All the evil karma I have created in the past,
from beginningless greed, hatred and delusion,
that arose from my body, speech and mind,
for all these I now seek repentance and reformation.
- Samantabhadra Bodhisattva (Avatamsaka Sutra)
往昔所造诸恶业
皆由无始贪嗔痴
从身语意之所生
一切我今皆忏悔
- 普贤菩萨 (华严经)
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Thursday, November 10, 2011
「醒過來」； 「放下」
小和尚:施主~妳離我越近，我離佛越遠
女施主:小和尚~我就是佛祖的化身
禪堂中死一般的寂靜，寂靜得似乎空無一人，只有守關的老禪師心中清楚，參加這次閉關的四十名法師今天已經到了最後一關——破生死關；生死觀亦稱情欲關，情欲不斷，生死難了，但願這些法師今天能不出意外，順利過關。
就在守關老禪師擔憂默禱中，門外傳來了陣陣爭吵聲，是禪堂外護關的師父與一名女子在爭吵，老禪師輕輕打開房門想勸阻爭吵，可就在這時，那名女子猛地推開了房門，突然一步闖進了禪堂，
守關法師再想攔時已經遲了。
隨著門響四十位閉關的法師幾乎同時睜開了眼睛，他們被眼前的這位女子驚呆了，
一位亭亭玉立的美麗少女，是那樣的秀美、端莊、俏麗、輕盈，她的目光掃遍了每一位端坐的禪師，並報以淡雅溫柔的一笑，那攝人神魂的一瞥，那動人心魄的一笑，足以讓每一個見到她的人終生難忘。
守關的老禪師恭敬地合掌相問：「請問女施主進我禪堂，不知有何貴幹？」
少女:「阿彌陀佛！得知眾位法師在此閉關，我特來供養每位法師僧鞋一雙，請老禪師慈悲，滿我心願。」
老禪師:「既然如此，請施主將僧鞋留下，待出關之後老納替施主分發便是。」
少女輕輕一搖頭，含笑答道：「我發願將每雙僧鞋親自為法師們穿上，請禪師慈悲，這樣既滿了我的宿願，也滿了諸位法師的難言之願。」
此時禪堂中四十位法師一聽少女要親自為自己穿上僧鞋，無不怦然心動，個個面露欣喜之色。
老禪師無奈地歎息一聲，合掌應道：「既是如此，施主請便。」
少女輕移蓮步，依次為每一位法師躬身穿鞋，那姣美的笑臉，那柔軟的雙手，那阿娜的身姿，那沁人的幽香，使每個法師無不暗暗自慨：「能與此女相伴一日，死也足矣！」 當少女為最後一位法師穿好僧鞋，準備離開禪堂時，才發現禪堂的門已經被鎖死了，少女來到老禪師面前問道：「師父將小女子鎖在禪堂內，不知有何打算？我怎麼出去啊？」
老禪師面沉似水，冷冷說道:「你今天還打算出去嗎？」
少女:「是啊，僧鞋已經發完了，我也該回家了。」
老禪師:「寧攪千江水，莫動道人心！你今天攪擾了我禪堂內四十位法師的道心，你還打算活著走出禪堂嗎？」
少女驚慌地問道：:「我是來佈施僧鞋的，法師們見色動心，難道是我的錯嗎？快把門打開放我出去。」
老禪師:「放你出去很簡單，但你得把一樣東西留下。」
少女:「請問法師你想要把我的什麼東西留下？」
「你的命！」老法師斬釘截鐵地說。
少女淚眼流情、楚楚動人地跪倒在老禪師面前委屈地問道：「為什麼要我的命？」
老禪師:「因為你今天種了一個惡因，在你面前只有兩條路：
一 、你將四十世輪迴女身，分別嫁給這四十位因你而動心的法師，他們也將輪回在六道，不論他們投生在那一道中，你都得隨業嫁。
二、就是你今天死在這裏，斷了這四十世輪迴之因。」
少女驚恐地睜大了美麗的雙眼，任由委屈的淚水流下面頰，:「我再沒有別的選擇了嗎？」
「是的！兩條路由你自己選。」老禪師堅決地回答道。
少女緩緩地對老禪師說道：「麻煩您給我找一條絲絛，我寧可把命留下，也不願再輪迴四十世女身。」
聽到少女的話，禪堂裏的四十位元法師全部驚呆了，看到剛才還是嫵媚動人的少女如今卻是神色凝重地手持絲絛，慢慢地走向門前去結束自己美麗而寶貴生命，無不為之惋惜。
少女自盡了，就吊死在禪堂門前的橫樑上，那曾經是春情勃動的生命，如今已灰飛煙滅，那曾經豔如花蕊的臉龐，如今已蒼白冷漠，但仍不失她的美麗。
三天以後，少女的屍身開始散發出腐臭，蒼白美麗的面頰也變了顏色，可老禪師就像什麼也沒發生過一樣，每天護守著禪堂內這四十位閉關的師父們。隨著時間一天天的推移，少女的屍身一天天也在發生著變化，
原本婀娜苗條的身軀，現在已經腐爛的臃腫不堪，那曾經令人心動的面孔如今變成淡綠色，不斷滲出的腐液，散發著令人作嘔的惡臭，閉關的師父們已經無法忍受了，想要請老禪師打開門窗換換空氣，並把這具女屍移出去，可老禪師仍然像無事人一樣，繼續無言地守候在禪堂內。
第七天，四十位閉關的師父們，面對著這具奇臭無比又令人恐怖的女屍再也忍無可忍的時侯，女屍身上的一塊腐肉脫落了，裙子和褲子也同時脫落了，這時大家才看清，腐肉脫落的地方露出了駭人的白骨，上面爬滿了蠕動的腐蛆。大家再也控制不住了，幾乎是同時作嘔起來。
老禪師緩緩地從蒲團上起來，面對大家冷冷地說道：「大家想要出禪堂嗎？」
「對！」四十個人同聲回答。
老禪師：「那好，誰能回答上我的問題，就可以出去了，想回答的請舉手。」
四十個師父同時舉手。
老禪師回手一指身邊的女屍問道：「她是誰？」
四十個閉關的師父全愣住了，啞口無言。
老禪師站在女屍面前大聲問道：：「告訴我，她是誰？是那個令你們神魂顛倒想入非非的少女嗎？」
「不是！」回答整齊！
老禪師：「現在你還打算和她廝守終生嗎？」
「不！」異口同聲！
老禪師：「這個世界上還有讓你們值得動心的女人嗎？」
