Category: Philippine Star

The National Development Co. (NDC) has welcomed Robert James Samson as its new general manager.

The announcement was made by the NDC following Samson’s formal oath-taking before Trade Secretary Cristina Roque.

Samson is stepping into the role with over a decade of international business development and investment management experience.

He has worked with major international companies, institutions, creators, innovators and investors across various fields.

Under Samson’s leadership, NDC aims to strengthen and diversify its investment portfolio.

As part of this goal, NDC will mobilize strategic partnerships.

It will also focus on emerging investment opportunities, as well as those providing long-term value to the economy.

Samson earned his degree from the University of California, Los Angeles.

NDC serves as the investment arm of the Department of Trade and Industry.

Under its Revised Charter, NDC, on its own or in partnership with the private sector, may undertake vital projects when necessary or when the private sector is not willing or unable to do so due to high risks or lack of funds.

The state-owned enterprise is investing in diverse industries to help achieve inclusive economic growth.

The Philippines was named as the deadliest country in Asia for environmental defenders for the 13th consecutive year, climate justice watchdog Global Witness reported.

In the 2025 report of the investigative and campaigning organization, the Philippines tied with Honduras with 12 defenders’ deaths, the highest record outside Latin America.

Six of the recorded killings in the Philippines were indigenous peoples, three were small-scale farmers, a journalist and two others.

Joan Carling, executive director of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights International, attributed the killings to the government’s counter-insurgency programs and extractive projects.

Global Witness said the militarization of rural communities enabled the military to impose repressive measures, including red-tagging to portray defenders as communists or terrorists.

The watchdog cited the case of Veronico Anterio, a 65-year-old farmer who was allegedly shot for voicing opposition to the growing military presence in Samar.

‘Global Witness linked five of those killings to the armed forces, showing how, when attempts to criminalize defenders fail, the military reverts to more direct attacks,’ said Carling.

Cases with suspected links to organized crime were also recorded in the Philippines, along with five other Latin American countries.

Environmental group Kalikasan People’s Network for the Environment asked the government for genuine accountability for the attacks, calling it to ‘end the use of state forces and criminal proceedings to suppress peaceful opposition.’

From 2012 to 2025, the Philippines ranked third in the Global Witness statistics, with 318 recorded killings and disappearances of environmental defenders.

The Philippines is joined by Colombia, Brazil, Honduras, Mexico, Guatemala, Peru, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Tanzania in the 2025 report.

The San Lazaro Hospital in Manila has reported an increase in deaths due to leptospirosis, with 31 fatalities recorded this year.

From the 24 deaths reported on Sept. 10, the fatalities went up to 27 on Sept. 14, and further increased to 31 four days after.

According to the hospital, 15 new leptospirosis cases were recorded for admission yesterday. It also recorded an overall admission of 747 patients.

Of the new cases, one is in the intensive care unit and six are undergoing hemodialysis.

Infectious disease expert Dr. Rontgene Solante earlier said the most common cause of death is pulmonary hemorrhage.

Solante, head of San Lazaro’s adult infectious diseases and tropical medicine department, said pulmonary hemorrhage occurs when there is bleeding in the lungs.

The Department of Health said 8,317 leptospirosis cases were recorded nationwide, a 14-percent increase from last year’s 7,280 cases.

With several Philippine companies still pursuing plans for their respective initial public offerings (IPOs), one can’t help but wonder what they are seeing that many of us do not?

After all, the Philippine economy is facing headwinds on various fronts. The peso closed at P62.73 to the dollar on Sept. 17. Headline or overall inflation reached 6.1 percent last month. Foreign direct investment net inflows into the country plunged to its lowest monthly level in more than 11 years.

These headwinds are also reflected in the Philippine stock market. The PSE index closed at 5,958.64 also last Sept. 17, with higher oil prices and the peso’s weakness expected to weigh further on investor sentiment.

But despite these economic troubles, potential entrants to the Philippine stock exchange remain interested. Two are already underway, that of Mynt Inc. (GCash’s parent company) and VITRO REIT of PLDT, with at least five other companies considering their own IPOs next year.

The presence of several potential IPOs in the PSE pipeline appears counterintuitive. But companies do not decide to pursue an IPO just based on how an economy is performing at a given time. Their decisions also reflect expectations about future business and market conditions.

Likewise, difficult macroeconomic conditions do not necessarily prevent companies with strong fundamentals and long-term growth prospects from entering the public market.

