Wednesday, June 22, 2011

And Just What Is Muhibbah's ED Thinking?

Saw this news clip:

  • Muhibbah director sells shares

    Published: 2011/06/22

    MUHIBBAH Engineering (M) Bhd executive director Lee Poh Kwee disposed of some half a million shares in the company for RM1.82 on June 16.

Interesting cos I could not find the link to this disposal on Bursa website..


Anyway, assuming the news is correct, the timing of this disposal could not have been much worst.

Consider the facts: Singapore Business Times published the article on 15th June 2011. CIMB puts Asia Petroleum Hub under receivership

The next day, 16 June: And Muhibbah Comes Crashing Down

And Muhibbah's ED chose to dispose half a million shares for rm1.82 on the same day?

How?

What's the company trying to tell the market eh?

----------------
Edit:


Found the Bursa announcement: DEALINGS IN LISTED SECURITIES (CHAPTER 14 OF LISTING REQUIREMENTS): DEALINGS OUTSIDE CLOSED PERIOD



    Tuesday, June 21, 2011

    ACE Market: Same Old, Same Old Issue

    So much talks about bad apples of the ACE stock market.

    Yesterday the Edge Financial had this write-up: Perils of investing in ACE Market

    • Perils of investing in ACE Market Written by Commentary by Max Koh
      Monday, 20 June 2011 11:39

      The recent slew of listings on the ACE Market has dampened the already moderate sentiment for stocks listed in that category of Bursa Malaysia.

      Who would blame investors for shying away considering that the debuts of recent listings — XOX Bhd and MClean Technologies Bhd — were accompanied by announcements of losses and plunging share prices. In the case of MClean, a substantial shareholder exited the company by selling a 12.8% stake on the maiden trading day.

      But should it deter investors from the ACE Market?

      To recap, XOX pulled a stunner when it reported a loss of RM1.66 million for 1QFY11 just a day before its debut. The company forecast an annual net profit of RM19.8 million for the full year. The loss sent its share price downhill. As at last Friday, XOX slipped to 44 sen, down 45% from its offer price of 80 sen.

      MClean also raised more than a few eyebrows. Just three weeks after its listing, MClean announced a quarterly net loss of RM190,000 blaming the teething problems at its Chinese operations.
      While the company has since assured that it will be profitable for the year as a whole and could still exceed FY10’s net profit of RM5.9 million, investors are likely to remain cautious. Last Friday, the company’s share price closed at 23 sen, down 56% from its IPO price of 52 sen.

      These events make it no surprise that investors are becoming wary of getting caught with the wrong companies.

      To be fair, however, investors should be aware of the perils of investing in the ACE Market.

      The whole purpose of the ACE Market is to allow new start-ups and companies with growth potential but no track record to access the capital markets.

      While ACE Market-listed companies have less of a track record than their Main Market counterparts, investors are actually taking a higher risk on these companies.

      And, as in any game of chance, there are bound to be winners and losers. Picking winners isn’t an easy feat.

      So, how can investors avoid being caught with a bad hand?
      The ACE Market is a high risk-high return game — but it still offers better odds than a game of pure chance at the casino. There are numerous things that investors can do.

      It is important for interested investors to do their due diligence and study the company’s prospectus before investing their money.
      The company would state its historical earnings (or losses) and its plans for the monies raised from the IPO.
      What was the financial track record like? Were there unusual swings in profitability or revenue, especially in the year just prior to listing? If there were, what were the reasons?

      Are most of the monies raised in the IPO meant for the company’s expansion, or do they accrue to a company’s major shareholders?
      That alone should tell the intention of the IPO — whether it is a “cashing out” exercise, or a chance to tap capital for growth.

      For instance, the listing of JCY International Bhd last year saw all its proceeds accrue to the major shareholder. JCY’s shares have since slumped to 59.5 sen from an IPO price of RM1.60 last February, dampened by a slowdown in the hard disk drive industry.

      For cyclical industries, one should ask if the cycle has peaked, or is nearing a peak.

      Some companies, though not all, provide an earnings forecast for the year, as well as the strategies to be used to achieve it.

      For example, XOX has projected its revenue to rise to RM249.5 million this year, which is more than a 10-fold jump from RM20.1 million a year earlier. In addition, it plans to increase the number of subscribers from 391,000 to 1.5 million in just one year. Whether these goals are attainable remain to be seen.

      It is interesting to note that XOX’s losses expanded from RM239,000 in FY07 to RM15.9 million in FY10. It expects a net profit of RM19.8 million for this year.

      XOX rides on Celcom Bhd’s network and has to pay the latter a “minimum commitment” amount annually for these services. If one peruses its prospectus, one would notice that the amount is set to more than triple this year to RM61.5 million from RM17.3 million last year.

      And this “minimum commitment” is set to escalate to RM109 million in FY12 unless there is a mutual agreement reached with Celcom to change it.

      However, it is important to remember that one or two examples should not represent all ACE Market-listed companies.

