Earning $100 by emailing telco

I have successfully earned $100 from M1. At first they turned down my request. But I managed to get it. I was intending to get about $50, but they gave me $100, which is 200% of my target. Below is the exchange of emails in chronological order:

Email sent to M1 on Mon, 17 Nov 2008 in an attempt to get some handphone vouchers. Let's see if it works.

"Hi, I have been a customer of M1 for a few years. I have seen my friends, colleagues getting phone vouchers from different telcos encouraging them to renew contract. But I have not received any vouchers from M1 so far. I wonder if it's because I'm using a low-end plan from M1 and hence not valued as an M1 customer. If that is the case, I am considering to go back to Starhub when my M1 contract ends so that I can at least enjoy some Starhub Hubber discounts.

I hope to receive good news from M1 so that I can spread the its goodwill and good service in forums, blogs and by word-of-mouth."


If this is successful, I will take this voucher (hopefully a $50), plus apply Citibank M1 credit card to enjoy another $50 off handset price and I will recontract. Have to admit M1 customer service is good generally though, which is why I want to make them treat me better. A bit paiseh, but who cares, I have nothing to lose.



M1 replied on Tue, 18 Nov 2008 (am)

"Please allow us to explain that the issuance of handset upgrade vouchersare based on factors such as customers' tenure, average spending for thepast 12 months, and current handset promotions. In addition, you are required to fulfill at least 20 months of the current handset contract. You may wish to note that mobile line 9******** have a current contract tenure of 11 months 2 days. We seek your understanding that these factors are neither based on our preferences nor meant to segregate our loyal customers."

I replied again on 18 Nov 2008 (pm)

"I have been with M1 for a few years although my current contract is only 11 mths old. As far as I remember, I didn’t receive any vouchers when I last renewed this contract 11 months ago. For you to mention that my current contract is only 11 months old, you imply that M1 ignores customers' past years relationships?

While you mentioned "non-segregation of loyal customers", but your basis of offering actually depends on so many factors of customers’ profile, isn’t this contradictory?

Based on your policy, you seem to value a "20-month old contract” customer who is more likely to jump ship rather than a current "11-month old contract” customer who is keen to be in business with M1 for another 21 months more.

M1 has delayed selling the Apple iPhone time and time again. Customers have no choice but to wait indefinitely. Due to this, customers with M1 are deprived of owning an iphone because they are stuck with the current contract with a high termination fee.

While M1 is unable satisfy its customers’ desires for the Apple iPhone, shouldn’t M1 at least compensate by giving out some handphone vouchers to sweeten the current deals for other brands of handsets? "


M1 replied again on 19 Nov 2008 (pm) - Success!
“Dear Mr ***

Thank you for your e-mail of 18 November 2008.

We have noted your feedback and we understand your point of view. We
have programmes specifically designed to address our existing customers'
needs and to recognise their loyalty to M1 as well as acquisition
promotions targeted at new customers.

We note that you wish to upgrade your handset. With the current handset
contract of 11 months old, you can purchase a handset at the advertised
price with additional $100 from any M1 Shop. You will need to sign a
new two-year handset contract. Thus, you will have two contracts that
run concurrently.

In appreciation of your support, we will be glad to offer you a $100
handset voucher for your mobile line 9********, which is to be used to
offset the additional $100 incurred for early handset upgrade. As this
is an electronic voucher, no physical voucher will be sent to you.

You can walk-in to any M1 Shop with your NRIC and SIM card to use the
voucher once it is installed. This voucher may not apply for selected
special upgrade offers at M1 Shop and M1 Shop Online. Please settle any
outstanding bill prior to your purchase.

Please submit a new online feedback form by 5 December 2008 you wish to
take up this offer. The voucher will be processed within three working
days upon your acceptance, and it will be valid for two weeks.

We also wish to clarify that there has been a change in the distribution
schedule of the iPhone in Asia. Hence, this is likely to affect M1?s
plans to sell the device by the end of the year. We thank you for your
patience and understanding.”

1-year EXTEND contract VS 2-years RENEW contract

Since my mobile plan contract has recently already reached one year, I did some thinking and developed some thoughts regarding recontracting our M1/Starhub/Singtel

As we all know we buy a phone with contract is much cheaper than buying a phone without line, we usually change our handphone every 2 years. Telcos have also improvised on this, allowing us to get the promotional prices for our desired phones if our contracts have only been 1 year, by just adding $100. Some pple like this idea because they can change phones every year, some pple don't mind waiting for 2 years before changing their handset.

I have discovered it makes a lot of economic sense to extend your contract every after 1 year.

Let me use a very popular phone for example, the Apple iPhone 16GB. Handphone shops or "Ah Beng Shops" are selling a brand new one for $1198. You may be able to find cheaper, say maybe $1100. This price is without contract.

