Bahrain
Kuwait
Oman
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
UAE
Print
Email
Discuss this article (41 Comments)Letters to the Editor
by ArabianBusiness.com staff writer on Monday, 23 July 2007
We welcome your feedback. If you want to comment on the Web site, one of our stories, or just want to give us your views, this is your space. Simply click on 'Discuss This Article', fill in the form and click on submit. The Editor will review and publish your comment shortly.
For news updates sign up for our newsletter
READERS' COMMENTS
Disclaimer: The views expressed here by our readers are not necessarily shared by ArabianBusiness.com or its employees.
Sticking 2 The Point
Posted by Dr. Madichie, Sharjah on Thursday 21 May 2009 at 03:19 UAE time
It is rather worrying that such a big issue as restricting women entrepreneurship through unjustifiable government instruments and policies should only get a brief commentary of no more than four paragraphs as reported on p. 16 of Arabian Business, May 10-16, 2009. I would personally like to follow the news story on what has become of the Saudi IT firm "2 The Point" which is run and staffed exclusively by women.
It behoves me how an industry worth over $15.9bn - the combined capital investment of the 20,000 women businesses in Saudi Arabia - can be dismissed by one circular from the Ministry of Commerce. Lest we forget this industry is worth the combined GDP of The Bahamas and Barbados going by estimates from the CIA Worldfactbook 2009.
Please keep us posted on the developments over government policy and women entrepreneurship in the Arabian Gulf - lets stick 2 The Point.
Posted by Dr. Madichie, Sharjah on Thursday 21 May 2009 at 03:19 UAE time
It is rather worrying that such a big issue as restricting women entrepreneurship through unjustifiable government instruments and policies should only get a brief commentary of no more than four paragraphs as reported on p. 16 of Arabian Business, May 10-16, 2009. I would personally like to follow the news story on what has become of the Saudi IT firm "2 The Point" which is run and staffed exclusively by women.
It behoves me how an industry worth over $15.9bn - the combined capital investment of the 20,000 women businesses in Saudi Arabia - can be dismissed by one circular from the Ministry of Commerce. Lest we forget this industry is worth the combined GDP of The Bahamas and Barbados going by estimates from the CIA Worldfactbook 2009.
Please keep us posted on the developments over government policy and women entrepreneurship in the Arabian Gulf - lets stick 2 The Point.
National bonds are NO more attractive.
Posted by Ramesh, Dubai, UAE on Wednesday 13 May 2009 at 16:46 UAE time
I got a mail from Natioanl Bonds saying
"Now Bondholders have the chance to be Millionaires every week, that's one Millionaire per week !!!!
To be eligible for the Millionaire draw, the minimum bond holding should be AED 10,000 at the time of the draw"
The second statement is IMPORTANT, it means if you have bonds worth say AED 500 or 2000, you are not eligible for the big prize. It is like riches for the rich. If some one has AED 10000 worth of bonds, they already have a better chance of winning because of higher number of bonds.
Seems this move is aimed at expatriates from South Asia and Africa, who have dreamt of becoming millionaires just by investing AED 100. Now they have been made ineligible just by a single decision. On the top of it, profits made with small investors money will go to rich investors in the form of prizes.
This move is clearly discriminatory towards small investors. No where in the world are such stupid rules. Premium bonds of UK, Prize bonds of Ireland, Lottery bonds in New zealand. they don't have such rules.
Posted by Ramesh, Dubai, UAE on Wednesday 13 May 2009 at 16:46 UAE time
I got a mail from Natioanl Bonds saying
"Now Bondholders have the chance to be Millionaires every week, that's one Millionaire per week !!!!
To be eligible for the Millionaire draw, the minimum bond holding should be AED 10,000 at the time of the draw"
The second statement is IMPORTANT, it means if you have bonds worth say AED 500 or 2000, you are not eligible for the big prize. It is like riches for the rich. If some one has AED 10000 worth of bonds, they already have a better chance of winning because of higher number of bonds.
Seems this move is aimed at expatriates from South Asia and Africa, who have dreamt of becoming millionaires just by investing AED 100. Now they have been made ineligible just by a single decision. On the top of it, profits made with small investors money will go to rich investors in the form of prizes.
This move is clearly discriminatory towards small investors. No where in the world are such stupid rules. Premium bonds of UK, Prize bonds of Ireland, Lottery bonds in New zealand. they don't have such rules.
Dubai International Boat Show
Posted by Barbara Edney, Dorset, United Kingdom on Wednesday 11 March 2009 at 13:54 UAE time
In your report No.4 of 7, you state "American yacht manufacturer,
"Sunseeker". Sunseeker is a wholly owned British manufacturer and has no connection to the USA.
I wondered why people were asking me if we had been taken over by an American company and now I know the reason why.
Posted by Barbara Edney, Dorset, United Kingdom on Wednesday 11 March 2009 at 13:54 UAE time
In your report No.4 of 7, you state "American yacht manufacturer,
"Sunseeker". Sunseeker is a wholly owned British manufacturer and has no connection to the USA.
I wondered why people were asking me if we had been taken over by an American company and now I know the reason why.
Rumours of Dubai’s demise are greatly exaggerated
Posted by Jeeja Kishan, Dubai, United Arab Emirates on Tuesday 13 January 2009 at 10:46 UAE time
I googled to find the truth in the article and located the below explanation on one dubai blogspot. I am surprised that the author did not do his home work before including such news in the article; even if there was a mistake in the press release given, he could have clarified it through his article - see the below note.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There's a grave mistake in the article, or you can call it lack of research, but a mistake nonetheless.