      Some loss-making companies could be going through a temporary rough patch, and these should be given a chance to prove themselves.

      ACE Market-listed companies that have proved successful include EA Holdings Bhd and Genetec Technology Bhd.
      EA Holdings had seen its net profit rise from RM200,000 in FY07 to RM4.1 million in FY10. Genetec’s net profit rose to RM12.4 million for FY11 from RM5.5 million three years earlier.

      Others such as Notion VTec Bhd and MyEG Services Bhd have since migrated from the old Mesdaq to the Main Market and are widely held by institutional funds.
      There were also companies that were caught in circumstances beyond their control.

      Green Packet Bhd, for example, which migrated from the former Mesdaq to the Main Market has seen numerous broadband licences going to other companies since its listing.

      While its target to break even earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation remains elusive as ever, the company continues to draw good faith from investors. Last year, South Korea’s SK Telecom bought a 25.8% stake in Green Packet’s subsidiary for US$100 million (RM304 million).

      In a nutshell, would these former small firms have grown to their current size without the Mesdaq or ACE Market?

      This article appeared in The Edge Financial Daily, June 20, 2011.
    Ok, to my best recollection, there have been six newly stocks in the ACE Market this year.

    Now, I am going to discard the IPO prices. Is that a stunner? Why? Well, the IPO is a silly game of lottery for the investing public and since the stocks have been listed, it's pointless to talk about their IPO pricing now. It's history.

    Instead, I would look at how these six stocks have performed since listing and the best way to highlight them is via simple charts.

    Ok, you don't need to be a technical expert to read and interpret the charts but I strongly believe all these six charts speaks for themselves and the story line or rather the chart line is so clear at this moment of time. (Note the keyword here is 'at this moment of time'. Yeah, stocks are traded 5 days a week and prices changes all the time. )









    How?

    What do you see?

    .

    Back in 2005, I blogged the following: http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2005/12/oh-messdaq.html

    Oh yeah.

    M'sia to unveil tougher rules for Mesdaq listing.

    Finally something is being done over the clear lack of quality of the newly listed stocks, especially those being listed on the MessDaq.

    Here is a snippet from the article which clearly highlights the appalling lack of quality control on stocks being listed on the MessDaq.


    Litespeed's showing so far typifies that of many a Mesdaq company. Listed only last Thursday on Malaysia's tech index, the counter is trading at 31.5 sen - 15.5 sen lower than its offer price of 47 sen.

    On its debut it opened one sen higher but closed the day at 39 sen, the second most-actively traded counter. A total of 11.4 million shares were traded, more than double the public IPO portion of five million shares.

    Litespeed raised RM16 million (S$7.2 million) from its public issue of 32.5 million 10-sen shares, and its public portion was subscribed almost six times.

    Unfortunately for those subscribers, only a few days into its listing, Lite-speed announced a net loss of RM1.9 million for its quarter ended July 31.
    Aiyoh! Only a few days into its listing, Lites-speed announced a net loss of rm1.9 million for its quarter ended July 31!!!!!

    This is simply NOT ACCEPTABLE.

    Truly appalling!

    A waste of market capital.

    Only this Lite-speed like this? or is there more?

    Ok... how about EB Capital
     ??

    Listed 2nd Aug 2005.

    Yesterday I saw this bugger's quarterly earnings.

    Sales Revenue: 1.802 million
    Net loss: 1.064 million!!!

    First quarterly earnings after listing and it reports a net loss!

    Imagine a horsie horse in a cup race. The bell rings and the horse stumbles, throwing the jockey off the horsie. How? Out off the gates and already no hope liao!!

    Disgusting or not?

    You tell me lah.

    And worse still, this EB Capital losses is at operating level and the company is net debt.

    And lagi worse still for EB Capital, based on yesterday's closing price, EB Capital market capital is worth some 21.4 million.

    And lagi, lagi worse still.. just imagine if the bossie owns 13% of this stock. This means the bossie is worth some 2.78 million based on his shares value in the market.

    You tell me lah.... how come sky NO eyes one?

    So, so easy to be a million hair ar?
    So, so easy to be kaya raya!!

    Sigh!

    And lagi, lagi, lagi worse... just how did such company got listed?

    Mana tu QC?

    Well, i dunno but u guys and gals but muah is certainly pleased to read that SC is aware of this issue and is enforcing stricter rules.

    Comeon... SC let's kick some butt!!!!!!
    But there are some who are sceptical.

    Will it really help?

    I dunno... but... at least the very first small step is being made to rectify this issue.

    I shall keep my faith... for now.


    --------------

    See? Mclean and XOX aren't the only ones. This very issue of the company announces that it is losing money shortly after listing is not new.

    It had been happening long, long time before!!!!

    There were talks about tougher rules back in 2005.... but.....

    sigh.

