Sepang Formula ONE has been for Malaysia, let alone to the Malaysian Licensee of this Formula ONE series.

What is the use of making hollow claims and imbecilic responses to my 'IDEAS' in organising evidence as 'FACTS' ?

Show what you believe to be your 'FACTS', and we will see if you have any 'IDEAS' in handling your 'FACTS', which up till now you have shown yourself to be an abject failure.

Atobe SG

Can you understand how 'FACTS' are derived ?

'IDEAS' are the seeds that are 'developed' by 'SPECULATIVE TESTING' for studies of the 'RESULTING EFFECTS', that require 'INTERPRETATION' for a 'SATISFACTORY AND EDUCATEDLY SAFE CONCLUSION' to be reached and to be confirmed as 'FACTS' in a conclusive manner.

This is where your lack of 'IDEAS' in understanding what has been posted is clearly exposed, and you can only be seen as being imbecilic in not knowing how to read and accept the statements made by an eminent Jackie Stewart - even at its superficial face value without the need to think any deeper at your infantile level of thought process that is even inferior to a spastic or handicap.

Which Owner - like Jackie Stewart - will not want to negotiate a better deal for themselves ? What do you think was the cause of the long period of negotiation between Mr Ong Beng Seng and Mr Bernie Ecclestone for the most favorable benefit that each will attempt to extract out of an agreement ?

How did you come to your brilliant conclusion that Jackie Stewart wish to spend as little as possible to improve the Silverstone circuit - when his first complaint was that -

1. the Formula One business model must be changed so that circuit promoters can make a profit to enable them to invest

2. Formula One charges so much for the rights to play host to a race that few circuits make enough from the ticket sales to make a profit

3. Stewart said. "We cannot invest $20 million when we are likely to make a loss of $2 million this year because the date of the race changed because of the World Cup."

How did you conclude the poor turnout to be caused by 'Traffic Jams' around Silverstone race track ?

For your information the English Sterling Pound had depreciated in value from a high of ONE Sterling Pound to Singapore Dollar 5.80 during the mid-1960s, to the current exchange rate of ONE Sterling Pound 3.01

Where is the benefit that you claim from the high ticket sales at Sepang and Shanghai, when even older and established Silverstone Circuit - built at a lower costs than current race circuits - cannot even operate profitably ?

Are there no other more substantial 'FACTS' that you can produce that shows your claims of the benefits to the nations that played host to the Formula ONE ?

Pathetic is when one continue to cling on to every single strand of useless argument, when you have always been pummelled and mauled, each time when you come up with more imbecilic statements to redeem your useless position.

Atobe SG

Unfortunately, it is a display of your stupendous brilliance in summarising a list of unsubstantiated imbecilic thought process in arguing in a useless incoherent manner, that move from one useless point to another each time when you have been cornered.

You have brilliantly shown the various issues that have been rebutted with sound arguments based on facts and corectly sourced figures that have demolished your pathetically held theories that you claim to be 'FACTS'.

It is better that you leave the 'FACTS' alone, since you have no need for IDEAS', nor even have a slightest clue as to how these 'FACTS' were established.

Remember your hairy arse, you have become the butt of your own joke that you try to turn on others.

Try to go back step-by-step and substantiate your imbecilic arguments instead of merely making uselessly infantile summary of an honor list of arguments that have demolished you completely.

Gazelle SG

Originally posted by Atobe:

[/i][/color]
You have made too many assumptions beginning with your beliefs that mega-events such as Olympics and F-1 will benefit the host country - when I had already shown you the a May 2006 Report - 'Scary Economics of Mega Events'.

Your referenced post merely showed a report dated [b]2004 based on the First FORMULA ONE race in China.

As matters stand, have you any further data on ticket sales for the subsequent 2005 and 2006 series, or MORE IMPORTANTLY your data that the Formula ONE series had benefitted any host nations ?

Considering that the China Formula ONE organiser has a contract with Formula ONE to host the series from 2004 to 2010, and that they have spent about US$3 Billion to build the Formula ONE facilities, and US$20 Million annually to maintain it, and with the gate receipts for 150,000 tickets bringing a revenue of US$36 Million from the 2004 race - it will be brilliant mathematics to find this event to produce any net gain for the Organiser, and China.

The only beneficiay - like all your useless foreign owned mega-events - will be the Foreign Owner of the licensing and franchise dispensing of the various mega-events and entertainment 'IDEAS'

continue below

[/b]

I didnt know the cost of the Chinese F1 track would actually cost US$3b..what the hell you get this number? Another pile of Atobe BS?

Gazelle SG

Originally posted by Atobe:

Unfortunately, it is a display of your stupendous brilliance in summarising a list of unsubstantiated imbecilic thought process in arguing in a useless incoherent manner, that move from one useless point to another each time when you have been cornered.

You have brilliantly shown the various issues that have been rebutted with sound arguments based on facts and corectly sourced figures that have demolished your pathetically held theories that you claim to be [b]'FACTS'.

It is better that you leave the 'FACTS' alone, since you have no need for IDEAS', nor even have a slightest clue as to how these 'FACTS' were established.

Remember your hairy arse, you have become the butt of your own joke that you try to turn on others.

