Sunday, 28 August 2011
The cycle of market emotions
I find this a good depiction of mass human psychology in the stock market. Look at how most of the investors feel when they are riding up a bull run – “excitement”, “thrill”, and “euphoria”! Alan Greenspan would have called it irrational exuberance. It is indeed the greed and behavior of the investors that drove the price up into a self fulfilling prophecy – the share price is going up, let’s invest. The more money gets thrown into the market, the higher the share prices go. The masses continue to do it to a point that no more greed is able to sustain the run.
When the downturn begins, many (denial) investors will want to ‘believe’ they have made the right investments and will continue to ‘believe’ the stock will rebound. Often, they will call themselves long term buy and hold investors when they admit that a short term gain is not realized.
As the downturn worsens, “fear”, “desperation” and even “panic”, create another self fulfilling prophecy – the share price is falling, we need to sell. The more they sell, the more the prices will drop.
So how do you capitalize on market emotions? It really depends on what kind of investor you are. I believe there are 2 kinds of investors that will probably make the best out of such situations.
Value Investing
The first would be the value investors. The point where they are likely to make investment will be between “capitulation” and “depression”, also denoted in the diagram by “point of maximum financial opportunity”. The fact that I stated a region rather than a point is because I believe not all value investors are able to locate the point where market bottoms, and it would be already profitable by buying around the region of bottoms. Thereafter, they will wait out for the next bull run to sell for profits.
It is apparent that the person who came out with this diagram is a value investor since he feels that the maximum opportunity is at the bottom of the market. Trend followers on the other hand, would see opportunities throughout the cycle.
Trend Following
Trend followers would follow the crowd riding up the bull run. The difference between them and the mass investors is that they will liquidate their stock holdings when the market begins to reverse, while the mass investors will still hold on to their stocks. After confirming the downtrend is valid and strong, trend followers would short the market, making money as the stock prices go down. Hence, trend followers are able to make money in both up and down markets, bull and bear runs.
Understand the characteristics of trend following as an investing strategy:
The diagram shows a typical trend following model. Read further to understand the characteristics of trend following as an investing strategy:
Contrarian market psychology
The masses have often proven themselves wrong. Many so-called investors have short term price memory such that when they see a stock drop in price, they will think it is ‘cheap’ to buy. But more often than not, this ‘cheap’ stock would continuingly drop further in price! Trend followers on the other hand, would only buy a stock when it proves that it has the momentum to go higher, usually when the stock breaks new high and while the Majority thinks it is too ‘expensive’. The Majority only knows how to buy a stock up in price to gain profit, but not know how to profit from a stock’s drop in price. Trend followers practise shorting of stocks, which allow them to ride the trend even during a market’s poor run.
Emotionless, mechanical and automatic system
Humans have emotions even when they are investing. Trend followers believe emotions are detrimental to investing. Majority of the investors usually hold onto losing stock and ‘hoping’ that the stock will regain its value, and tend to sell off their stock early for a small profit as they ‘fear’ they may lose the profit. Thus, in order to removed such negative emotions, trend followers have a system of rules to instruct them when to enter and exit the market. In addition, they would have a computerised system with their technical analysis algorithms installed to filter out stocks based on their rules. They want to detach themselves from the stocks – “Do not fall in love with a stock” or “get married to a position” – and this is one of the most difficult challenges.
Pre-determine entry and exit points, and allowing profits to run cutting losses
Majority of the investors get in the market without knowing when to get out. This would allow emotions to take hold of their decision-making process as the market moves. They would then tend to hold on to losses and take profits too early. Trend followers know what price they shall enter and exit the market. They would cut loss when the market has proven them wrong and let the profits run when they are right. The ability to detach their emotions has allowed them to cut loss without thinking twice. This is vital to their survival as they know they cannot be right all the time and they need to minimize their losses – Live today in order to fight another day. By allowing profits to run, over the long run, these large profits will be able to offset the small losses to achieve capital gain.
Price is the main indicator – employment of technical indicators while company fundamentals carry little importance
Trend followers believe price of a stock provides the most clues than anything else. Price suggests trends and they are to follow these trends – Do not fight the trend. Many times, they buy stocks without even knowing what businesses are these companies into, lest to say analysing their fundamentals in annual reports. They would employ technical indicators like moving averages to assist in identifying stocks to buy. Usually, each trend follower will have his/her own selection of a few technical indicators to form a trading system.
