Wednesday 3 September 2014

Currently browsing 'Euro & Finance'

In early 2010, fears of a sovereign debt crisis, the 2010 Euro Crisis developed concerning some European states. What should be the response? How should economic and financial policies be coordinated at the EU level?

 

New book: Next Europe

Posted by on 01/09/14

Next Europe – How the EU can survive in a world of tectonic shifts

After many months of interviewing, research and writing, I am happy to announce the launch of my fourth book: Next Europe.

It is already downloadable from Amazon, the Apple StoreGoogle BooksKobo BooksBruna and Smashwords. Other ebook stores will follow soon. 

Next Europe cover

Summary

The EU is in deep trouble. As the eurozone crisis keeps raging on, the European dream lies shattered on the ground. Euroscepticism and nationalism are on the rise, tens of millions are unemployed, Great Britain is heading for the exit door, while Russia flexes its muscles and the Middle East burns.

Is there any hopeful future for the European Union? Are we going to lose the race with the BRICS? Will Europeans ever truly engage with the EU institutes in Brussels?

Next Europe gives some compelling answers to the big questions of our time. EU Watcher Joop Hazenberg, a young Dutch writer who has been based in Brussels since early 2013, takes the reader on a venture across the globe to gain insight into the position of Europe in the 21st century.

His findings are surprising. The old continent is stronger and richer than we are inclined to think. Though the EU is in a mess, so is the rest of the world. Many of the rising giants will stumble and may even fall before they can do Europe harm. But it is also true that we are no longer the coolest dudes on the planet and that new (and old) dangers threaten our security and well-being.

Based on extensive research and interviews with leading experts, Next Europe soothes the unease that looms over our future. Joop Hazenberg also formulates a bold and strong agenda for reform of the EU. If we want to survive the coming age of uncertainty and tectonic shifts, then the European Union needs a restart. Not only in Brussels, but also in the capillaries of our society.

By acting now, Europe could become, once again, a leading continent. Next Europe is the starting point for a better understanding of our world, whether you are a student, Commission bureaucrat, a voter for UKIP or a Chinese businessman.

Praise for Next Europe

‘A spirited and courageous work’ – Jonathan Holslag, Professor of International Politics at the Free University in Brussels

‘Joop Hazenberg is a young thinker with the wisdom to realise that Europe has taken a wrong turn and the courage to want to change things’ – Philippe Legrain, author of European Spring: Why Our Economies and Politics are in a Mess and How to Put Them Right

Launch details

The official launch is in Brussels on Monday 22 September. I will hand over the ‘first copy’ to Constantijn van Oranje-Nassau, Head of Cabinet of Commissioner Kroes.

If you want to know more about the programme of the presentation or attending, please contact me.

I am also available for (media) interviews, lectures and panels.

 

European Council defies Ombudsman over rigging of EU Fiscal Pact

Posted by on 28/08/14

The European Ombudsman has strongly condemned the European Council for unscrupulously rigging the Irish referendum and parliamentary votes around the EU on the Fiscal Compact that controls the European economy. By withholding crucial documents, the European Council has deceived both the public and parliaments in Member States who passed the Pact as law. The Fiscal Compact is in reality an undemocratic Con-Trick. It violates basic principles of national and European democracy and law.

  • How can parliaments judge whether the Pact is fair, if the European Council hides the facts?
  • How can a referendum decide, if the European Council rigs the evidence?
  • How can the public interrogate their parliamentary representatives if the flawed legal basis for taxation and expenditure is locked away in the Council’s safe?
  • Can European institutions such as the Community’s civil service be exploited as a skivvy for the politicians’ own non-Community Pact?
  • The euro violates rules for a Community monetary system. Dishonest book-keeping and fraud reduced the Euro’s real value by 75 percent. Politicians refused to follow the Founding Fathers’ supranational economic and monetary principles.

The Pact makes Council the supervisor of fraud! After the Ombudsman condemned the European Council’s maladministration, the same document was requested AGAIN. The European Council again defied the Ombudsman. It refused to provide the document. A further appeal was made to the Ombudsman, Emily O’Reilly, that the European Council should respect her judgements and basic democratic principles.  The Ombudsman metaphorically threw up her hands. She confessed that the Ombudsman could do nothing to make the European Council follow the rules except the European Court of Justice.