「沒有了！」斬釘截鐵！
老禪師大手一揮:「好，出關！」
女屍身上蒙著一塊黃布，被四十個出關的師父們抬出來了，師父們並沒有散去，因為他們心中還有一個結：「她是誰？」
老禪師神情莊重地帶領著大家向停放在地上的女屍頂禮匐拜後，對大家說：「你們不是想要知道她究竟是誰嗎？我走以後，你們自己看吧。」說完老禪師轉身走回了自己的寮房。
當大家緊張地掀起蓋在女屍身上的黃布時，全部驚呆了，這哪裡是他們抬出來的腐爛女屍啊？
原來是寺院裏的一尊觀世音菩薩聖像，大家恭敬地把觀音菩薩聖像安頓好後，才想起應該問問老禪師是怎麼知道的？
大家發瘋般地跑到老禪師的寮房時，老禪師已經圓寂坐化了。
禪，留給我們的是啟示，不是遺憾。
醒過來
這個世界上有太多煩惱，
所以有許多人，不約而同地問了佛祖一樣的問題：
「我該怎麼做，才能不再煩憂？」
佛祖給的答案都相同：
「只要放下，你就能不再煩惱。」
有個自以為聰明的人很不服氣，
便專程去找佛祖，挑釁地問：
「世上有千千萬萬個人，就有千千萬萬種煩惱。
但是您給他們的解決方式都完全相同，那豈不是太可笑了？」
佛祖沒有生氣，只是反問男子：
「你晚上睡覺的時候，會做夢嗎？」
「當然會！」男子回答。
「那麼，你每天晚上做的夢，都是一樣的嗎？」佛祖又問。
「當然是不一樣的。」
「你睡了千千萬萬次，就做了千千萬萬個夢。」
佛祖微笑地說：
「但是要結束夢的方法，卻都是一樣的，
那就是：『醒過來』！」
男子聽到佛祖的回答，啞口無言。
我很喜歡這則禪宗故事。
這則故事把煩惱比喻成「夢」，只要我們願意放下，
就能從夢中清醒來。
無論你的煩惱是什麼，方法都是一樣的。
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
我當義工的時候，分別探訪過兩個老婦人。
她們的人生際遇有驚人的雷同：
都自小喪母，成為別人的養女；
都嫁了一個酗酒的老公；兒子都很不孝順；
兩人身體都不好，晚年都在洗腎。
然而，她們兩人的心境卻大不相同。
第一個老婦人談及往事，她處之泰然。
她說種種的不順遂，是她人生的功課，現在她年紀大了，
該吃的苦都吃過了，所以她覺得自己真好運，
人生像倒吃甘蔗，愈來愈順利。
這名老婦人，現在是某公益團體的義工。
第二個老婦人談及往事，仍然咬牙切齒。
她指天怪地，罵兒子詛咒媳婦，她說老天爺對她真不公平！
這名老婦人，也跟那個公益團體有關，但她不是義工，
而是受到義工關懷的憂鬱症患者。
讓我印象深刻的，是她們兩個臉上的表情、
散發的氣息形成了強烈的對比。
當下讓我感覺： 中國人說的「相由心生」，真的非常有道理。
當義工的老太太，因為已經放下了煩惱，
所以給人的感覺是祥和又親切，
讓人很想親近，表情有如菩薩。
得憂鬱症的老婦人，還把多年來的不順遂、痛苦扛在肩上，
她的氣息尖銳又暴烈，讓人避之唯恐不及，表情如同厲鬼。
然而，對於後者，其實我是深刻地同情的。
她的一輩子都在吃苦，但她不但不願意放下那些苦，
還要抱著那些其實已經遠離的苦難不放，讓它們繼續折磨自己。
也許，人生真的有太多無法逆轉的苦難、無法挽回的遺憾。
也許在夜闌人靜的時候，我們會因此哭泣，覺得蒼天真是無情，
竟然讓我承受如此巨大的痛苦……
但是，你我都不應該忘記，
能將我們從痛苦的地獄拯救出來的，
絕對不是別人，只有我們自己。
人生有太多包袱，
我們可以選擇將它一一扛在肩上，
也能選擇瀟灑地放下它們，
而能否放下，則會決定我們未來的人生，將繼續痛苦，還是可以享有幸福。
想擺脫惡夢的糾纏，唯一的方式是「醒過來」；
想忘卻人生的不順遂，唯一的方法就是「放下」。
醒過來，須苦到極點，痛到極處，才能省悟，反省其因。
放下呢，談兒蝾易，其功夫深徹，
一、必須有知苦而願離苦之愿，
二、面對真實，接受一切苦，明瞭一切無法避免。
三，反省、檢討一切來去姻緣。
四、而後圓融，寬恕，至知。
最後才能真正德放下喔！
-adapted from a facebook post
女施主:小和尚~我就是佛祖的化身
禪堂中死一般的寂靜，寂靜得似乎空無一人，只有守關的老禪師心中清楚，參加這次閉關的四十名法師今天已經到了最後一關——破生死關；生死觀亦稱情欲關，情欲不斷，生死難了，但願這些法師今天能不出意外，順利過關。
就在守關老禪師擔憂默禱中，門外傳來了陣陣爭吵聲，是禪堂外護關的師父與一名女子在爭吵，老禪師輕輕打開房門想勸阻爭吵，可就在這時，那名女子猛地推開了房門，突然一步闖進了禪堂，
守關法師再想攔時已經遲了。
隨著門響四十位閉關的法師幾乎同時睜開了眼睛，他們被眼前的這位女子驚呆了，
一位亭亭玉立的美麗少女，是那樣的秀美、端莊、俏麗、輕盈，她的目光掃遍了每一位端坐的禪師，並報以淡雅溫柔的一笑，那攝人神魂的一瞥，那動人心魄的一笑，足以讓每一個見到她的人終生難忘。
守關的老禪師恭敬地合掌相問：「請問女施主進我禪堂，不知有何貴幹？」
少女:「阿彌陀佛！得知眾位法師在此閉關，我特來供養每位法師僧鞋一雙，請老禪師慈悲，滿我心願。」
老禪師:「既然如此，請施主將僧鞋留下，待出關之後老納替施主分發便是。」
少女輕輕一搖頭，含笑答道：「我發願將每雙僧鞋親自為法師們穿上，請禪師慈悲，這樣既滿了我的宿願，也滿了諸位法師的難言之願。」
此時禪堂中四十位法師一聽少女要親自為自己穿上僧鞋，無不怦然心動，個個面露欣喜之色。
老禪師無奈地歎息一聲，合掌應道：「既是如此，施主請便。」
少女輕移蓮步，依次為每一位法師躬身穿鞋，那姣美的笑臉，那柔軟的雙手，那阿娜的身姿，那沁人的幽香，使每個法師無不暗暗自慨：「能與此女相伴一日，死也足矣！」 當少女為最後一位法師穿好僧鞋，準備離開禪堂時，才發現禪堂的門已經被鎖死了，少女來到老禪師面前問道：「師父將小女子鎖在禪堂內，不知有何打算？我怎麼出去啊？」
