racoma.com.phJ. Angelo Racoma on technology, economics, writing, problogging, and getting things done

The wife and I are fond of watching the early evening news, and one of the issues these days is the apparent lack of supply of LPG (or propane to some of you folks), which is used for cooking and nowadays also for fuelling LPG-equipped cars.

According to news sources, we do have enough supply, but it’s in the distribution chains that the supply is being limited. And so there is an apparent shortage.

We got worried since it was more than two months since we last bought LPG, and we were due to buy a new (refilled) tank soon. So it happened that this morning, we did run out, and when it was noontime, I loaded the empty Gasul tank into the car’s trunk, and we planned to visit nearby Gasul resellers and even Petron service stations (Gasul is a Petron brand).

Llamas Gas Kalayaan Ave. was closed. And so was Llamas Gas along Kamias Ave. (we usually phone these folks for delivery, but with today’s busy schedules, one cannot sit at home and wait forever). Petron V. Luna was out of Gasul. So was the Kalayaan corner Kamias Petron.

The other Petron stations were not as close by, so we had to plan our trip if we wanted to get lunch any time soon. It was almost 2:00 p.m.

And so we planned to pass Xavierville avenue on the way to the new Petron Katipunan station. But along the way, there was this small LPG distributor with a tank-full delivery truck parked in front. I didn’t waste any time calling the attendant’s attention and ordering my tank.

And so there you have it folks. Supply side economics. I got to wonder why the 11 Kg LPG’s price was at PhP 408, when our last purchase a few months back was at PhP 650 plus. Sure, LPG is now cheap, but it seems suppliers are not so happy with the low price.

What do they do? I would only speculate. But from what you would learn in any economics class, lower supply or higher demand (or both!) would increase the price of a commodity.

There is usually a natural point where supply and demand meet, and this is usually at the optimal price and quantity levels. X units of LPG will be bought and sold at Y pesos. And everyone is happy.

But if sellers think that the price is too low (for instance, they might have had stocked old supplies, which cost them more to import than the current prices), they could create an artificial shortage. This would lessen supply, and therefore sellers would place a premium on their products.

Buyers, meanwhile, sensing that the product may not be readily available, are willing to pay more for the same commodity.

In effect, this jacks up prices.

But for now, LPG price is still stable. Government vows to get to the bottom of this, but every day that the people involved don’t get to solve this problem contributes to the increasing headaches of regular folks like us. Fleets of LPG-powered taxi cabs are being put on standby. People are starting to look into other means to power their cooking ware, such as electric stoves and even coal.

They say the biggest problem facing the incoming Administration in the US will be energy. I think a looming energy crisis is everyone’s problem these days, in one way or another.

It was only a few months ago that I realized gas prices in the Philippines are increasing every week. It was somewhat stable at ~ PhP 46 per liter for the unleaded variety (price is higher for leaded, and diesel is cheaper by about PhP 8 per liter). But then the oil companies have implemented a weekly increase scheme, where they increase pump prices anywhere from PhP 0.50 to PhP 1.50 per liter either midnight or 6 a.m. of each Saturday.

And so as of this week, unleaded fuel costs about PhP 61 per liter, while diesel is about PhP 55 per liter.

I use Petron Blaze, which is the highest octane gas here. It’s among the most expensive varieties, too, at about PhP 1.50 to PhP 2 higher per liter (usually close to the price of Shell’s V-Power). So these days I usually gas up every Friday evening. I didn’t use to fill ‘er up with a full tank, but today’s situation calls for it. Filling up your tank can be more efficient since opening the cap too much causes fuel to evaporate.

But I’ve heard from a reliable source that gas prices will be PhP 80 per liter soon. The oil companies are trying to recoup losses from the increasing barrel prices worldwide. And get this—the price increase is due to the law of supply and demand. Oil producers are not producing enough (either they’re not able to or they won’t), and we are increasingly in need of oil. However, I hear that the US is actually hoarding oil imported from the Middle East, even though they are capable of producing enough to sustain their needs.

So where does that leave us common folk? That PhP 80 mark is probably just around the corner. As it is, the traffic situation in the Metro has lightened considerably. People are reportedly just opting to either carpool or ride public transportation. This is good, actually, since they are thinking green. But of course the personal mobility that a private vehicle offers is something else.

Also, oil prices usually have a direct relationship with other commodity prices. So with the trends we observe, we can surmise that the cost of living will be increasingly higher in the foreseeable future.

I’ve come to realize that a lot of Filipinos have been fans of game shows (from the silly ones to the intellectually challenging ones) because of various reasons. These range from a desire to get rich quick, to the desire to escape from one’s problems (even momentarily), or even just to entertain oneself.

PCIJ has an in-depth analysis, mostly from the psychological aspect of the game show mentality.

Cash draws people, most of whom dream of getting as much of it as possible. But while cash prizes have always been a game-show staple, it used to be that contestants needed to have some modicum of skill, talent, or intelligence to have a shot at them. By contrast, the more popular game shows today ask only that contestants have a great desire to get their hands on lots of money — fast.

Networks claim they’re helping out people by not simply giving dole-outs but opportunities to have a better means of living.

