bookmaker rules

Mr Carter, a former peanut farmer, served one term in the White House between 1977 and 1981, taking over in the wake of the Watergate scandal and the end of the Vietnam War. After his defeat by Ronald Reagan, he spent his post-presidency years as a global humanitarian, winning the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002. His death on Sunday was announced by his family and came more than a year after he decided to enter hospice care. He was the longest-lived US president. Our founder, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, passed away this afternoon in Plains, Georgia. pic.twitter.com/aqYmcE9tXi — The Carter Center (@CarterCenter) December 29, 2024 His son, Chip Carter, said: “My father was a hero, not only to me but to everyone who believes in peace, human rights and unselfish love. “My brothers, sister and I shared him with the rest of the world through these common beliefs. “The world is our family because of the way he brought people together, and we thank you for honouring his memory by continuing to live these shared beliefs.” Mr Carter is expected to receive a state funeral featuring public observances in Atlanta and Washington DC before being buried in his home town of Plains, Georgia. A moderate democrat born in Plains in October 1924, Mr Carter’s political career took him from the Georgia state senate to the state governorship and finally the White House, where he took office as the 39th president. His presidency saw economic disruption amid volatile oil prices, along with social tensions at home and challenges abroad including the Iranian revolution that sparked a 444-day hostage crisis at the US embassy in Tehran. But he also brokered the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel, which led to a peace treaty between the two countries in 1979. After his defeat in the 1980 presidential election, he worked for more than four decades leading the Carter Centre, which he and his late wife Rosalynn co-founded in 1982 to “wage peace, fight disease, and build hope”. Mrs Carter, who died last year aged 96, had played a more active role in her husband’s presidency than previous first ladies, with Mr Carter saying she had been “my equal partner in everything I ever accomplished”. Earlier this year, on his 100th birthday, Mr Carter received a private congratulatory message from the King, expressing admiration for his life of public service.bookmaker rules 。

16 things our shopping editors waited all year until Black Friday to buy

In November 2024, the Zhuhai Airshow unveiled a lineup of advanced military technology, prominently featuring the J-35A—a new fifth-generation stealth fighter from China’s Shenyang Aircraft Corporation. This event showcased a range of aircraft, drones, and munitions. It highlighted the significant advancements of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and PLA Air Force (PLAAF) in modern air combat capabilities. Amidst various hardware, the J-35A stood out, drawing immediate comparisons to the American Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II, one of the most advanced and widely adopted fighters globally. Both aircraft represent the pinnacle of stealth technology and are designed to meet the rigorous demands of contemporary warfare. However, despite their apparent similarities in design and purpose, the J-35A and F-35 embody distinct strategic priorities and technological paths shaped by the unique defense needs of China and the United States. This article compares these fighters against each other, exploring their design, performance, and role within their respective military frameworks. By comparing these advanced jets, we aim to understand their technological capabilities and the broader implications of their development in the context of global military dynamics and cybersecurity concerns. Background and strategic positioning of the J-35A stealth fighter The J-35A, originating from the Shenyang Aircraft Corporation’s FC-31 technology demonstrator, represents a significant evolution in Chinese military aviation technology . Initially conceptualized as a potential export without direct PLA support, the FC-31 underwent substantial modifications to meet the stringent requirements of modern air combat, showcasing its capabilities through various prototypes first flown in 2012 and 2016. By the mid-to-late 2010s, the design caught the PLA Navy’s (PLAN) attention, which led to its development into a carrier-borne fifth-generation fighter, tentatively named the J-35 . The first prototype, flown in October 2021, featured notable enhancements such as an enlarged folding wing, reinforced landing gear, and a catapult launch bar. These modifications, along with an enhanced dorsal fuselage hump and sophisticated sensor array, indicated a mature design aimed at carrier operations. In the past, the PLA Air Force (PLAAF) showed interest in adapting this advanced platform for land-based operations. By 2023, emerging prototypes with adaptations such as a reduced wingspan pointed to specific modifications tailored to the PLAAF’s operational needs. This version was officially designated as the J-35A during the Zhuhai Airshow 2024, coinciding with the PLAAF’s 75th anniversary. The J-35A and its variants often draw comparisons to the United States’ F-35, reflecting shared design features typical of medium-sized, fifth-generation fighters, such as dual-side air intakes and similar wing