Energy in Venezuela

The local press has recently published articles referring to the presentation by the National Executive to the National Energy Commission of a document which will lay out the plans to finally eliminate Venezuela’s rentist mentality. This means, basically, that increases in tariffs and prices of fuel are around the corner.

It seems clear that this document, in addition to establishing the bases for justifying new sources of income for the central government, will once again promote the thesis that the principal rentists of Venezuelan society are the common citizens, not its politicians and governors.

The identity card debacle is still fresh in our minds. This is a classic example of parasitic behavior. The Government was ready to dish out a macro-investment of US$ 500 million to solve the problems with our national identification system rather than putting just a little bit of effort into developing realistic and sane administration of the latter.

One of the main arguments used in the aforementioned document has to do with efficient use of our natural resources. The gist of the matter is that we are basically to forego the comparative advantages given us by nature in the form of abundant oil, gas and hydroelectric energy. Faced with high utility bills, companies and citizens alike must learn how to optimize and make more efficient use of these resources. The prime example of inefficient use of energy the authors of the document could come up with is that the Venezuelan aluminum and steel industry uses three time the amount of energy used in Japan.

This logic does not necessarily make sense, since Venezuela has abundant energy resources while Japan does not. The mix of production inputs such as capital, raw material and labor are usually established according to the conditions in each country. Surely most people would much rather see our comparative advantages be biased in favor of cheap energy rather than on cheap wages. It seems we don’t see eye to eye with the current or previous Governments on this.

On top of this both the aluminum and the steel industry have been managed by the State. Could it not be possible that this supposed inefficiency in the use of energy resources be related more than anything else to poor government administration?

The final blow was the publication in the press (on the same day the news of the document broke) of the invitation to prequalify for the privatization process of the power generation system of the State of Nueva Esparta. The basic terms of the invitation clearly stipulates that 100% of the shares will be sold to the highest bidder, on a strictly cash basis and without financing by the Venezuelan State.

This undoubtedly means that the power generation system will be allocated to the candidate who guarantees maximum income for the Central Government (which basically means charging higher rates to insure a return) rather than to the bidder that offers the Margariteño the best service and the lowest tariffs. Again, as far as I can see, this is just another example of the parasitic fiscal planning that has cost Venezuela immense amounts of financial resources and time. Why should Margarita pay tariffs that are higher than the in the rest of the country and might even be higher that what Venezuela will charge Brazil and Colombia for our exports of electricity? This makes no sense either.

For example, the implications of drastic increases in electricity rates for the hotel industry are horrible. A hotel needs a supply of abundant and continuous energy and there are preciously few ways to increase efficiency unless there is an unlimited amount of capital available which, for example, would allow for the importation of efficient but costly airconditioners. Today, faced with depressed room rates due to a flood of state owned supply and the lack of steady transportation due to Viasa’s exit, Margarita’s tourism industry simply does not have these resources.

Finally, as a sweetener, the Government most generously promises to limit its fiscal appetite to levels established by export values. This implies that it is it’s intention to at least not take undue advantage of the monopolistic conditions that tend to skew prices. We will live, eternally gratified with the hope that our average Venezolano will not one day pay more for each kilowatt of power than the average citizen in Tokyo.

A good lesson on how not to win at tourism

Tourism on our beautiful Island of Margarita has been harshly battered over the last few months. There are many factors that contribute to this situation, but I would like to specifically shed light on three of them since these have a common denominator: The problems could have been solved by more coherent official intervention.

The first factor refers to the administration of hotels by the official entities responsible for the management of assets recuperated during the recent financial sector crisis. The concentration of the supply side of the equation in the hands of a few players, without apparently requiring a minimum return on occupied rooms, has totally altered the structure of the hotel industry on the Island. 

As a result, Margarita has today abandoned the possibility of applying a sophisticated marketing strategy so aptly illustrated by the slogan “The Best Kept Secret in The Caribbean”. Instead, it has been introduced to the world of cheap-package tourism based on three elements, low rates, lower rates and lowest rates.

This strategy is outright dense In an petroleum-based nation like ours, where the local currency tends to revalue, making it difficult to compete. This is occurring today; we have had a relatively stable exchange rate for the last year while local inflation has burned underneath. There are islands in the Caribbean with less attractive infrastructure and landscapes that are applying tariff structures five or ten times higher than those actually in force in Margarita.

Having seen the immense dedication Pro-Competencia gave the Pepsi-Coca Cola fiasco, a case of obvious magnitude and importance but in which the dispute was between a few shareholders, it surprises me no end that they have not found it necessary to intervene in the hotel market in Margarita. The subtle control the government exerts over such a high percentage of hotel rooms definitely affects free competition. The sheer fact that it has placed rooms on the market at rates that barely cover variable costs, without requiring either returns or recovery of capital investment, raises the possibility of an anti-dumping suit.

The government could easily have avoided this sad situation should it have insured that the management contracts were awarded to various hotel operators and, among other things, required a return on each room occupancy. The fact is that the market has been seriously damaged and as a result the State has less possibilities of recuperating its investments.