Take the case of Mynt. AB Capital Securities estimates its equity value at P531 billion to P834 billion, citing its structural growth, established profitability and substantial room to further monetize its customer base. It says that this fintech company deserves a premium valuation due to these factors. Morgan Stanley also highlighted Mynt’s profitability, with the company generating P17.2 billion in net income in 2025, a net margin of 21.6 percent and a return on equity of 32.1 percent. Mynt’s net margin during the first half of 2026 strengthened to 25.2 percent and it estimates that the firm could generate P21.2 billion in net income in 2026.

Mynt’s premium valuation is a claim about the future, analysts say. Investors are not being asked to value the company solely on what it makes today but on what its market position, large customer base and expanding financial ecosystem could generate in the years ahead.

These current economic headwinds have buried more optimistic expectations about our economic recovery. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Governor Eli Remolona Jr. has said that the economy could fully recover in 2027. Multilateral institutions and credit rating agencies also expect the economy to rebound.

The current IPO pipeline may reflect a similar expectation. Companies preparing to list today are not making decisions based on the economy’s state now but are making a bet on 2027 and beyond.

While IPO activity should not be treated as the sole proof of economic recovery, it deserves greater attention alongside other forward-looking indicators of business and investor confidence. Large IPOs may attract foreign portfolio investors and generate capital inflows, providing some support to the peso. The public too should also look forward to these offerings since they provide additional investment opportunities in productive domestic assets.

Impartial justice

The Supreme Court recently overturned the 2018 conviction by the Sandiganbayan of former First Lady Imelda Marcos for violations of the anti-graft law, saying the prosecution failed to establish her guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The case filed against Marcos accused her as a member of the Interim Batasang Pambansa (IBP) then of having financial or pecuniary interest in a number of entities that were used to hold and transfer at least $200 million abroad through foreign bank accounts. The Sandiganbayan said that she participated in the management of these foundations which is a financial or pecuniary interest prohibited by the 1973 Constitution and is therefore guilty of violating Section 3h of Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act in seven criminal cases.

Marcos was convicted of violating a constitutional prohibition applicable to Cabinet members. No similar prohibition however was imposed on members of the IBP. However, the information in the criminal cases charged her in her capacity as a member of the IBP.

According to the High Tribunal, public interest could not substitute for the evidentiary standards required in criminal proceedings.

The SC noted that there was a fatal disparity between the allegations in the information and the legal basis for her conviction by the Sandiganbayan.

‘The accused may only be convicted of the crime charged. Since she was charged in her capacity as a member of the IBP and for violating the constitutional proscriptions applicable to such position, she cannot be convicted of violating the prohibition applicable to Cabinet members. Her right to due process was violated when the Sandiganbayan convicted her of an offense which she had not been legally informed of, warranting acquittal,’ it said.

It added that evidence used by the prosecution were inadmissible and lack probative value. ‘Relevant Swiss documents were not properly authenticated and prosecution failed to present credible witnesses who could have attested to the genuineness and due execution of the documents. Thus, they are inadmissible as evidence. And being hearsay evidence, the documents cannot be given credence, for these do not have probative value,’ the Court held.

And since Section 3h prohibits Cabinet members from having financial or pecuniary interest in any business and the prosecution failed to establish that the foundations were engaged in business, the prosecution likewise could not establish another element of the offense, it added.

This most recent decision of the High Court dated June 10 but made public only recently serves as a reminder that even the most controversial public figures remain entitled to the protection of the rules that govern everyone, including those many have already judged. As emphasized by the SC, the rules on the sufficiency of allegations in the information and the admissibility and probative weight of evidence, in so far as they may cause injury to the rights of the accused to due process of law, cannot be casually brushed aside by the invocation of substantial justice and public interest.

‘When the Court dons its robe, inclinations and personal beliefs are set aside. It is the constitutionally mandated duty of the Court to dispense justice in an impartial manner,’ the SC emphasized.

Janine Gutierrez responds to mysterious calls and finds herself on the titular island in “Balaraw,” an upcoming horror series on streaming platform Netflix.

The show, which also goes by “Balaraw: Blood Island,” is one of the few Filipino original projects greenlit by Netflix to come out this year.

A one-minute teaser for the series begins with the voice of Agot Isidro’s character asking Janine’s Sabina if she is not worried about still dreaming of the mysterious island.

Dark clips of the island, its trees, cave drawings, and strange inhabitants are shown, including a voice that goes “Nagpapasalamat kami at may makakasama kaming bago dito sa isla.”

Charlie Dizon, Romnick Sarmenta, Ronnie Lazaro, and Nonie Buencamino all appear in the teaser, with Teroy Guzman and Archi Adamos also featuring in the Rae Red project.