If you were to sign up a Singtel contract, maybe iOne Plus ($25.68 per month), you can get the iPhone at $748. Compared to buying without line at $1100, you save $350 by signing up a 2 year plan.

Now, if I currently have a Singtel iOne Plus contract which is already 1 year old, I can buy the iPhone at $748 + $100 = $848. This means that I can save $250 compared to buying without line at $1100.

The main crux is capitalising on this $100 which is the additional cost in order to renew the contract. This $100 is very cheap because I still save $250. If next year I extend again, given the same circumstances, I save another $250. This means that in a 2 year timeframe, I actually saved a total of $500 beause I renewed every after 1 year. Compared to waiting for 2 years for my contract to end and then renew it, I would have saved only $350 for a new phone. Thus in 2 years, I gained $150 more.

Some may think that they do not need a new HP every year. In fact many pple do. There's always other alternatives. Many HP dealers and shops offer cash to you for signing up new lines, something like $250 for a line similar to iOne Plus. Walk to Lucky Plaza HP shops to check out how much they offer for a brand new particular model before walking to Paragon M1 shop or Wisma Singtel shop, recontract your plan and get that model. Sell it back to the shop and you can gain at least $250.

You can even sign up the line at the Ah-beng shop itself, but they may quote you lower if you ask like that. Personally I also dont like to disclose my personal details to Ah bengs so I rather sign up with telcos, get the phone then negotiate with different Ah beng to see which Ah beng can quote me better price, or see which Ah lian prettier then I sell to her.

Althernatively, you can sell if off on internet buy/sell websites like eBay.com or hardwarezone.com, but subject to marketability, time and convenience.

Until the telcos realise that paying just $100 extra on top of promotional phone prices for extending contract is too cheap, it makes great economic sense for us consumers to extend contract after 1 year instead of renewing contract after 2 years. Hopefully they won't increase this $100.

P.S. I do know that after telcos offer only 21 months contract nowadays intead of 24 mths (2 years), but to calcuate in detail, we still earn by extending contract.

My dual currency trade

Today I sold a contract of changing NZD to USD at the rate 0.5979 one month later for 32% pa returns on my capital. I analysed that in the short term, NZD will fall while USD will rise. I will remain in NZD if the stock market continues to fall. I feel that the current bull run is a rebound as there are no confirmed signals to convince a trend reversal. To hedge this movement, I'm considering to buy some blue chips, so that either way the market goes, I will maximise my gains.

Call this a crisis? Just wait

Actually, don't wait, because we've got to stop a bigger economic disaster in the making: 78 million baby-boomers eligible for Social Security and Medicare.

By David M. Walker, former U.S. Comptroller General

Last Updated: October 30, 2008: 10:55 AM ET

(Fortune Magazine) -- Staring into the abyss always focuses the mind, which can help you avoid falling in. So let's take a look at the potential catastrophe that awaits us once we survive our current crisis.

At the dawn of the 21st century the U.S. had $5.7 trillion in total debt. As we approach the end of George W. Bush's presidency only eight years later, that sum has nearly doubled, thanks to war costs, tax cuts, spending increases, expanded entitlement programs, and now a welter of government bailouts and rescues.

This year was particularly bad. The federal budget deficit for fiscal 2008 hit $455 billion, up from $162 billion last year. That figure does not include the cost of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, which has an initial pricetag in the hundreds of billions of dollars. In fairness, some of that money presumably will come back to the Treasury, since the new rescue-related sums will be used to acquire preferred stock, mortgages, and other assets that someday could be sold at a profit.

Yet any such calculations are penny ante compared with the fiscal disaster that is bearing down on America. It's no longer an event in the misty future. It officially began earlier this year when teacher Kathleen Casey-Kirschling of Maryland became the first baby-boom retiree to collect Social Security benefits. She will be followed by about 78 million more boomers over the next 17 years.

The entitlements due from Social Security and Medicare present us with that frightening abyss. The costs of these current programs, along with other health-care costs, could bankrupt our country. The abyss offers no assets, troubled or otherwise, to help us cross it.

Yes, some have suggested less-than-revolutionary measures that could help. Among them: budget savings that would accrue from repealing the Bush-era tax cuts, ending the Iraq war, or expanding the economy after the current downturn runs its course. But even if the economy were to grow at the level of 3.2% a year, as it did in the 1990s, and these other savings were achieved, they wouldn't come close to addressing our federal financial problem.

Nor can we be complacent about timing. The costs of these programs start to threaten our solvency in the next several years. The only way to get across the chasm is to begin making tough choices now to change our current course. Delay will make the problem worse.

