Duterte's Presidency : Expectations, Controversies, Rants, Etc.

[rooster69ph]

Kahit gaano pa ang hinaba-haba ng thesis mo dyan sa foreign ownership issue ng Rappler, the SEC has solid basis from the constitution. The constitutional issue is that foreigners cannot invest in local news organizations to avoid foreign influence. Kahit may waiver pa, it is still an investment and any investment can be used to influence the way the organization does its business.

 

Pare simple ang buhay, mag bukas na lang ulit ng "Rappler Rev 1" na walang foreign investor.

i have indicated that earlier, i agree sec has a case for a different reason there but not what you are insinuating...

 

like i said abs and gma has pdr issued to foreigners ... non issue at all with the SEC. try to analyze and explain why sec allows them as it contradicts your claim that foreigners cannot invest in local news organization.

 

naiexplain ko na nga di mo pa rin naintindihan? yan ang hirap talaga sa taong opinionated pero hindi muna intindihin kung ano ang pdr at ang totoong issue ng kaso.

 

isa lang naman ang paulit ulit na tanong ko ... does ownership of a foreign investor in a pdr constitutes ownership in the company?

Edited January 21, 2018 by rooster69ph

[Maykeee]

PRRD is indeed different and somehow GREATER from his predecessors but his administration will just be the same with them.

 

The President is just a long-time mayor in Davao City and do not have a nationwide personal network of talents to fill in national government posts vacated by the last administration.

 

Dahil sa respeto nya kay Erap at GMA at political support na binigay nila kay PRRD last election, most of their trusted men were appointed by PRRD along with retired police and military officials who supported the campaign of the President.

 

The honeymoon of the PRRD Administration has already ended and this year is vital for the President to cement his legacy. Kahit marami ang ayaw sa pagkapanalo nya, we just have to accept him as the winner of our electoral system.

 

But we must always remain vigilant on how he will run the government. LAGI NATING KINAKALIMUTAN NA PINAHIRAM LANG NG TAONG-BAYAN ANG POSISYON NA MERON SYA. LAGI NATING TANDAAN NA TAYO AY ISANG DEMOKRATIKONG BANSA and our government is a...

 

"GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE", and not a government by the President.

Edited January 22, 2018 by 90mayk19

[camiar]

i have indicated that earlier, i agree sec has a case for a different reason there but not what you are insinuating...

 

like i said abs and gma has pdr issued to foreigners ... non issue at all with the SEC. try to analyze and explain why sec allows them as it contradicts your claim that foreigners cannot invest in local news organization.

 

naiexplain ko na nga di mo pa rin naintindihan? yan ang hirap talaga sa taong opinionated pero hindi muna intindihin kung ano ang pdr at ang totoong issue ng kaso.

 

isa lang naman ang paulit ulit na tanong ko ... does ownership of a foreign investor in a pdr constitutes ownership in the company?

 

Ang constitutonal issue ay foreign investment and foreign influence. We have an all-Filipino rule in the constitution for mass media companies in this country. Only Filipinos can invest in Filipino mass-media companies, no ifs, no buts.

 

Isa-utak mo lang yan, OK ka na.

 

Ngayong nabuking na ang CIA links ng Rappler, OK din lang kung yung foreign influence through foreign funding and investment on ABS-CBN and GMA ay pa-imbistigahan din. But these companies can most probably clear themselves.

[rooster69ph]

 

Ang constitutonal issue ay foreign investment and foreign influence. We have an all-Filipino rule in the constitution for mass media companies in this country. Only Filipinos can invest in Filipino mass-media companies, no ifs, no buts.

 

Isa-utak mo lang yan, OK ka na.

 

Ngayong nabuking na ang CIA links ng Rappler, OK din lang kung yung foreign influence through foreign funding and investment on ABS-CBN and GMA ay pa-imbistigahan din. But these companies can most probably clear themselves.

Wag mo ako nililinlang sa mga paikot mo. The fact is the SEC already made a statement that it will not look into the pdr of abs and gma coz they have already reviewed and approved the issuance of the pdr of these 2 media company before it was offered to the public.