She replied to me on 26 August 2014 that

‘I believe that a new inquiry into the Council’s recent refusal of disclosure would be repetitive, since there is no new element that would distinguish the new case of the one which I already inquired into. Moreover, the follow-up mentioned above (where the European Council again reiterated its own position) shows that the Council has no intention to change its position in this regard. It follows that a new inquiry into the same matters would, in all likelihood, lead to a new critical remark, which would neither be helpful to you, nor would trigger any positive follow-up from the Council.’

What is this crucial document? The European Council produced an analysis on the Pact’s flaws in terms of EU law. For European citizens it covered whether within the Pact they could take the Council and Commission to Court for abuse and criminality associated with it. That is a fundamental democratic right of all citizens. This key analysis is vital for understanding the basis on which the European Council is attempting to control the lives of 500 million citizens and multiple trillions of euros.

The document analyzing the insecure legal basis of the Fiscal Pact was circulated secretively to some EU delegations. It was never rendered public, in spite of national parliamentary debates and a referendum. Yet it is crucial for Europeans to protect the nascent European democracy that has been so abused by the European Council fraud in the past.

In this Pact the European Council gave itself unprecedented powers over national budgets and imposed controls and reviews on government spending. The measures were forced through national Parliaments. Some national leaders refused to sign up to the Fiscal Pact. Thus the Pact cannot be regarded as EU or Community law. At best it is an international agreement masquerading as European law. Obfuscation.

The Fiscal Pact measures are so radical and further distort the Community method for European democracy that referendums in all Member States should have been mandatory. Only one country, however, was able to force a referendum about this measure. That was Ireland. Its constitution requires such matters with major democratic consequences be subject to a vote. Other Member States railroaded the measure through their parliamentary system. A bare majority sufficed. There was minimal or no public debate about it. In Cyprus, which was hit by a euro banking disaster that shook the rickety foundations of the euro, it was passed simply by governmental Decree thus bypassing parliament.

The European Council’s imposition of the Fiscal Compact bypassed all the usual democratic control of the European system such as the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and proper public debate, The European Council has consistently blocked the legally required elections for these bodies. In this case they just ignored them.

Are the Pact’s measures legal? Have Europeans lost their democratic rights? The Court has yet to pronounce.

Robert Schuman, the initiator of the European Community, defined democracy by the goals the European peoples define for themselves, not politicians. He said that all measures must be ‘in the service of Europeans and acting in agreement with the European peoples.‘ In this Pact, the people were left out of the loop in one of the most important measures in recent European history.

A key issue of this Pact is whether Europeans will be able to take legal action against politicians’ abuse or criminality spawned by these ‘closed door’ measures. Were the people consulted? No. Did they call for it? No. Did they agree? Hardly.

The European Council is acting to prevent democratic control of its new powers. Specifically it has thumbed its nose at the Ombudsman in refusing to release documents of primary interest. It did the same to the citizen who pay their salaries and the cost of the legal document in question.

Who are these people who are refusing democratic control over taxpayers money?

The Fiscal Compact was brought in because of corruption of politicians who not only overspent their countries’ budget, but used national budgets in voter bribes to sections of the public while giving ‘tax breaks’ to party supporters. Then they cooked the books. The national statistics were bent, twisted and contorted to cover the fraudulent activity.

If this had happened in a commercial company the perpetrators would now be in prison.

But they are politicians. Now they have a Pact that puts them in the judge’s seat.

 

Will the economic sanctions of US and the EU against Russia fail?

Posted by on 26/08/14
By Tyszecki The harsh economic sanctions against Russia demonstrated the unity of the European Union and the United States on the issue of stopping the bloody war, unleashed and supported by Russia, as well as their full support for Ukraine. The stakes are high...

New payment system SEPA – Germans do not like it

Posted by on 28/07/14

It’s only two weeks until SEPA is starting officially. The start has been postponed from beginning of this year. At that time, many companies hadn’t been prepared for the new system. Now, the vast majority (89 percent) have taken it „into account“. By SEPA europewide transfer of money is much easier due to standardization. German companies do not like the system as it in first instant means conversion costs but in the long run it will most probably work out – in May, already 90 percent of remittances have been done by using the new system.