In fact, the deteriorating financial condition of our federal government in the face of skyrocketing health-care costs and the baby-boom retirement could fairly be described as a super-subprime crisis. It would certainly dwarf what we're seeing now.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), noting that the federal balance sheet does not reflect the government's huge unfunded promises in our nation's social-insurance programs, estimated last year that the unfunded obligations for Medicare and Social Security alone totaled almost $41 trillion. That sum, equivalent to $352,000 per U.S. household, is the present-value shortfall between the growing cost of entitlements and the dedicated revenues intended to pay for them over the next 75 years.

Why call it a super-subprime crisis? Besides its gigantic scale, there are very disturbing similarities between the current mortgage-related crisis and our next potential disaster.

First, like the securitized investment vehicles that blew up, federal programs were launched without adequately thinking through who would bear the ultimate cost and related risk. Just as originators of mortgages let themselves off the hook by unloading packages of dubious loans onto others, lawmakers have increased spending, expanded entitlement programs, and cut taxes while expecting future generations to pay the bill.

Second, just as a lack of transparency associated with mortgage-backed securities resulted in big surprises and large losses for investors, our nation's huge off-balance-sheet obligations for Social Security and Medicare present a threat wrapped in camouflage. After all, the government's "trust funds" don't really provide much security since they don't hold anything but more government debt.

Third, in the same way that private sector "risk management" executives failed to prevent the subprime mortgage crisis, overseers in Congress and the executive branch have turned a blind eye to costs associated with entitlement programs and tax cuts. While lax regulation of banks fed the current subprime crisis, a lack of statutory budget controls has led to a widening gap between the government's revenues and costs.

At the heart of these problems is our leaders' collective failure to act in the face of known challenges. Our country has veered from its founding principles, which held to individual responsibility and accountability today in order to create more opportunity tomorrow. When our constitution was written, the concepts of thrift and prudence were no less at the center of the American spirit than liberty and justice.

During past financial crises and wars, the government went into debt because our nation's survival was at stake. What has changed is that piling up debt has become business as usual, even during times of prosperity.

Today we are headed toward debt levels that far exceed the all-time record as a percentage of our economy. In fact, by 2040 we are projected to see debt as a percentage of our economy that is double the record set at the end of World War II. Based on GAO data, balancing the budget in 2040 could require us to cut federal spending by 60% or raise overall federal tax burdens to twice today's levels.

Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security already account for more than 40% of the total federal budget. And their portion of the budget is expected to grow so fast that their cost, and the cost of servicing our debt, will soon crowd out vital programs, including research and development, critical infrastructure, education, and even national defense.

The crisis we face is one of numbers and demographics but also of attitudes. Promises were made in an earlier time, when they seemed more affordable. Like homeowners borrowing against the value of their homes in the expectation that the values would go up forever, the American government borrowed against the future and assumed that the economy would grow fast enough to make that debt affordable.

But our national debt is not limitless, and our foreign lenders are not fools. If we persist on our current "do nothing" path, our future will be jeopardized. Americans need to reconcile the government we want with the taxes we're willing to pay for it.

True, attempts at reforming Medicare and Social Security have foundered in the past, and there may be some Americans who think that if the government can bail out the financial sector, it can bail out our entitlement programs. But the political difficulty of tackling these problems, hard as they are, has to be overcome this time.

The next President, working on a bipartisan basis with the Congress, must make sure that tough controls are put in place to get control of the budget, once economic conditions improve. (Example: We can require that all new spending programs, commitments, and tax cuts are paid for by comparable spending cuts or revenue increases in other parts of the budget.)

We'll need to make some tough decisions on which of the Bush tax cuts we can afford to keep, and resolve what to do about the alternative minimum tax.

These problems are not beyond our ability to master them. Social Security can be made sustainable and secure with some modest changes over time in retirement benefits, the retirement age, and the tax structure, as Republicans and Democrats did in the early 1980s.

As for Medicare, there are a number of good ideas that would introduce more cost sharing for the wealthy, increased competition, better cost controls, more use of technology, and other steps to curb the growth of health-care spending.

I urge the government to set up a bipartisan commission that would begin working in early 2009. It should keep everything on the table - all entitlements, other spending, and tax programs - and make recommendations on both sides of the federal ledger.

If we bring together the talent and expertise that abound in our great country, we can see our way through the current financial crisis and find solutions for the next one. From Washington we'll need leadership rather than laggardship. The 78 million baby-boomers aren't getting any younger.

My dual currency trade

One month had passed. Two days ago my trade had been fixed. I paired my NZD with CHF at 0.7728 strike/spot. It ended up at around 0.7400, so it is well covered with 300+ pips. I got back my NZD with 19.1%pa interest. I was thinking if I had shorted it on the FX market myself, I could have earned like 4% of my capital. But trading this currency option, I am only earning 1.6% of my capital. That's more than double the difference. Hmm... Well but of course, trading on the FX market is certainly more risky as the profit and losses are directly reflected by the direction of the curves. Currency options trading limits your losses but limits your gains as well.