    Here's another posting made on 27 Dec 2005.

    http://whereiszemoola.blogspot.com/2005/12/impressive-year-for-messdaq-ipos.html

    Given the issues mentioned and highlighted in the following two posts:

    1.
    Oh MessDaq
    2.
    Comments on IPO

    My fingers were itching when i found out that Star Business today had an article:
    Impressive year for Mesdaq IPOs


    From a business-perspective, it would definately make sense for Bursa Malaysia to highlight these issues. As a business-entity, Bursa is now focused on the Moola itself. This is its responsibility to its shareholders. To make Moola.

    However, making moola at all costs?

    Is it wise and feasible?

    Shouldn't due consideration be made on improving the quality of the newly listed stocks rather than the issue of churning out more business for the exchange?

    Anyway, as mentioned in the article, there were simply more new listings in the Messdaq than in the main board or the second board. And the article does shed some light on why is it so.

    “For many companies, a listing via Mesdaq was less cumbersome because there were fewer requirements to fulfil,” an analyst with a research house said.. ( EASIER!)

    In the case of Mesdaq, companies do not need to show a profit track record. (Lousy company can also list wor!)

    “The listing on Mesdaq allows young companies and less-established ones to focus on growth and improving earnings in the early years of listing without having to worry too much about meeting the exchange's stringent rules and regulations, especially on earnings,” he said.

    “The cost of entry into Mesdaq is lower (including listing exercise) while allowing companies flexibility to grow globally,” he said.

    Those were some of the reasons why the Messdaq seduced more listing...

    Now consider some of the following issues mentioned in this blog.

    Isn't there one too many companies which lost money after being listed on the Messdaq? (see
    Oh MessDaq ). For example, Litespeed accounced losses a few days after being listed!! Or companies like EB Capital and DVM.

    Now, why is it such a big deal?

    Yeah, yeah, yeah... the Messdaq is a good hunting ground for speculators and punters. A lot of fortune has been made.

    What about the losers?

    Yeah, they deserve to pay the price for their foolishness... but take the following issue mentioned in
    Karensoft "Move over who: Part Vii"

    When Kenanga first wrote on Karensoft, Kenanga stated that Karensoft some 69.2 million shares then.

    Get this... at 0.96 sen, Karensoft then had a market capital of rm65.8 million

    Today?

    Karensoft (which had a 1-for-2 bonus issue in June 2005) now has some 115.015 million shares.

    Now at 0.065 sen, Karensoft market value (market cap) is only some 7.475 million.

    Soooooooooooo ...... from 2nd Dec 2004 to 20th Dec 2005, some 58.35 million in market value has simply vanished!

    This for me is the huge issue. Huge Issue. Cos most of the messdaq stocks have been trading at a rather high price before crashing. Look at Karensoft, one of them Messdaq stocks had a market value was much as 65.8 million on Dec 2nd 2004. Now, almost a year later some 58.35 million has vanished!!

    Think about it.
    For a stock like Karensoft, this stock had the means to erase some 58.35 million in market capital from our stock exchange. And this is only one of them troubled Messdaq stock. Aren't the numbers mind boggling?

    Do such listings create or ultimately destroy value?

    How?

    If an investor bought and hold such a share, what would happen to their value of their shareholding?
    See the importance of creating value in the market and not quantity?

    Yes, yes, yes in this incident, the investor was probably wrong and silly to buy and hold a poor quality stock but let's think in regard to the market itself. Yes, Mr.Market.

    Can the market survive without these 'investors'?

    Can the market exist without any minority shareholders?

    Can the market survive if all there exists is rather poor quality stocks?

    Who would want to invest in a poor business?

    Shouldn't due consideration be made on improving the quality of the newly listed stocks rather than the issue of churning out more business for the exchange?
    Is bigger neccessary better?

    Think about it.

    ------------------------

    How?

    It's now June 2011.

    Look at Mclean. Look at XOX.

    Aren't we talking about the same old issue, over and over and over again?

    Sigh.

    And I ask once more:

    Shouldn't due consideration be made on improving the quality of the newly listed stocks rather than the issue of churning out more business for the exchange?

      ACE Stocks: The good apples of ACE?

      The following was published on Star Biz last Saturday: The good apples of ACE

      The section on Green Packet caught my attention! Oh yeah, my favourite EBITDA stock. LOL!  ( Past postings:

      • .... Green Packet
        Another ACE Market migrant is Green Packet Bhd, a mobile broadband networking solutions provider listed on the Mesdaq Market in 2005, and which transferred in July 2007.

        While still a loss-making company, group managing director (MD) and chief executive officer (CEO) Puan Chan Cheong noted in a recent media briefing that losses have narrowed year-on-year with the company on-track to achieve EBITDA or earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation break-even target by year-end.
      Yeah it's still a loss-making company.

      Oh yeah babe! The CEO had kept on repeating and repeating and repeating and repeating and repeating and repeating and repeating that Green Packet is on-track to achieve EBITA earnings before year-end. And since Feb 2008, we are still waiting for it to happen!

      So is Green Pack a good apple?

      Now there's only one true statement in the stock market.

      A stock is a good stock if it makes money for you and the stock is a damn bad stock if you lose money!

