S&P says Thailand's outlook stable despite political uncertainties

By Digital Media

BANGKOK, Dec 13 – Standard & Poor’s Rating Services has affirmed Thailand’s stable outlook on long-term foreign and local currency ratings, citing a favourable external position, light government indebtedness and the credibility of the country’s monetary policy as the main rating supports.

Chularat Sutheethorn, director general of the Finance Ministry's Public Debt Management Office, said S&P’s also affirms the 'axAA/axA-1' ASEAN regional scale rating for Thailand as well as its ratings on Thailand's outstanding debt issuances.

The rating agency projects Thailand's foreign exchange reserves at US$190 billion (eight months of current account payments) by the end of 2012, and indicates that Thailand has run (mostly small) current account surpluses since 2006.

“We expect this trend to continue at least through 2015. As a result, we estimate net external liabilities at 14 per cent of current account receipts at yearend 2012 and expect external liquid assets of the government and financial sector to be double that of the nation's external debt,” says S&P’s.

It continues, “Similarly, the general government has run surpluses or small deficits since its recovery from the Asian financial crisis of 1997. After steadily declining to 17 per cent of GDP in fiscal 2008 (ending September 30, 2008), net general government debt rose to 24 per cent of GDP at the end of fiscal 2011. We expect the ratio to increase only modestly through 2015. The general government's interest burden remained a comfortable 5.5 per cent of revenue.

“Thailand's inflation, as shown by the Consumer Price Index, has been less than 5.5 per cent per year since 1999. Credit growth has been in line with nominal GDP growth. We rank the country's banking system '5' on a scale of 10. Thailand's per capita GDP--about US$5,350 in 2012--is a credit constraint. The country's infrastructure, health, and education indicators also are more in keeping with those of lower-rated sovereigns.”

“Political uncertainties have been an important credit weakness for Thailand in recent years. Since 2006, frequent and at times extra-constitutional changes in the government have delayed structural reforms, hindered government infrastructure spending, and depressed foreign direct investment. Street protests opposing the leading government party at times have caused significant economic disruptions. However, since the new government took office, political tensions have begun to ebb.”

S&P’s says it could lower the rating if Thailand's fiscal position and economic indicators worsen significantly due to, for example, the government adopting strongly populist policies. (MCOT online news)

-- TNA 2012-12-13

Stable is relative......

Stables need mucking out, lotta <deleted> and stuffz

Ditto Thai government, but it will NOT happen.

The reports says the only danger to the rosy outlook is if the government implements populist policies.

So everything in the garden is lovely then.

Edited December 13, 201213 yr by bigbamboo

Heck, if it wasn't for Thai politics with a military coup thrown in every once in a while for good measure, Thailand would probably have the highest rating of Triple-A. But with the Thai politics stability factor in play which creates social unrest and inequality they'll never reach a Triple-A rating. Of course, it's getting harder and harder even for many western countries to maintain/reach a Triple-A rating, especially when they overspend to fund populist policies...no need to mention specific countries...we know who they are.

Oh no, oh no. Tourism is up. Auto sales are up. Bangkok is not flooding and everyone in Pattaya has not turned into salt.

And ....... ta da. S and P confirms it. I guess the late night posters of gloom and doom can finally get some sleep.

Edited December 13, 201213 yr by chiangmaikelly

The articles gives a quote and then says S&Ps. It is supposed to be a quote by a person representing S & P, and also the last sentence says something and then ends with S & P says, but it's not even in quotes at all. So is this all paraphrased Thai translation of what S & P actually said? Who knows what the truth is? Does anyone have the actual S & P report that the article is referencing?

The articles gives a quote and then says S&Ps. It is supposed to be a quote by a person representing S & P, and also the last sentence says something and then ends with S & P says, but it's not even in quotes at all. So is this all paraphrased Thai translation of what S & P actually said? Who knows what the truth is? Does anyone have the actual S & P report that the article is referencing?

On Dec. 11, 2012, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its 'BBB+/A-2' foreign currency and 'A-/A-2' local currency sovereign credit ratings on the Kingdom of Thailand. The outlook on the long-term foreign and long-term local currency ratings is stable. Our transfer and convertibility (T&C) assessment remains 'A'. At the same time, we affirmed the 'axAA/axA-1' ASEAN regional scale rating on Thailand. We also affirmed all our ratings on Thailand's outstanding debt issuances.