老禪師面沉似水，冷冷說道:「你今天還打算出去嗎？」
少女:「是啊，僧鞋已經發完了，我也該回家了。」
老禪師:「寧攪千江水，莫動道人心！你今天攪擾了我禪堂內四十位法師的道心，你還打算活著走出禪堂嗎？」
少女驚慌地問道：:「我是來佈施僧鞋的，法師們見色動心，難道是我的錯嗎？快把門打開放我出去。」
老禪師:「放你出去很簡單，但你得把一樣東西留下。」
少女:「請問法師你想要把我的什麼東西留下？」
「你的命！」老法師斬釘截鐵地說。
少女淚眼流情、楚楚動人地跪倒在老禪師面前委屈地問道：「為什麼要我的命？」
老禪師:「因為你今天種了一個惡因，在你面前只有兩條路：
一 、你將四十世輪迴女身，分別嫁給這四十位因你而動心的法師，他們也將輪回在六道，不論他們投生在那一道中，你都得隨業嫁。
二、就是你今天死在這裏，斷了這四十世輪迴之因。」
少女驚恐地睜大了美麗的雙眼，任由委屈的淚水流下面頰，:「我再沒有別的選擇了嗎？」
「是的！兩條路由你自己選。」老禪師堅決地回答道。
少女緩緩地對老禪師說道：「麻煩您給我找一條絲絛，我寧可把命留下，也不願再輪迴四十世女身。」
聽到少女的話，禪堂裏的四十位元法師全部驚呆了，看到剛才還是嫵媚動人的少女如今卻是神色凝重地手持絲絛，慢慢地走向門前去結束自己美麗而寶貴生命，無不為之惋惜。
少女自盡了，就吊死在禪堂門前的橫樑上，那曾經是春情勃動的生命，如今已灰飛煙滅，那曾經豔如花蕊的臉龐，如今已蒼白冷漠，但仍不失她的美麗。
三天以後，少女的屍身開始散發出腐臭，蒼白美麗的面頰也變了顏色，可老禪師就像什麼也沒發生過一樣，每天護守著禪堂內這四十位閉關的師父們。隨著時間一天天的推移，少女的屍身一天天也在發生著變化，
原本婀娜苗條的身軀，現在已經腐爛的臃腫不堪，那曾經令人心動的面孔如今變成淡綠色，不斷滲出的腐液，散發著令人作嘔的惡臭，閉關的師父們已經無法忍受了，想要請老禪師打開門窗換換空氣，並把這具女屍移出去，可老禪師仍然像無事人一樣，繼續無言地守候在禪堂內。
第七天，四十位閉關的師父們，面對著這具奇臭無比又令人恐怖的女屍再也忍無可忍的時侯，女屍身上的一塊腐肉脫落了，裙子和褲子也同時脫落了，這時大家才看清，腐肉脫落的地方露出了駭人的白骨，上面爬滿了蠕動的腐蛆。大家再也控制不住了，幾乎是同時作嘔起來。
老禪師緩緩地從蒲團上起來，面對大家冷冷地說道：「大家想要出禪堂嗎？」
「對！」四十個人同聲回答。
老禪師：「那好，誰能回答上我的問題，就可以出去了，想回答的請舉手。」
四十個師父同時舉手。
老禪師回手一指身邊的女屍問道：「她是誰？」
四十個閉關的師父全愣住了，啞口無言。
老禪師站在女屍面前大聲問道：：「告訴我，她是誰？是那個令你們神魂顛倒想入非非的少女嗎？」
「不是！」回答整齊！
老禪師：「現在你還打算和她廝守終生嗎？」
「不！」異口同聲！
老禪師：「這個世界上還有讓你們值得動心的女人嗎？」
「沒有了！」斬釘截鐵！
老禪師大手一揮:「好，出關！」
女屍身上蒙著一塊黃布，被四十個出關的師父們抬出來了，師父們並沒有散去，因為他們心中還有一個結：「她是誰？」
老禪師神情莊重地帶領著大家向停放在地上的女屍頂禮匐拜後，對大家說：「你們不是想要知道她究竟是誰嗎？我走以後，你們自己看吧。」說完老禪師轉身走回了自己的寮房。
當大家緊張地掀起蓋在女屍身上的黃布時，全部驚呆了，這哪裡是他們抬出來的腐爛女屍啊？
原來是寺院裏的一尊觀世音菩薩聖像，大家恭敬地把觀音菩薩聖像安頓好後，才想起應該問問老禪師是怎麼知道的？
大家發瘋般地跑到老禪師的寮房時，老禪師已經圓寂坐化了。
禪，留給我們的是啟示，不是遺憾。
醒過來
這個世界上有太多煩惱，
所以有許多人，不約而同地問了佛祖一樣的問題：
「我該怎麼做，才能不再煩憂？」
佛祖給的答案都相同：
「只要放下，你就能不再煩惱。」
有個自以為聰明的人很不服氣，
便專程去找佛祖，挑釁地問：
「世上有千千萬萬個人，就有千千萬萬種煩惱。
但是您給他們的解決方式都完全相同，那豈不是太可笑了？」
佛祖沒有生氣，只是反問男子：
「你晚上睡覺的時候，會做夢嗎？」
「當然會！」男子回答。
「那麼，你每天晚上做的夢，都是一樣的嗎？」佛祖又問。
「當然是不一樣的。」
「你睡了千千萬萬次，就做了千千萬萬個夢。」
佛祖微笑地說：
「但是要結束夢的方法，卻都是一樣的，
那就是：『醒過來』！」
男子聽到佛祖的回答，啞口無言。
我很喜歡這則禪宗故事。
這則故事把煩惱比喻成「夢」，只要我們願意放下，
就能從夢中清醒來。
無論你的煩惱是什麼，方法都是一樣的。
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
我當義工的時候，分別探訪過兩個老婦人。
她們的人生際遇有驚人的雷同：
都自小喪母，成為別人的養女；
都嫁了一個酗酒的老公；兒子都很不孝順；
兩人身體都不好，晚年都在洗腎。
然而，她們兩人的心境卻大不相同。
第一個老婦人談及往事，她處之泰然。
她說種種的不順遂，是她人生的功課，現在她年紀大了，
該吃的苦都吃過了，所以她覺得自己真好運，
人生像倒吃甘蔗，愈來愈順利。
這名老婦人，現在是某公益團體的義工。
第二個老婦人談及往事，仍然咬牙切齒。
她指天怪地，罵兒子詛咒媳婦，她說老天爺對她真不公平！
這名老婦人，也跟那個公益團體有關，但她不是義工，
而是受到義工關懷的憂鬱症患者。
讓我印象深刻的，是她們兩個臉上的表情、
散發的氣息形成了強烈的對比。
當下讓我感覺： 中國人說的「相由心生」，真的非常有道理。