“Makakaalis ka ng Balaraw, hindi mo lang matatakasan,” the same voice taunts followed by the camera tilting to show Janine’s Sabina laying on the island’s shoreline and a final threat before the title card.

“Balaraw” begins streaming on Netflix this October 29, just in time for Halloween.

Former reel- and real-life couple Julia Barretto and Joshua Garcia looked back at their working and romantic relationship which now turns a decade old.

The two are reuniting to headline Cathy Garcia-Sampana’s “Always Yours, Never Mine,” their eighth collaboration together and first since 2024’s “Un/Happy For You.”

Julia and Joshua first worked together in 2016’s “Vince and Kath and James” and began dating a year later, ending their relationship in 2019 after three films and a series together.

Post-split, the tandem fondly called JoshLia starred in apocalypse film “Block Z” and the music video of Moira dela Torre’s “Paubaya.”

The media conference for “Always Yours, Never Mine” was held last September 18 in a Taguig cinema where host Robi Domingo asked them both what it takes to maintain mutual respect and peace with someone across different chapters of life, a theme applicable to the film and their own lives.

Joshua began by saying acceptance is needed alongside respect for the other person, “Siyempre you have to accept that people grow… you have to respect kung nasaang estado ka ng buhay ngayon.”

He added that applying such would be a big help to improving the relationship in its current state, something Julia agreed with.

The actress, meanwhile, expressed gratitude for what was shared together, noting how she and Joshua have been in each other’s lives for a decade now.

“There’s something bigger than just what had transpired in the past,” Julia continued. “For me Josh is more than a screen partner, there’s something so profound in having shared so many milestones so much together.”

Having been through so much together allows her and Joshua to come back to doing what they both love, which is acting, noting they enjoy doing opposite one another.

“I’m lucky that I have that kind of partnership and friendship in my lifetime. I’m just so grateful for everything that we’ve shared – the hard work, teamwork, efforts, good and bad times. Gratitude, above all else, is the one that’s going to keep the respect going,” Julia ended.

Robi then asked the two actors what title they’d give their encompassing relationship and Joshua jokingly borrowed from their upcoming film to say ” Always Yours, Never Mind.”

Julia similarly quipped by answering “Once Yours” before asking for help from their co-star Joy Barcoma – making her full acting debut – for assistance.

The former beauty queen admittedly could not give a proper answer, answering with a laugh “Ruin the Friendship,” which is the title of a Taylor Swift.

“Always Yours, Never Mine” also starring Bianca Umali, Karen Reyes, Bob Jbeili, Migs Almendras, and Chanda Romero premieres in Philippine cinemas this September 30.

President Marcos was last heard trying to minimize the significance of the country’s indebtedness. By doing so, he does our citizens as disservice.

Marcos described the debt as a meaningless number floating in the air. He made it sound like it was not worth thinking about. That is an irresponsible thing to say.

Before this year ends, and depending on how fast the peso crashes, our outstanding sovereign debt will hit P20 trillion. Our debt-to-GDP ratio has climbed up to 66 percent. About a third of our national budget goes to automatic debt service allocation – taking money away from economic investments and social services.

Our indebtedness is a major factor explaining the weakness of the peso – now among the worst performing currencies in the world. The weak peso pushes up the inflation rate.

Oil, for instance, is expensive because of geopolitical concerns. With our weak currency, we pay more pesos per barrel of this entirely imported product. The price of everything rises because of escalating energy costs.

To meet its need for revenues, government raises taxes on everyone. Our consumers are hit once more: having paid more for basic needs, we are now asked to pay more for taxes.

As the debt grows, the debt service becomes more burdensome. Funds that might go to better education and public health are redirected to pay interest on debt. Our children’s future is compromised by the debt load.

Our economic growth is hampered by poor infrastructure. But we can devote only so much to economic investments because we must pay down the debt. Our decrepit logistics framework raises the cost of producing and transporting goods our people need. Our food is expensive not only because our farms are inefficient but also because it costs more to move goods from the farms to the consumers.

The debt overhang prevents us from building the infrastructure our economy needs. Because government cannot fund economic investments, it relies on the private sector to build ports, airports and roads. The cost for building and maintaining them passes directly to the consumer. Our best roads are tollways.

Because government does not have the funds to invest in power generation, we rely on private investments. That makes our power more expensive than the rest of the region. Private investors pay higher financing costs than government would.

Because large amounts of taxpayer money goes to debt service, we have little left to fund research. We could not build the talent base that will enable our economy to be more competitive. We have no money to advance our scientific cadre that is essential to discovering new products we could trade.

