Opinion

FOR a growing number of holidaymakers, the rational response to the intense heat, high prices and overcrowding that blight the Mediterranean in July and August is to visit in the spring or fall. After all, the weather is cooler, hotels are better value and the vibe is more relaxed. 

This so-called “shoulder season” travel is booming. The trend could help ameliorate overtourism while boosting the use of aircraft and accommodation during the normally fallow winter months. But this rebalancing won’t happen without a coordinated industry effort to keep resorts open and highlight the attractions of off-peak travel. Oh, and more flexible school holidays would also help. 

Europe is once again anticipating an influx of wealthy American visitors this year, but if they’re sensible, those unrestricted by the school calendar will delay their visit until the autumn. 

Since the Covid-19 pandemic, Delta Air Lines Inc has seen a “multi-year” “systematic shift” of US demand for European trips from July and August into the shoulder periods “as consumers look to avoid peak crowds and summer heat,” its president, Glen Hauenstein, told investors earlier this month. “The peak is getting less peaky and the shoulders are getting stronger,” he said. 

While anti-tourist protests and sweltering weather in southern Europe haven’t impacted UK budget carrier EasyJet plc’s peak summer bookings, it’s benefitting from more demand in the shoulder season. The final quarter of the calendar year has historically been loss-making, but there’s hope for generating profits in the future thanks in part to the elongation of summer into October, CEO Kenton Jarvis told analysts in May. 

Greek carrier Aegean Airlines SA has also seen its financial performance improve in the October to December period amid more travel to and from Athens and Thessaloniki, which it attributes in part to climate change and milder winter temperatures creating a “gradual smoothing” of demand, chairman Eftichios Vassilakis said in March. 

Inbound travellers to Greece increased 24% year on year in November, according to the Bank of Greece, while monthly travel receipts jumped 45% to €618 million (RM3.06 billion). American visitors to Greece boosted their spending that month by 78% and accounted for almost one-fifth of the total. 

Europe’s short-term rental market is also seeing more demand in the autumn, according to AirDNA which tracks listings on Airbnb and Vrbo; nights booked jumped 18% year on year in October 2024 and were 31% higher than the total in October 2019. Holiday-makers are taking advantage of lower off-season rates to book more upscale properties, and peak summer now represents a smaller share of total annual demand in popular vacation destinations as the chart below shows. 

Amid evacuations due to summer wildfires and the Acropolis having to close during periods of extreme heat, I’m not surprised several travel firms now report more bookings in September than during peak summer. Selling active holidays in July and August can be challenging, according to Ben Colbridge, product and commercial director for Exodus Adventure Travels, whose offer includes hiking, cycling and cultural trips. “Most people don’t want to be doing that sort of thing if the temperatures are above 40°C,” he told me, and those who must travel in July and August are increasingly picking cooler, northern destinations such as Scandinavia. 

Exodus’s main European travel period used to run from May until the middle of October, but it’s seeing a “creep at the edges” extending the season from April through the end of October. “Going forward we will start to push into the beginning of November in southern Europe,” he said, while acknowledging that airline capacity in the shoulder season remains a limiting factor.

Indeed, this nascent shift will only succeed if the travel industry coordinates to make off-peak visits more available and appealing, while being sensitive to local residents’ concerns that this will cause an increase in overall demand (rather than just redistributing guests from the summer peak). 

Convincing restaurants, transport services and attractions to remain open longer isn’t easy either. Seasonal workers often depart, and what if visitors don’t come? 

“Prioritising staff retention through flexible scheduling, short-term contract extensions, or end-of-season incentives is key to maintaining service quality,” notes the nonprofit European Travel Commission. 

Resorts also need to offer more than just a sun lounger in case the weather turns inclement — culture, nature, sporting and wellness offers are essential. For example, German travel giant Tui AG is trying to appeal to runners by sponsoring marathons on Rhodes, Majorca and Cyprus in the off-season (and offering shorter races for accompanying family members). 

It would help, too, if families could be more flexible in their travel dates. Schools in England traditionally have a six-week summer holiday, but some institutions are opting for a shorter hiatus. As well as easing childcare pressures and the potential educational benefits (kids forget much of what they’ve learned after a long break), this would mean the October half-term could be extended to a fortnight instead of one week — as is already the norm in Germany. 