當義工的老太太，因為已經放下了煩惱，
所以給人的感覺是祥和又親切，
讓人很想親近，表情有如菩薩。
得憂鬱症的老婦人，還把多年來的不順遂、痛苦扛在肩上，
她的氣息尖銳又暴烈，讓人避之唯恐不及，表情如同厲鬼。
然而，對於後者，其實我是深刻地同情的。
她的一輩子都在吃苦，但她不但不願意放下那些苦，
還要抱著那些其實已經遠離的苦難不放，讓它們繼續折磨自己。
也許，人生真的有太多無法逆轉的苦難、無法挽回的遺憾。
也許在夜闌人靜的時候，我們會因此哭泣，覺得蒼天真是無情，
竟然讓我承受如此巨大的痛苦……
但是，你我都不應該忘記，
能將我們從痛苦的地獄拯救出來的，
絕對不是別人，只有我們自己。
人生有太多包袱，
我們可以選擇將它一一扛在肩上，
也能選擇瀟灑地放下它們，
而能否放下，則會決定我們未來的人生，將繼續痛苦，還是可以享有幸福。
想擺脫惡夢的糾纏，唯一的方式是「醒過來」；
想忘卻人生的不順遂，唯一的方法就是「放下」。
醒過來，須苦到極點，痛到極處，才能省悟，反省其因。
放下呢，談兒蝾易，其功夫深徹，
一、必須有知苦而願離苦之愿，
二、面對真實，接受一切苦，明瞭一切無法避免。
三，反省、檢討一切來去姻緣。
四、而後圓融，寬恕，至知。
最後才能真正德放下喔！
-adapted from a facebook post
Sunday, October 2, 2011
The 4 Basic Elements Of Stock Value
The ancient Greeks proposed earth, fire, water and air as the main building blocks of all matter, and classified all things as a mixture of these elements. Investing has a similar set of four basic elements that investors use to break down a stock's value. In this article, we will look at the four ratios and what they can tell you about a stock.
Earth: The Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B)
Made for glass-half-empty people, the price-to-book (P/B) ratio represents the value of the company if it is torn up and sold today. This is useful to know because many companies in mature industries falter in terms of growth but can still be a good value based on their assets. The book value usually includes equipment, buildings, land and anything else that can be sold, including stock holdings and bonds. With purely financial firms, the book value can fluctuate with the market as these stocks tend to have a portfolio of assets that goes up and down in value. Industrial companies tend to have a book value based more in physical assets, which depreciate year after year according to accounting rules. In either case, a low P/B ratio can protect you - but only if it's accurate. This means an investor has to look deeper into the actual assets making up the ratio.
Fire: Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E)
The price to earnings (P/E) ratio is possibly the most scrutinized of all the ratios. If sudden increases in a stock's price are the sizzle, then the P/E ratio is the steak. A stock can go up in value without significant earnings increases, but the P/E ratio is what decides if it can stay up. Without earnings to back up the price, a stock will eventually fall back down.
