Category: Business

  • ‘Bush Shoe’ Gives Firm a Footing in the Market

    ‘Bush Shoe’ Gives Firm a Footing in the Market

    ISTANBUL — When a pair of black leather oxfords hurled at President Bush in Baghdad produced a gasp heard around the world, a Turkish cobbler had a different reaction: They were his shoes.

    In Iraqi’s Shoe-Hurling Protest, Arabs Find a Hero. (It’s Not Bush.) (December 16, 2008) “We have been producing that specific style, which I personally designed, for 10 years, so I couldn’t have missed it, no way,” said Ramazan Baydan, a shoemaker in Istanbul. “As a shoemaker, you understand.”

    Although his assertion has been impossible to verify — cobblers from Lebanon, China and Iraq have also staked claims to what is quickly becoming some of the most famous footwear in the world — orders for Mr. Baydan’s shoes, formerly known as Ducati Model 271 and since renamed “The Bush Shoe,” have poured in from around the world.

    via ‘Bush Shoe’ Gives Firm a Footing in the Market – NYTimes.com.

  • Foreign Currency Mechanism in Azerbaijan

    Foreign Currency Mechanism in Azerbaijan

    Trade banks started to work by permission of Russian Gosbank in 1991. They had been founded by state organs. As field of activity, giving credits to industry, special sector and small enterprises. In this area Azakbank and Ilkbank were famous. Important point is that these banks had a speciality as authority to foreign currency regulations.

    Azerbaijan declared Manat as national monetary in 1994 and founded Baku Interbanks Foreign Currency Market to regulate foreign currency activities in country. Azerbaijan decided to increase flow of Manat activities. Early time government used ruble as minor rate by giving them from Russian Central Bank. But this function as 4 billiard Ruble was inefficient to pay salaries and fees. So government decided to create a mechanism for regulating Manat and foreign currency. Firstly Manat had been published as 1, 10 and 250 Manat banknotes and gave to common market with ruble.

    In that time official foreign currency values was determined accordingly values of Moscow Interbank. But market foreign currency values was determined by Azerbaijan International Bank. So there are two value lines in market.

    Additionally, trade firms decided values according to their agreements.

    On the other hand, fourth value borned in foreign exchange in free market.

    National Bank of Azerbaijan defined rates of authoritative banks to declare Manat and ruble exchange rate. So 16 monetary values of other countries had been agreed as convertible by International Bank. (Turkish Lira, American Dolar, German Mark, Norway Cron…)

    According to decides of Baku Interbanks Foreign Currency, International Bank and other banks which have a right to determine foreign currency are in common market. Law regulated that any external body can not decide and activite in foreign currency. So illegal and other mix functions came to an end.

    Since 1995 these banks can determine rate of foreign currency. Main actor National Bank declares buy and sell of foreign currency on second day of every week. Also National Bank keeps stability every year according to situations of state.

    National Bank have an obligation as save and administration of foreign currency reserves of state. In a time, functions of National Bank and International Bank united to stabilize Manat. But after law declared a point as all corporations should give % 30 profits which are gaining foreign currency to Interbanks Foreign Currency. So National Bank is a unique unit to save and stabilize foreign currency reserves.

    National Bank can give a right to some special banks for foreign currency transaction. These banks can activite in transfer of foreign currency.

    Mehmet Fatih ÖZTARSU

    Qafqaz University – Interes Club

  • The Turkey-IMF Stand-By Accord: a Never-Ending Symphony?

    The Turkey-IMF Stand-By Accord: a Never-Ending Symphony?

    The Turkey-IMF Stand-By Accord: a Never-Ending Symphony?