Short term and no buy-and-hold
In a bull market, there will be mini-bear periods and vice versa. Thus, a price trend does not last very long – the longest being several months. Trend followers are considered short term investors because they exit trade once the trend reverses. They do not believe in holding on to losses or investing for the long term.
Sounds like gambling and cruelty of a zero-sum game
It may sounds like trend following is gambling but unlike the latter, it does not make predictions. It basically uses indicators and rules to determine the trend and follow it. Gambling depends on pure luck but trend following depends on the accuracy of the trading system and mastery of personal psychology to increase their probability of winning in the market. This means that for a trend follower to win, someone has to lose. On the other hand, it looks more ethical for a buy-and-hold investor to invest in sound businesses to improve economy and at the same time, receive capital gain for his/her investment. However, we need to remember for a company to succeed and increase in profits, its rivals and other industries have to take lesser profits or even go out of business. It is a zero-sum game too, just that it does not seem so direct.
Market Emotion Cycle
EMOTION AND COMMOTION
Market Emotion Cycle
(click for larger picture)
Fear and Greed tend to rule at market tops and bottoms. In the movie “Wall Street” Gordon Gekko says Greed is Good as the market soars higher. In market parlance the opposite of Greed is “Fear” which is bad for Investments. The market has a tendency to scare people out at the bottom and suck them in at the top. The market emotion cycle sees optimism turn to excitement, the thrill leads to euphoria and “Greed” slipping to anxiety, denial and “Fear” followed by desperation panic, capitulation, despondency ,depression, disgust and doubt. Globalization is upon us with what happens half way around the globe reported immediately and reflected in equity and bond market prices with virtually no delay. The problem is the global attitude influenced by events turns cold and hot with every movement.
The international investor attitudes changes in sync with yesterday’s news reports. It is necessary to filter out news & views and find a comfortable way to invest through thick and thin, good and bad, bullish and bearish. The World of investments has become 24/7 with no down time to reflect on issues before human emotion has reacted. This has caused cycles of “Market Emotion & Commotion”. The rollercoaster of emotional reactions are addictive and contagious moving from one time zone to the next. Now is the time to carefully choose individual stocks based on their merit and not by recent popularity.
There are many opportunities to make money but it requires action on your part, each stock selected must show risk/reward of at least 2:1.
What is Wealth Shift?
What is Wealth Shift?
Wealth Shift is the term I’ve coined to describe all the ways that people have found to grab cash and other things of monetary value for themselves based solely on their own judgment and not on any stated agreement between themselves and others.I’m not just talking about a little petty theft, here. I’m talking about a national phenomenon – a competition of unparalleled greed – one that is responsible for some of the biggest problems facing America today.
Look at Wealth Shift in the world of business. At the lower levels of an organizational chart, once-ethical employees are now Wealth Shifting with impunity by helping themselves to company supplies, taking extra-long lunches and mental-health days, and by accessing the internet on company time. Recent studies show that these and other seemingly innocuous offenses add up to nearly 40% of base compensation when taken as a whole. But Wealth Shifting isn’t limited to rank and file employees. Executives have become infamous for structuring perk-laden compensation plans for themselves and then using the complexity of those plans and loopholes in the financial reporting rules to hide the true cost of these perks from shareholders and the public in general. Don’t like CEOs flying around in private planes? Well that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
Still, it’s not enough to just identify and examine the phenomenon of Wealth Shift. We who have seen it in practice time and time again must work not only to expose it, but also to find a solution for it. The solutions currently being implemented by the vast majority of companies and politicians are twofold. Either we look the other way and chalk Wealth Shift up to a “cost of doing business”, or we heap on even more legalistic policies, procedures, rules and regulations designed to lock the barn door after the cow has already been stolen. This second technique is just as much a failure as the first, however, because it completely underestimates the creativity of the average American. Erect a road block and, in the absence of ethics, we see it as just another move in the game - a challenge to find our way around. No. What we need to do is to make people aware of how destructive their behavior really is and then encourage them to change their focus away from rampant materialism and toward something finer and far more rewarding.