The reason for this is simple: a P/E ratio can be thought of as how long a stock will take to pay back your investment if there is no change in the business. A stock trading at $20 per share with earning of $2 per share has a P/E ratio of 10, which is sometimes seen as meaning that you'll make your money back in 10 years if nothing changes. The reason stocks tend to have high P/E ratios is that investors try to predict which stocks will enjoy progressively larger earnings. An investor may buy a stock with a P/E ratio of 30 if he or she thinks it will double its earnings every year (shortening the payoff period significantly). If this fails to happen, then the stock will fall back down to a more reasonable P/E ratio. If the stock does manage to double earnings, then it will likely continue to trade at a high P/E ratio. You should only compare P/E ratios between companies in similar industries and markets.
Air: The PEG Ratio
Because the P/E ratio isn't enough in and of itself, many investors use the price to earnings growth (PEG) ratio. Instead of merely looking at the price and earnings, the PEG ratio incorporates the historical growth rate of the company's earnings. This ratio also tells you how your stock stacks up against another stock. The PEG ratio is calculated by taking the P/E ratio of a company and dividing it by the year-over-year growth rate of its earnings. The lower the value of your PEG ratio, the better the deal you're getting for the stock's future estimated earnings.
By comparing two stocks using the PEG, you can see how much you're paying for growth in each case. A PEG of 1 means you're breaking even if growth continues as it has in the past. A PEG of 2 means you're paying twice as much for projected growth when compared to a stock with a PEG of 1. This is speculative because there is no guarantee that growth will continue as it has in the past. The P/E ratio is a snap shot of where a company is and the PEG ratio is a graph plotting where it has been. Armed with this information, an investor has to decide whether it is likely to continue in that direction.
Water: Dividend Yield
It's always nice to have a back-up when a stock's growth falters. This is why dividend-paying stocks are attractive to many investors - even when prices drop you get a paycheck. The dividend yield shows how much of a payday you're getting for your money. By dividing the stock's annual dividend by the stock's price, you get a percentage. You can think of that percentage as the interest on your money, with the additional chance at growth through the appreciation of the stock.
Although simple on paper, there are some things to watch for with the dividend yield. Inconsistent dividends or suspended payments in the past mean that the dividend yield can't be counted on. Like the water element, dividends can ebb and flow, so knowing which way the tide is going - like whether dividend payments have increased year over year - is essential to making the decision to buy. Dividends also vary by industry, with utilities and some banks paying a lot whereas tech firms invest almost all their earnings back into the company to fuel growth.
No Element Stands Alone
P/E, P/B, PEG and dividend yields are too narrowly focused to stand alone as a single measure of a stock. By combining these methods of valuation, you can get a better view of a stock's worth. Any one of these can be influenced by creative accounting - as can more complex ratios like cash flow. As you add more tools to your valuation methods though, discrepancies get easier to spot. From the Greeks' four basic elements, we now have more than 100, some of which exist so briefly that we wonder if they count, and none of them are named water, earth, air, or fire. In investing, however, these four main ratios may be overshadowed by thousands of customized metrics, but they will always be useful stepping stones for finding out whether a stock's worth buying.
- Investopedia, Andrew Beattie
Earth: The Price-to-Book Ratio (P/B)
Made for glass-half-empty people, the price-to-book (P/B) ratio represents the value of the company if it is torn up and sold today. This is useful to know because many companies in mature industries falter in terms of growth but can still be a good value based on their assets. The book value usually includes equipment, buildings, land and anything else that can be sold, including stock holdings and bonds. With purely financial firms, the book value can fluctuate with the market as these stocks tend to have a portfolio of assets that goes up and down in value. Industrial companies tend to have a book value based more in physical assets, which depreciate year after year according to accounting rules. In either case, a low P/B ratio can protect you - but only if it's accurate. This means an investor has to look deeper into the actual assets making up the ratio.
Fire: Price-to-Earnings Ratio (P/E)
The price to earnings (P/E) ratio is possibly the most scrutinized of all the ratios. If sudden increases in a stock's price are the sizzle, then the P/E ratio is the steak. A stock can go up in value without significant earnings increases, but the P/E ratio is what decides if it can stay up. Without earnings to back up the price, a stock will eventually fall back down.
The reason for this is simple: a P/E ratio can be thought of as how long a stock will take to pay back your investment if there is no change in the business. A stock trading at $20 per share with earning of $2 per share has a P/E ratio of 10, which is sometimes seen as meaning that you'll make your money back in 10 years if nothing changes. The reason stocks tend to have high P/E ratios is that investors try to predict which stocks will enjoy progressively larger earnings. An investor may buy a stock with a P/E ratio of 30 if he or she thinks it will double its earnings every year (shortening the payoff period significantly). If this fails to happen, then the stock will fall back down to a more reasonable P/E ratio. If the stock does manage to double earnings, then it will likely continue to trade at a high P/E ratio. You should only compare P/E ratios between companies in similar industries and markets.
Air: The PEG Ratio
Because the P/E ratio isn't enough in and of itself, many investors use the price to earnings growth (PEG) ratio. Instead of merely looking at the price and earnings, the PEG ratio incorporates the historical growth rate of the company's earnings. This ratio also tells you how your stock stacks up against another stock. The PEG ratio is calculated by taking the P/E ratio of a company and dividing it by the year-over-year growth rate of its earnings. The lower the value of your PEG ratio, the better the deal you're getting for the stock's future estimated earnings.