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 5 Issue: 235
    December 10, 2008 03:52 PM
    Category: Eurasia Daily Monitor, Turkey, Economics, Home Page, Featured
    By: Saban Kardas
    The Turkish government’s handling of the economic crisis continues to draw criticism. Business leaders and investors have been insisting that urgent measures are needed to protect the economy. An expert from Moody’s maintained that without a new IMF program, Turkey could face recession in one or two years (Today’s Zaman, December 2). Since the previous stand-by deal ended in May, the Turkish Industrialists’ and Businessmen’s Association (TUSIAD) has repeatedly called on the government to conclude a new accord with the IMF (Radikal, April 26). Referring to the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development’s November report, which noted that Turkish economic growth might decline in 2009 and that Turkey needed an injection of foreign capital to respond to the global crisis, TUSIAD Chairwoman Arzuhan Dogan-Yalcindag stated that Turkey was the only country that had failed to take effective measures against the crisis. She added, “In Turkey we only hear speculation about the repercussions of the global crisis. The inability of the political authorities to offer diagnoses and solutions based on a realistic, timely, and comprehensive approach has shaken confidence in the markets” (www.ntvmsnbc.com, December 1).

    In response, several press reports said that Turkey was close to sealing an agreement, even citing the total amount of IMF assistance. The Under-Secretariat for the Treasury issued a statement on December 5, however, asking people to trust only the information that came from official channels about “the content, timing, format, duration, and amount of the accord being discussed with the IMF” (www.cnnturk.com, December 5).

    The same day, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told journalists that most of the remaining disagreements had been overcome and if the talks with the IMF continued at the same pace, the parties might reach an agreement by the end of the year. In response to mounting criticism, Erdogan said, “Some groups want an accord soon. It is easy for a bachelor to divorce a wife. They never negotiated with the IMF. We are driving a tough bargain with the IMF. We are telling the IMF not to put us in a situation [that would] shut down businesses” (www.ntvmsnbc.com, December 5).

    Minister of the Economy Mehmet Simsek said that Turkey-IMF talks had reached an advanced stage, yet Turkey would not formally apply to the IMF before concluding the discussions about the terms. He did not indicate whether the agreement would be precautionary—which is preferred by the Turkish government because it would give Turkey more flexibility about whether to use the funds—or a regular stand-by agreement, which would allow direct access yet impose more stringent rules on the government. Simsek said that the program should serve Turkey’s best interests, contributing to the solution of structural economic problems. He emphasized that “what is important for us here is for the deal with the IMF to increase confidence in these hard times while offering a chance to find foreign currency liquidity whenever it is needed” (Today’s Zaman, December 6).

    The government’s resistance to pressure and its hard bargaining with the IMF are driven mainly by two domestic political concerns.

    First, since coming to power in 2002 the government has made ending the IMF tutelage over the Turkish economy one of its primary goals. Having insisted that Turkey would not need another stand-by agreement with the IMF, the government is reluctant, for fear of harming its political reputation, to give in to the IMF’s demands (EDM, November 17). Since IMF stand-by arrangements usually impose a heavy burden on various social sectors, democratic governments are averse to structural adjustment programs. Given the approaching municipal elections, the AKP quite understandably is working to obtain an agreement with a minimum number of strings attached to government spending, in order to reduce the negative effects on society and preserve electoral support (EDM, December 3).

    This is where business circles are right to ask the government to sign the stand-by agreement to maintain macroeconomic stability and boost confidence in the markets. They also hope that in this way the government could be subjected to budgetary discipline and held back from excessive election spending. Dogan-Yalcindag is therefore seeking to convince the government that asking for the IMF’s support should not be seen as a sign of weakness (www.worldbulletin.net, October 17; Referans, November 11).

    Second, the AKP government demonstrates a certain degree of self-confidence that it can tackle the global crisis on its own. It views outside help as a last resort, accepting foreign assistance at a minimum level and only as part of its own program. Erdogan has claimed that several mini-projects initiated by the government were part of its economic package to deal with the crisis. Such projects include provision of interest-free loans to small and medium-sized enterprises, encouraging Turkish citizens to return their overseas investments to Turkey, and postponing tax payments (Radikal, December 5). Through these projects, the government is working to alleviate problems in sectors likely to be hit by the crisis, so that massive unemployment can be avoided.