The German school holiday system — which is also staggered by region to lessen the bunching of vacation bookings — is no panacea, though. Flights during the autumn half-term are often extortionate as this Berlin-based columnist can confirm. 

Yet, after experiencing the delights of Sicily in late October — when the beach was comparatively empty and the sea still invitingly warm — I’ve decided “shoulder season” vacations are the way forward. Please don’t tell everybody. — Bloomberg

• This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

---

• This article first appeared in The Malaysian Reserve weekly print edition

The post Never-ending summer is changing how we holiday appeared first on The Malaysian Reserve.

The legendary 80s advertisement heralded a savings culture that empowered Malaysia’s economic ascension 

MALAYSIANS have always been proud to claim that we were distinctively ranked among the best of countries in the world in terms of savings rate — consistently within the approximation of 40% of GDP. 

Close to three decades ago, finance ministers and/or central bank governors were always quick to highlight — almost daily and almost to the point of arrogance — our savings numbers. 

Economists would argue that our high savings then were among the most important factors that enabled Malaysia to become a credible tiger economy in the early 1990s. Domestic savings provided cheap funds to fire up the nation’s growth engines. 

The 1997/1998 financial crisis was a setback, hindered our economic progress and choked our savings as the currency market losses burned the national savings to crisp. 

We did, however, bounce back and continue to consistently register a respectable 30-ish% savings rate in the following decade, thanks largely to the mandatory savings agency Employees Provident Fund (EPF) and other public and private trust funds. 

The gross savings rate in 2011, for instance, stood at 37.7% of GDP, according to the World Bank. It, however, took a turn for the worse since. 

Exacerbated by the disastrous Covid-19 Movement Control Orders (MCOs), national savings bottomed out at 25% GDP in 2020. 

They inched to 26.6% in 2022, slowly but surely, and were forecasted to reach 35-ish% last year. 

However, economic uncertainties have explicitly revealed the worsening trend prevalent since the pandemic years. 

Last year, a survey found that due to the mediocre level of savings, the majority of Malaysians — 61% to be exact — can’t even produce RM1,000 for emergencies. 

Not only that. According to the Financial Planning Association of Malaysia (FPAM), the population’s understanding of financial literacy is well below the global average. 

As at 2023, only 36% of Malaysians demonstrated an understanding of basic financial concepts, mediocrely lower compared to the global average of 42%. 

According to FPAM, many Malaysians are now allocating more towards meeting expanses than saving for retirement or investments — meaning that we’re losing sight of our horizon. 

There were factors that degraded our financial literacy level, particularly the proliferation of credit cards and easy payment schemes, but surely, we must take it seriously when our basic financial awareness went limp. What’s happening to Malaysians? What can be done to return our financial literacy level to the good old days?

I would say — bring back the Mak Ngah advertisement — Merah sangatlah Mak Ngah. Maybe not in its actual form, but the one medium of communication that could replicate the impact of the legendary advert. 

(Merah sangatlah Mak Ngah was a TV advert aired circa 1983 to promote Permodalan Nasional Bhd’s [PNB] open-end fund, Amanah Saham Nasional [ASN]. Refer to: https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=FldzvH08tjg) 

Long before branding became a catchphrase, this advert was already moving minds with its sheer simplicity and humour. 

It was a piece of reels art that reverberated across decades — as simple as it was, in humour — with the message on the importance of saving for a rainy day, that had been lastingly etched in the minds of generations of TV viewers. 

Ask any Gen-Xers or Baby Boomers about the Mak Ngah advert — regardless of race or creed — I swear by my three-wood that most of them, if not all, would remember. 

That’s effective communication. No double-speaking, no ambiguity. It might may just be exactly what we need to raise national awareness. 

• Asuki Abas is the editor of The Malaysian Reserve.

---

• This article first appeared in The Malaysian Reserve weekly print edition

The post Bring back the Mak Ngah advertisement appeared first on The Malaysian Reserve.

IN A recent crackdown, the anti-graft agency raided recycling facilities in Penang and other cities, uncovering a suspected syndicate involved in the illegal smuggling of scrap metal and electronic waste through the ports. 

