Search interesting materials

Wednesday, November 21, 2007

Implications of new international financial centres

I was at the FT/DIFC World Financial Centres Summit in Dubai, which helped me to write a Business Standard article titled Implications of new international financial centres.


  1. Seems to me that in the decades to come, the Emirates region and regions such as Singapore and Mauritius will derive significant incomes and obtain major opportunities thanks to the inefficiencies of the Indian Government and the severe curtailing of the free markets in India.
    While using such opportunity is but a natural process, I cannot but imagine how severely undeveloped their (the Gulf) own local markets are...there is deplorable human talent in the Gulf..most of the talent is imported from India and the local oil economies depend totally on foreign help...same with may be the cleanest, sterlized place on earth - but a sterilized place is no place to do business...lack of freedom and the inability to innovate will always curtail future growth.

  2. Whilst I agree with your viewpoint on the myopic manner in which financial services is viewed in India, do not think the Middle East could spring a surprise. As demonstrated elsewhere in the world, this segment requires a captive economy with a democratic setup & appropriate legislations to back up the same. Centres in the Middle East may end up as mere conduits rather than an effective financial services hub - like Singapore & HK. The main centres are still London & NY.

    India has the potential to become the third centre appropriately placed timezone wise too - between London & Japan. But am afraid that reaching such a level, in the present scenario, seems only a remote possibility, a glint on the horizon.

    Staunch believers in afterlife & rebirth may still be optimistic !

  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

  4. Dear Sir,
    I am doing research on implied volatility in Indian market. I have a practical doubt regarding it.
    Is it true that when we have a near-the-money call and put option that time the call and put implied volatility should be approximately same? That means with a same strike price, spot price, time to maturity and interest rate both the volatility should be approximately equal. But in my case in won’t. In my case the put implied volatility for near the money is much higher that call implied volatilities. I have also found that the call price in near the money is less than put because of high volatility. I want to know why this is happening.



Please note: Comments are moderated. Only civilised conversation is permitted on this blog. Criticism is perfectly okay; uncivilised language is not. We delete any comment which is spam, has personal attacks against anyone, or uses foul language. We delete any comment which does not contribute to the intellectual discussion about the blog article in question.

LaTeX mathematics works. This means that if you want to say $10 you have to say \$10.