By comparing two stocks using the PEG, you can see how much you're paying for growth in each case. A PEG of 1 means you're breaking even if growth continues as it has in the past. A PEG of 2 means you're paying twice as much for projected growth when compared to a stock with a PEG of 1. This is speculative because there is no guarantee that growth will continue as it has in the past. The P/E ratio is a snap shot of where a company is and the PEG ratio is a graph plotting where it has been. Armed with this information, an investor has to decide whether it is likely to continue in that direction.
Water: Dividend Yield
It's always nice to have a back-up when a stock's growth falters. This is why dividend-paying stocks are attractive to many investors - even when prices drop you get a paycheck. The dividend yield shows how much of a payday you're getting for your money. By dividing the stock's annual dividend by the stock's price, you get a percentage. You can think of that percentage as the interest on your money, with the additional chance at growth through the appreciation of the stock.
Although simple on paper, there are some things to watch for with the dividend yield. Inconsistent dividends or suspended payments in the past mean that the dividend yield can't be counted on. Like the water element, dividends can ebb and flow, so knowing which way the tide is going - like whether dividend payments have increased year over year - is essential to making the decision to buy. Dividends also vary by industry, with utilities and some banks paying a lot whereas tech firms invest almost all their earnings back into the company to fuel growth.
No Element Stands Alone
P/E, P/B, PEG and dividend yields are too narrowly focused to stand alone as a single measure of a stock. By combining these methods of valuation, you can get a better view of a stock's worth. Any one of these can be influenced by creative accounting - as can more complex ratios like cash flow. As you add more tools to your valuation methods though, discrepancies get easier to spot. From the Greeks' four basic elements, we now have more than 100, some of which exist so briefly that we wonder if they count, and none of them are named water, earth, air, or fire. In investing, however, these four main ratios may be overshadowed by thousands of customized metrics, but they will always be useful stepping stones for finding out whether a stock's worth buying.
- Investopedia, Andrew Beattie
Friday, September 2, 2011
As such...so we learn...
As assistants, we learn how to endure
As seniors, we learn how to find solutions
As seniors, we learn how to find solutions
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Friday, July 1, 2011
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Hua Hee Tio Ho
This is a hokkien song which I find the lyrics very meaningful. It is usually sung by a Taiwanese Singer, Chen Lei. This video is a version of the original and the sound is tweaked to sound like Alvin & The Chipmunks.
Hua Hee Tio Ho (Being Happy will Suffice/高兴就好)
A rough translation of the song is as follows,
Life is such...
Not everyone understands...
Sometimes very particular...
Other times whatever...
While some people speaks nicely
There will be others who speak nastily
But if we dont take them too seriously
Life would be much more easy
One moment feels that car not big enough
One moment feels that house not spacious enough
One moment feels that dishes are not well cooked
One moment feels that your spouse is not attractive
When gotten big car, one fear it being stolen
When gotten big house, one realise the pain in keeping it clean
When gotten all the good food in the world, one is told that one has high blood pressure
When gotten a beautiful wife, one fear she will leave for someone better
Life is short...
Liken it to a game...
Sometimes you worry all day...
Sometimes you slack all the way...
If you ask me,
What treasure do I have with me..
I will tell you there is nothing...but contentment...that is bliss
Hua Hee Tio Ho (Being Happy will Suffice/高兴就好)
A rough translation of the song is as follows,
Life is such...
Not everyone understands...
Sometimes very particular...
Other times whatever...
While some people speaks nicely
There will be others who speak nastily
But if we dont take them too seriously
Life would be much more easy
One moment feels that car not big enough
One moment feels that house not spacious enough
One moment feels that dishes are not well cooked
One moment feels that your spouse is not attractive
When gotten big car, one fear it being stolen
When gotten big house, one realise the pain in keeping it clean
When gotten all the good food in the world, one is told that one has high blood pressure
When gotten a beautiful wife, one fear she will leave for someone better
Life is short...
Liken it to a game...
Sometimes you worry all day...
Sometimes you slack all the way...
If you ask me,
What treasure do I have with me..
I will tell you there is nothing...but contentment...that is bliss
Monday, June 6, 2011
Camp Rainbow 2011
Initially when I received the invitation to volunteer my service, I hastily gave my commitment but I started to regret my decision afterwards. All the while I tried coming up with possible excuses to back out.
I was really glad I kept to my promise and gave my best effort for the camp. I am determined to volunteer my service again for Camp Rainbow 2012 if the opportunity arises.
The theme for the camp this year was "Camp Discovery". Not only was it meant for the kids to discover what they can do, it is also an opportunity for the volunteers to discover the strength and weakness within themselves.
I saw many familiar faces at the camp which not only brings a smile to me but is also one of the reason I am determined to serve again next year if the opportunity arises. These people reminds me that making a commitment is not a one time affair, once commited, it should be an on going process
During the camp I get to observe many instances of selfless contribution which really earned my utmost respect. Comparing to these selfless volunteers and caregivers, I realised how self centered I have been. From this camp, I am inspired to learn to think and act more for others and less for myself.
It is also from this camp that once again I get to witness the power of the collective effort. When a group of like minded individuals come togther for a common purpose, great things can be accomplished regardless of the number of obstacles ahead.
With this post, I would like to remind myself for as long as I can remember to, that one should live everyday with gratitude and contentment. The spirit of the selfless lives on forever...
I was really glad I kept to my promise and gave my best effort for the camp. I am determined to volunteer my service again for Camp Rainbow 2012 if the opportunity arises.
The theme for the camp this year was "Camp Discovery". Not only was it meant for the kids to discover what they can do, it is also an opportunity for the volunteers to discover the strength and weakness within themselves.
I saw many familiar faces at the camp which not only brings a smile to me but is also one of the reason I am determined to serve again next year if the opportunity arises. These people reminds me that making a commitment is not a one time affair, once commited, it should be an on going process
During the camp I get to observe many instances of selfless contribution which really earned my utmost respect. Comparing to these selfless volunteers and caregivers, I realised how self centered I have been. From this camp, I am inspired to learn to think and act more for others and less for myself.