Vassilev-Peevski, CCB bank run: oligarchy in Bulgaria exposed

Posted by on 13/07/14

Credit dossiers for a total of 3.5 billion leva (1.78 billion euro) of Bulgaria’s Corporate Commercial Bank (CCB) have disappeared and a sum equivalent to 206 million leva (105 million euro) has been withdrawn in cash upon order by its president of the supervisory board and the majority shareholder Tzvetan Vassilev, the Bulgarian National Bank (BNB) announced on 11 July. Tzetan Vassilev is left on the photo.

BNB Governor Ivan Iskrov also said the license of CCB will be withdrawn, the bank will be declared bankrupt and all deposits and accounts of individuals and companies, with the exception of the accounts of Vassilev, will be transferred to CCB’s subsidiary bank “Crédit Agricole Bulgaria”, which will be nationalized.
Vassilev spoke from Vienna, denied any wrongdoing and basically said the developments were a conspiracy.
So much for the news. Now some comments.
Several media in Bulgaria titled “The robbery of the century”. It is assumed that CCB, one of the few Bulgarian-owned banks in the country, is the “bank of the power” – this is where most of the state assets used to be deposited.
In return for the favour, CCB contolled a media empire which paid lip service to the government – previously of Boyko Borissov, presently of the coalition between the mainly ethnic Turkish Movement for Rights and Freedoms (DPS) and the Socialists. The media empire also badly attacked political foes and critics, including in the media.
A key figure in the story is Delyan Peevski, a shady power broker and MEP from DPS. Deevski is right on the photo. As it is common knowledge, the biggest concentration of Bulgarian media ownership and distribution concerns primarily the New Bulgarian Media Group Holding, of which Peevski’s mother Irena Krasteva is the owner, and of which credible press investigative reports suggested long ago that Vassilev is the creditor. I wrote about it myself some time ago.
In fact, the European Commission’s latest monitoring report on Bulgaria’s deficient law-enforcement system largely focused on Peevski, without naming him.
CCB has also reportedly financed the expensive European election campaign of the party “Bulgaria without censorship” of former journalist Nikolay Barekov, who is now an MEP. Vassilev has made no secret he wanted to play a role in politics. Barekov denies having been financed by CCB.
Then, the relations between Vassilev and Peevski deteriorated greatly, for undisclosed reasons. The Bulgarian prosecution took seriously Peevski’s signal that Vassilev had hired three people to kill him and investigated Vassilev’s offices, which contributed to a bank run on CCB that accelerated the early elections.
According to media reports, DPS has largely taken control over the siphoning of Bulgaria’s state resource, in terms of public procurement, governmental decision-making and law-making. Also according to publications in the Bulgarian press, the Prosecutor General Sotir Tsatsarov often appears to act (or not to act) according to Peevski’s will.
Now the main topic in Bulgaria is “who will pay” over the salvaging of the bankrupt CCB. Some views support the conspiracy theory – unnamed big creditors created the bank run, so they will not have to pay.
In Bulgaria, huge wealth is visible (against the background of massive poverty), although few economic activities exist. It is assumed that much of the wealth has been created during a major previous bank crisis, in 1996.
Maybe we see a remake of the story. How was it possible that CCB and Peevski created such a powerful center of oligarchic power? Despite the fact that several media outlets in Bulgaria have warned against both against Vassilev and Peevski’s alleged foul play? How is it possible that the Bulgarian Central Bank did not notice for years the wrongdoings of CCB, before Iskov cried wolf a few days ago? Why major political forces were so largely silent, what was their interest to keep their eyes wide shut? Who are those people and companies who safely withdrew their millions just before the bank run became obvious?
Vassilev’s bank offered extremely generous interest rates for savers, and this is why most of the Bulgarian elite had put their money in his bank.
Many Bulgarian commentators today speak as if they were paid communicators by Vassilev. And nobody in the Bulgaria major TV stations asks those commentators before inviting them to comment: do you have put your money in CCB?
I don’t have any and will try to remain objective when returning to the matter.

Matteo Renzi’s rise: It’s Rome vs. Berlin now

Posted by on 07/07/14
By Bernhard Schinwald The European elections in May saw a number of winners. The biggest amongst them, however, can be found in Rome. The young Italian Prime Minister, Matteo Renzi, is set to become for the Socialists what Angela Merkel is for Christian Democrats.