and tail configurations. While these similarities have sparked discussions about potential espionage and technology transfer—particularly in the context of alleged Chinese cyber operations targeting F-35 data—the convergence seen in other contemporary fighters like the KF-21 and AMCA suggests that these design traits may be driven more by a pursuit of optimal aerodynamic and operational solutions than by direct copying. The J-35A is strategically positioned within the PLAAF as a versatile, medium-weight complement to the heavier J-20, expanding China’s fleet of fifth-generation fighters . This development strategy aligns with the varied operational requirements of the Chinese military, from achieving air superiority to conducting precise strike missions. The F-35, in its role, continues to be a central asset for the U.S. and its allies, providing a critical blend of stealth, advanced sensor integration, and multi-role capabilities. Furthermore, China’s military advancements include the operation of another stealth fighter, the J-20 air superiority aircraft, and the ongoing development of the H-20 flying wing stealth bomber, as reported in a 2023 Pentagon document on China’s military forces. Design comparison of J-35A and F-35 fighter jets Stealth and airframe design Both the J-35A and the F-35 are engineered with an emphasis on low-observable, stealth technology, which is evident in their sleek and smooth airframes. These designs are crucial for minimizing radar cross-section (RCS) and enhancing operational efficacy by staying undetected during missions. The aircraft feature streamlined surfaces and curvature that disrupt radar wave detection, a fundamental aspect for stealth operations. Vertical stabilizers and canards The J-35A and F-35 incorporate similar aerodynamic components like canards and vertical stabilizers arranged in a distinctive V-like structure. This setup not only aids in maintaining a stealth profile but also plays a critical role in reducing turbulence, further decreasing radar visibility. However, subtle differences in their designs underscore divergent engineering approaches. The J-35A’s stabilizers are slightly wider and set at a different angle, potentially offering better aerodynamic performance tailored to the specific operational requirements of the Chinese military. This could influence the aircraft’s agility and its RCS. Conversely, the F-35 features more sharply angled stabilizers optimized for an enhanced stealth profile. This design choice reflects a deliberate focus on radar evasion, integral to the F-35’s role in U.S . and allied operations, ensuring superior performance even in challenging conditions. Cockpit ergonomics and visibility The cockpit design of both aircraft fuses functionality and advanced technology, designed to meet the rigors of modern air combat. Each cockpit has a rounded glass canopy, optimizing pilot visibility and situational awareness—crucial during high-speed, high-stress combat scenarios. The J-35A’s cockpit is narrower with a simpler design and less curvature in the canopy glass, suggesting a focus on practicality and cost-efficiency. However, this design could slightly elevate the RCS, albeit still adhering to stealth norms. In contrast, the F-35’s cockpit is more expansive, featuring a sophisticated, rounded canopy with extensive glass coverage. Specialized coatings on the F-35’s canopy enhance its stealth capabilities, significantly reducing its radar signature while prioritizing pilot comfort and visibility. Engine design and stealth optimization The rear sections of the J-35A and F-35 showcase significant differences in design philosophy, particularly around the engine housings. The J-35A opts for a more enclosed engine design with fewer visible edges and a smoother outline around the exhaust, aimed at minimizing radar reflections—a crucial element in stealth technology. This design is likely optimized to meet the J-35A’s unique performance specifications, possibly prioritizing operational flexibility in varied combat scenarios. In contrast, the F-35’s exhaust system is more intricate, with defined features that reflect advanced American engineering practices aimed at maximizing stealth. The pronounced design and use of cutting-edge materials in the F-35’s exhaust system illustrate a comprehensive approach to reducing its radar footprint, aligning with the aircraft’s strategic role in achieving air superiority. Wing design and aerodynamic efficiency The wing designs of the J-35A and F-35 further reflect their distinct tactical priorities. The J-35A features slightly more angular wings, designed to enhance maneuverability—a critical factor in dogfights and rapid tactical shifts. This design choice supports the J-35A’s presumed role in regional dominance and quick-response scenarios. The F-35, however, sports smoother, more contoured wings that align with its overarching stealth strategy. These wings are engineered to minimize radar reflections and maintain stability at high speeds, supporting the F-35’s role in deep-strike missions and sustained air operations over hostile territory. Air intakes and landing gear The design variations extend to both aircraft’s air intakes and landing gear. The J-35A’s air intakes are wider and more angular, possibly increasing engine airflow and improving performance but at a potential cost to its stealth profile. Meanwhile, the F-35’s air intakes are designed with stealth as a