The stable outlook reflects our expectation that imbalances in Thailand's external, fiscal, and monetary accounts will not emerge and that the country's political economy will remain in a steady state.

Google, "TEXT-S&P affirms Thailand ratings with stable outlook." Now that wasn't so hard was it.

Oh no, oh no. Tourism is up. Auto sales are up. Bangkok is not flooding and everyone in Pattaya has not turned into salt.

And ....... ta da. S and P confirms it. I guess the late night posters of gloom and doom can finally get some sleep.

they also rated sub prime mortgage backed securities as investment grade hmmm

As long as Godman Sachs doesn't recommend buying Thai treasuries Thailand should be safe from major doom.

it's a shame Egan Jones doesn't cover Thailand would be interested in their assessment, they are the best rating agency in my view.

Screw the rest of the world. Thai economy is the BEST! Nothing ever affects it, no floods, no demonstrations, not American financial crisis, not European Financial crisis, not the neighboring countries, i mean really nothing affects Thai economy. It should be a role model for the rest of the world

Oh no, oh no. Tourism is up. Auto sales are up. Bangkok is not flooding and everyone in Pattaya has not turned into salt.

And ....... ta da. S and P confirms it. I guess the late night posters of gloom and doom can finally get some sleep.

they also rated sub prime mortgage backed securities as investment grade hmmm

As long as Godman Sachs doesn't recommend buying Thai treasuries Thailand should be safe from major doom.

it's a shame Egan Jones doesn't cover Thailand would be interested in their assessment, they are the best rating agency in my view.

Nomad, man you got the wrong post. It's not about the veracity of S&P, or sub prime mortgage backed securities. It is about Thailand's outlook stable despite political uncertainties. Your first post was a cheap shot at the article and you asked where to get the real goods and I posted that and you didn't even say thanks. If you want to start a new thread about the the qualifications of S&P as a rating agency go ahead. But until that you just join the legion of sour grapes posters who don't like Thailand doing good.

Screw the rest of the world. Thai economy is the BEST! Nothing ever affects it, no floods, no demonstrations, not American financial crisis, not European Financial crisis, not the neighboring countries, i mean really nothing affects Thai economy. It should be a role model for the rest of the world

A lot of Americans and people from all over the world feel that way and transferred assets to Thailand 5 years ago and now live here. Thank goodness that there is a place like Thailand that can offer some protection against the people that are running the US, UK and Europe right now. Rich people are leaving France by the boatload now; I wonder why? I first got here 40 years ago and Thailand was a funny little country. Now it looks a lot better. 40 years ago the West looked a lot better than it does now. S&P says the outlook is stable for Thailand despite political uncertainties and S&P is a well respected rating agency that the whole world still has a great deal of confidence in.

Screw the rest of the world. Thai economy is the BEST! Nothing ever affects it, no floods, no demonstrations, not American financial crisis, not European Financial crisis, not the neighboring countries, i mean really nothing affects Thai economy. It should be a role model for the rest of the world

A lot of Americans and people from all over the world feel that way and transferred assets to Thailand 5 years ago and now live here. Thank goodness that there is a place like Thailand that can offer some protection against the people that are running the US, UK and Europe right now. Rich people are leaving France by the boatload now; I wonder why? I first got here 40 years ago and Thailand was a funny little country. Now it looks a lot better. 40 years ago the West looked a lot better than it does now. S&P says the outlook is stable for Thailand despite political uncertainties and S&P is a well respected rating agency that the whole world still has a great deal of confidence in.

i am not sure if you been sarcastic or serious. If you are serious, then you might have been here little too long. You actually consider this country to be well run? you have PM with masters from USA and yet can not speak English, you have Tourism minister who can not count and list goes on.

Thailand STILL is a funny little country. Do i have confidence in Thailand and would i ever bring all the money over? NEVER! The country where everything can change over night with no security or rule of law, really not sure how S&P can be respected in terms of making predictions.

