Minggu, 04 Maret 2012

Contoh Artikel Koran yang Mengandung Singular Adjectives

The Jakarta Post
Mobile phone — making a choice in uphill struggle
Ibrahim Kholilul Rohman and Christophe Stork, Gothenburg, Sweden | Sat, 12/03/2011 12:43 PM

The significant growth of Indonesian mobile telephony to over 211 million active SIM cards in 2010 (Directorate General of Post and Telecommunications, 2011), three and half times larger than the number in 2006, has been accompanied by an overwhelming number of products and prices, thereby making an informed choice by customers nearly impossible.

Eight mobile operators compete fiercely, whereas products and prices change frequently and the choice of discounts and specials are offered in the market. 
The pricing structure of cellular services in Indonesia is unique. Besides conventional price discrimination between on-net (calling on the same network) and off-net (calling from one network to another) and peak and off-peak rates, accumulative discounts, friends and family discounts and cash (airtime) backs are being used. Prices differ also by region and distance. Billing is either in minutes or seconds. Flat rates for voice, SMS and data in any permutation compliment the product offerings [1].
The complexity of product design and pricing is amplified by misleading advertising. “Zero” or “free services” are advertised with the small print listing the limitations thereof and even in some circumstances stating that tariffs may change without prior notice.
Straight product comparison is hardly made for the layman, which inhibits customers from making an informed decision on which prepaid product best fits their income.
In relation to this issue, OECD (2002) developed a method to compare price plans between operators by creating a monthly basket of services and pricing baskets for each product. The methodology allows one to objectively compare product prices across operators and countries.

Following this framework, the likely prices of services can be assessed employing a low-bundle, middle or heavy user categorization depending on the number of SMS and calling with a particular threshold for each group. 

Trying to apply the price basket following OECD framework to Indonesia is, unfortunately, not suitable, as the discounts and specials are mostly on a daily basis. 
Therefore, a new daily basket is required to compare prices in Indonesia. Given the complexities, an alternative framework to assess prices has been constructed in this simulation. All prepaid products are being priced for a basket constituting six calls each for every hour of the day and night (24 hours) – three calls of the length 35 seconds, 75 seconds and 200 seconds to the same network (on-net) and to another network (off-net). The daily basket also includes one off-net and one on-net SMS per hour.
The call length was determined to best reflect the complexity of billing and free callings for a certain time period (30 seconds in most cases), or free calling after a required period (usually one minute).

Figure 1 displays the cost of this basket for most prepaid product available in Indonesia in November 2011. Figure 1 does not show the actual cost users pay, but the cost for the defined basket. It serves to provide a neutral, objective look at the price and product differences.

The price comparisons show that despite operators claiming that their product is the cheapest, or even free, this may be misleading. 

Indonesia’s Telecom Regulatory Body (BRTI) could, therefore, offer users an online tool that allows them to compare product prices for their actual usage, as has been done by regulatory authorities in Europe; for instance, in Sweden. Such a tool would also be able to factor the network because subscribers from large operators usually make more on-net and less off-net calls compared to subscribers of smaller operators.
This issue has a wider implication. It has been demonstrated that the development of telephony has an accelerated effect on GDP growth once critical mass has been reached. Roller and Waverman (1996) identified the critical mass of 40 percent as the threshold for voice telephony, whereas Torero, Chowdhury and Bedi (2002) found 5 and 15 percent use of the Internet enabled a 0.03 percent increase in GDP as a result of each 1 percent increase in the penetration rate.

In fact, Indonesians use multiple SIM cards to benefit from ever changing promotions and to avoid off-net calling. Off-net calling for some products is more than 10 times as expensive as on-net calling.

The survey conducted by the Institute for Economic and Social Research (LPEM-FEUI) together with LIRNEasia in 2011 found that among the Bottom of Pyramid users in Java based on the World Bank’s poverty expenditure of US$ 1.25 per person per day, multiple SIM cards is a common phenomenon. Around 20 percent of the users have multiple SIM cards as a result of seeking cheaper promotion prices. Consequently, neither the question of the actual penetration rate nor the actual impacts to economy can be identified [2].
This finding suggested the importance of price transparency to ensure that consumers are well-informed concerning the range of services and prices available. To do so, BRTI could use price baskets to create transparency and monitor price developments in the market. 
BRTI may even prescribe that any product advertisement would need to carry a public interest notice indicating the cost for a specific user basket, similar to cigarette advertisements having to mention potential harm caused by smoking. This would allow ordinary people, regardless of their education level, to make sense of product offerings. 
Ibrahim Kholilul Rohman is PhD candidate at Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden and a researcher at the University of Indonesia’s Institute for Economic and Social Research University (LPEM-FEUI). Christophe Stork is senior researcher at Research ICT Africa and associate at LIRNEasia.