I firmly believe that we Americans are hungry for more. I believe we spend our days scratching, clawing, and compromising our principles to accumulate things because we don't really know what true wealth is and we lack admirable people to emulate. Instead of being solely out for ourselves, we long to be a part of something significant and lasting. We use shopping and other forms of diversion to anesthetize ourselves from feeling the pain associated with an inability to achieve the top two tiers of Maslow's hierarchy of need (namely self-esteem and self-actualization). We go to bed at night feeling isolated from humanity because we spend our lives competing rather than cooperating with each other to achieve life's greatest goals.
In order for change to happen everywhere, we must first make it happen in the workplace. It must start at the top and work its way down. Business leaders must replace their current ideology of “ruin the company, take the money, and run” with a “desire to inspire” and a willingness to create long-lived, purpose-driven organizations that a) encourage their employees to strive to be their best selves, b) compensate them equitably for doing so, c) mentor them in other important aspects of their lives (like debt management and personal financial planning) and d) make them feel like they are participating in something special – something even more important than themselves.
I am not just theorizing here. I have had opportunities to practice what I preach and have experienced amazing results (which I detail in my book). And I am not alone. Bill Cecil of the Biltmore Company, Fisk Johnson of S. C. Johnson and Company, and John Mackey of Whole Foods are prime examples of high-profile CEOs who clearly demonstrate my management philosophy of humanism, mentorship, and legacy building. Indeed, S. C. Johnson and Company not only ranks at the top of Forbes list of Best Places to Work in America, but is also one of the trailblazers in the area of working to diminish the environmental impact of both its production process and its products upon the world. (Not surprisingly, none of these men top Forbes list of highly-compensated CEOs.)
For the first time since the Great Depression our country is in real financial peril. Americans really do want to follow a nobler path, but they need a new breed of business executive to inspire them - one who is willing to set a positive example and prove to his employees that earning a reasonable amount of compensation and building a profitable company with purpose and staying power don’t have to be mutually-exclusive concepts. It is time - past time - for us to rekindle our ethics, reduce the disparity between the have and have-nots in this country, and embrace global humanistic ideals that will restore our standing as the most respected nation in the world. With fear and desperation gripping our nation, I don’t think there is another message out there more important to deliver than this one, and I am asking for your help to spread the Wealth Shift word.
Sincerely,
Dana L. Meador, C.P.A.
http://wealthshift.org/
Saturday, 27 August 2011
Petronas Chemicals Q1 net profit up 12pc
Petronas Chemicals Q1 net profit up 12pc
2011/08/27
KUALA LUMPUR: Petronas Chemicals Group Bhd (PCG) posted a 12 per cent increase in net profit to RM814 million for the first quarter ended June 30 2011.PCG suggested that it would have made a higher net profit if it wasn't bogged down by maintenance activities and methane gas supply limitations during the quarter.
The setbacks caused group revenue quarter-on-quarter to ease 23 per cent, or RM1 billion, to RM3.3 billion, although on a year-on-year basis, the revenue was up by 6 per cent, or RM183 million.
"Going forward, we remain highly focused on improving our plant utilisation rate. In addition, we are working diligently with our counterparts on feedstock to secure a reliable rate of gas supply to support our operations as we compete in a continuously challenging business environment," PCG president and chief executive officer Dr Abd Hapiz Abdullah said in a statement yesterday.
A single tier final dividend of 19 sen per share, amounting to RM1.52 billion in respect of the financial year ended March 31 2011, was paid to shareholders on Thursday.
PCG has changed its financial year-end from March 31 to December 31 effective April 1 2011. Accordingly, the group's financial statements for the period ending December 31 2011 cover a nine-month period. Thereafter, its financial year will revert to the usual 12 months from January 1 to December 31 .
PCG said during the quarter, methane gas supply limitation had affected the production in the fertilisers and methanol business segment.
On the other hand, the supply of ethane and propane was unaffected and continued to support the operations of the olefins and derivatives segment, a key contributor to group revenue.
However, as the group had undertaken maintenance activities during the quarter, production volume declined inevitably.
Nonetheless, higher product prices and lower feedstock costs lifted the group's operating profit by RM114 million, or 13 per cent, year-on-year to RM981 million.
PCG's ebitda (earnings before interest, tax, depeciation and amortisation) rose 14 per cent year-on-year to RM1.24 billion in the current quarter from RM1.09 billion.
