Thai Ratings Raised By Fitch On Yingluck Stability

[webfact]

Bloomberg News
Thai Ratings Raised by Fitch on Yingluck Stability
By Shamim Adam and Daniel Ten Kate

BANGKOK: -- Thailand’s credit rating was restored to BBB+ by Fitch Ratings four years after political turmoil prompted a cut, signaling confidence in Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s ability to maintain social stability.

The long-term foreign currency-denominated debt was raised one step by Fitch to three levels above junk on March 8, bringing the rating back in line with rankings by Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s Investors Service. The outlook is stable.

Yingluck has sought to avert political tensions since taking power in 2011 by shelving measures that would bring back Thaksin Shinawatra, her brother who was ousted as prime minister in a coup seven years ago.

The upgrade comes as her government prepares a bill to spend 2 trillion baht ($67 billion) by 2020 on high-speed trains and mass-transit networks.

Full story: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-03-10/thailand-raised-by-fitch-on-yingluck-stability-southeast-asia

-- Bloomberg Businessweek 2013-03-11

[Robby nz]

And the previous Govt was considered unstable because of the actions of who??

[Bellweather]

Recently financial experts have slammed rating agencies for a series of blunders and although I'm no expert I would question how they could call say this country is stable. Political problems are bubbling away under the surface, politicians are too busy with school playground squabbles to co-operate and the spectre of a certain person looms large. I should also add that at anytime the various factions will hit the streets if they don't get their way and none worse than the red shirts. If this is what Fitch calls stable they should replace their analysists

[chainarong]

Fitch??? been on the piss again

[geriatrickid]

And the previous Govt was considered unstable because of the actions of who??

Abhisit, the military, the entrenched elite, PAD, political opportunists, speculators and some others.

[Pib]

I just love the mystical and magical credit ratings given by credit agencies....a BBB+ for Thailand. From looking at this Wikipedia article Fitch has 9 B-level ratings of which the BBB+ is one of them and is their top B rating. And then above the B ratings are 9 levels of A ratings.

[Payboy]

Gotta love these ratings agencies. I made a small fortune with their recommendation of mortgaged-backed securities. Started with a big one though.

[geriatrickid]

Recently financial experts have slammed rating agencies for a series of blunders and although I'm no expert I would question how they could call say this country is stable. Political problems are bubbling away under the surface, politicians are too busy with school playground squabbles to co-operate and the spectre of a certain person looms large. I should also add that at anytime the various factions will hit the streets if they don't get their way and none worse than the red shirts. If this is what Fitch calls stable they should replace their analysists

The rules and regulations that apply to rating agencies changed a couple years ago. Unfortunately, it's all the world has and the reality is that this is the way sovereign debt and financial outlook is assessed. It is only one component of a multi part assessment. The reality is also that the change is good for all of Thailand including the current government's political opponents. A deterioration in the rating would mean the potential for a higher cost of borrowing, and that is something all taxpayers would like to avoid since it is the taxpayer that pays that cost. The reality is also that the country has been rather stable since the election of PM Yingluck. Don't read more into this then is there. There is no conspiracy, and no taking of political sides.

[chiangmaikelly]

The international ratings agency Fitch said on Friday it had downgraded Italy's sovereign debt rating by one notch to "BBB+" from "A-" and added that the outlook was negative. So Thailand's and Italy is the same.

[davejones]

I just love the mystical and magical credit ratings given by credit agencies....a BBB+ for Thailand. From looking at this Wikipedia article Fitch has 9 B-level ratings of which the BBB+ is one of them and is their top B rating. And then above the B ratings are 9 levels of A ratings.

Yes, crazy. They would be easier to understand if they were A, B, C, D, E, etc. But I just realized that I got a BBB+ for one of my O levels. I always thought it was a fail. LOL.

[jayboy]

And the previous Govt was considered unstable because of the actions of who??

The question has already been succinctly answered by geriatrickid why the previous government was unstable.A related issue is that while technically legitimate the previous government rode to power on the back of a military coup, judicial activism, and the backing of the unelected elite.To this must be added the sheer incompetence of Abhisit as a politician.Whatever its shortcomings the current government benefits from having fairly won power in a general election, and its unquestioned legitimacy is reflected in the credit ratings.

[davejones]

Recently financial experts have slammed rating agencies for a series of blunders and although I'm no expert I would question how they could call say this country is stable. Political problems are bubbling away under the surface, politicians are too busy with school playground squabbles to co-operate and the spectre of a certain person looms large. I should also add that at anytime the various factions will hit the streets if they don't get their way and none worse than the red shirts. If this is what Fitch calls stable they should replace their analysists

Thailand has been pretty stable over the last few years. It's nowhere near perfect (is anywhere?), and things may be bubbling under the service, but it's been pretty stable. In fact, much more stable than most were predicting. You can't expect it to jump straight from rioting in the streets to perfect stability. These things take time, but they are off to a good start. This ratings rise just puts it where other ratings companies already have it. And don't forget that it's three above junk status, so this isn't really saying much at all. I think they've risen from 11 to 10 in the ratings. No big deal.

