Location. Location. Location

One of the conventional wisdom for Singapore's early success was its location.

"Situated at the crossroads" and "gateway to the orient" (so... Singapore is not "orient"?) Singapore's location is key (according to many analyses) to her success.

I would argue that it may be a necessary but insufficient condition.

After all, Penang and Malacca have historically been trading centres as well.

To the south, Bintan and Batam are islands as well placed as Singapore. 

Raffles chose Singapore in part to challenge the Dutch who were in (what is today) Indonesia. 

The video below also suggests that Singapore was well-placed to take advantage of the opening up of the Suez Canal.

But the Suez Canal is thousands of kilometres away, and yes, it did help Singapore.

But it could've help many other ports and countries as well.

So why did Singapore prosper, but Penang, Malacca, Bintan and Batam did not?

As a side note, the above video is one of the few videos that understands Singapore's policy on private cars.

It also understands that pure, unfettered, unregulated capitalism would be a disaster for any society. 

I think this is one of the better explanation of Singapore's success.

But the other "secret" of Singapore's success, is that "nothing succeeds like success" and we should build on our success:

Consider, Singapore has ports. How else can we leverage on it? Bunkering services! We sell fuel to the ships that call at our ports! How else can we leverage on that? Become a Petroleum centre! Then we started refining petroleum. And then petroleum products. And now, Singapore is one of the biggest players in the petroleum industry!

And we have NO OIL RESERVES!

Singapore does not sit back and wait for fortune to fall in our laps. Look at how we got Taylor Swift to bring her Eras Tour to Singapore. The word in the region is that Singapore paid Taylor Swift to perform exclusively in Singapore.

Singapore is bound by confidentiality clauses in the agreement. But the truth is Eras was NOT going to any SE Asian Cities... until Singapore came along and persuaded Swift to perform in Singapore. Why didn't she want to perform in SE Asia? Many reasons.

No Suitable Venue: Eras is an expensive concert to stage, and it will need a large enough venue to make it worth their while. Singapore's National Stadium is one (55,000 - 60,000 capacity). The Philippines have a comparable venue, and Jakarta also has a venue with a huge capacity. Kuala Lumpur and Bangkok does not. 

No Supporting Infrastructure: In Singapore, the Stadium MRT Station is right next to the National Stadium. After the concert, Swifties were AMAZED at the efficiency with which the crowd was dispersed! In Manila and Jakarta, there was gridlocked traffic for the Coldplay concert. Bangkok's traffic is quite bad without the crowd from a concert adding to it.

No Cosmopolitan "vibe": Singapore is modern and cosmopolitan. Strangely, despite our reputation for being a "Fine" country, we have no problems with rock and pop stars strutting their stuff on stage in skimpy costumes. Not so, Malaysia, and Indonesia. Malaysia has even implemented a "kill switch" provision for any concert so that authorities can terminate a concert if they find the performance too risqué or suggestive.

The new management of our Sports Hub/National Stadium are not just passive "rent collectors". They are pro-active and hunt down opportunities. That spells good fortune for Singapore.

The point of the Eras Tour example and the Petroleum Centre example, is that Location is a matter of providence or luck. If location is the secret of Singapore's success, then our neighbours should be as successful or as lucky. Unless Singapore is the only country in this part of the world. What the two examples cited showed is that Singapore does not passively await good fortune to come our way. We have good natural harbour, and our location brings ships to our ports. Those ships can also go to Penang, or Malacca, or Bintan. How do we ensure that we provide the additional service to attract them to our ports?

Bunkering services. 

So now we have bunkering services. We have fuel storage. How else can we leverage on that? 

Oil refining. So we get Shell, Exxon-mobile, BP to refine their oil here. 

What else? Plastic and petroleum products.

So we grow and expand. And we provide the infrastructure - like Jurong Island and its rock cavern for storing oil, while the island centrally locates the various refineries, cracker plants, etc.

So now when a shipping line considers ports, Singapore has bunkering services. What does other ports in the area have?

When oil tankers consider where to offload their crude oil, is there any other option but Singapore?

Similarly, when Eras Tour decided to skip the cities in SE Asia because of a lack of adequate venue (with capacity) and transport infrastructure, the other venue operators took on the passive role of "Rent Collectors" waiting for Eras Tour to choose their city and venue. 

Singapore's team proactively went to LA, sought out various entertainers and promoters, found out about the impending Eras Tour BEFORE the international tour dates were announced, discovered that the tour did not intend to tour SE Asia, and made a pitch for the tour to stop in Singapore. 

THAT's how Singapore got to be so rich.

The video above has some ideas but frames it... "conventionally".

1) "Singapore did not reject our colonial past." More to the point, Singapore embraced "globalisation" before globalisation was a catchphrase. Initially, the conventional wisdom was to industrialise based on "import substitution". That was not working. So Singapore open up. When newly independent countries were nationalistic, "patriotic", and xenophobic, Singapore encourage Multi-nationals to invest in Singapore, and to do business here.

2) Government Intervention. This is a complex issue. The simplistic take on this is that the govt controls the labour Unions. The more informed opinion on this is that the govt ensures that unions and businesses work together for the good of all. How many times have you seen strikes or labour unrest which could have been resolved easily if only both sides had some common sense? In Singapore, the govt provides the "common sense" or at least the ability to knock some of that into the heads of business leaders and union leaders.

3) Shifting from manufacturing to services. Singapore was able to "escape" the "middle income trap" by liberalising financial service. Of course, it was also important for proper education (which is another area that the govt "intervenes"in). 

4) Provide the foundation. Singapore is successful because at every stage of development, Singapore focused on the fundamentals and try to get it right. Housing was one. Employment was another. Education is also important. As was security. And law. And then there are the less "glamourous" areas like defence, environment, water resources. But are just as important.

5) Corruption. Singapore started its struggle against corruption early. From the 1960s to the 1970s. From "petty" corruption like "coffee money" to mortuary attendants to expedite the release bodies of loved ones, or bribing police officers to look the other way or change the summons to a verbal warning. Or, more recently, to our Minister for Transport accepting gifts from contractors. To be fair, his corruption is almost petty compared to Clarence Thomas's. But high status or low, embarrassing to the govt or not, corruption will be weeded out.

So location may be a necessary, but insufficient condition for success. Providence may have put us here, but success is still 99% perspiration. Or effort.