The scheme allegedly involved wrongly declaring scrap metal as machinery and other non-taxable goods to evade the government’s 15% export tax — a blatant manipulation of regulations for illicit gain. 

Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) suggested that the operation may have cost the national treasury over RM950 million in unpaid export duties over the past six years. 

If accurate, this case represents not just a massive financial loss, but a symptom of a deeper malaise: Systemic corruption that continues to erode public trust and drain national resources. 

The scale of the alleged fraud — nearly a billion ringgit — is staggering. It is money that could have part-funded schools, hospitals or infrastructure projects vital to the nation’s development. Instead, it has enriched a select few. Put all the frauds togethers, we’re talking about mind-boggling figures. 

If the Madani Government is serious about leaving a lasting legacy, it must confront corruption with both courage and concrete reforms. 

In February 2024, this column proposed four key measures for Prime Minister (PM) Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to consider: 

1. Relinquish the finance minister portfolio — a promise made by Pakatan Harapan (PH). 

2. Mandate full asset declarations for all MPs. 

3. Place MACC under parliamentary oversight, with future commissioners vetted by the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC). 

4. Disclose all contracts awarded without open and competitive tenders to enhance transparency. 

Yet, more than halfway into its term, the government has made limited progress. The PM continues to hold the finance portfolio, and MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki has been granted three successive contract extensions — despite growing concerns, including from within Anwar’s own party, PKR, about the need for fresh leadership and institutional independence at the anti-graft agency. 

Beyond these structural reforms, there is another powerful tool the government should adopt: The Unexplained Wealth Orders (UWO) regime. 

An UWO allows authorities to demand that individuals explain the source of assets that appear disproportionate to their known income. If they fail to provide a legitimate explanation, the state can move to seize those assets through civil proceedings. Crucially, the burden of proof temporarily shifts to the individual — forcing them to justify their wealth, rather than requiring prosecutors to trace every corrupt transaction. 

The UK implemented such a regime under the Criminal Finances Act 2017, colloquially dubbed “McMafia Orders” after a BBC series on global corruption. 

The system was further strengthened by the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Act 2022, which expanded the scope of UWOs to target two key groups. One, politically exposed persons (PEPs) —individuals holding prominent public roles like ministers, MPs, ambassadors, their families and close associates. Second, individuals suspected of involvement in serious crime. 

The rationale is clear: Those in positions of power are at higher risk of corruption and their unexplained wealth should be subject to greater scrutiny. 

The time is ripe for such a mechanism. Consider the RM950 million smuggling case — such sums don’t vanish into thin air. They flow into luxury homes, high-end vehicles, offshore accounts and corporate holdings. An UWO regime would empower law enforcement to follow the money, disrupt kleptocratic networks and recover assets for the public good. 

Imagine being able to question a businessman driving a fleet of supercars while declaring minimal income — or a public official living in a mansion funded by undeclared offshore income. With UWOs, authorities could compel answers. And if those answers don’t add up, the courts could order the forfeiture of suspicious assets. 

We have children of politicians who are said to be in the ranks of billionaires. We have family members of well-known politicians flaunting wealth so obscene that it makes the honest taxpayers boil with rage. And we have middle-ranking civil servants living a life of luxury, one that could never have been attained by their legitimate income. 

Australia, Ireland, Kenya and Mauritius are among jurisdictions that have introduced UWO as a tool to improve recoveries of the proceeds of crime, particularly kleptocracy. But the result has been mixed. Still, it is worth considering if UWO could add to the arsenal to fight corruption locally. 

Ultimately, no law is a magic bullet. The success of any anti-corruption measure depends on the integrity and independence of those who wield it. But by introducing UWOs, Malaysia would send a powerful message: Ill-gotten wealth will no longer be tolerated. 

For the Madani Government, introducing the UWO would be a welcome step in battling corruption. 

• Habhajan Singh is the corporate editor of The Malaysian Reserve. 

---

• This article first appeared in The Malaysian Reserve weekly print edition

The post Introduce Unexplained Wealth Orders to combat corruption appeared first on The Malaysian Reserve.