Its ebitda decreased by RM262 million from RM1.50 billion in the preceding quarter. However, ebitda margin in the current quarter improved to 37.1 per cent from 34.6 per cent.
The setbacks caused group revenue quarter-on-quarter to ease 23 per cent, or RM1 billion, to RM3.3 billion, although on a year-on-year basis, the revenue was up by 6 per cent, or RM183 million.
"Going forward, we remain highly focused on improving our plant utilisation rate. In addition, we are working diligently with our counterparts on feedstock to secure a reliable rate of gas supply to support our operations as we compete in a continuously challenging business environment," PCG president and chief executive officer Dr Abd Hapiz Abdullah said in a statement yesterday.
A single tier final dividend of 19 sen per share, amounting to RM1.52 billion in respect of the financial year ended March 31 2011, was paid to shareholders on Thursday.
PCG has changed its financial year-end from March 31 to December 31 effective April 1 2011. Accordingly, the group's financial statements for the period ending December 31 2011 cover a nine-month period. Thereafter, its financial year will revert to the usual 12 months from January 1 to December 31 .
PCG said during the quarter, methane gas supply limitation had affected the production in the fertilisers and methanol business segment.
On the other hand, the supply of ethane and propane was unaffected and continued to support the operations of the olefins and derivatives segment, a key contributor to group revenue.
However, as the group had undertaken maintenance activities during the quarter, production volume declined inevitably.
Nonetheless, higher product prices and lower feedstock costs lifted the group's operating profit by RM114 million, or 13 per cent, year-on-year to RM981 million.
PCG's ebitda (earnings before interest, tax, depeciation and amortisation) rose 14 per cent year-on-year to RM1.24 billion in the current quarter from RM1.09 billion.
Its ebitda decreased by RM262 million from RM1.50 billion in the preceding quarter. However, ebitda margin in the current quarter improved to 37.1 per cent from 34.6 per cent.
Dark clouds over US and Europe
Saturday August 27, 2011
Dark clouds over US and Europe
WHAT ARE WE TO DO
By TAN SRI LIN SEE-YAN
The world is adrift and it will continue to drift in the coming months or even years
Within the past couple of weeks, the world has changed. From a world so used to the United States playing a key leadership role in shaping global economic affairs to one going through a multi-speed recovery, with the emerging nations providing the source of growth and opportunity. This is a very rapid change indeed in historical time. What happened? First, the convergence of a series of events in Europe (contagion of the open ended debt crisis jolted France and spread to Italy and Spain, forcing theEuropean Central Bank or ECB to buy their bonds) and in the US (last minute lifting of the debt ceiling exposed the dysfunctional US political system, and the Standard & Poor's downgrade of the US credit rating) have led to a loss of confidence by markets across the Atlantic in the effectiveness of the political leadership in resolving key problems confronting the developed world. Second, these events combined with the coming together of poor economic outcomes involving the fragilities of recovery have pushed the world into what the president of the World Bank called “a new danger zone,” with no fresh solutions in sight. Growth in leading world economies slowed for the fourth consecutive quarter, gaining just 0.2% in 2Q'11 (0.3% in 1Q'11) according to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. The slowdown was marked in the euro area. Germany slackened to 0.3% in 2Q'11 (1.3% in 1Q'1) and France stalled at zero after 0.9% in 1Q'11. The US picked up to 0.3% (0.1% in 1Q'11), while Japan contracted 0.3% in 2Q'11 (-0.9% in 1Q'11).
The US slides
Recent data disclosures and revisions showed that the 2008 recession was deeper than first thought, and the subsequent recovery flatter. The outcome: Gross domestic product (GDP) has yet to regain its pre-recession peak. Worse, the feeble recovery appears to be petering out. Over the past year, output has grown a mere 1.6%, well below what most economists consider to be the US's underlying growth rate, a pace that has been in the past almost always followed by a recession. Over the past six-months, the US has managed to eke out an annualised growth of only 0.8%. This was completely unexpected. For months, the Federal Reserve had dismissed the economy's poor performance as a transitory reaction to Japan's natural disaster and oil price increases driven by turmoil in the Middle East. They now admit much stiffer headwinds are restraining the recovery, enough to keep growth painfully slow. Recent sentiment surveys and business activity indicators are consistent with expectations of a marked slowdown in US growth. Fiscal austerity will now prove to be a drag on growth for years. Housing isn't coming back quickly. Households are still trying to rid themselves of debt in the face of eroding wealth. Old relationships that used to drive recoveries seem unlikely to have the pull they used to have. Historically, consumers' confidence had tended to rebound after unemployment peaked. This time, it didn't happen. Unemployment peaked in Oct 2009 at 10.1% but confidence kept on sinking. The University of Michigan's index fell in early August to its lowest level since 1980. Thrown in is concern about the impact of the wild stock market on consumer spending. Indeed, equity volatility is having a negative impact on consumer psychology at a time of already weakening spending.