"last week the federal constitution was pointedly amended to bar the prime minister (Dubai's Sheik Mohammed), his deputies and federal ministers from "any professional or commercial job" and to prohibit them from any business transactions with the federal or local governments."
Barred from any professional or commercial job?
For those who could read Arabic, the next excerpt from Al Sharq Al Awsat website shows that the new amendment to the constitution HAS GIVEN THE PRIME MINISTER MORE AUTHORITIES!
كما نص التعديل الذي اقره المجلس الاعلى للاتحاد للمادة 62 من الدستور على انه لا يجوز لرئيس مجلس الوزراء او نوابه او لأي وزير اتحادي اثناء توليه منصبه ان يزاول اي عمل مهني او تجاري او مالي او ان يدخل في معاملة تجارية مع حكومة الاتحاد او حكومات الإمارات او ان يجمع الى منصبه اكثر من منصب رسمى واحد في حكومة احدى الإمارات.
ومنع رئيس الوزراء ووزراء الحكومة من ممارسة الأعمال التجارية أثناء أدائهم لأعمالهم، ليس مادة جديدة في الدستور الإماراتي، وإنما هي من المواد الأساسية في الدستور الحالي، وما تم هو فقط حذف فقرة في المادة ذاتها تتحدث عن «أو أن يجمع بين منصبه والعضوية في مجلس إدارة شركة تجارية أو مالية». وبالتالي يفتح التعديل الدستوري الباب أمام الجمع بين الوزارة والعضوية بمجالس إدارات الشركات. ويمتلك كثير من الوزراء في الإمارات بعضا من اكبر الشركات واكثرها ربحية في البلاد ويشغلون مقاعد في مجالس ادارة العديد من الشركات في نفس وقت شغلهم مناصبهم الرسمية.
http://www.asharqalawsat.com/details.asp?section=4&article=497407&issueno=10963
Let me explain, the item barring the prime minister from professional or commercial job was ALREADY in the UAE's constitution. What happened is that the amendment had omitted a part barring the prime minister from holding a board membership in commercial companies. i.e. giving him more power. Or more maneuverability.
" How this can be enforced is an open question—to a large extent, Dubai is Mohammed Al Maktoum—but the message was clear enough: Abu Dhabi is now in charge."
Notice how the writer of the article had dramatized the conclusion drawn from this amendment.
If only journalist who report false and misleading info about Dubai would end up laid of
Posted by Jeeja Kishan, Dubai, United Arab Emirates on Tuesday 13 January 2009 at 10:46 UAE time
I googled to find the truth in the article and located the below explanation on one dubai blogspot. I am surprised that the author did not do his home work before including such news in the article; even if there was a mistake in the press release given, he could have clarified it through his article - see the below note.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There's a grave mistake in the article, or you can call it lack of research, but a mistake nonetheless.
"last week the federal constitution was pointedly amended to bar the prime minister (Dubai's Sheik Mohammed), his deputies and federal ministers from "any professional or commercial job" and to prohibit them from any business transactions with the federal or local governments."
Barred from any professional or commercial job?
For those who could read Arabic, the next excerpt from Al Sharq Al Awsat website shows that the new amendment to the constitution HAS GIVEN THE PRIME MINISTER MORE AUTHORITIES!
كما نص التعديل الذي اقره المجلس الاعلى للاتحاد للمادة 62 من الدستور على انه لا يجوز لرئيس مجلس الوزراء او نوابه او لأي وزير اتحادي اثناء توليه منصبه ان يزاول اي عمل مهني او تجاري او مالي او ان يدخل في معاملة تجارية مع حكومة الاتحاد او حكومات الإمارات او ان يجمع الى منصبه اكثر من منصب رسمى واحد في حكومة احدى الإمارات.
ومنع رئيس الوزراء ووزراء الحكومة من ممارسة الأعمال التجارية أثناء أدائهم لأعمالهم، ليس مادة جديدة في الدستور الإماراتي، وإنما هي من المواد الأساسية في الدستور الحالي، وما تم هو فقط حذف فقرة في المادة ذاتها تتحدث عن «أو أن يجمع بين منصبه والعضوية في مجلس إدارة شركة تجارية أو مالية». وبالتالي يفتح التعديل الدستوري الباب أمام الجمع بين الوزارة والعضوية بمجالس إدارات الشركات. ويمتلك كثير من الوزراء في الإمارات بعضا من اكبر الشركات واكثرها ربحية في البلاد ويشغلون مقاعد في مجالس ادارة العديد من الشركات في نفس وقت شغلهم مناصبهم الرسمية.
http://www.asharqalawsat.com/details.asp?section=4&article=497407&issueno=10963
Let me explain, the item barring the prime minister from professional or commercial job was ALREADY in the UAE's constitution. What happened is that the amendment had omitted a part barring the prime minister from holding a board membership in commercial companies. i.e. giving him more power. Or more maneuverability.
" How this can be enforced is an open question—to a large extent, Dubai is Mohammed Al Maktoum—but the message was clear enough: Abu Dhabi is now in charge."
Notice how the writer of the article had dramatized the conclusion drawn from this amendment.
If only journalist who report false and misleading info about Dubai would end up laid of
Mobile