It is also from this camp that once again I get to witness the power of the collective effort. When a group of like minded individuals come togther for a common purpose, great things can be accomplished regardless of the number of obstacles ahead.
With this post, I would like to remind myself for as long as I can remember to, that one should live everyday with gratitude and contentment. The spirit of the selfless lives on forever...
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Reviewing ministerial salaries: Seven lessons from the private sector
SINGAPORE: Last week, I taught executive and director pay to an executive MBA class and, during lunch, the subject of conversation at my table was ministerial pay in Singapore — a regular topic among the executives attending the programme over the years.
While most of the rest of the world is concerned with high executive pay, this must be the only country where ministerial salaries are of more interest.
Quite coincidentally, on Saturday morning, I had begun writing a commentary with the tentative title of "Ministerial pay: Lessons from corporate scandals and the financial crisis". That night, I saw on the news the Prime Minister’s announcement that he was setting up a committee to review ministerial pay.
When you pay poorly, you might still get good people but, undoubtedly, the pool you select from will be smaller. You may also attract some who are willing to take low pay because they want to use their position for other benefit, such as taking bribes or getting directorships in companies.
When you pay very well, the pool will be larger, but you also risk attracting the wrong people who are motivated purely by money. People who are attracted to politics because of the money (or power) might still want to use their positions for their own benefit because for some, it is never enough.
I personally do not believe that high pay is effective for fighting corruption; I think it is an affront to the many who make an honest living on low pay to suggest that paying little encourages corruption.
However, it is very difficult to determine what is the "right" pay for CEOs, people with very specialised skills — and government ministers. For CEOs, certain "benchmarks" have been suggested, such as some percentage of profits, some ratio to average employee pay, the pay of sports stars and celebrities or fellow CEOs. None of these are wholly satisfactory.
Benchmarking ministerial pay to other professions has its limitations because they are totally different jobs, and different jobs come with different lifestyles and employment risks. When I look at my peers who have gone to the private sector, many are earning a lot more than I do now, but they do not have my more flexible lifestyle as an academic, and they are not able to achieve tenure which gives better job security.
In any case, I believe that the best people in any field are those who are driven first by their passion and calling.
IT’S HOW THEY EARN IT
As a corporate governance advocate, it has never been my concern if someone is well paid and earns it in the right way. I would be outraged if someone makes a lot of money but does so in an illegal or unethical manner, where it is not related to appropriate measures of performance, or the pay determined is through a contaminated process.
The corporate sector suggests the following "best practices" which should be followed in setting senior executives pay:
— An "arms length" process for determining remuneration policy and packages
— Benchmarks used should be comparable (similar job responsibilities, similar size and industry, etc)
— There should be a reasonable mix of short— and long—term pay
— Pay should be based mainly on factors within the executive’s control
— Performance measures used for evaluation should have strong links with the corporation’s long—term performance
— There should be minimal benefits and termination payments that are generally unrelated to performance
— There is good disclosure and transparency
A private sector approach which treats running a country as equivalent to running a corporation is, of course, flawed to start out with. After all, a government can always print money, raise taxes, determine whether it wants to make a profit (budget surplus) or a loss (budget deficit) and so on.
Tying ministerial bonuses to annual GDP growth can create the same perverse incentives as tying CEO pay to annual revenue growth. For example, it can lead to incentives to invest in projects with high economic payoffs, but with attendant high social costs and under—investing for long—term growth.
But if we are determined to follow a private sector approach to setting ministerial pay, then we should go the whole nine yards and adopt similar sound pay practices, which could involve the following. (Incidentally, when I showed someone the draft of this commentary, I was alerted to a 2007 speech by MP Denise Phua in which she made some similar points. I am glad there was such an alternative voice in Parliament and wish that her views were taken more seriously then.)
DEFER PAY, BE TRANSPARENT
One, have an independent ministerial pay committee to oversee ministerial pay policy and levels (members must be independent and perceived to be so).
Two, adopt a small number of macro performance measures which capture overall performance in a holistic way (such as average GDP growth, average wage growth, Gini coefficient and unemployment rate) and micro performance measures which directly reflect a particular minister’s performance (such as traffic accident rates, average expressway speeds, admission rates of Singaporeans into local universities, percentage of low—income families owning HDB flats).
Three, tie a minister’s pay primarily to his individual responsibilities and performance, based on his portfolio (a small component can be tied to more macro measures but these may be more relevant to assessing the performance of the "chief executive", that is, the Prime Minister).
Four, benchmark targets such as GDP growth to trends in comparable economies, to better ensure that improvements are not largely due to external factors (for example, a significant increase in GDP growth — just like a significant increase in a company’s stock price — may be driven more by general trends in the inter—connected global economy).
Five, defer a part of a minister’s pay for a number of years and put in place conditions under which the deferred pay may be reduced.
Six, eliminate or significantly reduce pensions and other benefits not linked to a minister’s performance. And seven, publish a report each year on the actual amount of each minister’s pay and its breakdown.
This may sound like an awfully tedious process for setting ministerial pay. Unfortunately, corporate scandals and the recent financial crisis have taught us that poorly designed pay schemes set through a flawed process and which lack transparency can create perverse incentives and undermine governance. The current approach to setting ministerial pay emulates the pay levels in the private sector but not the sound pay principles that well—governed companies follow.
If we are not prepared to adopt similarly robust processes and practices for setting ministerial pay, then perhaps we should just follow how other countries determine pay for their government officials.
We can then rely more on robust selection processes and strong enforcement of laws to take to task ministers who are corruptible, in order to ensure that we get ethical and competent government leaders.
However, even if we decide to "de—privatise" ministerial pay, I believe there are certain merits in adopting some of the good practices in the private sector approach — such as having a more independent mechanism for setting ministerial pay, having better measures of ministerial performance, creating mechanisms to encourage ministers to focus on longer—term consequences of decisions, and greater transparency in ministerial pay.