IT was a back-to-back disastrous political gambit and public relations exercise on the part of the Government last week.

No matter how the supporters and backers of the government try to spin them, they felt flat.

The first was Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s reply in parliament to a question on the status of the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) into a decision not to pursue the appeal over the decision of the international courts to award Pulau Batu Puteh to Singapore in 2008.

For some background, the decision not to appeal in 2018 was made under Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s watch when he had just won the general election for Pakatan Harapan and became Prime Minister for the second time around.

Dr Mahathir’s decision not to pursue the appeal, which was initiated under his then-predecessor, was later on RCI-ed under Anwar’s watch after he became PM at the end of 2022.

While there were recommendations from the RCI which pinned some blame on Dr Mahathir, the RCI report was supposed to be tabled in parliament and its recommendations endorsed.

A Government Minister tabled it, but no vote was taken, and it was withdrawn without any explanation given.

That was the end of last year.

In this week’s Parliamentary sitting, an Opposition member of Parliament asked what had become of the RCI to which Anwar said that though Dr Mahathir was guilty, he and his Cabinet chose not to pursue the matter because of his age.

Dr Mahathir turned 100 on the 10th of July.

Despite his age, he was quick on the draw, questioning Anwar’s contention about his guilt.

To Dr Mahathir, guilt or wrongdoing was to be determined by a judge in the court of law and to determine whether a case should be pursued is under the purview of the attorney-general.

The twice PM summed Anwar up quite succinctly – he is the PM, judge and prosecutor, a three-in-one package.

If that’s damaging, Anwar’s use of Dr Mahathir’s advanced age as the reason not to pursue the case received a witty albeit scathing retort.

To Dr Mahathir, his age should not provide him the immunity against wrongdoing, challenging Anwar to charge him in open court. The centenarian added that only those who are guilty need immunity.

The retort was measured, reminding everyone of the ongoing court process whereby the PM is seeking a declaration of immunity for the position in relation to a civil suit by his former aide Yusoff Rawther.

There are, however, backers of the PM who felt that Dr Mahathir’s response was him falling into a trap set by Anwar.

To them, if Anwar had proceeded with the process to make Dr Mahathir face the law for his alleged wrongdoings, public opinion may turn against the PM on the grounds that he was vindictive and not magnanimous enough to let such an elderly person off.

Now that Dr Mahathir had “waived” the immunity, Anwar could proceed with the process.

But that reasoning is flawed. In the first place, the immunity is not for Anwar to give and neither is the decision to charge Dr Mahathir his.

If anything, there is no magnanimity in Anwar’s immunity offer when he had, before the courts and the prosecutor, declared Dr Mahathir guilty.

By Dr Mahathir’s standards, it is better to take his chances in courts and clear his name rather than live the remaining years of his life with the label of being accused of a crime he didn’t commit.

Zapata’s “I would rather die standing than live on my knees” is of the essence.

If the social media reports are of any measure, public opinion roundly favoured Dr Mahathir over Anwar on the issue.

The second issue, which the administration seemed to have blundered terribly, is over Anwar’s announcement to show his appreciation to the rakyat.

It was a build-up of over a week, and the anticipation, though it ran high, was also awaited with much scepticism.

And when the “goodies” were announced the sceptics had a field day flaying Anwar and the administration.

Again, the backers of the Government and the PM attempted to use the “being grateful” card to those who felt that the amount and measures announced were a pittance, if not insulting.

Obviously, these backers were either detached to what grinded the ordinary folks daily or they chose to be oblivious because they had gone too far up into the bowels of their leaders.

What had irked the general populace was that the Government had been imposing new taxes, new tariffs and withdrawing subsidies.

When these new measures are imposed, the administration tries to manufacture consent by claiming that the increases would only affect and be targeted at the upper echelon, the industries and businesses.

They chose to ignore that the upper crusts, the businesses and industries, can transfer new costs to the consumers and wage earners, meaning that in many ways, they end up paying for the increase of tariffs and new taxes imposed.

And these, they had suffered for the past two years since the change of the government.

To expect them to be grateful for receiving a pittance from what had actually been collected from them is indeed an insult to their intelligence and their very sense of worth.