 

bakit di mo masagot ang isang Simpleng tanong ... kala ko ba ayaw mo pahabain ang isang issue.

 

Uulitin ko .... does foreign ownership of pdr constitute foreign ownership?

 

The constitutional issue is ownership (not investment) and management must be 100% filipino.

 

As i explained sa management sila nabutasan bec of the requirement to seek 2/3 vote of the pdr holders for changes.

 

Hala sige magmagaling at paikot pa more. Hahaha

Edited January 22, 2018 by rooster69ph

[camiar]

Wag mo ako nililinlang sa mga paikot mo. The fact is the SEC already made a statement that it will not look into the pdr of abs and gma coz they have already reviewed and approved the issuance of the pdr of these 2 media company before it was offered to the public.

 

bakit di mo masagot ang isang Simpleng tanong ... kala ko ba ayaw mo pahabain ang isang issue.

 

Uulitin ko .... does foreign ownership of pdr constitute foreign ownership?

 

The constitutional issue is ownership (not investment) and management must be 100% filipino.

 

As i explained sa management sila nabutasan bec of the requirement to seek 2/3 vote of the pdr holders for changes.

 

Hala sige magmagaling at paikot pa more. Hahaha

Ang hindi mo talaga maiintindihan, kaya hindi ka maka move-on, ay ang simpleng idea na ang Philippine constitution does not allow foreign investments in Filipino mass media organizations.

Edited January 22, 2018 by camiar

[rooster69ph]

hay camiar, hindi ako makamove-on? on the contrary i have no beef against the SEC as they have found a case against rappler. as such what is there to move on?

 

but not how simpletons who in the first place have no idea of what pdr is but are trying very hard to sound convincing ... dito ako di talaga maka move-on, lolz.

 

show me where the constitution states bawal ang foreign investment sa media. foreign ownership and management ang nakasulat. so uulitin ko ang tanong investment in pdr ba is tantamount to ownership? yes or no? nakailang tanong na ako di mo naman masagot. pinatatagal mo lang ang issue samantalang numero unong reklamador ka kapag iba ang nagpapatagal ng issue.

[darksoulriver]

hay camiar, hindi ako makamove-on? on the contrary i have no beef against the SEC as they have found a case against rappler. as such what is there to move on?

 

but not how simpletons who in the first place have no idea of what pdr is but are trying very hard to sound convincing ... dito ako di talaga maka move-on, lolz.

 

show me where the constitution states bawal ang foreign investment sa media. foreign ownership and management ang nakasulat. so uulitin ko ang tanong investment in pdr ba is tantamount to ownership? yes or no? nakailang tanong na ako di mo naman masagot. pinatatagal mo lang ang issue samantalang numero unong reklamador ka kapag iba ang nagpapatagal ng issue.

 

no law prohibiting foreign entities to invest to any Philippine companies... clear na clear

 

pero ito yung explanation ng isang LAW FIRM...

 

Law-firm Dizon and Orbe-Dizon has published a factual explanation on how online news platform Rappler had violated the law,

 

“There is nothing wrong with the issuance of PDRs,” Dizon said.

The problem, the lawyer pointed out, was WAS WITH THE CONDITIONS linked to the PDRs issued by Rappler to Omidyar Network, prompting the SEC to revoke the news site’s registration as a Philippine corporation.

“The provisions included a condition that Rappler and Rappler Holdings cannot alter, modify, or change their Articles of Incorporation and Corporate By-Laws without discussion with the Omidyar Network PDR holders and obtaining the approval of at least two-thirds of all issued PDRs,” Dizon explained.

 

sa tagalog kailangan ng pagsangayon galing sa 2/3rds ng lahat ng PDR Holders (ksama si OMIDYAR NETWORK dun)

 

so kapag need mo ng approval from a PDR holders natural mente may control na sila sa isang kumpanya...

 

so ang sagot sa tanong mo eh DEPENDE sa CLAUSE na nakalagay sa inyong agreements...

