T 10

14 - 20 November 2014
When it’s too good to be true
Greed in the city
THE ANSWER is obvious.
Sex, vanity and greed are the
major driving forces in life –
on this occasion it was greed.
Bright people in management
who were already rich gambled
with other people’s money and
bet the company – and lost.
I recently had the pleasure
of reading Thomas Sandburg
and Niles Sand’s book ‘Andre
Folks Penge’ (somebody else’s
money). It dealt with the psychology of when an abundance
of funds is available, and how
no restraints seems to encourage bankers, developers and
managers to play with somebody else’s money – even if
they were already rich. During
the financial crisis there was
a lot of that. We hoped it was
over, but alas no.
We have seen the capital
fund ownership lead to capi-
Fashion Jam
talisation of companies driven
by incentives for managers –
very often with little risk on the
downside and a lot of bonus on
the upside.
They never learn
AT OW BUNKER it happened again. They thought
they were experts in the game
of predicting oil prices. They
were experts, but they were
not always right, and here they
were wrong big time. Same
thing happened years back
when bankers sold interest
swaps to farmers who are today technically bankrupt and
even today do not understand
why the exchange rate on Swiss
Franc skyrocketed when the
wise guys in the suits promised
the opposite.
One proverb is learned:
never trust a banker. They are
not evil – just greedy. Maybe
we should extend this to management and the boards of
capital fund owned companies.
Interestingly the recent fraud
allegations will reveal to what
extent that group were bonustakers at OW Bunker.
Common sense dictates that
if everybody in the chain of the
decision-making process is on a
bonus and not a single one-on
flat fee, then the risk of immoral shortcuts is eminent and
greed directs proceedings. The
good are now weeping and the
wicked laughing. It just goes to
show we always need the little boy in ‘The Emperor’s New
Clothes’ to warn us. (ES)
As a Swede who had spent eleven years in London and
New York, coming to Denmark three years ago has its
ups and downs. Having worked in fashion most of her
professional life, Jenny will be giving her opinion on our
dress sense: the right choices and the bad ones.
HE NATION has witnessed
become a burning platform and sink into bankruptcy
less than a year after an IPO at
a 5.33 billion kroner valuation.
At that point, 30,000 shareholders were eager to benefit
from what was a success story
with a 90 billion kroner turnover and a healthy profit.
Today we see shock and
frustration among OW Bunker’s shareholders, unhappiness
among staff members and red
ears among capital investors.
How could so much value disappear so fast?
You’re allowed to have a messy bedroom as long as you don’t mismatch your undies
NDERWEAR is a garment that some women
are willing to spend
a lot of money on – to pamper themselves or to feel good
wearing – while some women
just regard it as something
to be worn underneath their
clothes and not worth putting
much thought into.
Do not underestimate it!
UNDERWEAR was originally designed to serve several
purposes: changing a woman’s
shape, preserving her modesty
and for hygiene reasons. Women have worn rib-crushing
corsets, bandaged their chests
to get an androgynous silhouette and burned their bras as a
statement of liberation – put
mildly, underwear matters.
From bloomers to thongs,
and pointy brassieres to
push-up bras, the history of lingerie reveals a lot about women’s
changing role in society: both
how we perceive ourselves and
how we are viewed by others. It’s
fascinating to see how lingerie
has changed over the last hundred years.
It starts on the inside
JUST BECAUSE you can’t
see underwear, don’t think it
doesn’t matter. Nobody can
see your thoughts either, but
they’re the engine of your life.
The truth is that your undies
lurk under there all day, sending a message to you about who
you are and what you deserve.
If your underwear no longer has the same shape, or has
turned into the colour of a
weak latte, or simply doesn’t
look the same as when you
bought it, then it’s time to say
Less is more …
FOR MEN’S underwear, one
rule applies: less is more. And
with that I don’t mean the size
of the fabric and looking like a
Chippendale, but the colours
and the patterns.
I felt obliged to do some
research on the subject and
went on to the website of Bjorn
Borg, which in its glory days
did some great underwear for
men. Boy, was I in for a shock!
One of its (according to the
website) best-selling patterns
nearly made me blind. It really
caught my attention though, I
had to click on it. The description underneath said: “Wearing
a dark suit to work every day?
With these multicoloured
shorts you can still make sure
you get your daily dose of colour.”
Don’t believe in Superman
NO! I CAN think of a million
other ways of getting your daily
dose of colour. I would rather
pour a bucket of paint over my
head than have to see those as
my daily dose. Please guys – that
is not the way to do underwear!!!
We do not want men wearing
underwear with the Simpsons or
Superman and abstract patterns.
Black, grey, white and navy go a
long way. Underwear is not supposed to be funny.
Bjorn is not the only one getting it all wrong though – he’s
got plenty of friends thinking
comedy underwear will work
miracles. They should have a
talk with Calvin. He knows exactly how it should be done.
Raising the wunderbar
MEANWHILE, one Danish
underwear brand, Alexander
Cobb, has taken it to an altogether different level. It uses
micro-capsules in its underwear
fabric filled with strawberry and
vanilla fragrance, which last for
approximately ten washes. I’m
just at a loss for words!
Well, it’s really nice to know
that we can trust the Danes to
come up with really useful inventions. It’s sobering to think how
we used to survive without the
Wunderbaum-effect underwear.