We’re not clueless . . .

. . . Are we doing it by design then?

Pangilinan represents Indonesian money; ergo, we have to stop him? Didn’t Cojuangco champion the coco industry while invoking nationalism? So we can’t let Indonesian money own Meralco? Thus, Cojuangco/SMC taps SM? And the press and we, the people, are riveted by the excitement?

During Marcos’s time, a crony won a construction contract in the Middle East. And that became the genesis of our OFW-centric economy. We could get Filipinos working in the Middle East for better pay than working in the Philippines.

But it was short-sighted (and we had to strike out brain drain from our lexicon?) driven by a lack of confidence to be a developed country or a realization that being capital-challenged we would not have the chance? (But still we didn’t want an open economy – to protect our patrimony – thus unwittingly rewarding the few, and ensuring our decline?) Or was it crony-capitalism invoking patriotism? Or was it an insult to Filipino intelligence? But now many years later we still see it as a real positive – being an OFW-dependent economy, with the shadow of Marcos no longer lurking? And kids born post-Marcos haven’t heard of brain drain? Net, we’re the economic basket-case of Asia? How do we right our economic ship?

But first back to the Pangilinan-Cojuangco/SM fight for Meralco: It’s a replay of an old song – we don’t have the confidence to be a developed country and so we’ll just have local entrepreneurs (more precisely, the few) own our industry. Thus we miss the requisite value-adding question: are they geared to be regionally or globally competitive?

We may not need foreign capital in Meralco’s case. But the bigger issue is: how do we move towards development? Beyond local capital, we should gear up to be globally competitive – because our local capital and economy generate only third-world economic output and thus an alarming poverty rate. But we have yet to come to grips with this glaring economic reality? In the meantime we find ourselves clutching at straws!

International institutions have been encouraging us – that we need to develop our infrastructure. And source capital, market, technology and talent, wherever! No matter, for now we have a ringside view of titans fighting, and are applauding them like Americans applaud Donald Trump or Warren Buffet. But America generates first-world economic output with its multi-trillion $ economy. And we’re not American copycats – of the unbridled brand of capitalism?

Foreign or Indonesian money must be geared to make us regionally or globally competitive – which was how China designed their investment/economic model. Is Indonesian money thus geared or more to be a monopolist-conglomerate? Have they successfully marketed Philippine-produced products and services regionally or globally? How much of their Philippine operations’ income comes from overseas? That is the gut of a regionally or globally competitive economy: i.e., industry, whether local or foreign capital, is a successful regional or global player!

Simply changing ownership does not generate incremental economic value! We need to re-design our economic model – to serve the many not just the few? Re-design? Developing countries are fixated by cheap pricing. But the mind plays tricks. In the developed markets they “turn things on their head”. Instead of being paralyzed by cheap pricing, they think value. Value opens the mind – to optimize its dynamic with pricing, and much more!

Our local businesses are locally but not globally competitive because their premise is cheap pricing, not value. Cheap pricing doesn’t generate the means to do creative product development, R&D, regional/global marketing and logistics. Thus they need a two-track strategy in order to be competitive both ways and make a dent on GDP.

(The writer will be in Manila in the January to March timeframe and is offering his time to anyone who wants to discuss value-pricing and product development – and gear up for regional/global competitiveness.)