[rooster69ph]

bro am just trying to prove a point to someone who replied like this ...

 

the point is someone who knows what a plain vanilla pdr is would know if a holder of a pdr constitutes an ownership in the company or not kesehodang local yan o foreign ang may hawak ng pdr. very obvios sa sagot niya na hindi niya talaga alam. inamin naman niya na yun knowledge niya eh more on the issue kung saan nabasa o narinig niya.

for him ang change in ownership ay dependent kung how the pdr is done ... mali eh. hindi naman shares of stocks ang pdr to constitute change in ownership when a company issues a pdr to either a local or a foreign individual / entity. in fact anyone who has read the SEC decision (and i actually mean the drafted resolution not the new reports on the issue) would know hindi sinabi ni sec na hey rappler dahil nag issue ka ng pdr sa foreigner eh nilabag mo ang foreign ownership kasi nga it does not constitute a change in ownership.

so ano ba ang issue ni sec kay rappler ... eto yun eh. the guy posted section 11of the constitution pero hindi niya nauunawaan at di niya ma-relate sa issue ni rapppler. sa sec. 11 malinaw na sinasaad dun na the ownership and management of mass media shall be limited to filipino individuals or entities. even with the pdr held by foreign entities 100% filipino owned pa rin si rappler. ganyan di naman sila abs at gma for example na have issued their own pdr which are in fact listed in the PSE. ang problema when they issued the pdr there was an agreement of sort that the company need the conformity of 2/3 of the pdr holders for any changes it wants to make in its articles of incorporation, etc. dun siya nadale ... because while rappler remains fully filipino owned it does not however have full filipino control in the MANAGEMENT of the company as it needs to seek the conformity of pdr holders who happens to be foreigners. now technically kung local yan pdr holders non issue coz while wala pa rin change of ownership at yun hinihingan nila ng conformity under the terms of the issued pdr eh filipino pa din so complied pa rin ang ownership and management provision ng sec. 11.

so in short ang kaso ni rappler eh hindi dahil nagkaroon ito ng foreign ownership through the foreign investor per se dahil uulitin ko the issuance of the pdr does not constitute a change in ownership but rather because of the provisions under the terms of the pdr issued. the pdr was now seen by the SEC to be an equity derivatives in order to circumvent the ownership rule. that the pdr issued was illegal thus was voided.

based on the merits, i would say the SEC has a point in its case. kaya nga ang defense ni rappler is nagbigay sila ng isang documentong nagpapatunay supposedly na nai-waived naman yun particular item in question sa pag issue ng pdr. as far as the sanction imposed some are saying its too harsh. maybe yes because it can be rectified but on the other hand this is within the authority of the SEC.

no law prohibiting foreign entities to invest to any Philippine companies... clear na clear

 

pero ito yung explanation ng isang LAW FIRM...

 

Law-firm Dizon and Orbe-Dizon has published a factual explanation on how online news platform Rappler had violated the law,

 

There is nothing wrong with the issuance of PDRs, Dizon said.

The problem, the lawyer pointed out, was WAS WITH THE CONDITIONS linked to the PDRs issued by Rappler to Omidyar Network, prompting the SEC to revoke the news sites registration as a Philippine corporation.

The provisions included a condition that Rappler and Rappler Holdings cannot alter, modify, or change their Articles of Incorporation and Corporate By-Laws without discussion with the Omidyar Network PDR holders and obtaining the approval of at least two-thirds of all issued PDRs, Dizon explained.

 

sa tagalog kailangan ng pagsangayon galing sa 2/3rds ng lahat ng PDR Holders (ksama si OMIDYAR NETWORK dun)

 

so kapag need mo ng approval from a PDR holders natural mente may control na sila sa isang kumpanya...

 

so ang sagot sa tanong mo eh DEPENDE sa CLAUSE na nakalagay sa inyong agreements...

so tell me saan ba ako sumalungat sa sinasabi ng lawyer?

 

pero malinaw hindi bawal ang foreign investment na siyang pinipilit ng iba ....