Europe should enjoy its low inflation level

Posted by on 07/07/14

Europe is enjoying a level of price stability and low interest rates rarely seen since the end of World War II.

Wages, pensions, rents etc. do not require permanent adjustments to rising prices, an advantage we are not fully appreciating.

Citizens are no longer deceived by monetary illusions. The Euro has lost very little of its value during the past 10 years. Citizens can therefore keep their savings in liquidity without being afraid of a hidden depreciation, while house owners should no longer be deceived by inflationary rises in value.

The only ones not content with price stability are those who benefit from inflation, like heavily indebted governments and companies which see the relative weight of their debt shrink when prices rise, though they too benefit from price stability because of the low interest rates that go along with.

So why are the ECB and most monetary economists so afraid of low inflation? Why does the ECB keep reminding us of its medium-term inflation target below but close to 2%?

The answers are simple though not fully convincing:

  • Price stability might turn into deflation and lead to economic stagnation.
  • A moderate inflation may facilitate the consolidation of excessive public debt.
  • Investment may be more stimulated by expectations of inflation than of deflation.

There is no serious reason to fear deflation in Europe or in the world.

  • The prices of energy and other basic materials are bound to rise under the impact of growing scarcities, rising populations and demand.
  • In Europe wages are coming under upward pressure due to ageing population and increasing shortages of qualified labour.

Economic growth will remain weak in Europe for two basic reasons:

  • The labour force is stagnating;
  • It will become more and more difficult to raise productivity by more than 1% per year.

The meagre 1.7% economic growth projected for 2015 is in line with what will be ahead of us in the future. Considering our exceptional level of prosperity we should be more than happy with annual economic growth of 1% to 2% and focus our efforts on

  • absorbing the unacceptably high numbers of young unemployed by better training and schooling;
  • reducing regional income disparities;
  • making Europe fitter for global competition.

Eberhard Rhein, Brussels, 10/7/2014

Kadyrov could disclose Putin’s conversation with Abramovich

Posted by on 21/06/14

Recently, the media scene is excited by news about Russian President Putin’s intentions to conduct the manual rotation of the government. There was even a leak to the press concerning supposedly intercepted Putin’s private conversation with notorious Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich, owner of London Chelsea FC.

It is to be recalled that in mid-June, some Russian and European media published a fragment of a conversation between two Russian-speaking people whose voices journalists attributed to Putin and Abramovich.

If that fact is true, Putin offered the billionaire to take up a post of the Prime Minister of Russia, instead of Dmitry Medvedev, who, according to the Russian president, “lost confidence”.

Considering that it is technically impossible to establish the primary source of information leakage, authorship of radio intercept was mothered to Americans.

At the same time, the intelligence community of the UK seems to be more engaged in receiving information about the Abramovich covert activities, especially taking into account large British assets of the oligarch.

Having found such an argument a weighty one, we managed to communicate with known in the recent past senior NATO general who is considered an expert on Russia and has recently provided consulting services to MI6.

Generally, he was skeptical of the likelihood of Abramovich’s appointment to high office, primarily, because of the attitude of the billionaire who does not want to take responsibility for the unpredictable Putin’s policies, which in principle can be reduced to complete curtailment of business cooperation between Moscow and Western countries.

Commenting on the incident with the unveiling of a telephone conversation, the general emphasized that the recent scandals concerning wiretapping of the EU first persons made guide technical units of most secret services to abandon most of their activities.

Answering the question of who may be in advantage to make public the internal Kremlin “wrangles”, an expert on Russia pointed directly to the Chechen leader Kadyrov. The latter allegedly draws a bid on Abramovich’s assets since spent heavily on the participation of his militants in the Ukrainian campaign.

Taking into account that the Russian authorities, who previously fully met Kadyrov’s financial appetites, today are experiencing physical discomfort themselves due to Western sanctions, Kadyrov is forced to search other financial sources, which was the cause of playing this dangerous standalone game.

Besides illegal collection of compromising information on Putin sponsors, the head of Chechnya is actively working to convince Saudi Arabia to consider his candidacy as a possible Medvedev successor, and in exchange for gold and preferences, ensures every assistance in promoting the ideas of Islamic fundamentalism in Russia.

In this regard, the information leak about Abramovich, made by Kadyrov, was consciously aimed to discredit the oligarch and forestall his possible appointment.

