Three voices

I have ‘complained’ about the media before and this time I come with an example. Weirdly enough none of them are doing anything wrong, but when you see the example you might wonder what the fuzz is about. As I see it is more than merely one stating the bottle is half full and the other stating the bottle is half empty. But I will let you decide. I got there because I am investigating a setting that is approaching maturity and I want my share. Google walked way from well over 5 billion a year and Amazon is leaving it on the floor. Both are entitled to do so, yet now Tencent Technologies is coming and there is every chance that they will not pay me a dime. I am not willing to hand it to Amazon with Andy Jassy stating ‘Thank You’ and pocketing all that revenue for himself. I am not THAT nice. As such I am in a state of worry and the battle arena seems to be Dubai. Amazon has options if it is forced to break up. I think its setting will be stronger if a layer like the Kingdom Holding Company would champion the stage, especially with someone like Al Waleed bin Talal Al Saud overlooking the stage. A setting that brings benefits but might not be essential. I do believe that a strong setting could be presented from Dubai, it is a personal feeling. So at times I look at the UAE and that is where the three voices got hold of me. So lets begin.

Voice One: Arab News
Here we see (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2348896/business-economy) ‘UAE’s non-oil economy remains strong in July as PMI stands at 56’ this is good, someway. I like to think that it will be better soon enough, but the Arab News gives us “According to the seasonally adjusted S&P Global UAE Purchasing Managers’ Index, the country’s PMI stood at 56 in July compared to 56.9 in June. This still indicates a positive trend as any readings above 50 are considered a growth in economic activities, while figures below 50 show contraction.” Overall a strong message, there is a little fallback, but the story gives us that is still in the growth margin. The message has the added “Higher business activities were driven by an upturn in new orders, which continued to be boosted by strong customer demand and improving market conditions, the report stated, citing survey panelists. However, it noted that growth eased since June as several firms faced greater competition which dampened sales in the process.” OK, greater competition is a little vague, but that is fine a positive approach to a story.

Voice Two: Khaleej Times
Then we get the article (at https://www.khaleejtimes.com/business/uae-non-oil-sector-continues-to-grow-at-a-strong-pace-creating-more-jobs-in-july) here we are given ‘UAE non-oil sector continues to grow at a strong pace, creating more jobs in July’, which makes sense as it is a UAE newspaper. Here we get “The S&P Global UAE Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) – an indicator designed to give an overview of operating conditions in the non-oil private sector economy – dropped from 56.9 in June to 56.0 in July but remained well above the 50.0 no-change mark and the series long-run average. The reading indicated a sharp improvement in the health of the sector, supported by a marked expansion in output.” It basically gives us the same we saw in the Arab News with the added “S&P said driving activity higher was an upturn in new orders, which continued to be boosted by strong customer demand and improving market conditions, according to survey panellists.” I personally would have a few question marks, but in the end it is how the painting is made. I would state that this critic is looking at the painting, giving the summary and looking at the use of blue paint in the process. This happens, we all have our ways of looking at a painting and it is probably the best way to describe it. 

Voice Three: Reuters
It was the first article I saw (at https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/lower-sales-weigh-uae-non-oil-business-activity-july-pmi-2023-08-03/) making me look at the setting a little deeper. The start ‘Lower sales weigh on UAE non-oil business activity in July’ with the added “The slowdown was attributed in part to an easing of growth in new orders, although demand remained strong, with the sub-index falling to 57.4 in July from 61.0 the previous month, which was the fastest rate of expansion since June 2019.” Now we get an interesting sight, this article is cautiously pessimistic (headline) but the overall message is still positive. Yet the numbers are not matching. It might not be wrong as they use ‘sub-index’, but which one? Then we get the added “Owen added that the “the easing of sales growth was substantial and, if accelerated in future months, suggests that the demand boom could have reached its peak.”” The reference is to David Owen, senior economist at S&P Global Market Intelligence. Yet the station is how does ‘substantial’ apply? Is this fear-mongering for investors, is it biased negativity towards the Middle East? You tell me, I have no clue. But the fact that we have these three voices is important because it shows us that there is a media flaw. Now, there are all kinds of flaws and flaws due to arbitrary interpretation is nothing new and optionally not a flaw but the stage is there and now we have ourselves a ballgame. So which one is true? They might all be true but the anarchy in the three voices tend to impact us all. My gut tells me to go with the Arab News, but that is instinct and not a given view of evidence. I will let you decide which one is more apt.

Enjoy the day, Friday is about to start in Vancouver, the rest of us are already there.