 

akala ata pag sinabing investment ang equivalent nun is ownership. a company may issue bonds and foreigners may subscribe to it. it is an investment per se via indenture not equitiues thus no ownership in the company for the so called investor, same with the pdr it is simply an investment instrument wherein it does not give ownership. but because of the conditions set it was deemed to be an equity derivatives thus contrude to circumvent the foreign ownership restriction. yun ang kaso ng SEC vs rappler.

Edited January 22, 2018 by rooster69ph

[darksoulriver]

so tell me saan ba ako sumalungat sa sinasabi ng lawyer?

 

pero malinaw hindi bawal ang foreign investment na siyang pinipilit ng iba ....

 

akala ata pag sinabing investment ang equivalent nun is ownership. a company may issue bonds and foreigners may subscribe to it. it is an investment per se via indenture not equitiues thus no ownership in the company for the so called investor, same with the pdr it is simply an investment instrument wherein it does not give ownership. but because of the conditions set it was deemed to be an equity derivatives thus contrude to circumvent the foreign ownership restriction. yun ang kaso ng SEC vs rappler.

 

im just answering some part of your question hehehe

 

depende nga sa Clause ng inyong PDR agreement kung ang PDR agreement mo ay may Clause na tulad ng sinabi ng atty ibig sabihin nun owner ka dahil may rights of approval kana...

 

ito yung Clause kaya nasita ng SEC si Rappler... kung wlang ganitong Clause which is ginagawa ni ABS at GMA sa knilang foreign PDR holders ayun abswelto itong dalawang media company..

 

remember 100% Filipino owned dpat so khit 0.01% ay bawal may Foreign entities

[rooster69ph]

Rody said shoot me if i overstay...

 

Naman mandadamay ka pa sa kalokohan mo at may masesentensiyahan pa ng pagpatay dahil sa kahilingan mo. Bakit di ka na lang magpatiwakal?

 

Oh i forget ... you are only joking. Yan nga pala ang laging paalala ng mga tards at blind followers mo.

[tk421]

Ano difference ng CNN Phils sa Rappler?

[arnel_gumaru]

I have a prophecy... at the end of his term Duterte will be China's biggest problem. All the while he gave in to accommodate China.. letting them know that he's a friend... but China gave nothing back but a straight face that WPS is theirs. Duterte then pulls his card and berates - with malulutong na mura, China... and goes to the US.... just as planned...

 

Now the next administration has... whoever f#&king idiot we elect... and US on one side... and China is cornered...

Edited January 23, 2018 by arnel_gumaru

[paulwalking]

Complain pa more hahaha...ilang taon taon pa kayo magtitiis. Meanwhile, build lang ng build.

[tk421]

I have a prophecy... at the end of his term Duterte will be China's biggest problem. All the while he gave in to accommodate China.. letting them know that he's a friend... but China gave nothing back but a straight face that WPS is theirs. Duterte then pulls his card and berates - with malulutong na mura, China... and goes to the US.... just as planned...

 

Now the next administration has... whoever f#&king idiot we elect... and US on one side... and China is cornered...

Ayan na naman ang he has a plan wishful thinking.

 

Matatakot ang China sa pagmumura? At by that time na malalaki na mga military base ng Tsina sa WPS, may magagawa pa ba ang US para paliitin uli ang mga ito?

Edited January 24, 2018 by tk421

[Jake 🥓🥞]

Let the man finish his term

[tk421]

Who says we aren't letting him? We put up with Penoy's incompetence for 6 years, and know this too will pass. Unless he goes all out tyrannical and extends his term, that is.

 

But I'm going to go on record that this one is the most dangerous president we'd had thus far. If not directly, then by the way he influences his followers.

[rooster69ph]

Yun ang problema, we already put up for 6 year and had to endure 6 more...

 

Btw, amazingly instead of arguing on the basis of merit ad hominem na lang kayang ibanat. Napaghahalataan sino talaga butt hurt sa mga patamang pailalim. What a loser.

Edited January 24, 2018 by rooster69ph

[darksoulriver]

Ikaw, ano ba ang posisyon mo sa issue?