Of course, today it is difficult to imagine that Putin at least hypothetically can conceive Kadyrov premiership, but in the Kremlin back rooms future shifts in the power block are already being discussed.

In particular, a fairly low profile of Defense Minister Sergey Shoygu concerning Ukraine can become a certain chance for Kadyrov. In support of this prediction says at least the role that is currently assigned to the Chechen at conflict escalation in eastern Ukraine.

However, the question is who helps Kadyrov act behind Putin and how he is able to lead an independent game in order to subsequently dictate his rules to the Kremlin.

Bitcoin: The Perfect Crime?

Posted by on 15/06/14
Over the last year or so I have read quite extensively about Bitcoin. The amateur economist in me is fascinated by it’s disruptive capabilities and supply and demand characteristics. However, something that has been evident over the months is the extent to which very smart people around the world have been able to hack less [...]

Lithuania will join monetary union in 2015

Posted by on 11/06/14

After obtaining green light from the Commission and the ECB small Lithuania is almost certain to get confirmation by the EMU finance ministers and join the EMU next January.

This has been expected to happen for a long time. Lithuania has carefully prepared for it, especially by early tying its currency to the Euro and putting its financial house in order.

Estonia and Latvia having preceded it in 2011 and 2013 its decision to join was a logical consequence. After all, the three tiny robust Baltic economies have demonstrated an amazing capacity to adapt to economic stress. It would have been strange for one of them to stay outside the EMU and continue keeping its national currency.

Lithuania considers the adoption of the EU currency also as a demonstration of its strong ties to Europe.

The Lithuanian prime minister Butkevicius has therefore called the decision to join “one more step

toward deeper economic, financial and political security”.

Will other EU members follow in the next few years? All of them have to join one day under the terms of the Treaty, except for the UK and Denmark which have negotiated a derogation to stay outside”.

It is only a question of timing and political will. Joining the the Euro zone has not been very popular during the years of financial crisis. In many EU countries the Euro has suffered from often unjustified attacks. It has been made responsible for national economic difficulties and most recently for the admirable price stability. The increasing talk about the of deflationary threats by the Central Bank has not made the Euro more attractive.

Sweden, Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, confronted with domestic opposition, feel they can do without membership. Others are not yet ready economically.

We should therefore not expect a rush for membership in the coming few years. The EMU can very well do with only 19 members and should refrain from being pushy.

But the time will come when the countries on the side line that fulfill the conditions for membership like Sweden should discreetly be called to duty.

Eberhard Rhein, Brussels, 8/6/2014

Echoes of the past in the future of Europe

Posted by on 10/06/14
By Žiga Turk European peace, prosperity and democracy are in crisis. To fight this crisis, EU leaders are advised to stop looking at Europe as a project - it's not. Europe is half billion Europeans that deserve peace, security, jobs, economic opportunities and services from efficient public sector. Democracy as a system to establish trust between the rulers and the ruled, and it's time to go back to the basics in the EU.

Is Mario Draghi kicking out financial capitalism and austerity policies?

Posted by on 09/06/14

Yesterday’s decision of the European Central Bank to cut its key interest rate below zero and the other measures announced are more than a European way of the U.S. Quantitative Easing (QE). The ECB cut its main refinancing rate to 0,15% and its deposit rate from zero to minus 0,1%. The European Central bank is the first major central bank to endeavour into negative territory. In fact it is a historical breaking decision. It is particularly historical because it challenges the European Union institutional setting. It was not a genuine European procedure; rather it was an impartial decision of the board of directors of the European Central Bank!

A negative interest rate is the announcement to the financial markets that something is changing fundamentally. Banks are urged from now on by a simple declaration to channel money for real investment and not for speculation in the financial markets. European banks can no longer just ‘bunker’ money into the ECB. Even more the so called TLTRO program (Targeted longer-term refinancing operation) punishes banks when they don’t channel the credits to the private investment sector. This is the real revolution in European central banking: it is no longer the ‘invisible hand’, instead it has become a rule of the central bank to pave the road for investment and growth, rather than beforehand it was up to governments to initiate an investment programme.