    Commenting on a working meeting he held on December 7 with five ministers responsible for the economy, Erdogan claimed that Turkey would come out of the crisis as the least affected country. If all economic players acted in a spirit of solidarity, he said, they could turn the crisis into an opportunity for Turkey (Radikal, December 8).

    Although the government’s reluctance about the IMF deal and its optimism about Turkey’s potential to overcome the crisis might make sense in terms of boosting confidence in the economy, many analysts have grown extremely skeptical of Turkey’s prospects for escaping the crisis. Responding to Erdogan, a senior columnist, Osman Ulagay, maintained that “since the global crisis was not being taken seriously and it could not be managed correctly, production is falling, domestic and external markets are shrinking, liquidity problems cannot be overcome, and many firms have been pushed to the brink of closure.” Ulagay criticized the government’s horse-trading with the IMF and argued that by the time an agreement was reached, the horse might well be dead (Milliyet, December 7).

    The Erdogan government, rather than tying its hands with tighter fiscal rules set by a hasty IMF program, is seeking to obtain a better arrangement through a well-negotiated agreement and to use an IMF program as a tool to support its own priorities. It remains to be seen whether it will be able to have its cake and eat it too, when Turkish-IMF talks resume after the religious holidays.

    https://jamestown.org/program/the-turkey-imf-stand-by-accord-a-never-ending-symphony/
  • Turkey’s crisis – Financial woes threaten economy

    Turkey’s crisis – Financial woes threaten economy

    Tulin Daloglu
    Tuesday, December 9, 2008 OP-ED:

    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/dec/09/turkeys-crisis/
     
    Many people are directly feeling the effects of the recession –- and the ramifications reach far beyond the United States.
     
    According to the International Labor Organization, the current global financial crisis could cause as many as 20 million people worldwide to lose their jobs and cause extreme poverty to afflict as many as 40 million people. This crisis will test the ability of elected officials to make difficult decisions that their people may not agree with. That is, however, the weakest point in today´s democracies.
     
    Take Turkey as an example. It is accustomed to coping with financial crises. When the markets toppled in February 2001, and thanks to an agreement with the International Monetary Fund, the economy recovered. But the worldwide financial turmoil is again jeopardizing Turkey’s economy, and this time the Turkish government seems reluctant to agree to the IMF’s conditions.
     
    According to a recent public opinion poll by CNBC-e, more than 60 percent of Turks do not want their government to enter into a new agreement with the IMF. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan strongly agrees –- and has used some inflammatory rhetoric to make his point.
     
    Last month, he accused the IMF of “squeezing Turkey’s throat by curbing needed spending” and said the country doesn’t need another IMF program. It may make some Turks feel better to hear their prime minister speak with such attitude. But the way Mr. Erdogan’s government is negotiating with the IMF could bring about a different kind of reality. Truth be told, it´s Turkey rather than the IMF that needs the agreement.
     
    Last week, however, IMF spokeswoman Caroline Atkinson said that “there has been no formal request from the Turkish authorities for a program.” Yet prior to that statement, Turkish officials leaked claims to the media either that the IMF would not ratify a loan for the amount that Turkey needs or that an agreement is near. Those reports were then followed by an official statement from the Turkish Treasury confirming Ms. Atkinson´s statement. A responsible government should have foreseen the inevitable nervousness that it would create with such mixed messages. It’s good that the Turkish stock market will be closed this week for a religious holiday.
     
    Separately, the government is expecting the Gulf countries to invest $10 billion to $20 billion in Turkey. But that money will either go toward buying land or on the construction business, which has little or no effect on a country’s growth rate. In other words, this is not investment in industry. It does not contribute to the real economy. Mr. Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) seems to object to the IMF program because it wants the country’s growth rate to decline.
     