paramount consideration, featuring a rounded, smooth structure that enhances airflow while minimizing radar detection. The J-35A’s landing gear is simpler and more robust, likely designed to endure diverse and potentially rugged operational environments. On the other hand, the F-35’s landing gear is more complex, incorporating features that reduce radar cross-section and enhance the overall stealth profile, which is critical for operations in highly contested areas. Performance and role of the J-35A and F-35 stealth fighters Speed, range, and endurance The J-35A achieves a maximum speed of Mach 2.0, surpassing the F-35’s top speed of Mach 1.6. This superior speed equips the J-35A with an advantage in fast-paced combat scenarios, particularly in intercepting high-speed targets, which is crucial for air superiority roles. The design supports quick maneuvers and rapid response, aligning with its intended use within the People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF). Conversely, the F-35 excels in range and versatility, featuring a longer operational range of approximately 2,220 kilometers compared to the J-35A’s 1,200 kilometers. This extended range makes the F-35 more suitable for long-range missions and deep-strike capabilities. It reflects its role in projecting power over vast distances and supporting varied mission profiles, from ground attack to reconnaissance. Originally thought to employ Russian RD-33 engines, the J-35A is likely to transition to using more advanced Chinese-developed WS-13E or WS-21 engines . Future models are expected to incorporate the WS-19 engines, enhancing their thrust and performance capabilities. Both aircraft can refuel in-flight, significantly extending their operational reach and endurance. This allows for prolonged deployment in contested areas without ground support. Advanced avionics and weaponry The J-35A incorporates a suite of advanced Chinese-made avionics, including AESA radar, infrared search and track systems, and comprehensive electronic warfare capabilities. These systems enhance the aircraft’s awareness of its surroundings, which is crucial for engaging multiple threats simultaneously and adapting to dynamic combat environments. The F-35 has the AN/APG-81 AESA radar, AN/AAQ-37 Distributed Aperture System, and AN/ASQ-239 electronic warfare suite, offering unmatched sensor fusion and situational awareness. This integration allows the F-35 to detect, track, and engage targets at considerable distances, even in highly contested environments. Both the J-35A and F-35 maintain their stealth profiles by carrying weapons internally. The J-35A can carry up to 7,000 kilograms of payload, while the F-35 has a slightly higher capacity of 8,160 kilograms. This internal carriage design is critical for maintaining a low radar cross-section during missions. The J-35A emphasizes speed and agility for regional operations, while the F-35 focuses on versatility, range, and global interoperability. These aircraft demonstrate the advanced state of modern air combat technologies and illustrate the critical role of securing intellectual property in maintaining national defense advantages. Cyber espionage and the theft of F-35 design data Frank Kendall, the Defense Acquisitions Chief in 2013, highlighted the compromise of unclassified F-35 data despite the classified information remaining secure. This breach reportedly allowed competing powers, particularly highlighted in Pentagon reports linking the Chinese government and military, to advance their military technology programs. In 2014, a Los Angeles grand jury indicted Chinese national Su Bin for assisting PLA hackers in stealing over 630,000 files related to the F-35 and other critical U.S. aircraft from 2008 to 2014. Bin’s role involved facilitating the translation and targeting of sensitive defense technology, underscoring the depth of espionage activities to undermine U.S. technological supremacy.British Columbia Premier David Eby said Canada must approach Donald Trump's plan to impose a 25 per cent U.S. tariff on Canadian goods from a position of strength, as business, trade and community organizations called for quick action on the trade threat. Eby said premiers and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would meet this week to discuss "our strategic approach" to the U.S. president-elect's plan to impose the tariff on Canadian and Mexican imports immediately after his inauguration on Jan. 20, unless action was taken to stem the cross-border flow of migrants and illegal drugs. The B.C. premier made the comments Tuesday in a speech to the annual convention of the B.C. Federation of Labour in Vancouver. "Obviously, this will be devastating to workers on both sides of the border," he said. "Both in the U.S. and in Canada, the impact on families will be profoundly significant." Canada and the U.S. have long been top trading partners, on imports as well as exports, and the strength of this relationship put Canada in a solid position when it came to Trump's tariff threat, Eby said. "We have more in common with Americans than what separates us," he said. "We buy more American stuff than France, than China and Japan and the United Kingdom combined. So, we are negotiating, I believe, from a position of strength." Eby called for a united Canadian approach to the proposed U.S. tariff. "We're going to stand together and we're going to ensure we negotiate from a position of strength and