Nowadays with the high volatility, option yields are much higher offered by banks. My latest trade done yesterday, I paired my NZD with CHF again, now with a whopping 25%pa yield. I did not do it at strike/spot again. I strike it at 0.7500. That means if NZD/CHF is 0.7500 or above, I get back in CHF. If NZD/CHF is less than 0.7500, I get back in NZD. The reason I choose CHF again is because CHF is on a long term uptrend with SGD. Besides, CHF is considered a 'safe heaven' in bad times like this. I predict that NZD will continue to fall, but with less momentum. ADX and MACD has shown signs of weaknesses of the fall of NZD. However, there is no signs of confirmed trend reversal yet.

Latest stock news

The Board of Directors of The Straits Trading Company Limited (‘Company’) is pleased to announce the entry into a joint venture agreement by its hotel management arm, Rendezvous Hotels International Private Limited (‘RHI’), with the Chennai based Indian developer, XS Real Properties (‘XS Real’), pioneer of bungalow apartments in Chennai. XS Real has been a prominent property developer in India since 1995 and has won numerous building awards. Pursuant to the joint venture, RHI will manage hotels and resorts in the dynamic Indian market under its Rendezvous or Marque brandings, through its 51% stake in the joint venture company to be named Rendezvous India Hospitality Private Limited.

The Board of Directors of Iconic Holdings Limited wishes to announce that the Company has entered into a Heads of Agreement dated 12 September 2008 with Hunan Taihe Group Stock Co., Ltd and Phoon Wui and Zenna Overseas in relation to the proposed acquisition of the entire share capital of Zenna which if undertaken and completed will result in a reverse take-over of the Company.

The Public Transport Council (PTC) today announced fare revisions for bus and train fares which will come into effect on 1 October 2008. Under the new fare structure, adult ez-link fares and senior citizen concession ez-link fares will be increased by 4 cents while adult cash fares will rise by 10 cents. The increase will go largely towards the transfer rebate which is being increased from 25 cents currently to 40 cents. SBS Transit will bear 10 cents of the 15-cents increase. Children and student fares, as well as prices for student and NS concession passes, will not be increased. To mitigate the impact of the fare changes, SBS Transit will be extending $3.6 million worth of assistance schemes. This will comprise: $350,000 worth of transport vouchers which will be disbursed through the Citizens’ Consultative Committees (CCCs) to complement the assistance they are already rendering to the needy through the CCC ComCare Fund, $3 million worth of extended concession hours for the elderly - a concession which SBS Transit has been extending throughout the day since 2005; and $250,000 for offering unlimited bus travel with our SeasonPass.

The Board of Directors of Koh Brothers Group Limited wishes to announce that Pencroft Investments Pte Ltd, a 50:50 joint venture company between AIG Lengkong Investment Limited and Koh Brothers Development Pte Ltd has been placed under members’ voluntary liquidation.

The Board of Directors of Nam Lee Pressed Metal Industries Limited wishes to announce that the Company is proposing a Proposed Share Consolidation of every two (2) existing ordinary shares in the capital of the Company into one (1) ordinary share. As a result of the Proposed Share Consolidation, each shareholder of the Company will receive one (1) Consolidated Share for every two (2) Shares held prior to the Proposed Share Consolidation as at the Books Closure Date.

The Board of Directors of Oniontech Limited wishes to announce that the Company has disposed of its entire equity interest in its wholly-owned subsidiary, Guangzhou Oniontech Information Technology Limited to Oniontech Co. Limited, another wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company at a cash consideration of KRW 201,500,294.

The Board of Directors of CH Offshore Ltd is pleased to announce that the Company has entered into the following charters with third parties (a) Five-year extension of two Time Charters of two 2005-built 5,400 brake horse power anchor-handling tug/supply vessels, and (b) A Bareboat Charter of a new 12,240 brake horse power, 150 ton bollard-pull anchor-handling tug/supply vessel that the Company took delivery of from the building yard in Japan on 12 September 2008. The Bareboat Charter is for a primary period of 8 months, with an option for the Charterer to extend the charter period for another 8 months. The total gross contract value for the Charters, including the extension period under the option, is approximately US$40 million.

The Board of Directors of Contel Corporation Limited wishes to announce that the Singapore Exchange Securities Trading Limited has on 12 September 2008 granted its in-principle approval for the listing and quotation of 14,613,836 additional new ordinary shares to be issued pursuant to the issue of Zero Coupon Convertible Bonds due 2010 and the resetting of Conversion Price pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Convertible Bonds.