    But the IMF program is crucial for Turkey. It commits the country economically to accountability and credibility. It guarantees a continuous flow of money into a market in a time when global liquidity is drying up and investors have almost no appetite for risk. The Turkish government has not shown the expected GCC money as an alternative to the IMF program. But it certainly is keeping it in mind as it negotiates with the IMF –- and its method of negotiation does not fit the mold of credible business dealings.
     
    The point of Mr. Erdogan’s harsh rhetoric about the IMF could be that he really believes what he says –- that “the worst of the economic crisis was now past.” Yet U.S. President-elect Barack Obama said that “the economy seems destined to get worse before it gets better.” More, Mr. Erdogan recently said that the global financial crisis will not harm Turkey and proudly noted that on his watch no Turkish bank has gone bankrupt.
     
    Technically, Mr. Erdogan bought some time. But the crucial point remains that the IMF is demanding that the Turkish government take control of its budget. The program is meant to focus on the budget on a macro level, but its application will certainly impact the micro level. Given that municipality elections are fast approaching in March, many Turks are debating as to whether the government wants to maximize gain in the elections, which is why it will not accept the IMF demand about budget control.
     
    One of the key elements in the success of AKP –- or any Islamic movement –- is they do take care of their supporters. The party has distributed coal to people in the winter, as well as food –- creating a specific kind of relationship between constituents and the government. Over the long term, however, this means of operating actually puts down the people. But it certainly wins elections.
     
    Right now, Turks are unsure as to how to judge the AKP’s success in managing the financial storm. On that point, the local elections are critical for the AKP. The party has invested a lot in its establishment, but if it can’t win a significant number of new municipalities, there has to be a political interpretation. It could signal a possible coalition government in the upcoming general elections, which hopefully will turn back the rising power of political Islam in Turkey.
     
    Tulin Daloglu is a free-lance writer.
  • ERDOGAN VISITS INDIA: BILATERAL TRADE AND TURKISH-ISRAELI-INDIAN ENERGY COOPERATION ON THE AGENDA

    ERDOGAN VISITS INDIA: BILATERAL TRADE AND TURKISH-ISRAELI-INDIAN ENERGY COOPERATION ON THE AGENDA

    By Saban Kardas

    Tuesday, November 25, 2008

    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited India from November 21 to 24, against a background of growing economic ties between the two nations. Erdogan was the first Turkish prime minister to visit India since Bulent Ecevit’s visit in 2000. Erdogan met Indian President Pratibha Patil, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, and Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee. He visited India’s historical and cultural sites and technological centers and held meetings with Turkish and Indian businessmen (www.akparti.org.tr, November 21-24). 

    Turkish State Minister Mehmet Aydin, Minister of Industry and Trade Zafer Caglayan, and Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Hilmi Guler were part of the Turkish delegation. Earlier this year, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan and Minister of State for the Economy Kursat Tuzmen visited India, and President Abdullah Gul is expected to go there in the first half of 2009. This busy diplomatic agenda, as the latest of Turkey’s ambitious openings to its neighboring regions, shows that the AKP government considers India a strategic partner and major market in East Asia (Cihan News Agency, November 20).

    Also accompanying Erdogan were a large number of Turkish businessmen who explored opportunities for joint projects with their Indian counterparts. The meeting was reminiscent of former President Turgut Ozal’s trips to Central Asia and the Balkans in the early 1990s, which helped facilitate the Turkish business community’s penetration into new markets, making the country more competitive in the global economy.

    Throughout his visit, Erdogan underlined the conditions that created a favorable environment for closer economic cooperation between the two countries. First, he noted that Turkey and India shared historical ties and that they had no current political problems with each other (Cihan News Agency, November 21).

    As a matter of fact, the Turkish people are sympathetic to the cause of the Kashmiri Muslims; and Turkey has traditionally maintained a close friendship with Pakistan, India’s archrival. Nonetheless, Turkey and India are not parties to a political dispute that might poison economic relations. Since the AKP government came to power in 2002, the trade volume between the two countries has almost quadrupled, reaching $2.6 billion in 2007 (Referans, November 19).