Because we never have the funds, we could not modernize our agriculture. The result is a more expensive food price regime. Our people’s access to better nutrition is constrained. Malnutrition and stunting happens.

We could, for instance, dramatically bring down our power costs by investing in nuclear power. Only government can properly make such investments. But a heavily indebted government could not do this.

In most countries, urban mass transport is government-run. This enables commuters to get to work at least expense. But a debt-ridden government cannot devote funds to running mass transport. Therefore, we have a stressed-out working class.

To help pay down our debts, our government has been forced to sell off its prized jewels. Privatization is a necessity created by indebtedness.

Government should, ideally, subsidize communications. This helps build an informed citizenry. But our debt-strapped government cannot afford to fund a national broadband.

In a word, the debt punishes our people daily in multifold ways. It increases our people’s misery by the day. It penalizes our ability to build a modern economy that raises incomes and eliminates poverty.

In the best of all worlds, debt might have served our people if it was wisely invested to produce economic expansion. Over the past few decades, however, our debt always grew faster than our growth. At present debt levels, especially over the last four years, we can no longer hope to outrun the debt service.

We have a political order addicted to borrowing. The debt we incurred was not used productively. The debt we continue to incur funds dole-outs rather than productive economic activity.

And then we have lost so much to rampant corruption. Much of what was stolen was also borrowed, to be repaid by future generations. This is double jeopardy.

Our politics runs on indebtedness. Governments buy their legitimacy through subsidies. They win popularity through dole-outs. The nature of our politics puts us on the road to bankruptcy.

It is the President’s responsibility to educate our citizens on this matter. The economy is on its back and the currency is collapsing because we borrowed much and used the money wantonly.

It is the leader’s task to educate the people about the importance of fiscal discipline to shape a better society than what we now see. It for the President to enlighten our people of our current predicament: a large debt that is pushing the whole economy towards failure.

But instead of doing that, Marcos Jr. mystifies our fiscal situation. He instructs our people not to think much about the debt. He tells us the debt ‘is just a number.’

And then he gaslights our citizens by claiming that our national economy is better than all the rest.

Janine Gutierrez responds to mysterious calls and finds herself on the titular island in “Balaraw,” an upcoming horror series on streaming platform Netflix.

The show, which also goes by “Balaraw: Blood Island,” is one of the few Filipino original projects greenlit by Netflix to come out this year.

A one-minute teaser for the series begins with the voice of Agot Isidro’s character asking Janine’s Sabina if she is not worried about still dreaming of the mysterious island.

Dark clips of the island, its trees, cave drawings, and strange inhabitants are shown, including a voice that goes “Nagpapasalamat kami at may makakasama kaming bago dito sa isla.”

Charlie Dizon, Romnick Sarmenta, Ronnie Lazaro, and Nonie Buencamino all appear in the teaser, with Teroy Guzman and Archi Adamos also featuring in the Rae Red project.

“Makakaalis ka ng Balaraw, hindi mo lang matatakasan,” the same voice taunts followed by the camera tilting to show Janine’s Sabina laying on the island’s shoreline and a final threat before the title card.

“Balaraw” begins streaming on Netflix this October 29, just in time for Halloween.

There is a word that gets used constantly in the business world, celebrated in keynotes, printed on motivational posters and cited as the defining quality of every great entrepreneur.

Opportunity.

We build entire economies around it. The best companies, we are told, are the ones that see opportunity before anyone else. The best leaders are the ones who move fastest when the window opens. There is almost nothing in the business vocabulary that carries more prestige than being called someone who recognizes and seizes opportunity.

But there is a word that looks almost identical from a distance, operates through the same mechanisms and produces very different results. And we rarely name it as clearly as we should.

Opportunism.

The difference between the two is not a matter of speed or ambition or the size of the gain. It is a matter of character. Opportunity asks: what can I build here? Opportunism asks: what can I take?

Opportunity is aligned with purpose. Opportunism operates without moral restraint seizing whatever is available because, as the opportunist tells himself, he would be foolish not to.

C.S. Lewis, writing in 1944, warned about the seductive power of what he called ‘the inner ring,’ the exclusive circles of influence and access that tempt otherwise decent people to quietly trade their values for belonging.

That warning maps perfectly onto business.

The board that knows a loophole is legal and uses that as permission. The supplier relationship exploited the moment the other party has no alternatives. The pricing that technically complies with the contract while violating its obvious spirit.

In each case, no law is broken. And something is still lost slowly, quietly, in the space between what is permissible and what is right.

Too often, legality is mistaken for morality. And access is mistaken for entitlement.