[davejones]

And the previous Govt was considered unstable because of the actions of who??

The question has already been succinctly answered by geriatrickid why the previous government was unstable.A related issue is that while technically legitimate the previous government rode to power on the back of a military coup, judicial activism, and the backing of the unelected elite.To this must be added the sheer incompetence of Abhisit as a politician.Whatever its shortcomings the current government benefits from having fairly won power in a general election, and its unquestioned legitimacy is reflected in the credit ratings.

I'm certainly no red shirt, but even I can see that they won in a democratic vote. The problem with many that claim to believe in democracy is that they suddenly stop believing in it if the wrong side win. I would rather the Democrats had won, but the reds won, as that is what the vast majority of people of Thailand want. It's their choice, whether for good or bad. No different from USA, where the wrong guy has won twice.

[Robby nz]

Abhisit, the military, the entrenched elite, PAD, political opportunists, speculators and some others.

No Gerry your defense of the reds and PT has led you to get it all wrong again.

It was caused in the main by the red shirt riots which made it necessary for Abhisit to call out the military to clear them out before they did any more damage.

I do however agree about Thaksin and his entrenched elite having to take most of the blame.

Hay and consider;

Given that the red shirt riots instigated by Thaksin were the prime reason for a downgrade and that there has been no violent disruption caused by an opposition party in the term of the present Govt.

It could well be said that the reason for the stability and therefore the upgrade is that the present opposition parties have chosen to do things in a responsible and lawful manner rather than anything Yingluck and her Govt have done.

[jamhar]

I still have to give Y her props.

a financial upgrade is a sign that foreign countries are showing a positive confidence in TL's stability.

[NanLaew]

... To this must be added the sheer incompetence of Abhisit as a politician. Whatever its shortcomings the current government benefits from having fairly won power in a general election, and its unquestioned legitimacy is reflected in the credit ratings.

My goodness yes! Just how many of Abhisit's farang afficionados rated his work solely on the fact that he spoke English better than they could?

But I digress... despite knocking a point off here and there, these ratings agencies also consider the perpetually in debt USA and the moribund UK economy as fairly solid bets. <deleted>?!

[jayboy]

Abhisit, the military, the entrenched elite, PAD, political opportunists, speculators and some others.

No Gerry your defense of the reds and PT has led you to get it all wrong again.

It was caused in the main by the red shirt riots which made it necessary for Abhisit to call out the military to clear them out before they did any more damage.

I do however agree about Thaksin and his entrenched elite having to take most of the blame.

Hay and consider;

Given that the red shirt riots instigated by Thaksin were the prime reason for a downgrade and that there has been no violent disruption caused by an opposition party in the term of the present Govt.

It could well be said that the reason for the stability and therefore the upgrade is that the present opposition parties have chosen to do things in a responsible and lawful manner rather than anything Yingluck and her Govt have done.

Your post doesn't make much sense, not even an intelligent effort to disagree.Still I am aware of the poor quality of your posting record, so will just move along....

Though I don't normally respond to this kind of substance free post, nevertheless one point is worth mentioning for the benefit of those who have a genuine interest in understanding the dynamics.Thailand's strong ratings are remarkably resistant to political instability.This reflects the strength of the private sector, robust banking system and the generally excellent economic management of the country.These positive aspects transcend political divisions.Overall Thailand seems more vulnerable to the vicissitudes of world and regional economic dislocation than the country's internal divisions.Quite why this should be so is interesting to speculate and I doubt whether it would be the case if political divisions deteriorated to the level of 2010 again or (even worse) if military criminals again overthrew the elected government.Having said that the legitimacy of the current government is a definite plus.Looking forward what I would like to see is a genuinely strong opposition, perhaps led by Korn which would allow the Democrats to regroup,discard its corrupt element,loosen their ties with the corrupt unelected elites and win power fairly at a general election.It is not healthy in a democracy for one party to hold power consistently - even if won legitimately.

Edited March 11, 2013 by jayboy

[Robby nz]

The question has already been succinctly answered by geriatrickid why the previous government was unstable.A related issue is that while technically legitimate the previous government rode to power on the back of a military coup, judicial activism, and the backing of the unelected elite.To this must be added the sheer incompetence of Abhisit as a politician.Whatever its shortcomings the current government benefits from having fairly won power in a general election, and its unquestioned legitimacy is reflected in the credit ratings.

Oh J boy surely not back to the same old garbage about "rode to power on the back of a military coup"

Even you must now know there were two Govt.s between the coup and the Dem Govt.