    Second, Erdogan emphasized Turkey’s role as a bridge between different continents and civilizations. He also said that Turkey, as a developing economy at the intersection of three continents, provided access to energy, trade and transportation routes, and major markets. He invited Indian businessmen to invest in Turkey and take advantage of the economic opportunities that Turkey provided (Anadolu Ajansi, November 21).

    Indian ambassador to Turkey Raminder S. Jassal spoke to Turkish journalists before Erdogan’s visit. His remarks, as well as those of other Indian politicians during Erdogan’s visit, clearly show that the Indians are aware of Turkey’s strategic position in the global economy. Echoing Erdogan’s positive views about the potential for improving bilateral relations, Jassal described Turkey as the “center of energy in the region.” He also outlined various projects that are currently under way as well as Indian companies’ plans to invest in Turkey (Today’s Zaman, November 18).

    Erdogan attended a Turkish-Indian business forum in New Delhi, which was sponsored by Turkey’s Foreign Economic Relations Council (DEIK). A report published by the DEIK on the status of trade and economic relations between Turkey and India noted that the major areas of cooperation were energy, tourism, and communications. Turkey seeks to attract a greater share of the increasing foreign investments of Indian firms. The report shows that Indian companies are interested in investing in mining, pharmaceuticals, construction, the automotive industry, energy, communications technology, and sugar production in Turkey. The report also pointed to trade inequality in bilateral relations: Turkey’s exports to India amounted to $545 million from January to September, while its imports reached $1.9 billion (Referans, November 19). It was noted, however, that since Turkey’s imports were mainly raw materials, the imbalance was not a major concern for the Turkish economy (Cihan News Agency, November 20).

    During his trip, Erdogan underlined both parties’ willingness to increase the trade volume to $6 billion by 2010. To this end, he said, the two countries had agreed to form a working group that would prepare the groundwork for the establishment of a free-trade zone between India and Turkey (www.ntvmsnbc.com, November 24).

    One spectacular joint project concerned energy transportation. India is eager to diversify its energy supplies and seek alternative routes to transport the oil it imports from Russia. Erdogan and Guler noted India’s interest in joining the Turkish-Israeli Med Stream project. The three countries had already started feasibility studies about connecting Turkey’s Ceyhan port to the Red Sea through a undersea pipeline and announced that the project might be completed by 2011 (Sabah, September 13). The project will carry Russian oil from the Turkish port of Samsun on the Black Sea to Ceyhan, feeding the Med Stream pipeline. This alternative could enable India to load Russian crude into tankers at an Israeli port. When the project is completed, it will reduce the transport time to India from 39 to 16 days, while cutting the shipping costs significantly. Guler added that he would meet his Israeli and Indian counterparts in the coming days to discuss this project further (www.cnnturk.com, November 24).

    The parties announced that they would increase cooperation in nuclear energy, which is significant given Turkey’s plans to build nuclear power plants and India’s experience in this area. They also noted their determination to join forces in fighting terrorism. Reflecting on their consensus on a broad range of issues, Erdogan said, “Turkey made a strategic decision to develop relations with India in all fields” (Zaman, November 23).

  • Turkey in free-fall

    Turkey in free-fall

    By Robert M Cutler

    MONTREAL – Turkey’s stock markets, reflecting a stalling economy and doubts over International Monetary Fund loans in the run-up to polls next year, have intensified a year-long plunge, with a key benchmark tumbling more than 36% in barely 11 weeks.

    The ISE National 100 equities index has taken a 36.8% hit from its level at the end of August, the last time I reviewed the country’s economic and financial situation (See Turkey has a rough road ahead, Asia Times Online, August 28, 2008). At just above the 25,000 level, it is now down 56.8% from its all-time high of mid-October 2007.

    The ISE 100 is now in a short-term trading range between the low 24,300s and the mid 29,300s, but will sooner rather than later break out of this range on the downside. The next support level is in the 19,000-20,000 range, after which a medium-term recovery should kick into gear that could take it back as high as 30,000.