Oh no, oh no. Tourism is up. Auto sales are up. Bangkok is not flooding and everyone in Pattaya has not turned into salt.

And ....... ta da. S and P confirms it. I guess the late night posters of gloom and doom can finally get some sleep.

Just take a look around the corner.

Oh no, oh no. Tourism is up. Auto sales are up. Bangkok is not flooding and everyone in Pattaya has not turned into salt.

And ....... ta da. S and P confirms it. I guess the late night posters of gloom and doom can finally get some sleep.

Just take a look around the corner.

Around my corner are five guys planting trees and building a path with bricks for my new house. I'm staying home to supervise and my wife is at work designing steel structures that will find a home in Italy, Brazil and India.

Edited December 13, 201213 yr by chiangmaikelly

But what about S&P's outlook for cake sales next year?

Thailand is on its way to deserving the "developing country" classification. Soon it will spend about US$14 billion to built train system from BKK to two northern cities. It is doing well overall. It needs to do better of course. Like a better infrastructure e.g., garbage collection, clean water supply, etc.

Above the following was posted:

"of course, it's getting harder and harder even for many western countries to maintain/reach a Triple-A rating, especially when they overspend to fund populist policies...no need to mention specific countries...we know who they are. "

Please mention the countries, are they in Europe of in continental America?

Oh no, oh no. Tourism is up. Auto sales are up. Bangkok is not flooding and everyone in Pattaya has not turned into salt.

And ....... ta da. S and P confirms it. I guess the late night posters of gloom and doom can finally get some sleep.

they also rated sub prime mortgage backed securities as investment grade hmmm

As long as Godman Sachs doesn't recommend buying Thai treasuries Thailand should be safe from major doom.

it's a shame Egan Jones doesn't cover Thailand would be interested in their assessment, they are the best rating agency in my view.

Nomad, man you got the wrong post. It's not about the veracity of S&P, or sub prime mortgage backed securities. It is about Thailand's outlook stable despite political uncertainties. Your first post was a cheap shot at the article and you asked where to get the real goods and I posted that and you didn't even say thanks. If you want to start a new thread about the the qualifications of S&P as a rating agency go ahead. But until that you just join the legion of sour grapes posters who don't like Thailand doing good.

what have you been smoking CK? that was my first post!

what does it matter what the outlook is if the agency providing the outlook is corrupt? They may have improved their performance and objectiveness but if Goldman Sachs can pay them for a rating who is to say anyone else can't including the Thai government.

I have not attacked the Thai economy merely the rating agency, as i said i'd have loved Egan Jones to cover Thailand but unfortunately they haven't. I love Thailand and hope their outlook is warranted, but i'm not naive enough to assume S&P are infallible when history shows they are very much so.

it seems to me based on your post history if something supports your view it's fact but if it doesn't it's some how false. you're getting very predictable these days, i look forward to the day you ask just 1 question of an article lauding the Thai economy i'd be a happy man. Not because you are questioning your beliefs but because you are question the information in some of these articles which often is sketchy at best.

Oh no, oh no. Tourism is up. Auto sales are up. Bangkok is not flooding and everyone in Pattaya has not turned into salt.

And ....... ta da. S and P confirms it. I guess the late night posters of gloom and doom can finally get some sleep.

they also rated sub prime mortgage backed securities as investment grade hmmm

As long as Godman Sachs doesn't recommend buying Thai treasuries Thailand should be safe from major doom.

it's a shame Egan Jones doesn't cover Thailand would be interested in their assessment, they are the best rating agency in my view.

Nomad, man you got the wrong post. It's not about the veracity of S&P, or sub prime mortgage backed securities. It is about Thailand's outlook stable despite political uncertainties. Your first post was a cheap shot at the article and you asked where to get the real goods and I posted that and you didn't even say thanks. If you want to start a new thread about the the qualifications of S&P as a rating agency go ahead. But until that you just join the legion of sour grapes posters who don't like Thailand doing good.

what have you been smoking CK? that was my first post!

what does it matter what the outlook is if the agency providing the outlook is corrupt? They may have improved their performance and objectiveness but if Goldman Sachs can pay them for a rating who is to say anyone else can't including the Thai government.