      Everything else does not matter.

      Let's look at before and after Green Packet migrated to the main board.

      18 July 2007 was the migration date: GPACKET-Transfer from Mesdaq Market to Main Board of Bursa Securities

      Here's Green Packet chart as a MeSS-daq stock.


      Look at that!

      Now that's an awesome stock chart, yes?

      How?

      Stock is up... I guess I cannot argue much that Green Packet is not a good Green apple of ACE. (LOL! Sorry I cannot resist the pun! )

      Now look at this... this is Green Packet performance since it migrated to the main board.



      How then?

      What kind of apple is Green Packet?

      This is how Green Packet had performed since listing. The dark vertical line highlights 18 July 2007, the day Green Packet migrated to the main board.



      ps: This is a good example to show that the 'migration' doesn't mean the stock would be a stock market winner. Look at Green Packet. It had crash and burned since migrating to the main board.

      Do You Think FIFA Is Corrupt?

      On the UK Guardian: Fifa's Jack Warner resigns and claims Chuck Blazer 'undermined' him

      • ...Warner had been suspended last month pending an investigation into allegations made by the executive committee member Chuck Blazer, who worked as Concacaf's general secretary under Warner for two decades, that he and the Fifa presidential challenger Mohamed bin Hammam had offered financial incentives to members of the Caribbean Football Union.....

        World football's governing body released a statement on Monday which read: "Jack A Warner has informed Fifa about his resignation from his posts in international football. Fifa regrets the turn of events that have led to Mr Warner's decision.

        "His resignation has been accepted by world football's governing body, and his contribution to international football and to Caribbean football in particular and the Concacaf confederation are appreciated and acknowledged.

        "Mr Warner is leaving Fifa by his own volition after nearly 30 years of service, having chosen to focus on his important work on behalf of the people and government of Trinidad &Tobago as a cabinet minister and as the chairman of the United National Congress, the major party in his country's coalition government.

        "The Fifa executive committee, the Fifa president and the Fifa management thank Mr Warner for his services to Caribbean, Concacaf and international football over his many years devoted to football at both regional and international level, and wish him well for the future.

        "As a consequence of Mr Warner's self-determined resignation, all ethics committee procedures against him have been closed and the presumption of innocence is maintained."
        Warner said: "This is giving the impression that Fifa is sanitising itself. I've been hung out to dry continually and I'm not prepared to take that."

        Warner and fellow Fifa member Bin Hammam were suspended last month after they were accused of giving or offering bribes of $40,000 (£24,500) to the 25 members of the CFU. The total sum involved was £1m according to a report to the Fifa ethics committee.....
      Let me get this correct... Warner was accused of offering bribes $40,000 (£24,500) to the 25 members of the CFU and because Warner resigned...FIFA is dropping all charges against him... with the presumption of innocence is maintained!

      What? OMG! What?

      Gimme a break!

      What kind of organisation is this?

      Isn't the charge serious? Doesn't it undermine the integrity of FIFA? Shouldn't FIFA prove to everyone involved and more important to the whole world that is a HONEST organisation run by HONEST people? By dropping all charges, what's FIFA telling you? Well it's telling me, it's above law and at this moment, FIFA's law reckons it's ok to drop all bribery charges and as long as the person resigns and it does not matter if the bribery charge is true or false.

      Or what if bribery and corruption runs much deeper within FIFA? What if a full scale investigation reveal just how badly corrupt FIFA is?


      Let's see $40,000 to 25 members was the bribery claim.

      Do the math.

      How muchie?

      That's a million dollar bribe. Think about it. If the bribery is real, surely there has to be an incentive, a profit incentive. Yes? Why bribe so much of there is no profit incentive?

      Yeah, how big is the profit incentive?

      Doesn't FIFA want to know?


      Then I started wondering how much is that Sepp Blatter making? Why is the bugger hanging and hanging on to the FIFA presidency for decades? Why?

      Then I did a simple google search on the phrase 'Sepp Blatter salary' (There's 1,400,000 search hits on this set of key words!)

      And Blatter is making ONE MILLION POUNDS per annum!

      I got it from the following article: FIFA: Why Blatter Must Go and Take All Members of Ex-Co with Him and the folllowing passage is interesting read:
      • ... If Sepp thinks that FIFA are simply having some difficulties then what does the suspension of four of the 24 members of the top executive committee mean? Let's make that clear, the 24-member executive committee has had four of its members suspended on allegations (two now proven) of corruption.
        All of this has occurred and developed whilst Saint Sepp has been in charge so he is guilty at best of being an idiot at worse he is part of the most corrupt sporting body in existence.

        FIFA members also live a five-star lifestyle at the expense of grassroots football. Sepp earns a basic salary of $1 million per year but he also has free use of cars, hotels and food on expenses that would shame a British MP.

        Every time Sepp spends a dollar it is one less dollar that can be spent on football development or equipment or pitches in Sierra Leone or Belize or Thailand.

        But Sepp isn't alone there are literally hundreds of people on huge salaries because they backed Sepp in the past.