    However, it is more than likely that the recovery will be followed by another decline of indeterminate but substantial proportion. Any fall in the index significantly below 20,000 in the meantime will signify that that medium-term recovery is foregone and the further steep falls are to be expected.

    The domestic economic outlook justifies this pessimism. Declines in industrial production steepened in September to 5.5%, the biggest drop since 2002, from a 4.1% fall in August. With car manufacturers such as the local units of Ford and Toyota temporarily closing plants, and textiles manufacturing plunging 17.6% in September, the government’s 2009 spending plans based on 4% economic growth are now looking unrealistic, according to analysts.

    The economy expanded 1.9% year-on-year in the second quarter, down from 6.7% in the first quarter. Meanwhile, the central bank has kept its benchmark interest rate at 16.75%, more than four times the level in the euro zone, as it tries to bring down an inflation rate the central bank said this month could exceed 11% at the end of 2008.

    The government plans to increase key spending 17% next year as Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party prepares for municipal elections due to be held by March.

    Foreign confidence in the economy plays a disproportionate role in Turkey’s stock market. Morgan Stanley estimates that foreign investors hold 16.5% of domestic debt stock and 72% of the free float in the stock market itself.

    International financial players, as well as domestic business interests, accordingly, are strongly in favor of Turkey signing a new agreement with the IMF, which is considered an important lever in encouraging further economic reforms.

    Turkey’s last agreement with the IMF, involving US$10 billion, expired in May. It was the most recent in a series of stand-by agreements beginning in 1999 that have been nearly universally viewed as an “anchor” instilling the discipline necessary to implement successive reform agendas, many of which would bring the country further into line with European Union standards.

    The government has continually claimed that it is bringing its economic, legal and financial structure into line with EU norms only because this is to the benefit of Turkey itself. Negotiations for Turkey’s accession to the EU are stalled in a number of key fields and the trading bloc has as yet no power to impose conditionality on the country’s reforms. Turkish public opinion in favor of accession, meanwhile, has recently declined.

    Turkey’s business community has been calling for another loan deal to help to limit the fallout from the global financial crisis. There is also concern in the national and international banking sectors that only an IMF agreement can supply the incentive for further reform and greater fiscal discipline. The IMF, meanwhile, admits that Turkey is better able than in the past to deal with external shocks, thanks to more diverse export markets and a flexible exchange rate.

    Perhaps partly because the present domestic financial crisis is not of Turkey’s own making, the government has hesitated to explore possibilities for a precautionary stand-by agreement with the IMF, of the sort that Ukraine and Hungary have recently concluded.

    The absence of a precautionary agreement would not necessarily cut Turkey off entirely – it could conceivably receive up to US$8.8 billion under the Short-Term Liquidity Facility that is dedicated shoring up emerging markets. Still, Erdogan would prefer to put off any agreement until after the local elections in March so as to avoid giving his political opponents any additional momentum in their criticism of his policies.

    To increase government spending in the run-up to the local elections. Erdogan would like to take the state unemployment fund and label it as revenue, but an agreement with the IMF could tie his hands in this respect.

    As a result, he may request a currency swap agreement from the US Federal Reserve Bank, of the sort that it has extended to other countries lately. While these funds might be intended to ameliorate the current-account deficit, there would be nothing to prevent the government from using them, in the place of existing state revenues, for expenditures in view of the upcoming local elections.

    The IMF and Turkey are expected to hold further talks during this weekend’s summit of industrial and developing nations in Washington.

    Even so, “It is not very easy to say whether there will be an agreement with the IMF or not,” Deputy Prime Minister Nazim Ekren said last week, according to a Reuters report.

    Robert M Cutler (http://www.robertcutler.org) is Research Fellow, Institute of European, Russian and Eurasian Studies, Carleton University, Canada.

    (Copyright 2008 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)