Three main reasons underlie why the Fed made the recent commitment to keep short-term interest rates near zero through mid-2013: (i) cuts all round to US growth forecasts for 2H11 and 2012; (ii) drop in oil and commodity prices plus lower expectations on the pace of recovery led to growing confidence inflation will stabilise; and (iii) rise in downside risks to growth in the face of deep concern about Europe's ability to resolve its sovereign debt problems. The Fed's intention is at least to keep financial conditions easy for the next 18 months. Also, it helps to ensure the slowly growing economy would not lapse into recession, even though it's already too close to the line; any shock could knock it into negative territory.
The critical key
Productivity in the US has been weakening. In 2Q11, non-farm business labour productivity fell 0.3%, the second straight quarterly drop. It rose only 0.8% from 2Q10. Over the past year, hourly wages have risen faster than productivity. This keeps the labour market sluggish and threatens potential recovery. It also means an erosion of living standards over the long haul. But, these numbers overstate productivity growth because of four factors: (a) upward bias in the data - eg the US spends the most on health care per capita in the world, yet without superior outcomes; (b) government spending on military and domestic security have risen sharply, yet they don't deliver useful goods and services that raise living standards; (c) labour force participation has fallen for years. Taking lower-paying jobs out of the mix raises productivity but does not create higher value-added jobs; and (d) off-shoring by US companies to China for example, but they don't enhance American productivity. Overall, they just overstate productivity. So, the US, like Europe, needs to actually raise productivity at the ground level if they are to really grow and reduce debt over the long-term. The next wave of innovation will probably rely on the world's current pool of scientific leaders - most of whom is still US-based.
US deficit is too large
The US budget deficit is now 9.1% of GDP. That's high by any standard. According to the impartial US Congressional Budget Office (CBO), even after returning to full employment, the deficit will remain so large its debt to GDP will rise to 190% by 2035! What happened? This deficit was 3.2% in 2008; rose to 8.9% in 2010, pushing the debt/GDP ratio from 40% to 62% in 2010. This “5.7% of GDP” rise in the deficit came about because of (i) a fall of “2.6% of GDP” in revenue (from 17.5% to 14.9% of GDP), and (ii) a rise of “3.1% of GDP” in spending (from 20.7% to 23.8% of GDP). According to the CBO, less than one-half of the rise in deficit was caused by the downturn of 2008-2010. Because of this cyclical decline, revenue collections were lower and outlays, higher (due to higher unemployment benefits and transfers to help those adversely affected). They in turn raise total demand and thus, help to stabilise the economy. These are called “automatic stabilisers.” In addition, the budget deficit also worsened because, even at full-employment, revenues would still fall and spending rise. So, the great recession did its damage.
Looking ahead, the Obama administration's budget proposals would add (according to CBO) US$3.8 trillion to the national debt between 2010 and 2020. This would raise the debt/GDP ratio to 90% reflecting limited higher spending, weaker revenues from middle and lower income taxpayers, offset in part by higher taxes on the rich. Even so, these are based on conservative assumptions regarding military spending, no new programmes and lower discretionary spending in “real” terms. No doubt, actual fiscal consolidation would imply much more spending cuts and higher revenues. According to Harvard's Prof M. Feldstein, increased revenues can only come about, without raising marginal tax rates, through what he calls cuts in “tax expenditures,” that is, reforming tax deductions (eg cutting farm subsidies, eliminating deductions for ethanol production, etc). Such a “balanced approach” to resolve the growing fiscal deficit will be hard to come-by given the political paralysis in Washington. Worse, the poisonous politics of the past two months have created a new sort of uncertainty. The tea partiers' refusal to compromise can, at worse, kill off the recovery. The only institution with power to avert danger is the Fed. But printing money can be counter-productive. Fiscal measures are the preferred way to go at this time. Even so, the US fiscal problems will mount beyond 2020 because of the rising cost of social security and medicare benefits. No doubt, fundamental reform is still needed for the long-term health of the US economy.