that we negotiate hard and ensure any decisions that are made are in the best interests of British Columbians and Canadians," he said. Eby acknowledged improvements could be made on Canada's border, especially when it came to policing contraband and illegal drugs. "We've called repeatedly, for example, for port police to ensure what comes into B.C. is not contraband, is not illicit drugs or precursor chemicals," he said. "These are things that we can do to make life better here in B.C., as well as respond to concerns that have been raised south of the border." Trump issued a statement on social media on Monday saying Canada and Mexico had the power to solve their border issues, which he called a "long simmering problem." Opposition B.C. Conservative Leader John Rustad called for the immediate recall of the B.C. legislature Tuesday to provide funding to secure borders to stop the flow of illegal drugs and migrants. Business organizations in B.C. called on the provincial and federal government to immediately address Trump's tariff plan, which they said would will hurt businesses. The proposal would have significant consequences for B.C. businesses of all sizes and would harm communities and workers across the province, said Fiona Famulak, B.C. Chamber of Commerce president and chief executive officer. “Ottawa must take this news seriously and work proactively with representatives of the incoming U.S. administration immediately to address the issue before the tariffs are implemented," she said in a statement. "We cannot afford to wait until January to take action." The Metro Vancouver city of Surrey, which has two U.S. border crossings, said in a statement the proposed tariff would have severe implications for the city's business community. Most of B.C.'s manufacturing industry is located in Surrey and the city is also home to many thriving import-export-reliant businesses, which would face increased costs and potential job losses if the U.S. tariff was imposed, said Jasroop Gosal, Surrey Board of Trade spokesman. The B.C. Lumber Trade Council said the proposed tariff would hurt U.S. consumers and homebuyers by driving up the cost of building materials from Canada, while the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade said the U.S. was B.C.’s most important trading partner, accounting for 54 per cent of the province’s commodity exports in 2023. "It is imperative that we engage constructively with our U.S. counterparts to advance our collective interests," said Bridgitte Anderson, board of trade president and CEO. "This should act as a wake-up call to all levels of government that a new Team Canada approach is required," said Anderson. "We saw the reaction in the markets, and we saw the (Canadian) dollar fall. The shock waves were quite significant and we shouldn't underestimate what the impact of this could be." She said some of B.C.’s top exports to the U.S. are natural gas, softwood lumber, agricultural products, and minerals and metals. But some economists and policy analysts warned against falling for familiar Trump negotiation tactics. “He likes nothing more than to see his negotiating partners trembling in fear or running around screaming with their hair on fire," said Carlo Dade, trade and infrastructure director at the Alberta-based Canada West Foundation. "So, we need to react, but we need to do so with prudence, with firmness, with thought and without fear and panic." Prof. Nicolas Schmitt said the tariff proposal was a threat rather than a solid policy decision. “We should not panic about the 25 per cent threat right now," said Schmitt, who teaches economics at Simon Fraser University. "It's a bullying tactic. It's like bullying in the schoolyard." B.C. government data says the province's exports to the U.S. in the first half of 2024 were worth $16.9 billion, down 1.1 per cent compared to the same period last year. The U.S. is by far B.C.'s largest export destination, with mainland China in second place receiving goods worth $4.9 billion in the year to July, up 13.2 per cent. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 26, 2024. Dirk Meissner and Nono Shen, The Canadian Press

I mentioned last week the impact of Big-Tech companies on the banking industry. These companies - Google, Amazon, Tencent and Alibaba - are increasingly making their mark in the financial services space, which presents both opportunities and challenges for traditional banking. On the one hand, they bring innovation, improved customer experience and efficiency through adopting financial technologies like artificial intelligence, Web3, blockchain, etc. On the other, they pose competitive threats and regulatory challenges due to their vast resources, data capabilities and customer bases. The emphasis during the recent Hong Kong FinTech Week was strong on responsible AI application in financial services. The Hong Kong Monetary Authority announced a clear policy stance promoting the responsible use of AI and Gen AI, highlighting the need to balance innovation with cybersecurity risk, data privacy and intellectual property protection. I want to look at the five key takeaways from the week, which drew over 30,000 attendees from more than 100 economies. First is AI and tokenization. In his opening remarks, Financial Secretary Paul Chan Mo-Po recapped the strides Hong Kong has made in establishing itself as a fintech hub and how it is now home to more than 1,100 companies specializing