And you must realize the term "the backing of the unelected elite" fits Thaksin perfectly. "Thaksin Thinks PT acts"

The only 'incompetence' as you chose to put it of Abahsit was being to soft on the reds if he had been more 'Thaksin like' he would have had them rounded up and cleaned out as soon as they fired the first grenade.

Sure the present Govt is legitimate and won power in a general election but you must look at their policies, ie the rice mountain, to see how well they are doing.

[Buchholz]

I'm certainly no red shirt, but

.

thanks

.

[sungod]

The international ratings agency Fitch said on Friday it had downgraded Italy's sovereign debt rating by one notch to "BBB+" from "A-" and added that the outlook was negative. So Thailand's and Italy is the same.

Is that good, should we be happy ? I am confused.

'Ratings agency Fitch added to Italy's mounting problems this week by cutting its credit rating due to the political uncertainty after last week's election, deep recession and rising debt.'

[Robby nz]

Your post doesn't make much sense, not even an intelligent effort to disagree.Still I am aware of the poor quality of your posting record, so will just move along....

Getting down to the level of insults J boy, usually what people do when they have no reasonable response.

This reflects the strength of the private sector, robust banking system and the generally excellent economic management of the country. These positive aspects transcend political divisions.Overall

There I would agree with you that strength in the private sector goes a long way to holding the whole thing together plus the legacy of Korn.

There are however the problems with two of the Govt banks which could in the near future need bailing out which does not look good.

Plus all the subsidies and resulting debt which will one day will come back to haunt

[AleG]

A trolling post followed by TV's arbiter of honesty and morality endorsing it.

[dickyknee]

And the previous Govt was considered unstable because of the actions of who??

Abhisit, the military, the entrenched elite, PAD, political opportunists, speculators and some others.

and some others not worth a mention

[hellodolly]

Recently financial experts have slammed rating agencies for a series of blunders and although I'm no expert I would question how they could call say this country is stable. Political problems are bubbling away under the surface, politicians are too busy with school playground squabbles to co-operate and the spectre of a certain person looms large. I should also add that at anytime the various factions will hit the streets if they don't get their way and none worse than the red shirts. If this is what Fitch calls stable they should replace their analysists

Agreed

Of course there will be no terrorist activities such as the previous government had to handle. The reason is the terrorists are just the military arm of the PTP. It dosen't take a genius to figure that one out.

Yes indeed how can they say it is stable when the party in power has enough seats to vote in any thing they want with out the help of other parties and yet have been trying to no avail to put through legislation that is so hypocritical that their own members will not get behind it. They will talk about it but not vote for it.

[hellodolly]

Abhisit, the military, the entrenched elite, PAD, political opportunists, speculators and some others.

No Gerry your defense of the reds and PT has led you to get it all wrong again.

It was caused in the main by the red shirt riots which made it necessary for Abhisit to call out the military to clear them out before they did any more damage.

I do however agree about Thaksin and his entrenched elite having to take most of the blame.

Hay and consider;

Given that the red shirt riots instigated by Thaksin were the prime reason for a downgrade and that there has been no violent disruption caused by an opposition party in the term of the present Govt.

It could well be said that the reason for the stability and therefore the upgrade is that the present opposition parties have chosen to do things in a responsible and lawful manner rather than anything Yingluck and her Govt have done.

Your post doesn't make much sense, not even an intelligent effort to disagree.Still I am aware of the poor quality of your posting record, so will just move along....

Though I don't normally respond to this kind of substance free post, nevertheless one point is worth mentioning for the benefit of those who have a genuine interest in understanding the dynamics.Thailand's strong ratings are remarkably resistant to political instability.This reflects the strength of the private sector, robust banking system and the generally excellent economic management of the country.These positive aspects transcend political divisions.Overall Thailand seems more vulnerable to the vicissitudes of world and regional economic dislocation than the country's internal divisions.Quite why this should be so is interesting to speculate and I doubt whether it would be the case if political divisions deteriorated to the level of 2010 again or (even worse) if military criminals again overthrew the elected government.Having said that the legitimacy of the current government is a definite plus.Looking forward what I would like to see is a genuinely strong opposition, perhaps led by Korn which would allow the Democrats to regroup,discard its corrupt element,loosen their ties with the corrupt unelected elites and win power fairly at a general election.It is not healthy in a democracy for one party to hold power consistently - even if won legitimately.

You say

"Thailand's strong ratings"

Thailand's strong ratings are BBB+ three levels above junk the same levels as Italy. The rest of your article kind of falls apart under that reality.