I have not attacked the Thai economy merely the rating agency, as i said i'd have loved Egan Jones to cover Thailand but unfortunately they haven't. I love Thailand and hope their outlook is warranted, but i'm not naive enough to assume S&P are infallible when history shows they are very much so.

it seems to me based on your post history if something supports your view it's fact but if it doesn't it's some how false. you're getting very predictable these days, i look forward to the day you ask just 1 question of an article lauding the Thai economy i'd be a happy man. Not because you are questioning your beliefs but because you are question the information in some of these articles which often is sketchy at best.

Questioning the veracity of Standard and Poor's is questioning the entire international banking system and way beyond the capacity of this thread and you. Sorry you are way off topic and I won't respond.

Questioning the veracity of Standard and Poor's is questioning the entire international banking system and way beyond the capacity of this thread and you. Sorry you are way off topic and I won't respond.

Ahh no it isn't, and considering the news item is reporting on S&Ps outlook for Thailand my issue raised is important and needs to be discussed within this thread. You are hiding behind big statements with no substance. i mean really questioning S&P is questioning the entire international banking system, who are you trying to fool here?

You have an emotional view of the Thai economy and this shows in the way you post. your emotions cloud your posts and remove objectivity from them, not only in this thread.

Your 2nd post says it all, "But until that you just join the legion of sour grapes posters who don't like Thailand doing good." just because we question things and have different opinions based on the information provided does not mean we want Thailand to end up in any kind of economic or financial trouble. It is 1 thing to want something and another thing to interpret data to show which way it is heading. This is partly why people can no longer debate with you anymore. I thought you can add value and i did try hopefully in the future you won't be so 1 dimensional. i guess i'd compare debating economic issues with you to debating austerity with a Greek, it just can't be done rationally.

i have tried to persist with you but since you cannot debate objectively and your emotions cloud everything i am no longer wasting my time with your posts until things change, Best of luck hopefully you stop alienating yourself in this forum as debate is a good thing and you can contribute quality if you want to.

Questioning the veracity of Standard and Poor's is questioning the entire international banking system and way beyond the capacity of this thread and you. Sorry you are way off topic and I won't respond.

Ahh no it isn't, and considering the news item is reporting on S&Ps outlook for Thailand my issue raised is important and needs to be discussed within this thread. You are hiding behind big statements with no substance. i mean really questioning S&P is questioning the entire international banking system, who are you trying to fool here?

You have an emotional view of the Thai economy and this shows in the way you post. your emotions cloud your posts and remove objectivity from them, not only in this thread.

Your 2nd post says it all, "But until that you just join the legion of sour grapes posters who don't like Thailand doing good." just because we question things and have different opinions based on the information provided does not mean we want Thailand to end up in any kind of economic or financial trouble. It is 1 thing to want something and another thing to interpret data to show which way it is heading. This is partly why people can no longer debate with you anymore. I thought you can add value and i did try hopefully in the future you won't be so 1 dimensional. i guess i'd compare debating economic issues with you to debating austerity with a Greek, it just can't be done rationally.

i have tried to persist with you but since you cannot debate objectively and your emotions cloud everything i am no longer wasting my time with your posts until things change, Best of luck hopefully you stop alienating yourself in this forum as debate is a good thing and you can contribute quality if you want to.

The thread is about a news article released by S&P. If you don't trust S&P as a rating agency there is nothing to talk to you about. You are on the lunatic fringe. Please list one major bank anywhere in the world that does not rely on S&P for information.

Despite the shortcomings of the politicians here, they are doing a much better job than western governments at the moment. GDP is growing faster, inflation is low, debt is low. You don't need an open an honest government for economic success. Many countries have great economies despite being corrupt or being run by dictators. That is somewhat separate from economics, although not totally so. I model democratic government could still run the economy into the ground, as many western governments are prone to do. So don't get the two confused. Politics can certainly affect the economy, but it's not as straightforward as most think.

From an economic point of view there's not much difference between paying corruption money and paying excessive taxes and extra money to put up with excessive bureaucracy.