Eurozone stumbles
Looming large as a risk factor is Europe's long running sovereign debt saga, which is pummelling US and European financial markets and business confidence. So far, Europe's woes and the market turmoil it stirred are worrisome. The S&P 500 fell close to 5% last week extending losses of 15.4% over the previous three weeks, its worse streak of that length in 2 years, and down 17.6% from its 2011 high. The situation in Europe has been dictating much of the global markets' recent movements. The eurozone's dominant service sector was effectively stagnant in August after two years of growth, while manufacturing activity, which drove much of the recovery in the bloc shrank for the first time since September 2009. Latest indicators add to signs the slowdown is spreading beyond the periphery and taking root in its core members, including Germany. The Flash Markit Eurozone Services Purchasing Managers' Index (PMI) fell to 51.5 in August (51.6 in July), its lowest level since September 2009. The PMI, which measures activity ranging from restaurants to banks, is still above “50”, the mark dividing growth from contraction. However, PMI for manufacturing slid to 49.7 the first sub-50 reading since September 2009. Both services and manufacturing are struggling.
Going forward, poor data show neither Germany nor France (together making- up one-half the bloc's GDP) is going to be the locomotive. Indeed, the risks of “pushing” the region over the edge are significant. Germany faces an obvious slowdown and a possible lengthy stagnation.
European financial markets just came off a turbulent two weeks, with investors fearing the debt crisis could spread further if Europe's policy makers fail to implement institutional change and new structural supports for the currency bloc's finances. In the interim, the ECB has been picking up Italian and Spanish bonds to keep borrowing costs from soaring. The action has worked so far, but the ECB is only buying time and can't support markets indefinitely. So far, the rescue bill included 365 billion euros in official loans to Greece, Portugal and Ireland; the creation of a 440 billion euros rescue fund; and 96 billion euros in bond buying by the ECB. Despite this, market volatility and uncertainty prevail. Europe is being forced into an end-game with three possible outcomes: (a) disorderly break-up - possible if the peripherals fail in their fiscal reform or can no longer withstand stagnation arising from austerity; (b) greater fiscal union in return for strict national fiscal discipline; and (c) creation of a more compact and more economically coherent eurozone against contagion; this implies some weaker members will take “sabbatical” from the euro. My own sense is that the end-game will be neither simple nor orderly. Politicians will likely opt for a weak variant of fiscal union. After more pain, a smaller and more robust euro could emerge and avoid the euro's demise. Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman gives a “50% chance Greece would leave and a 10% odds of Italy following.”
Leaderless world
The crisis we now face is one of confidence. Starting with the markets across both sides of the Atlantic and in Japan. This lack of confidence reflected an accumulation of discouraging news, including feeble economic data in the US and Europe, and signs European banks are not so stable. The global rout seems to have its roots in free-floating anxiety about US dysfunctional politics and about euroland's economic and financial stability. Confidence is indeed shaky, already spreading to businesses and consumers, raising risks any fresh shock could be enough to push the US and European economies into recession. Business optimism, at best, is “softish.” Consumers are still deleveraging. Unfortunately, this general lack of confidence in global economic prospects could become a self-fulfilling prophecy. In the end, it's all about politics. The French philosopher Blaise Pascal contends politics have incentives that economics cannot understand. To act, politicians need consensus, which often does not emerge until the costs of inaction become highly visible. By then, it is often too late to avoid a much worse outcome. So, the demand for global leadership has never been greater. But, none is forthcoming not for the US, not from Europe; certainly not from Germany and France, or Britain.
The world is adrift. Unfortunately, it will continue to drift in the coming months, even years. Voters on both sides of the Atlantic need to demand more from their leaders than “continued austerity on autopilot.” After all, in politics, leadership is the art of making the impossible possible.
Former banker, Dr Lin is a Harvard educated economist and a British Chartered Scientist who now spends time writing, teaching and promoting the public interest. Feedback is most welcome; email:starbizweek@thestar.com.my.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)