Some observers say TV shows that are practically giving away huge amounts of money are actually exploiting the poor. This, they say, was most apparent in the “Wowowee” tragedy of 2006, where 71 people were trampled to death in a mad rush to get inside the Ultra stadium where the show was going to be held. Over 30,000 people had come — and camped out in front the stadium days before — hoping to win the P1-million cash prize and giveaways that included two houses and lots, 15 passenger jeepneys, two taxicabs with franchises, and 20 tricycles.

The fact that the program offered jeepneys, taxicabs, and tricycles among its prizes does show an effort to encourage enterprise among would-be contestants; its producers could also argue that all they were doing was giving people a leg up. Where they may have erred, however, is in failing to provide real criteria and means through which those who join and eventually win the prizes could feel that they truly deserve these.

Still, I think it’s the get-rich-quick mentality that prevails, and the producers exploit this. A lot of disadvantaged, uneducated people wishing to have a shot at these game shows look to these as means to escape poverty. As Ruffa Mae Quinto’s character said in one of her movies: habang may game show, may pag asa (while there are game shows, there is hope).

But as money mentors would say, if you have a low potential for money, or a poor financial blueprint, then whatever you gain from such activities are quickly lost. Have you heard of the Lottery winner who ended up poorer than he originally was only a year after winning his millions?

At any rate, of course there is entertainment value. And I’m particularly fond of those game shows that really challenge the mind, in terms of asking difficult questions, or requiring computation and risk-management.

But it’s still tantamount to gambling, if you rely too much on luck and circumstance, such as with lotteries and other such games of chance. It’s wise to take calculated risks. It’s foolish and sinful to gamble. There is a thin line easily crossed.

And to the millions out there who still languish in hunger and poverty, hoping for an easy way out—is there an easy way out at all?

[via the Daily PCIJ]

I’m not for it. I think the costs outweigh the potential benefits. Here’s an editorial of mine on the Blog Herald. For one, it’s not likely to be viable given that networks hire bloggers that are spread throughout different countries. Also, the offshoring of blogging jobs would be another issue. The very reason why networks hire bloggers from outside of the more developed countries—you get the same quality at less cost!

Sure, it’s good to have solidarity, and to harness the power of numbers. However, I believe in the power of free markets (I’m an economist, after all, right?). And here, I feel it’s best not to mess with with the pro-blogging industry as it is. If we want solidarity, we can do it through other ways, like by setting up groups, communities, professional associations even, that foster solidarity without necessarily making it an us-against-them proposition.

One of my favorite writers and bloggers, Joel Spolsky writes an interesting piece on customer service. He says you won’t have to deal with irate customers, chargebacks, and bad reputations if you find solutions to problems early on, so you solve these at the root, and not when everyone and his uncle is already calling in to complain about lousy service. He also says that if you go to great lengths to please your customer, the return will be tenfold (or more).

We treat each tech support call like the NTSB treats airliner crashes. Every time a plane crashes, they send out investigators, figure out what happened, and then figure out a new policy to prevent that particular problem from ever happening again. It’s worked so well for aviation safety that the very, very rare airliner crashes we still get in the US are always very unusual, one-off situations.

One striking statement Joel makes is that in-house customer service is best, because outsourced customer relations management will not be able to adequately address issues at the source having no direct ties to whoever is developing the darn thing. Joel even specifically mentions the Philippines (along with Bangalore).

This perhaps will get negative feedback from those in the BPO industries, particularly those in my country. Believe me, I have several friends and relatives who work in call centers and other BPO firms, and I can say it’s been a boon, especially to people here looking for a decent living. They’re sort of the dream jobs of this generation.

However, I do agree with Joel that there’s something wrong with the concept of outsourcing customer relations. You’re basically letting someone else be the spokespeople of your company to the public. Never mind hiring PR firms for marketing. Never mind blogging about your stuff ‘til kingdom come. If you don’t handle customer concerns personally then you’re probably only able to address their concerns on a superficial level. Then the problem will keep on happening, again and again, like a weed that will keep on growing unless you grab it by the balls roots and burn it to ashes.

Take for instance this recent issue with HP support that Technosailor Aaron Brazell wrote about. What about the PLDT CSR swearing incident? These things give your company a bad rap. And even if it’s only one customer that you end up losing, it’s the loss of goodwill that will ultimately kill your business one way or another.

So what saves you more money? Being stingy with costs but losing a bit of customer trust? Or being all out with customer relations and gaining more clients because of goodwill? It depends, of course, but it matters when it comes to what image you want your company to project.

One good solution would be to offshore, but still keep development and customer relations teams within the same company. Or perhaps you can be selective with the concerns that can be handled by the offshore customer service centers (like billing or other minor, non-critical stuff).

I’m not against business process outsourcing. Believe me, I consider BPO as a Godsend, too. I’m in sort of an outsourced business myself, since I blog for foreign-own sites and blog networks (which is in a way different from outsourced customer relations). But it’s a reality that companies and BPO providers will have to contend with sometime.

There are more. Joel writes seven—no eight—steps to remarkably good customer service. Read on. I hope you enjoy.

Remember, greed will get you nowhere.