 

[1] Billing is either in minutes or seconds. Flat rates for voice, SMS and data in any permutation compliment the product offerings : Penagihan baik dalam menit atau detik. Tarif rata untuk suara, SMS dan data dalam setiap pujian permutasi penawaran produk.
[2] Consequently, neither the question of the actual penetration rate nor the actual impacts to economy can be identified : Akibatnya, baik pertanyaan tentang tingkat penetrasi yang sebenarnya maupun dampak yang sebenarnya untuk ekonomi dapat diidentifikasi.

The Jakarta Post
Indonesian economy 2012: Bright, but can it be sustained?
Lili Yan Ing and Chatib Basri, Jakarta | Sun, 01/29/2012 12:07 PM 

The Indonesian economy has shown its resilience in the face of consecutive global crises since 2008 by maintaining growth at an average of 6 percent from 2008 to 2011. Even though the global economic outlook continues to deteriorate and financial markets continue to be volatile, Indonesia is not highly integrated into the world market and the real economy remains little affected. It is even expected to record growth of around 6 percent in 2012, but will it be sustained?

Please keep in mind that, firstly, the Indonesian economy is still heavily reliant on the domestic market and less on exports and investment, with around 60 percent of GDP attributable to domestic consumption. Secondly, Indonesia’s exports have been largely dominated by natural resource-intensive commodities. In fact, the contribution of such exports (agricultural commodities and mining and minerals) to total export value has increased from 18 percent in 2000 to 42 percent in 2010, while that of exports of manufactured goods has decreased from 35 percent to 20 percent over the same period.

Why could relying heavily on natural resources be a problem for sustained development even though Indonesia has a comparative advantage in those products? 

First, relying on natural resource-intensive exports could lead to volatile growth as prices and production of these commodities are relatively volatile. Second, natural resources do not generate much employment, unlike manufacturing industries and related services.

Even though these enclave sectors typically operate at very high productivity, they cannot absorb the surplus labor from agriculture. Moreover, compared to these sectors, the agriculture and mining sectors offer relatively lower wages for secondary school graduates who make up the bulk of Indonesia’s labor force (World Bank Economic Quarterly, December 2011).

Last, there is little transfer of technology in resource-intensive sectors. Economies with a revealed comparative advantage in primary products have less of an advantage in the sense that development in the natural-resource sector brings less structural transformation compared to manufacturing industries. The larger the proportion of natural resources in exports, the smaller the scope of productivity-enhancing structural change (McMillan and Rodrik (2011).

Considering these reasons, it is time for Indonesia to revive its manufacturing sector as it cannot always rely on its abundant natural resources. Indonesia should put more effort into developing its high-value added and employment-generation sectors such as the manufacturing sector and leave other businesses to go on as usual.
A decade of slow growth which was just 4.5 percent from 2000 to 2010 down from 12.8 percent in the decade prior to the Asian Crisis deserves special attention from both the Indonesian government and the private sector to work together to ensure manufacturing regains its growth and development [1]. Manufacturing is the key sector in creating high-value jobs as well as technology transformation. 

This year is actually a good moment for Indonesia to regain its competitiveness in the manufacturing sector. The Indonesian economy is not only a growing market but also an attractive investment destination. This allows firms to operate at economies of scale and thus improve competitiveness. 

Indonesia is not only a growing market but also one of the most promising investment destinations in the coming decades [2]. Indonesia has a growing domestic market with an annual income per capita of US$3,000 in 2011 and a rising middle class. This is coupled with the fact that 65 percent of the 237 million population constitute a labor force with unit labor costs lower than that of China and Vietnam, particularly since 2008 and 2011. On top of that, Indonesia has recently attained an investment grade of BBB- from Fitch Ratings. 

While there are opportunities, there must be challenges. While we could name from A to Z challenges and things that should be fixed to increase investment in the manufacturing sector and improve manufacturing competitiveness, Indonesia could start the reform with easy and zero-cost steps.
First, simplify business registration. Second, speed up full implementation of electronic tax filing and payment systems. Third, incentivize labor training. Fourth, improve efficiency at the ports including customs and payment systems. 

This is the time for Indonesia to articulate a master plan for developing the manufacturing corridor with real action, don’t let Indonesia just be a plan master.
The writers are lecturers at the Faculty of Economics, University of Indonesia. The views expressed are personal.

[1] A decade of slow growth which was just 4.5 percent from 2000 to 2010 down from 12.8 percent in the decade prior to the Asian Crisis deserves special attention from both the Indonesian government and the private sector to work together to ensure manufacturing regains its growth and development : Satu dekade pertumbuhan yang lambat hanya sebesar 4,5 persen dari tahun 2000-2010 turun dari 12,8 persen dari dekade sebelum krisis Asia, layak untuk mendapatkan perhatian khusus baik dari pemerintah Indonesia dan sektor swasta untuk bekerja sama untuk memastikan manufaktur dapat kembali tumbuh dan berkembang.
[2] Indonesia is not only a growing market but also one of the most promising investment destinations in the coming decades : Indonesia bukan hanya pasar yang berkembang tetapi juga salah satu tujuan investasi yang paling menjanjikan dalam beberapa dekade mendatang.