Placing accountability on SGX....

There have been many articles on some of the internet that put the blame on SGX for its worse than bad management of its control on the market speculative behavior and investigation of possible market manipulation.Seriously who won't?

In the first place, is it not because of it's declaration that Asiason, Blumont as signatory counters then releasing them to the mercy of the market that led to the tumbling of these counters? I mean losing 90% of their values is considered serious damage to those holding these counters.

The question is: Why SGX only chose to act when these counters reached the peak? Don't they know that by this time, the market manipulator (if there is one) would have been gone long time ago? Don't they know that those who are still inside would most probably be those who are lured in by the up-surge caused by the manipulator(s)? I got a feeling here that SGX certainly do not understand the market and complacent in its duty, reacting to the situation only when it is too late and the lack of understanding of the consequences of their action, yet they want to play God!

I still remember that more than once, SGX changed the components of STI, replacing weak performing counters with stronger ones, just to make STI to look good. Have any other world leader do that? When was Dow Jones last change its components? When did FTSE, DAX and All Ordinary Index replace weaker components for stronger ones?It is only uniquely Singapore, and for what?

I am sure it all have to do with not Government policy, but to create an illusion of Government performance by show casing a strong index performance, thereby indicating economy performance. I still remember many years ago, the index rallied the day after Singapore election, LKY was quick to say that the market supported their returning of power.

It is no wonder that even with so many counters fdast becoming penny counters, the index is at a high of above 3,000 mark. STI as I see it, can no longer be used to gauge the performance of the economy.

The question remains for those who claim that it is wrong for SGX to be both player and regulator: If not SGX then who? Should MAS be stepping in to regulate instead? I am sure they are as suck as SGX. I seriously doubt that those experts inside with qualification such as masters or phds know the market behavior at all, they only think they know and they are sure of it.

To me, some one from SGX has to resign to demonstrate accountability of the event. Who is responsible for monitoring the market behavior, who executed the desasterous operation? Heads have to roll. But I am sure that the investigation will end up claiming system inadequacy instead of human responsibility. The thing is that do they know that it is exactly such behavior that lead to the decline of Singapore?