 

IMPOV dont cancel the contract, cguro better inform MIASCOR to change all personnel who handles the passengers luggage's kawawa naman tlaga yung mga nadamay sa kalokohan ng iba,,,,

 

pero madaming naging ganitong kaso wala nman ginagawa ang MIASCOR... kinunsinte nila kc..

 

after nyo ng masayang Christmas Party wala pang 3 buwan ng 2018 wla na kyong trabaho... saklap!

[tk421]

Baka may ma butt hurt niyan dito mawalan ka ng feeling magaling na kakampi.

 

 

 

Dun sa nagrereklamo kung bakit hindi pa nareresolba ang plate mess by this admin

 

http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2018/01/23/supreme-court-release-license-plates.html

Well duterte isn’t very smart also. I think he’s just as incompetent as his predecessor, so there’s that.

[rooster69ph]

d mo tlaga gets na if your PDR agreements have that clause you have control to the company in any form ur a part owner,,,

 

yung attach pix mo ay hindi naging basehan why RAPPLER got sack by SEC... its the PDR conditions na binigay kay Omidyar ewan ko ba tlaga!

 

SEC argued that an Omidyar Network PDR provision which states Rappler Holdings need to seek approval of 2/3 of PDR holders on corporate matters is a violation to Foreign Equity Restriction of the Philippine Constitution.Foreign Equity Restriction states that "ownership and management of mass media shall be limited to citizens of the Philippines, or to corporations, cooperatives or associations, wholly-owned and managed by such citizens."

 

nbasa mo ba? its the provision (clause) on the PDR

 

if seeking approval from someone who holds a PDR doesn't constitutes ownership abay ewan ko ba talga hindi mo maunawaan!

 

 

at isa pa inconsistent dyosku ITS MY POINT OF VIEW dun sa kaso ng MIASCOR if you got a problem with that its your problem not mine hahaha

sec ruling na yan pinakita ko sa iyo on how they interpret it. ... pinagpipilitan mo pa yun iyo...lolz

 

maliwanag pa sa sikat ng araw na sinabi ni sec na despite the issuuance of the pdr technically speaking rappler is still filipino owned but with the said clause they yielded control which is bawal. kaya nga ang sinasabi nila hindi hoy nagissue ka ng pdr na may clause kaya may foreign ownership ka kundi while walang change in ownership sa pag issue ng pdr may clause ka naman na nagbibigay kontrol sa foreign investors kaya ang nilabag is un 100 percent management wherein ang sabi kasi sa batas dapat pilipino lang ang ownership and management.

 

magkaiba ang ownership at control ... for example sa common shareholders thet have both. for non voting pref shareholders the have ownership but no control. ang pdr even with the clause there is no change in ownership STRICTLY SPEKING sabi na yan ng SEC. BUT THHE CLAUSE GAVE THEM CONTROL.

 

in short what sec is saying is while stockholders on paper ninyo despite the issuance of pdr is still hundred percent filipino yun control hindi as such nilabag nila yun batas sa foreign ownership limit

Edited January 24, 2018 by rooster69ph

[haroots2]

Well duterte isn’t very smart also. I think he’s just as incompetent as his predecessor, so there’s that.

 

I don't think your KISA will agree to that.

[tk421]

Its ok, because i can categorically say Duterte is even dumber, based on the people he surrounds himself with.

[daphne loves derby]

Teddy Locsin Jr.‏ @teddyboylocsin 3h3 hours ago

More

Finally a Filipino president who tells it as it is and as it should be to Arab countries. Our ambassadors there should say the same thing to their host countries or go home. Enough is enough. Why we cannot afford NOT to have Duterte as President.

[daphne loves derby]

Some OFWs who went home because their sons or daughters were killed in Tokhang Operations. Just saying.

 

what is your point then?

how is your post related to my previous post?

 

elaborate

 

[sayonara]

the economy has been moving forward for the past years as evidenced by a fast growing middle class unfortunately this administration seems bent on reversing the situation