I have seen this pattern across the companies and leaders I have worked with over the decades. A business qualifying technically for a benefit it did not genuinely lose. A tender won not on merit but on relationship. A competitor undermined not by building something better but by leveraging information not meant to be used that way.

The justification always sounds the same: ‘If it’s legal, we’d be foolish not to.’ Or: ‘That’s how the game is played.’ Or the most dangerous: ‘If we don’t, someone else will.’

These rationalizations are not arguments. They are moral shrugs.

And the quiet danger of the moral shrug is that it does not announce itself as a character failure. It arrives dressed in pragmatism.

Here is the business truth underneath the philosophy: in the short run, opportunism often works. It produces results that look like wins on the quarterly report.

The problem is that it erodes the one asset no balance sheet fully captures, and that is trust.

And once trust is systematically eroded, it does not regenerate quickly. Customers leave without explaining why. Talented employees stop bringing their best ideas to a culture they no longer believe in. Partners begin protecting themselves in ways they would not have needed to before.

The compound interest on opportunism is paid slowly and painfully, long after the original gain has been spent.

Opportunity at its best is something entirely different. It is a test of character, not a blank check.

Every significant business decision carries a mirror in its reflection not just what you gained, but who you became in the process of gaining it.

The company you build through genuine value creation is a different company, with a different culture and a different capacity for the future, than the one built through calculated exploitation of every available angle.

This does not mean business must be naïve. Competitive markets are real. Hard decisions are unavoidable. Negotiating firmly is not opportunism. Protecting your organization’s interests is not opportunism.

The line is not between aggressive and gentle.

The line is between decisions that could bear the full light of transparency and decisions that depend on the other party not seeing clearly.

The practical question every leader can ask before a significant decision is a simple one: if the other person in this transaction, the customer, the supplier, the partner, the employee could see exactly what I am doing and why, would I be comfortable?

Not proud necessarily. Not perfect. But comfortable that this is a decision I could defend with integrity to someone who knows me well.

History has a long memory for this distinction.

The leaders and organizations that are remembered, trusted and genuinely powerful over decades are not the ones who were most calculating. They are the ones who stood for something consistent, especially in the moments when standing for nothing would have been so much easier and more immediately profitable.

Opportunity is a summons to build something worthy of the freedom it represents.

What you do with that summons is your character, written in the decisions that only you will fully remember.

Join Francis Kong for The winning edge, a one-day seminar-workshop on Oct. 21, designed for emerging leaders, high-potential professionals, direct reports, next-generation executives and young family members being prepared to take over the business. This practical and inspiring learning experience focuses on personal growth, leadership readiness, confidence, discipline, and the mindset needed for the next level, while also equipping participants to stay grounded, adaptable and effective amid uncertainty, pressure, disruption and difficult times. For inquiries and registration, contact April at +63 928 559 1798 or Sylene at +63 976 638 8974.

Asia and the Pacific, including the Philippines, is on track to increase spending on generative artificial intelligence (AI) to over $555 billion by 2030, led by software and information services.

In its latest spending guide, the International Data Corp. (IDC) said Asia and the Pacific is poised to grow investments on generative AI by 36 percent yearly until 2030.

In turn, spending on generative AI will balloon to $555.2 billion by 2030 from $121.5 billion in 2025, in a region headed by automation giants China and Japan.

By industry, software and information services will contribute the largest share to the spending at 43 percent. AI investments in the market will fund largely the development of software platforms and support technologies.

Banking and financial services will chip in the second largest share at 10 percent. Banks will be forced to spend more on AI adoption to automate some of their customer-facing applications.

The government ranks third at eight percent, while telcos place fourth with six percent, rounding up the industries that would lead the AI buildup in Asia and the Pacific.

IDC senior market analyst for Asia and the Pacific Vinayaka Venkatesh said the AI battleground would be determined by how firms move up from exploration to deployment.

‘The next phase of AI adoption in Asia-Pacific will be defined by how effectively organizations can move from experimentation to scaled, operational deployments,’ Venkatesh said.

Venkatesh warned that being left behind in the AI race may cost opportunities and revenues.

The region, he added, is marked by the adoption of agentic AI, which could assess, plan and execute tasks like how a human would.

What could throw off the growth of the AI industry in Asia and the Pacific is the development of rules and regulations to curb automation’s risks. Venkatesh said the lack of energy infrastructure could be a threat, given how demanding AI computing is on power.

On the ground, IDC said 32 percent of AI spending in the region is still at the entry level, such as subscription to cloud services and expansion of data centers.

The world has seen an increase since the pandemic in demand for generative AI, used to produce in an instant new content like text and video from existing materials on the web.