Despite the shortcomings of the politicians here, they are doing a much better job than western governments at the moment. GDP is growing faster, inflation is low, debt is low. You don't need an open an honest government for economic success. Many countries have great economies despite being corrupt or being run by dictators. That is somewhat separate from economics, although not totally so. I model democratic government could still run the economy into the ground, as many western governments are prone to do. So don't get the two confused. Politics can certainly affect the economy, but it's not as straightforward as most think.

From an economic point of view there's not much difference between paying corruption money and paying excessive taxes and extra money to put up with excessive bureaucracy.

so you do not think thai economics is controlled or restricted? do you think its an open market?

Despite the shortcomings of the politicians here, they are doing a much better job than western governments at the moment. GDP is growing faster, inflation is low, debt is low. You don't need an open an honest government for economic success. Many countries have great economies despite being corrupt or being run by dictators. That is somewhat separate from economics, although not totally so. I model democratic government could still run the economy into the ground, as many western governments are prone to do. So don't get the two confused. Politics can certainly affect the economy, but it's not as straightforward as most think.

From an economic point of view there's not much difference between paying corruption money and paying excessive taxes and extra money to put up with excessive bureaucracy.

so you do not think thai economics is controlled or restricted? do you think its an open market?

You didn't ask me so forgive me for butting in but.. Where do you mean? Thailand? China? Australia? Do you mean the Thai internal markets or the external markets? And just so I understand it perhaps you could give some examples of controlled or restricted markets like Singapore and how it has hurt them?

The rating agency projects Thailand's foreign exchange reserves at US$190 billion

well if they want to remain on top and moving towards the developing country then they must diversify out of the FIAT US$ as its printing its way to being totally worthless

The rating agency projects Thailand's foreign exchange reserves at US$190 billion

well if they want to remain on top and moving towards the developing country then they must diversify out of the FIAT US$ as its printing its way to being totally worthless

China holds ten times more than Thailand do you think they are worried?

Questioning the veracity of Standard and Poor's is questioning the entire international banking system and way beyond the capacity of this thread and you. Sorry you are way off topic and I won't respond.

Ahh no it isn't, and considering the news item is reporting on S&Ps outlook for Thailand my issue raised is important and needs to be discussed within this thread. You are hiding behind big statements with no substance. i mean really questioning S&P is questioning the entire international banking system, who are you trying to fool here?

You have an emotional view of the Thai economy and this shows in the way you post. your emotions cloud your posts and remove objectivity from them, not only in this thread.

Your 2nd post says it all, "But until that you just join the legion of sour grapes posters who don't like Thailand doing good." just because we question things and have different opinions based on the information provided does not mean we want Thailand to end up in any kind of economic or financial trouble. It is 1 thing to want something and another thing to interpret data to show which way it is heading. This is partly why people can no longer debate with you anymore. I thought you can add value and i did try hopefully in the future you won't be so 1 dimensional. i guess i'd compare debating economic issues with you to debating austerity with a Greek, it just can't be done rationally.

i have tried to persist with you but since you cannot debate objectively and your emotions cloud everything i am no longer wasting my time with your posts until things change, Best of luck hopefully you stop alienating yourself in this forum as debate is a good thing and you can contribute quality if you want to.

The thread is about a news article released by S&P. If you don't trust S&P as a rating agency there is nothing to talk to you about. You are on the lunatic fringe. Please list one major bank anywhere in the world that does not rely on S&P for information.

As usual...resorts to insult to conclude his argument .....

Questioning the veracity of Standard and Poor's is questioning the entire international banking system and way beyond the capacity of this thread and you. Sorry you are way off topic and I won't respond.

Ahh no it isn't, and considering the news item is reporting on S&Ps outlook for Thailand my issue raised is important and needs to be discussed within this thread. You are hiding behind big statements with no substance. i mean really questioning S&P is questioning the entire international banking system, who are you trying to fool here?

You have an emotional view of the Thai economy and this shows in the way you post. your emotions cloud your posts and remove objectivity from them, not only in this thread.