        Let's remember that each five-star hotel room they use makes it much harder to employ a football/soccer coach in Africa, each meal they eat at a Michelin-starred restaurant takes goalposts away from a field in Bosnia, each first-class flight they utilise means that kids stay on the streets and in danger in South Africa.

        As FIFA is a registered charity it seems odd that its head earns so well and is treated like royalty of course, but it FIFA also only allows the World Cup to be hosted in countries if FIFA has to pay no tax. A tax dodging sporting body doesn't seem that charitable to me.

        So ignoring the corruption allegations the simple fact that Sepp has overseen FIFA in the years that it became a plaything for rich fools and overpaid politicians means that he should go
      Then I did another search based on the following keywords 'Is FIFA corrupt'.

      http://www.google.com.my/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=is+fifa+corrupt...

      That's a 2,690,000 hit search!
      Did another search. I searched 'Is Sepp Blatter corrupt' and I got the following.

      http://www.google.com.my/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=is+sepp+blatter+corrupt..

      Monday, June 20, 2011

      And Who Is Helping The Stock Market Become A Casino?

      On the Star Biz last weekend, there were a series of articles on the ACE Market

      1. A place for ACE?
      2. Rookies take a beating
      3. The good apples of ACE
      4. Divided over listing issues
      The very first article, A place for ACE?, the very first sentence caught my attention:
      • The alternative market has drawn harsh scrutiny due to some bad apple.
      Harsh scrutiny? Bad apples?

      Towards the end..
      • “Stock markets are a casino tell me which market isn't? This is particularly true for emerging growth markets, so investors should know what they are investing in,” an analyst says.
      Waloeh! Like this meh?

      Let me re-use a recent posting on April 2011: What Do You Look For In A Report? Ms. Sexy Stock?

      AsiaEP was trading below 20 sen for a large period of time back in 2006. Then in Dec 2006, it started climbing and climbing. And by 6 Feb 2007, it closed the day trading at 0.355 sen!



      Up so much already woh. And then here come KN with its guns blazing claiming that AsiaEP is our country's "A homegrown Google and Baidu in the making"!
      Sounds sexy enough?

      In a 8 page report on a relatively unknown Masdaq stock (now ACE stock), KN gave the market an incredible initiation report.




      ....
      STRONG BUY with a 12-month target price of RM0.99, which is based on a FY09 P/E of 10.0x. We believe Itah SE is worth a lot as a technology. Wall Street will not accord Google and Baidu with a market capitalisation of US$149b and US$4.0b otherwise. Moreover, players without a strong presence in the paid-search space, such as Microsoft, EBay and etc., may be willing to pay top dollars for Itah SE once proven.
      And of course, as in most reports, the 12-month target is based on a very optimistic future earnings. In AsiaEP's example, the target price hinges on the estimates of what AsiaEP could earn in FY 2009.

      And here's the earnings estimate table once more.

      So AsiaEP was a company that was making just 3 million. But because of this new project, this "A homegrown Google and Baidu in the making", AsiaEP earnings could soar to 21.8 million.

      Oh yes. The company was making just 3 million. And the research report said it can and because it can, it rates AsiaEP to be worth a whopping 99 sen based on the fact that earnings could fly to 21.8 million!

      Aha...that's the sexy story told.

      And as you know in the market, a stock's future price is based in what it could earn in the future.

      And that's how unreal it was. AsiapEP which was trading for a long time under 20 sen, had soared to 35.5 sen (up 78%!!) was given an incredible buy recommendation of 99 sen based on an incredibly optimistic earnings projection.

      And then local papers helped. On Feb 24th, the Star Bisweek carried this article: Googling for growth
      And what did AsiaEP do after such a sexy report?

      Fly it did.

      By 26 Feb 2007, the stock was trading at 0.82 sen!


      And incredibly, the next month on March 2007, Goldman Sachs decides to jump into the bank wagon! Yes, Goldman Sach decides to be an investor (err.. not sure if you call them an investor - if you read what happens next).

      This was reported on March 9th by the Edge reported the following: 09-03-2007: Goldman Sachs buys 5.7% stake in AsiaEP.

      And KN decides to the utmost incredible.

      It raised the target price based on the fact Goldman Sachs bought!

      Duh!

      KN called it the Goldman factor and they reasoned:

      VALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONWhile our FY07, FY08 and FY09 earnings forecasts remain unchanged (Please refer to our Initiation Report dated 6 February 2007), investors should not under-estimate the positive impact of GSI’s presence in asiaEP for the following reasons:
      • Emergence of GSI as a substantial shareholder in asiaEP could lend Itah SE instant credibility – a big vote of confidence on its business potential;
      • Presence of GSI could enhance deal possibility between asiaEP and other BIG SE players on Wall Street; and
      • Deal potential tends to inflate valuations.
      We continue to rate asiaEP a STRONG BUY with a revised 12-month target price of RM1.97 (+99.0%), which is based on a FY09 P/E of 20.0x. Increasing foreign interests, who seem to better appreciate the company’s growth potential, to a large extent, drives the latest re-rating.