There have been various comments and reactions especially from bankers but also from governments. Not surprisingly the harshest critics came from the former chief economist of the ECB, Jürgen Stark, and the head of the German IFO Institute Werner Sinn. They argue that the ECB decisions are a desperate attempt to pump more liquidity towards the south with even cheaper money. However they argue that the final bill will ultimately be paid by the small savers who will get barely any interest any more for their savings and the pensioners who will get less for their life insurance. They argue that this will affect in particular the richer countries in the North of the Eurozone.

Evidently, those criticising are largely orthodox monetary policy bankers stipulating that first and foremost price stability is the overall priority and investment comes second. According to them, firm consolidation of their structural economic problems is priority together with the substantial reducing of their debt. Moreover, they argue that there is already too much liquidity in the markets and lending will not and cannot be reinforced.

Nonetheless this decision is a real turning point of European monetary policy which has been for far too long influenced predominantly by the German Bundesbank and its orthodox and traditional approach of targeting only price stability and a low inflation rate rather than growth and investment.

Generally it is governments that have to provide stimulus with increased spending on public services and hence investments on stimulating growth. But the crisis countries are obliged to do exactly the opposite. They are cutting spending and increasing taxes to conform to austerity policies. As long as austerity policies prevail there is little hope for a vigorous economic recovery in the euro zone as the New York Times is commenting.

The ECB is now giving a strong wake-up call to these kinds of policies. Interest rates will now stay low for longer and more liquidity will be in the market to facilitate lending for investment especially in the south of Europe. This is the essence of the radical announcement.

Amazingly this links straight to the current negotiations on the top jobs in the EU. It is not by chance that some rumours stipulate that the German Chancellor, highly influenced by orthodox economists would like to get rid of this unorthodox Italian Central Banker. Rumours tell that she is trying to send him to the IMF in Washington. Is that the real merry-go-round behind in order to have not only a new mainstream president of the EU Commission but first and foremost another ECB head who is more in line with orthodox austerity policies?

Consequently the question lies if progressives allow conservatives once again to hinder a fresh start for Europe. It is absolutely inappropriate to try to smoothly sort out a non-conformist central banker who likes to stimulate growth and investment for substantially reducing unemployment especially for young people in southern Europe.

As long as European political leaders are continuing to argue that austerity is the only way out of the crisis they do not accept the dramatic consequences of these socially devastating policies! Mario Draghi seems to put an end to this with a courageous and risky decision and doesn’t address orthodox neo-liberals concerns. This makes him a truly avant-gardist. Hence, the decision is a historical break and a genuine starting point of kicking out devastating financial capitalism and austerity policies.

Litauen für den Euro?

Posted by on 04/06/14

Nach den Erfahrungen der europäischen Schuldenkrise fragen sich manche Europäer, ob die Eurozone eine Ausweitung verkraftet. Litauens Eintritt sollten sie jedoch begrüßen. Denn, mal ehrlich, ein Drei-Millionen-Einwohner-Land an der Ostsee wird den gemeinsamen Währungsraum wohl kaum sprengen, wenn es G-7-Mitglied Italien nicht geschafft hat. Litauen, das eigentlich schon 2007 dem Euroraum beitreten sollte, hat in den vergangenen Jahren Sozialausgaben und Gehälter gekürzt, Steuern erhöht, Staatsverschuldung und Haushaltsdefizit niedrig gehalten. Nach diesen Einschnitten erwarten die Litauer jetzt Preissteigerungen und jene Pflichten, die eine Euro-Einführung mit sich bringen. Die Frage müsste also eher heißen: Verkraften die Litauer die Eurozone? Und für die CSU gilt: Keine Angst, die Litauer dürfen ohnehin schon längst in die Sozialsysteme.

Why the new European Parliament should care about the EIB

Posted by on 30/05/14
Guest blogpost by Xavier sol, director of Counter Balance. The role of the European Investment Bank (EIB) has been a marginal topic during the European election campaign – regrettable for a bank with such an impact on the European economy. Here are some good reasons why newly elected MEPs should pay attention to the EIB [...]

True love?

Posted by on 26/05/14

Do you know the situation, trying to get rid of a friend that is in a way helpful but life would be easier without? German „Commerzbank“ is in a quite similar situation. German Government took over significant stake in the institute during financial crisis when the bank has been defined as „systematically relevant“ but too weak to survive independently. Now, it is in a much better situation but German Government remains to be stakeholder. The reason: The Ministry of Finance is hoping on an increased price of the share and making more money by that.

Advertisement