Your 2nd post says it all, "But until that you just join the legion of sour grapes posters who don't like Thailand doing good." just because we question things and have different opinions based on the information provided does not mean we want Thailand to end up in any kind of economic or financial trouble. It is 1 thing to want something and another thing to interpret data to show which way it is heading. This is partly why people can no longer debate with you anymore. I thought you can add value and i did try hopefully in the future you won't be so 1 dimensional. i guess i'd compare debating economic issues with you to debating austerity with a Greek, it just can't be done rationally.

i have tried to persist with you but since you cannot debate objectively and your emotions cloud everything i am no longer wasting my time with your posts until things change, Best of luck hopefully you stop alienating yourself in this forum as debate is a good thing and you can contribute quality if you want to.

The thread is about a news article released by S&P. If you don't trust S&P as a rating agency there is nothing to talk to you about. You are on the lunatic fringe. Please list one major bank anywhere in the world that does not rely on S&P for information.

As usual...resorts to insult to conclude his argument .....

Are you on the fringe too? Perhaps you could list one major bank anywhere in the world that does not rely on the S&P for information? I really don't think I insulted anyone. The man is questioning the veracity of S&P because he can't bring himself to accept their conclusions. It is an extreme case of shooting the messenger. Which I assume you are also trying to do. So put away the flames for a minute and answer my question? Or maybe you trust S&P like everyone else in the world?

Despite the shortcomings of the politicians here, they are doing a much better job than western governments at the moment. GDP is growing faster, inflation is low, debt is low. You don't need an open an honest government for economic success. Many countries have great economies despite being corrupt or being run by dictators. That is somewhat separate from economics, although not totally so. I model democratic government could still run the economy into the ground, as many western governments are prone to do. So don't get the two confused. Politics can certainly affect the economy, but it's not as straightforward as most think.

From an economic point of view there's not much difference between paying corruption money and paying excessive taxes and extra money to put up with excessive bureaucracy.

so you do not think thai economics is controlled or restricted? do you think its an open market?

You didn't ask me so forgive me for butting in but.. Where do you mean? Thailand? China? Australia? Do you mean the Thai internal markets or the external markets? And just so I understand it perhaps you could give some examples of controlled or restricted markets like Singapore and how it has hurt them?

Like currency is not floated on the open market but is manipulated, like stock exchange gets closed if it starts to drop too fast or too much. Sorry i did not realize you needed clarifications, with all the experience and knowledge you have of Thailand and economics

Despite the shortcomings of the politicians here, they are doing a much better job than western governments at the moment. GDP is growing faster, inflation is low, debt is low. You don't need an open an honest government for economic success. Many countries have great economies despite being corrupt or being run by dictators. That is somewhat separate from economics, although not totally so. I model democratic government could still run the economy into the ground, as many western governments are prone to do. So don't get the two confused. Politics can certainly affect the economy, but it's not as straightforward as most think.

From an economic point of view there's not much difference between paying corruption money and paying excessive taxes and extra money to put up with excessive bureaucracy.

so you do not think thai economics is controlled or restricted? do you think its an open market?

You didn't ask me so forgive me for butting in but.. Where do you mean? Thailand? China? Australia? Do you mean the Thai internal markets or the external markets? And just so I understand it perhaps you could give some examples of controlled or restricted markets like Singapore and how it has hurt them?

Like currency is not floated on the open market but is manipulated, like stock exchange gets closed if it starts to drop too fast or too much. Sorry i did not realize you needed clarifications, with all the experience and knowledge you have of Thailand and economics

You might want to look up words like limit down, limit up and trading curbs as almost all stock markets in all countries use these. Sorry I did not realize you needed clarifications. Do countries buy currencies? Yes of course they do. Some countries pretend they don't but they all manipulate currency. Some like China openly.

I did ask a question that I don't think you attempted to answer. Could give some examples of controlled or restricted markets like Singapore and how it has hurt them? I would still like an answer if you don't mind.

You might want to look up words like limit down, limit up and trading curbs as almost all stock markets in all countries use these. Sorry I did not realize you needed clarifications. Do countries buy currencies? Yes of course they do. Some countries pretend they don't but they all manipulate currency. Some like China openly.

I did ask a question that I don't think you attempted to answer. Could give some examples of controlled or restricted markets like Singapore and how it has hurt them? I would still like an answer if you don't mind.

you would get an answer if this thread WAS about Singapore or any other country, but its not, it is about Thailand.

Just as you stated in post 18, or have you forgotten already