      And did you know what was the price of AsiapEP when KN made this buy upgrade on 9th March 2007? AsiaEP was trading at 94 sen!!!

      Yes, stock was below 20 sen in Dec 2006. On 6 Feb 2007, At 35.5 sen, KN gave it a buy with a target price of 99 sen. A month later, at 94 sen, AsiaEP target price was upgraded to 1.97!!!

      Hail Mary!

      And yes, AsiaEP reached a high of 1.14 in March 2007!

      Back to Goldman Sachs.

      Their arrival notice was made on 8th March: Notice of Interest Sub. S-hldr (29A) - GOLDMAN SACHS INTERNATIONAL. Goldman Sachs bought 12,421,100 shares or a 5.72% stake.

      But at the end of March 2007, Goldman ceased to be a major shareholder: Notice of Person Ceasing (29C) - The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. They sold some 2,300,000 shares and so they were no longer considered a substantial shareholder (which meant that Goldman Sachs need not report anymore to Bursa Malaysia on their shares purchase/disposals on AsiaEP! )

      On 18th June: asiaEP BHD (“asiaEP” or “Company”)Proposed acquisition of 800,000 ordinary shares of RM1.00 each in General Perfect Sdn Bhd (“GP”) (“GP Shares”) representing 80% equity interest therein, for a cash consideration of RM23.2 million (“Proposed Acquisition”).

      AsiaEP announced it was spending 23 million to buy a NEW dormant company which had NO financial track record!

      And of course the selling started in July and by the end of month, AsiaEP sell down was highlighted on the Edge. (sorry no more link)
      • 27-07-2007: asiaEP RM23m buy raises concern
        by Maryann Tan

        KUALA LUMPUR: asiaEP Bhd shares and warrants suffered further losses yesterday, going down 17% or 9.5 sen to 44.5 sen and 15% or six sen to 33 sen.

        On Monday, asiaEP shares and warrants hit limit down in afternoon trading before it announced plans to buy an 80% stake in General Perfect Sdn Bhd for RM23.2 million in cash.

        In the last four trading days, its share price fell by almost 50% from last Friday’s closing of 87 sen while its warrants lost 42% from 56.5 sen last Friday.

        General Perfect, currently held by two individuals, Liang Chee Wah and Liang Chee Hoo, intends to venture into the electronic top-up and payments kiosk business.

        The acquisition has aroused suspicion, as General Perfect is a dormant company, incorporated on May 11 with no financial track record.

        AsiaEP said the Liangs will provide a net profit guarantee of RM25 million effective from the date of completion of the purchase (expected to be end 2007) up to Feb 10, 2010. This amounts to RM20 million over two years in net profit attributable to asiaEP.

        The Liangs and other key management will also remain in the company for five years from the date of the acquisition.

        The cash consideration, which asiaEP will finance entirely through borrowings, will be held by a stakeholder (jointly appointed by asiaEP, the vendors and the financier) in an escrow account, the company said.

        This cash will be released to the Liangs, upon General Perfect fulfilling the profit guarantee. Should there be a shortfall in profits during the guarantee period, the difference will be made up with the cash in the escrow account.

        Given the non-existent financial record and highly competitive nature of the business, investors are not surprisingly, concerned over the proposal......
      But the chairman said "NO PROBLEM!". On Star Biz Volatility of shares no cause for concern: AsiaEP chairman

      How?

      Newly incorporated dormant company in May 2007 and needless to say no financial track record and AsiaEP dared to announce that it wants to buy it for 23 million!!!!

      Did the deal go thru in the end?

      Sadly.... no. :P

      Deal was terminated on Nov 2007. asiaEP BHD (“asiaEP” or “Company”)- Proposed acquisition of 800,000 ordinary shares of RM1.00 each in General Perfect Sdn Bhd (“GP”) (“GP Shares”) representing 80% equity interest therein, for a consideration of RM23.2 million (“Proposed Acquisition”)

      And what about Goldman Sachs?

      On 1st Aug 2007, Goldman Sachs became a substantial shareholder again! Notice of Interest Sub. S-hldr (29A) - Goldman Sachs International - it purchased some 8,000,000 shares. And Goldman Sachs said it was holding some 15,961,500 shares.

      WOW! That was what I said back then. Despite the 'stunt' to purchase that dormant company for 23 million, 'some how' Goldman Sachs decided to buy more AsiaEP shares!

      And again, a few weeks later, Goldman Sachs was disposing their shares again! Changes in Sub. S-hldr's Int. (29B) - Goldman Sachs International

      And by Nov 2007, Goldman Sachs ceased to be a substantial shareholder again. Notice of Person Ceasing (29C) - Goldman Sachs International

      And remember KN's initial buy recommendation? Remember how KN valued AsiaEP at 99 sen? The valuation was based on an expected earnings of 21.8 million for AsiaEP's fy 2009.