[hellodolly]

Recently financial experts have slammed rating agencies for a series of blunders and although I'm no expert I would question how they could call say this country is stable. Political problems are bubbling away under the surface, politicians are too busy with school playground squabbles to co-operate and the spectre of a certain person looms large. I should also add that at anytime the various factions will hit the streets if they don't get their way and none worse than the red shirts. If this is what Fitch calls stable they should replace their analysists

Thailand has been pretty stable over the last few years. It's nowhere near perfect (is anywhere?), and things may be bubbling under the service, but it's been pretty stable. In fact, much more stable than most were predicting. You can't expect it to jump straight from rioting in the streets to perfect stability. These things take time, but they are off to a good start. This ratings rise just puts it where other ratings companies already have it. And don't forget that it's three above junk status, so this isn't really saying much at all. I think they've risen from 11 to 10 in the ratings. No big deal.

Just out of curiosity.

I was wondering if the fact that the stability has any thing to do with the fact that the man behind all the instability is now in fact if not name the Prime Minister of the country.

It escapes me how a farong can not understand that. The Thais with their red shirt school diplomas on freedom by use of force is Democracy. Them I understand.

[hellodolly]

And the previous Govt was considered unstable because of the actions of who??

Abhisit, the military, the entrenched elite, PAD, political opportunists, speculators and some others.

Would you not agree that the some others included Thaksin a man paying for a terrorist operation in down town Bangkok and culminating in an attempt to burn Bangkok down. Was a prime factor in the instability along with the Parliamentary system of having to please to many different parties do do a proper job.

I can only imagine the mess Thailand would be in if the PTP had to deal with that. The government would be going to Cambodia and Vietnam to buy rice direct for their storage bins if they had the kind of support Abhist had.

In fact due to the direct actions of one man the previous government was ham strung,

(clue his first initial is T)

Just a casually observation and I could be wrong but it seems to me Thaksin pays good money to have people make him look good. Unfortunately for Thaksin there are a lot of people still around who are not on his pay roll and when we look at him we see a pile of sh-t.

[davejones]

Recently financial experts have slammed rating agencies for a series of blunders and although I'm no expert I would question how they could call say this country is stable. Political problems are bubbling away under the surface, politicians are too busy with school playground squabbles to co-operate and the spectre of a certain person looms large. I should also add that at anytime the various factions will hit the streets if they don't get their way and none worse than the red shirts. If this is what Fitch calls stable they should replace their analysists

Thailand has been pretty stable over the last few years. It's nowhere near perfect (is anywhere?), and things may be bubbling under the service, but it's been pretty stable. In fact, much more stable than most were predicting. You can't expect it to jump straight from rioting in the streets to perfect stability. These things take time, but they are off to a good start. This ratings rise just puts it where other ratings companies already have it. And don't forget that it's three above junk status, so this isn't really saying much at all. I think they've risen from 11 to 10 in the ratings. No big deal.

Just out of curiosity.

I was wondering if the fact that the stability has any thing to do with the fact that the man behind all the instability is now in fact if not name the Prime Minister of the country.

It escapes me how a farong can not understand that. The Thais with their red shirt school diplomas on freedom by use of force is Democracy. Them I understand.

You might be right, but the fact is that the current government won a landslide victory, and there is some sort of political stability. The ratings increase isn't claim things are great, just that they are slightly better than before. Surely everyone can see that what we have now is better than what was going on in 2010. Fitch, and others are still sating that Thailand credit rating is just above junk status. Some are reading too much into what they have said.

[bigbamboo]

And the previous Govt was considered unstable because of the actions of who??

The question has already been succinctly answered by geriatrickid why the previous government was unstable.A related issue is that while technically legitimate the previous government rode to power on the back of a military coup, judicial activism, and the backing of the unelected elite.To this must be added the sheer incompetence of Abhisit as a politician.Whatever its shortcomings the current government benefits from having fairly won power in a general election, and its unquestioned legitimacy is reflected in the credit ratings.

The Abhisit government, although always vulnerable due to the way it came to power, was considered stable. Indeed under Korn it was praised for the way it managed Thailand's successful riding of the wave of the 2008 crash.

The instability was actually caused by threats and actions that were being orchestrated from outside the kingdom.

[AleG]

And the previous Govt was considered unstable because of the actions of who??

The question has already been succinctly answered by geriatrickid why the previous government was unstable.A related issue is that while technically legitimate the previous government rode to power on the back of a military coup, judicial activism, and the backing of the unelected elite.To this must be added the sheer incompetence of Abhisit as a politician.Whatever its shortcomings the current government benefits from having fairly won power in a general election, and its unquestioned legitimacy is reflected in the credit ratings.

The Abhisit government, although always vulnerable due to the way it came to power, was considered stable. Indeed under Korn it was praised for the way it managed Thailand's successful riding of the wave of the 2008 crash.

The instability was actually caused by threats and actions that were being orchestrated from outside the kingdom.

The news articles I read about stability keep mentioning 2006. What happened in 2006 to upset them so much?

Thaksin, after running out his legal term as caretaker PM, officially resigning and then reinstating himself was removed from the position he was holding illegitimately by a military coup.