in AI, Web3, blockchain and other innovation tech applications. AI and tokenization were major themes at the event, with experts discussing their transformative impacts across various industries. AI applications in financial services, such as fraud detection and personalized customer service, were highlighted. Second is the regulatory framework. While Hong Kong has embraced innovation, the administration has been mindful of the potential risks that come with new technological developments. International and cross-sector collaboration has also defined Hong Kong's adoption of AI and Gen AI, a theme which was echoed in Chan's speech when he announced an up-and-coming policy statement on the responsible application of AI in the financial market. Hong Kong's commitment to financial innovation was underscored by new regulations on digital assets and insurtech as well as infrastructure modernization efforts. Its regulatory initiatives include a licensing framework for trading platforms, a stablecoin issuer sandbox to test stablecoin-related activities and regulations governing over-the-counter trading of digital assets. Third is cross-border partnerships. The event emphasized our strategic role as a fintech bridge between East and West, with new partnerships and cross-border collaborations being announced. For example, a memorandum of understanding was signed with Saudi Arabia to foster connections and investments. Fourth is environmental fintech. Environmental fintech emerged as a significant theme, with startups focusing on emissions compliance and blockchain solutions for tracking carbon credits. This approach, known as the "financialization of nature," is reshaping how firms view their environmental responsibilities. Last but not least is the global fintech hub. Hong Kong has reinforced its position as a global fintech hub, highlighting its business-friendly environment, robust regulatory framework and strategic location. The more than 1,100 companies that have made their home here represents an increase of about 15 percent from 2023. They are leveraging cutting-edge technologies to provide innovative solutions that benefit customers by improving access to financial services, reducing costs and enhancing overall customer experience. For example, Animoca Brands pioneered Web3 technologies with a broad portfolio of products and investments. Its Web3 applications with blockchain-based digital property rights provide true ownership of digital assets through non-fungible tokens, enabling users to create and monetize unique experiences. Overall, while fintech companies offer promising advancements for the banking industry, it's crucial to navigate these developments carefully to ensure a fair and secure financial ecosystem. These five takeaways reflect Hong Kong's proactive approach to embracing new technologies and fostering a supportive environment for fintech innovation. Dr Jolly Wong is a policy fellow at the Centre for Science and Policy, University of CambridgeA 7-year-old rivalry between tech leaders Elon Musk and Sam Altman over who should run OpenAI and prevent an artificial intelligence "dictatorship" is now heading to a federal judge as Musk seeks to halt the ChatGPT maker's ongoing shift into a for-profit company. Musk, an early OpenAI investor and board member, sued the artificial intelligence company earlier this year alleging it had betrayed its founding aims as a nonprofit research lab benefiting the public good rather than pursuing profits. Musk has since escalated the dispute, adding new claims and asking for a court order that would stop OpenAI’s plans to convert itself into a for-profit business more fully. The world's richest man, whose companies include Tesla, SpaceX and social media platform X, last year started his own rival AI company, xAI. Musk says it faces unfair competition from OpenAI and its close business partner Microsoft, which has supplied the huge computing resources needed to build AI systems such as ChatGPT. “OpenAI and Microsoft together exploiting Musk’s donations so they can build a for-profit monopoly, one now specifically targeting xAI, is just too much,” says Musk's filing that alleges the companies are violating the terms of Musk’s foundational contributions to the charity. OpenAI is filing a response Friday opposing Musk’s requested order, saying it would cripple OpenAI’s business and mission to the advantage of Musk and his own AI company. A hearing is set for January before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland. At the heart of the dispute is a 2017 internal power struggle at the fledgling startup that led to Altman becoming OpenAI's CEO. Musk also wanted the job, according to emails revealed as part of the court case, but grew frustrated after two other OpenAI co-founders said he would hold too much power as a major shareholder and chief executive if the startup succeeded in its goal to achieve better-than-human AI known as artificial general intelligence , or AGI. Musk has long voiced concerns about how advanced forms of AI could threaten humanity. “The current structure provides you with a path where you end up with unilateral absolute control over the AGI," said a 2017 email to Musk from co-founders Ilya Sutskever and Greg Brockman. “You stated that you don't want to control the final AGI, but during this negotiation, you've shown to us that absolute control is extremely important to you.” In the same email, titled “Honest Thoughts,” Sutskever and Brockman also voiced concerns about Altman's desire to be CEO and whether he was motivated by “political goals.” Altman eventually succeeded in becoming CEO, and has remained so except for a period last year when he was fired and then reinstated days later after the board that ousted him was replaced. OpenAI published the messages Friday in a blog post meant to show its side of the story, particularly Musk's early support for the idea of making OpenAI a for-profit business so it could raise money for the hardware and computer power that AI needs. It was Musk, through his wealth manager Jared Birchall, who first registered “Open Artificial Technologies Technologies, Inc.”, a public benefit corporation, in September 2017. Then came the “Honest Thoughts” email that Musk described as the “final straw.” “Either go do something on your own or continue with OpenAI as a nonprofit,” Musk wrote back. OpenAI said Musk later proposed merging the startup into Tesla before resigning as the co-chair of OpenAI's board in early 2018. Musk didn't immediately respond to emailed requests for comment sent to his companies Friday. Asked about his frayed relationship with Musk at a New York Times conference last week, Altman said he felt “tremendously sad” but also characterized Musk’s legal fight as one about business competition. “He’s a competitor and we’re doing well,” Altman said. He also said at the conference that he is “not that worried” about the Tesla CEO’s influence with President-elect Donald Trump. OpenAI said Friday that Altman plans to make a $1 million personal donation to Trump’s inauguration fund, joining a number of tech companies and executives who are working to improve their relationships with the incoming administration. —————————— The Associated Press and OpenAI have a licensing and technology agreement allowing OpenAI access to part of the AP’s text archives.

Dallas HERO threatens to sue City of Dallas over failure to enforce law on homeless encampments

Anexo Group (LON:ANX) Trading Down 2.9% – Should You Sell?Houlihan Lokey co-chairman sells $952,500 in stock16 things our shopping editors waited all year until Black Friday to buyInvestor confidence was still recovering from recent stock market manipulations when a high-profile investment scam involving Dr Boon Vanasin, an 86-year-old hospital veteran, sent shockwaves throughout Thailand's business arena, causing damages of nearly 8 billion baht. Dr Boon, founder and former chairman of SET-listed Thonburi Healthcare Group (THG), became headline news after being accused of embezzling a massive amount of money through medical investment projects as a means to deceive the public. Police revealed that between December 2023 and October this year, 247 complaints were lodged against him at the Huai Khwang police station by victims who could not cash checks he issued. Dr Boon has fled the country, reportedly to China, while police have charged him and eight others on several counts, with damages initially estimated 7.5 billion baht. The suspects are accused of misleading people into investing in medical businesses promoted by Dr Boon, which police said did not exist. WHO IS DR BOON AND HOW DID HE BUILD HIS HOSPITAL EMPIRE? Dr Boon and his 79-year-old wife come from a prominent family. The doctor established THG in 1977 and continually expanded the business, making him well-known in medical and investment circles. Dr Boon earned the trust of his victims and the public after successfully listing the business on the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) in 2017. He was often quoted in news and regularly addressed public events. THG operates seven hospitals in Thailand and two overseas. According to the company's website, the group has 1,100 registered beds and a combined capacity to service 9,700 outpatients daily, making the group one of the leading healthcare providers in Thailand. Dr Boon was keen to articulate the narrative of Thailand becoming an aged society, with the global trend opening a vast opportunity for healthcare and well-being services and residences for senior clients. His standing enabled him to convince many investors to back his proposed projects. Dr Boon envisioned projects such as a cancer centre and a wellness centre in Bangkok, a condo on the banks of the Chao Phraya River for seniors, hospitals in Laos and Vietnam, and a medical intelligence project in Chon Buri province. According to police, the fraud was not the work of a single individual, but involves a network that includes family members and brokers who collaborated in the scheme. HOW WAS THE FRAUD EXECUTED? Dr Boon and his associates leveraged their social status and reputation in the medical business to persuade investors to join seemingly credible projects. He offered loan agreements with attractive interest rates to investors, issuing post-dated checks to cover principal and interest payments. However, these checks could not be cashed, leaving investors without the returns they were promised. Initially, Dr Boon paid the loan interest as promised to build confidence among investors. However, when the larger payments were due, he failed to do so, resulting in massive financial losses for investors. Finance permanent secretary Lavaron Sangsnit, who is also a board member of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), said Dr Boon engaged in off-market fundraising by inviting lenders to