      And how did AsiaEP did for fy 2009? Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 28/2/2009 - AsiaEP lost some 7.46 million for fy 2009!

      And in April 2011, AsiaEP announced it had losses of 31.2 million!

      In response to the current volatility of the world economic conditions affecting the local market as a whole, the Management decided to adopt a prudent stance by providing an impairment on the intangible assets amounting to RM28.268 million during the current quarter ended 28 February 2011. This has resulted in the Group recording a consolidated loss of approximately RM31.256 million for the current quarter ended 28 February 2011 (before taking into account the aforementioned impairment, it would have registered a consolidated loss of only RM2.988 million), compared to the corresponding quarter of the preceding year ended 28 February 2010 when the Group registered a consolidated loss after taxation of approximately RM0.942 million. In view of the aforementioned market condition, the Group revenue generated was approximately RM 0.234 million for the current quarter ended 28 February 2011 compared with approximately RM1.633 million as posted in the preceding year corresponding quarter.

      Last Saturday, 18th June 2011, on Business Times.
      • asiaEP to venture into new businesses

        By Presenna Nambiar Published: 2011/06/18

        PUTRAJAYA: asiaEP Bhd is likely to make a minor loss or at best break even, as it focuses on venturing into new businesses to prop up itself.

        In April this year, asiaEP announced it would buy a 41 per cent stake in an iron ore miner, Global Mineral Technology Sdn Bhd.
        "As long as the company we are buying can give positive impact to us, we will explore," asiaEP managing director Dr Tan Boon Nunt said after its annual general meeting (AGM) yesterday. The AGM lasted some two hours as shareholders voiced concerns on its financial standing.

        In 2010, asiaEP recorded a net loss of RM33.1 million due to RM28.3 million impairment losses of intangible assets for the financial year ended February 28.

        Despite the losses, Tan is confident the company will be able to forge ahead with its plans to venture into more new businesses.

        As at February 28, the company has no borrowings on record.

        Tan said part of the losses were due to its technical contract with MuslimSE.com, the world's largest Muslim online search engine.

        It was reported that the contract was worth US$26 million (RM79.30 million).

        "Middle East is very volatile. Even though it is not officially terminated yet, the board decided to be prudent and make the impairments before hand, so that it does not eat into our future profits," he said.

        No more such provisions are expected to be made.

        "The IT business is declining, that's why the board is looking for new revenue streams and has decided to change the name of the company from asiaEP Bhd to asiaEP Resources Bhd," Tan said.

        asiaEP is still in the midst of a due diligence on Global Mineral.

        While financial statements filed to Bursa Malaysia Bhd showed that Global Mineral made a net profit of RM2 million for the period between March 2009 and June 2010, the Companies Commission Malaysia (SSM) has no financial accounts filed with it.

        Documents filed with SSM, however, showed that it was registered on March 25 2009 and that it has about RM4 million in borrowings. This included RM2 million charged in May 2011.
      AsiaEP now wants to buy an iron core miner???

      AsiaEP was THE star in the Mesdaq (now known as ACE) markey back in 2007. The stock was below 20 sen back in Dec 2006. By March 2007, it was trading at a high of 1.14!!

      And as quickly as it rose, it's plunge was dramatic too. The chart below says it all.



      Now back to the statements made on Star Biz this weekend.

      • The alternative market has drawn harsh scrutiny due to some bad apple.
      • “Stock markets are a casino tell me which market isn't? This is particularly true for emerging growth markets, so investors should know what they are investing in,” an analyst says.
      I believe everyone understands that we should know what they are investing in but let's reflect on AsiaEP. Yes, clearly the stock was stir fried.

      But think about the events surrounding the stock back in 2007.

      The stock was already up some 78% when KN made its buy call on Feb 2007. At 35.5 sen, with the stock up some 78% since early Dec 2006, KN gave it a huge buy call, stating the stock should be worth 99 sen! And the stock continued to soar. The local media highlighted that research report. Then the big name fund, Goldman Sachs bought a stake. And the stock was upgraded AGAIN - from 99 sen to 1.97 based on this factor alone. The local media highlighted this so-called good news. Everybody was happy and the stock went up, up and awayyyyyyyyyyy.

      Did anyone care what was AsiaEP actually doing? Did anyone bother to ask if KN's valuation on AsiaEP on Feb 2007 was perhaps way too optimistic?

      Was there the need to own research?

      Goldman Sachs was buying woh. What's there to argue about?

      As you all know, many only consider a stock to be a good stock if they make money from it. And the stock is only a bad stock if they lose money in it.

      And AsiaEP was a good stock. It was the Mesdaq (ACE) darling of 2007.

      But when AsiaEP turned and started falling in July 2007, was AsiaEP still a darling?

      Or did it turn into a rotten apple?

      However, think about it for a moment. If you are just an observer, with no vested interests at all in the stock market, how exactly would you rate AsiaEP based on what has happened?

      How did the stock rise to fame? How did the stock soar? Why did it plunge?