Try to go back step-by-step and substantiate your imbecilic arguments instead of merely making uselessly infantile summary of an honor list of arguments that have demolished you completely.

[/b]

Atobe, there is no point talking so much if you are incapable of standing by what you have said. Yeah, so when did PM Badawi visit Singapore again? What it before or after the Sentosa annoucement?

maurizio13 SG

To Atobe:

Don't bother replying to this imbecile, he doesn't read the links you post (cost of F1 facilities in China), he just reads your post without the links and say that what you have written is baseless.

Atobe SG

How much do you know about anything when you prefer not to believe in 'IDEAS' and can only accept 'FACT' that are produced and packaged neatly for your brain ?

You are an embarrassment even to those who are medically spastic, and even physically handicapped, when you cannot even read carefully and click on the given referenced site to the information already given above as :

''US$3 Billion to build the Formula ONE facilities, and US$20 Million annually to maintain it

Try this again, if you know how to left click on a device attached to your desktop PC and commonly known as a 'mouse':

Shanghai cashes in on F-1 frenzy

:
SIC has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on hosting the race. The track and related infrastructure cost US$3 billion to build, let alone the money required to maintain these facilities.

SIC has reportedly spent around US$20 million a year to gain the rights of holding the race from the Federation of International Automotive (FIA).

Gazelle SG

Originally posted by Atobe:
[b]continue from above

If you have no IDEA how to find a single word for one alphabet F, and can only think one out of three words to fit this alphabet, you are already a confirmed FAILURE.
You simply have no IDEA how to begin thinking, as you have resisted accepting any [B]IDEAS[/b], but only FACTS it is simply too late for you to begin learning how to think.

If you cannot accept what I have offered concerning the 'Scary Economics of Mega Events', show me how profitable the Malaysian Sepang Formula ONE has been for Malaysia, let alone to the Malaysian Licensee of this Formula ONE series.

What is the use of making hollow claims and imbecilic responses to my 'IDEAS' in organising evidence as 'FACTS' ?

Show what you believe to be your 'FACTS', and we will see if you have any 'IDEAS' in handling your 'FACTS', which up till now you have shown yourself to be an abject failure. [/b]

Again, I think you have to do better than quoting USA's failure in hosting football World Cup, (or should I say soccer) as an example of a host nation not making any economical gain from mega sports event. Especially if you consider a country where football is actually NFL, and FIFA world cup is called soccer.

Gazelle SG

Use your common sense, how can an F1 track cost US$3b? And before you jump into conclusion or behave like monkey see monkey do, you might want to find out what do they mean by related infrastructure, and are these infrastructure paid for my the organiser or government, and are these infrastructure only to be use by F1 and nothing else?

Atobe SG

Originally posted by Gazelle:

Atobe, there is no point talking so much if you are incapable of standing by what you have said. Yeah, so when did PM Badawi visit Singapore again? hat it before or after the Sentosa annoucement?

So we are back to PM Badawi ?

Did you not bother to subscribe to the Strait Times and access their archives to read that one article that you wish could prove me wrong ?

Running out of points to argue but going back to points that you wish you have something to cling on to ?

Is it not about time that you prove me wrong that you are an embarrassment even to those mentally disadvantaged that we termed as 'spastics' ?

Surely you are not physically handicapped to be unable to reach out to subscribe the Straits Times archives ?

Are you proving me correct that the IMF-World Bank meeting did not benefit the general population, as you seem reluctant to spend your imaginary benefits supposedly available from this event, even on a cheap subscription to the Straits Times to access their archives ?

Atobe SG

Are you qualified to even 'THINK' when you cannot accept the status of an 'IDEA' ?

Thinking needs someone who has 'IDEAS' - are you qualified to even make such a judgment call based on your ability ?

Here is another one of your stupendous ability to meander from macro arguments into micro issues that have no relevance to the line of debate.

Did my referenced site of the 'Scary Economics of Mega Events', refer only to the USA World Cup event ?

This clearly - AGAIN - shows your incapacity to read, understand, interprete, and conclude - as you are only reliant and dependant only on 'FACTS' develop by those who have 'IDEAS'.

Even to BS, one need to have 'IDEAS' and some ability to SKILLFULLY use avavilable 'FACTS' at their disposal.

Can you even know one end of the 'FACTS' presented when your expertise in recognising BS is based on 'FACTS' that others cook up for you ?

You are an absolute joke.

Gazelle SG

Another example how people like to distort information to suit their arguement, or should I say piling shi.t over shi.t

From what you have quoted, the US$3b is the cost to built the F1 facilities AND RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE. And before you find out what is these infrastructure, dont you think it is a little premature to jump into the conclusion that these are F1 or motor racing related cost?

As far as I know the cost of building the Shanghai F1 track, which is the most expensive in the world, is around US$317m, about 1/10 of what you have quoted.

Gazelle SG

Atobe, I know shi.ting is easy and having to eat your own shi.t back is difficult, so if you are incapable of standing by what you said, it is best that you dont anyhow BS here.

Oppss...are you saying that ST is the only media that cover PM Badawi's visit? Another BS?

« Previous Page Next Page »