Beware, it is said, of Greeks bearing gifts. The right hand giveth while the left taketh. There is no altruism, deception or distraction.

It is even ominous.

---

The post Friday Jottings: Ingratitude at dubious altruism appeared first on The Malaysian Reserve.

A shrinking herd is pushing the cost of meat to record highs 

I SHOULD disclose my bias from the start: I’m a carnivore. Hamburger? Check. Chops? Yes please. Steak? Yum. To my palate, all delicious and, right now, also incredibly pricey. As the barbecue season peaks, the cost of meat has jumped to an all-time high. Don’t expect relief anytime soon. 

Record prices for beef may sound counterintuitive when vegetarianism seems to be on the rise. Skipping meat, and particularly beef, even if only for a few days a month is a popular trend among climate-conscious social media influencers. But the issue behind sky-high prices isn’t consumption; if anything, demand is lacklustre. 

The problem is supply. Put simply, the world is running out of calves. In the US, the size of the cattle herd hit a 74-year low last year. In Europe, it’s the smallest since the days of mad-cow disease three decades ago. With fewer animals making it into slaughter-houses, the market’s invisible hand is rationing supply. 

In Britain, the average rump steak now costs a record £18.89 (RM108) per kg, up more than 25% over the last five years, according to government data. The European Union (EU) is witnessing a similar trend. In the US, American ground chuck beef — a closely watched indicator — has jumped to an all-time high of US$6.02 (RM25.60) per lb, up about a third from early 2020. 

While the cost of other food staples has stabilised after a bout of price increases between 2021 and 2023, red meat has become an inflationary headache for supermarket chains and fast-food restaurants. Back in May, McDonald’s Corp boss Chris Kempczinski warned investors the company was battling a “very inflationary environment in Europe, particularly because of beef.” 

The price increases accelerate a trend that started around 2000, when the cost of beef broke away from 20 years of stability. The 1980s and 1990s were astonishingly good times for consumers; in nominal terms, the price of ground beef was the same when George W Bush arrived at the White House in 2001 as when Jimmy Carter left in 1981. Since then, however, prices have rocketed. 

Among the top sources of animal protein, beef — alongside chicken — has seen the biggest price increases over the last 25 years, up more than 200%. Salmon prices have nearly doubled during the period, while lamb, pork and seafood costs have increased by significantly less. 

Over time, high beef prices will rebalance the market. But the cycle is notoriously long — typically 10 to 12 years — and so far, the herd isn’t recovering despite several years of rising prices. Why? Because while ranchers are paid more for their meat they also face much higher costs to raise the animals for slaughter. 

One reason is the cost of feed, which has become much more expensive. Whether wheat, barley, corn or soymeal, prices have trended higher over the last two decades, with several significant spikes in 2007-2008, 2010-2011, and, more recently, in 2021-2022 after Russia invaded Ukraine, disrupting exports from the Black 

Sea region. Another reason, particularly in Europe, is the rising costs of meeting new regulations regarding animal health and climate change. It’s not just public regulations; the private sector is also pushing for stricter rules, with supermarkets demanding farmers adhere to new standards that increase production costs. 

Along with every other business, farmers have also faced rising energy prices, higher interest rates and labour shortages that have boosted salaries. In many regions, farms are closing due to a lack of generational successors. Many industry insiders summarise the problem as “structural unprofitability.” 

The supply-and-demand balance has reached a breaking point. For the last couple of years, abattoirs have had sufficient supply despite the historically small — and getting smaller — herd, because ranchers still had enough cattle-on-feed to push into the slaughterhouses. It helped, too, that some liquidated their ranches, releasing stock. 

But now there simply aren’t enough animals mature enough for slaughter due to smaller numbers of young calves further up the supply chain. Even with high prices, it will take a long time to rebuild the stock. Unless demand wanes further, meat packers will have to compete via higher prices to secure cattle. And consumers will pay at the till. Flipping hamburgers on your barbecue is going to become increasingly expensive during the next couple of months. — Bloomberg

• This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

---

• This article first appeared in The Malaysian Reserve weekly print edition

The post Flipping burgers this summer won’t be cheap appeared first on The Malaysian Reserve.