The second problem which could have been avoided by timely and intelligent government intervention, was caused by the cancellation of Viasa’s flights to Margarita. Routine flights between Europe and Margarita fed hotel room demand and allowed tourists to travel directly, and to then pick and choose among hotels at their whim.

Charter flights, even though very welcome, have the disadvantage of transferring the act of selecting hotel accommodation in the country of origin. In this sense, the foreign tour operator is in a win-win situation as far as tariff negotiations is concerned. In other words, the lion’s share of the package paid by the tourist is allocated to the air-fare while little is left to cover the hotel room.

It is inconceivable that, knowing the vital importance of these flights to Margarita, the government did not ensure the immediate entry of other carriers to substitute Viasa’s canceled flights from Europe to Margarita. This can only be explained in terms of indolence and/or incapacity.

Finally, I’d like to comment on the issue of energy supply to the Island. There is no doubt that lack of regular supply of electricity seriously affects the tourism industry anywhere. I’m sure that, given the right type governmental intervention, the Island would be benefitting from an abundant supply of energy.

In this sense, it is surprising that resources were not made available to Edelca to finance the installation of an additional transmission line to the Island. That would allow Margarita access to Venezuela’s vast availability of hydroelectric power.

I don’t understand what is holding officials back from recuperating the tourism industry in our beloved Margarita. It seems that the entire official sector has dedicated all its energy to the debate on casinos and bingos. When will they realize that the development of tourism is not merely a game!

Per Kurowski

Banking - between mirrors and piglets

Although I have never worked in the banking sector, I do remember, during the latter part of the seventies, being proud about the development of Venezuelan banks. I thoroughly enjoyed listening to anecdotes such as the fact that the most popular software application (i.e. SAFE) for the management of on-line banking operations had been developed in Venezuela. 

I was also aware of the fact that on-line banking in the country was being applied to a much greater degree than in the United States. I loved to read in the press about the participation of Venezuelan financial institutions in international loan syndications, although while doing so I pondered about the sanity of this participation and had the same ambiguous love-hate feeling as when I flew overseas with VIASA, our flagship airline. 

Finally, the fact that Venezuelan banks routinely appeared in “The Banker” magazine’s listing of largest banks, made reading this publication in London waiting rooms quite agreeable.

Twenty years later, I cannot but feel somewhat humiliated when I am asked to feel respectful and thankful that we are now to be the beneficiaries of new banking technology that in my humble opinion for the moment merely seems to imply substituting the small mirrors used by the Conquistadores to seduce the continent’s Indians with little plastic piglets.

Let me make it clear that my possible observations as a Patriot about the strategies established by financial Neo-Royalists are certainly not based on the rejection of the presence of foreign banks in general, much less of Spanish financial institutions, which due to their high profile will undoubtedly bear the brunt of humoristic expressions so proper of the Venezuelan populace. 

On the contrary, I am certain that there is an important place for foreign banks in Venezuela, although I would have liked to see an early aperture of the financial system aimed more at strengthening than at the reconstruction, in the style of the mythical Phoenix, of a system in ruins.

What motivates me is that an excessive praise heaped on the newly arrived foreign bankers, in addition to possibly causing unnecessary damage to the egos of our local bankers (that famous patriotic cry, “Vuelvan Caras”, is already audible in banking circles), clearly tends to confuse the issues and principal causes of the collapse of our financial system.

History can be written in a few words. A series of devaluations, the breach of exchange guarantee contracts, restrictions on offshore positions, obligatory preferential treatment for certain sectors of the economy, minimized participation in the financing of petroleum industry projects and surprising macroeconomic policy decisions such as the application of exorbitantly high real interest rates. 

All these factors caused a drastic decline in the quality of bank loan portfolios and an erosion of their respective net worth values to a minimum. Responsibility for all these ills lies principally with the Central Government and their main cause is again the fundamental failing of our society, i.e. the excessive concentration of national wealth in the hands of the State.

Each case must by analyzed separately but in general terms, I’m certain that should the United States, the United Kingdom and even Spain have had to suffer through similar catastrophes, the mortality rate would have been the same or higher. Likewise, I’m sure that the future productivity of Venezuelan banks will depend more on the rectification of the State’s actions than on the masterly lessons in banking we may receive from, with all due respect, the Casa Cándido strategists (Casa Cándido is a restaurant in Segovia famous for its servings of roasted piglet).

A better supervision of the banking sector by a professional Superintendency; reasonable norms that regulate the banking activities without strangling it; development of management capabilities that would insure the proper handling of banking crises without multiplying their initial cost; and responsible, professional bankers. 

All the above certainly must exist in order to head off another financial tragedy in the future, but they are certainly not enough to avoid such disasters.

As long as the size of Venezuelan State is not reduced in proportion to the private sector and the State continues to impose its omnipresent influence over all aspects of national life, the possibility of creating and environment of economic rationality is remote. Without economic rationality there is no way to avoid another financial crisis. Today’s generation of local bankers hopefully has already learned its lesson and I sincerely hope our newly arrived visitors will not have to do so as well.