This may minimise the risk of receiving an "unexpected" performance appraisal from the electorate every four years. —
- TODAY , Mak Yuen Teen is an associate professor at NUS Business School.
While most of the rest of the world is concerned with high executive pay, this must be the only country where ministerial salaries are of more interest.
Quite coincidentally, on Saturday morning, I had begun writing a commentary with the tentative title of "Ministerial pay: Lessons from corporate scandals and the financial crisis". That night, I saw on the news the Prime Minister’s announcement that he was setting up a committee to review ministerial pay.
When you pay poorly, you might still get good people but, undoubtedly, the pool you select from will be smaller. You may also attract some who are willing to take low pay because they want to use their position for other benefit, such as taking bribes or getting directorships in companies.
When you pay very well, the pool will be larger, but you also risk attracting the wrong people who are motivated purely by money. People who are attracted to politics because of the money (or power) might still want to use their positions for their own benefit because for some, it is never enough.
I personally do not believe that high pay is effective for fighting corruption; I think it is an affront to the many who make an honest living on low pay to suggest that paying little encourages corruption.
However, it is very difficult to determine what is the "right" pay for CEOs, people with very specialised skills — and government ministers. For CEOs, certain "benchmarks" have been suggested, such as some percentage of profits, some ratio to average employee pay, the pay of sports stars and celebrities or fellow CEOs. None of these are wholly satisfactory.
Benchmarking ministerial pay to other professions has its limitations because they are totally different jobs, and different jobs come with different lifestyles and employment risks. When I look at my peers who have gone to the private sector, many are earning a lot more than I do now, but they do not have my more flexible lifestyle as an academic, and they are not able to achieve tenure which gives better job security.
In any case, I believe that the best people in any field are those who are driven first by their passion and calling.
IT’S HOW THEY EARN IT
As a corporate governance advocate, it has never been my concern if someone is well paid and earns it in the right way. I would be outraged if someone makes a lot of money but does so in an illegal or unethical manner, where it is not related to appropriate measures of performance, or the pay determined is through a contaminated process.
The corporate sector suggests the following "best practices" which should be followed in setting senior executives pay:
— An "arms length" process for determining remuneration policy and packages
— Benchmarks used should be comparable (similar job responsibilities, similar size and industry, etc)
— There should be a reasonable mix of short— and long—term pay
— Pay should be based mainly on factors within the executive’s control
— Performance measures used for evaluation should have strong links with the corporation’s long—term performance
— There should be minimal benefits and termination payments that are generally unrelated to performance
— There is good disclosure and transparency
A private sector approach which treats running a country as equivalent to running a corporation is, of course, flawed to start out with. After all, a government can always print money, raise taxes, determine whether it wants to make a profit (budget surplus) or a loss (budget deficit) and so on.
Tying ministerial bonuses to annual GDP growth can create the same perverse incentives as tying CEO pay to annual revenue growth. For example, it can lead to incentives to invest in projects with high economic payoffs, but with attendant high social costs and under—investing for long—term growth.
But if we are determined to follow a private sector approach to setting ministerial pay, then we should go the whole nine yards and adopt similar sound pay practices, which could involve the following. (Incidentally, when I showed someone the draft of this commentary, I was alerted to a 2007 speech by MP Denise Phua in which she made some similar points. I am glad there was such an alternative voice in Parliament and wish that her views were taken more seriously then.)
DEFER PAY, BE TRANSPARENT
One, have an independent ministerial pay committee to oversee ministerial pay policy and levels (members must be independent and perceived to be so).
Two, adopt a small number of macro performance measures which capture overall performance in a holistic way (such as average GDP growth, average wage growth, Gini coefficient and unemployment rate) and micro performance measures which directly reflect a particular minister’s performance (such as traffic accident rates, average expressway speeds, admission rates of Singaporeans into local universities, percentage of low—income families owning HDB flats).
Three, tie a minister’s pay primarily to his individual responsibilities and performance, based on his portfolio (a small component can be tied to more macro measures but these may be more relevant to assessing the performance of the "chief executive", that is, the Prime Minister).
Four, benchmark targets such as GDP growth to trends in comparable economies, to better ensure that improvements are not largely due to external factors (for example, a significant increase in GDP growth — just like a significant increase in a company’s stock price — may be driven more by general trends in the inter—connected global economy).
Five, defer a part of a minister’s pay for a number of years and put in place conditions under which the deferred pay may be reduced.
Six, eliminate or significantly reduce pensions and other benefits not linked to a minister’s performance. And seven, publish a report each year on the actual amount of each minister’s pay and its breakdown.
This may sound like an awfully tedious process for setting ministerial pay. Unfortunately, corporate scandals and the recent financial crisis have taught us that poorly designed pay schemes set through a flawed process and which lack transparency can create perverse incentives and undermine governance. The current approach to setting ministerial pay emulates the pay levels in the private sector but not the sound pay principles that well—governed companies follow.
If we are not prepared to adopt similarly robust processes and practices for setting ministerial pay, then perhaps we should just follow how other countries determine pay for their government officials.
We can then rely more on robust selection processes and strong enforcement of laws to take to task ministers who are corruptible, in order to ensure that we get ethical and competent government leaders.
However, even if we decide to "de—privatise" ministerial pay, I believe there are certain merits in adopting some of the good practices in the private sector approach — such as having a more independent mechanism for setting ministerial pay, having better measures of ministerial performance, creating mechanisms to encourage ministers to focus on longer—term consequences of decisions, and greater transparency in ministerial pay.
This may minimise the risk of receiving an "unexpected" performance appraisal from the electorate every four years. —
- TODAY , Mak Yuen Teen is an associate professor at NUS Business School.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