invest, offering attractive interest rates and claiming the borrowed funds would be invested in various projects. To secure these loans, Dr Boon used shares of Thonburi Hospital, where he was a major shareholder, as collateral. For example, for a loan of 100 baht, he pledged 4 shares of Thonburi Hospital, which were valued at 25 baht per share at the time. As the hospital's share price increased, the number of shares required as collateral decreased proportionally. According to the SET, Dr Boon is the 17th-largest shareholder in THG, holding 5.8 million shares, equivalent to 0.68% of the company, valued at 90 million baht. Victims reported that Dr Boon and his family offered high-return investments with advance interest payments. However, when the principal and interest came due in 2023, there were payment problems, and many checks issued to investors could not be cashed, leading to widespread complaints to the authorities. WHO ARE THE VICTIMS? According to the police, there are several groups of victims, including private lenders who demanded off-market shares as collateral. These lenders provided loans to Dr Boon in exchange for high interest rates of 8-9%. They did not receive repayments as promised in agreements, and many were forced to sell their debts at a discount to minimise losses. Another group comprises major investors in the capital market, including business executives and wealthy individuals who invested in THG shares or projects that were non-existent. Other victims include medical industry leaders, such as doctors managing Thonburi hospitals. They were reportedly lured into investing tens of millions of baht in these projects. Also ensnared were business tycoons and members from high-profile families, including political families, as some shifted into business ventures and were encouraged to invest, according to the police. In addition, the owners of construction materials, telecom and real estate firms were listed as victims, lending significant sums to Dr Boon, noted the authorities. The final group of victims is retail investors, including THG shareholders. Retail shareholders who trusted the company and invested in THG shares suffered indirect losses from the financial damage and reputational harm caused by the scandal. The scandal also shook confidence in the already fragile Thai capital market, particularly regarding transactions involving off-market shares and the use of assets as collateral. WHAT IS THE EXTENT OF THE DAMAGES? The initial damages claimed in lawsuits are estimated at 7.5 billion baht. However, total damages are estimated to reach 20-40 billion baht. The number of victims is currently 500-600 people, with more expected as investigations progress. There is speculation Dr Boon used his personal THG shares as collateral to secure loans amounting to roughly 2 billion baht. This may have been linked to his financial liquidity issues, possibly arising from unsuccessful large-scale investments. It is believed he sought additional funds to stabilise his personal finances. However, Dr Boon denied these allegations, asserting that no such pledging of shares took place. General investors are concerned because the activities involving THG shares led to questions about the company's financial stability. Stock prices have been volatile as investors want to know about past transactions, investments, and the allocation of funds for large projects that have yet to yield clear returns. HOW ARE THE INVESTIGATIONS PROGRESSING? THG's board of directors has initiated a thorough investigation into Dr Boon's past transactions and management practices, aiming to restore investor confidence and stabilise the company's future regarding large-scale projects and the management of working capital. Authorities said this case serves as a critical example of the risks associated with using personal assets to manage organisational finances, potentially impacting shareholders and investors on a broad scale. The police issued arrest warrants for two more individuals linked to Dr Boon's network, charging conspiracy to commit fraud and soliciting fraudulent loans from the public. The warrants were issued after victims revealed new evidence that both individuals acted as brokers or intermediaries, encouraging others to invest in the fraudulent schemes. In addition, an arrest warrant was issued for Nawara Vanasin, Dr Boon's former daughter-in-law who previously claimed her signature was forged. However, an investigation into her financial transactions revealed links to Dr Boon. Authorities are examining the authenticity of her signature. Dr Boon's network involved three main groups: Dr Boon and his family; company employees and document witnesses; and brokers or intermediaries. The police emphasised that any further implicated individuals will face legal action without exception. According to Mr Lavaron, the SEC is drafting regulations to control the behaviour of major shareholders in the market, aiming to prevent similar incidents. "To protect minor shareholders in the market, the SEC is preparing a draft regulation to control the actions of major shareholders if they intend to use their shares as collateral for loans, as in the case of Dr Boon," he said. Major shareholders will be required to notify the SET, which will allow authorities to monitor whether such actions might affect other shareholders. The measure is meant to enhance transparency for investors, said Mr Lavaron.