      Or should one blame the stock market itself cause it is a casino?

      But think about it for a minute. Just who's helping the stock market to become one?

      The owners of the stock? The buyers of the stock? And judging from AsiaEP example, do you think the research houses could do much better?

      Saturday, June 18, 2011

      Should One Bet On Muhibbah Now?

      So what do we have? Posted on Thursday: And Muhibbah Comes Crashing Down and posted on Friday:
      Featured Post: The Muhibbah Fiasco : How Lousy Disclosure Cost Shareholders Monies.

      And remarked in the comments of the posting And Muhibbah Comes Crashing Down, Muhibbah made the following statement on Bursa Malaysia.

      • The Company is one of the contractors in respect of the Project known as Procurement, Construction and Commissioning of a Petroleum Hub and Bunkering Facility at the Reclaimed Island Off Tanjung Bin, Johor (APH Project). The receivables for certified work done and related costs amount to RM 370.8 million as at 31 Dec 2010.

        With reference to the articles in the Singapore Business Times on 15 June 2011 regarding the appointment by CIMB (the financier of APH project) of receivers and managers for APH, the Company wishes to inform that according to APH, they have identified an investor, and are in negotiations with the investor to fully finance the completion of the APH Project, including making due payments to contractors.

        As this is a oil and gas project with a secured business and the said investor due to finalise its financing transaction with APH, there are reasonable grounds to hold that the receivables are recoverable in due course.
      So that's Muhibbah's reasoning. They are saying that APH is in talks with a potential investor and the talks includes making payment to long overdued contract work done by its contractors. So Muhibbah is saying it's hopeful and it believes that's these receivables could be collected.

      On Star Biz today: Muhibbah recovers after explanation to Bursa on APH. ( Yeah the stock recovered but the article offers nothing much, does it?

      On Business Times: Muhibbah shares rebound but investors wary
      • ..... Analysts felt the rebound may most likely be a knee-jerk reaction, as the statement does not fully address investors' concern.
        "I don't think the announcement can fully address investors' concern. More information needs to be revealed," Jupiter Securities head of research Pong Teng Siew said when contacted.

        "This is one of the few things about construction companies that I am worried about. First, the capabilities of getting contracts. Then, when one gets the contract, it doesn't mean the job can be completed. Even if the job is completed, it doesn't mean money can be collected," he added.

        Analysts added that even if a new investor comes into the picture, Muhibbah may take a hit on its bottomline due to the provisions, as the new investor may take time to settle the due payments.
        Muhibbah was awarded a RM820 million contract to undertake marine piling and jetty works for APH. However, rising cost due to APH funding issues led to the stalling of payments due to Muhibbah.
      I like the comment about constrution companies!
      • "This is one of the few things about construction companies that I am worried about. First, the capabilities of getting contracts. Then, when one gets the contract, it doesn't mean the job can be completed. Even if the job is completed, it doesn't mean money can be collected,"
      Yes, I strongly agree that the announcement does not fully address the investors concern on Muhibbah.
      • Lousy Financial Reporting Standard
        That aside, back to Muhibbah. If one actually take the opportunity to read their disclosure in their annual report, one would not have face this problem. In their FY 2009 audited account, Muhibbah actually discloses this:

        A trade debt of RM337.0 million (including retention sum of RM22.5 million) and an amount due from contract customer of RM28.3 million in relation to a project undertaken by the Company for the engineering, construction, installation, commissioning and completion of a bunkering facility has been outstanding for more than a year.
        The project has temporarily ceased during the financial year ended 31 December 2009 due to financing difficulties encountered by the project owner. The last progress payment received by the Company was in February 2009. The project owner has continued to approve the progress billings submitted by the Company and had acknowledged its obligations under the contract signed with the Company. The project owner has informed the Company that it is in the process of arranging an alternative source of financing and expects the arrangement to be completed by mid 2010.
        The Directors have evaluated the situation and other evidence available, including the assessment of the status of the project owner’s refinancing arrangements, and are of the view that no allowance for doubtful debts or a write down in the amount due from contract customer is required at this moment.
        The account is audited by KPMG and is issued at 30/4/2010. KPMG, short of qualifying the account  (for those of non-accounting background: Unqualified means good, qualified means bad), actually emphasize the issue in their audit opinion in addition to the disclosure in the notes. The audit opinion, meanwhile, is something that most investors do not read although most bad stuff that the auditor do not agree with the management normally end up there. Take note that by the time this audited account is being issued to shareholders, APH (the trade debtors) has not paid Muhibbah for more than a year. Plus, by the time the audited annual account is issued, it has reached mid 2010, the time frame that the whole financing thing supposed to be done. The fact that the opinion of the auditor remains the same means that the financing is not being completed yet. In addition, pay attention to the management reason for not providing for any doubtful debts : APH acknowledge the obligation under contract signed by the company. It is just an acknowledgement. A normal thing. It did not elevate Muhibbah position in the debtors packing list or provide them with any security. Just because APH acknowledge the debts, Muhibbah decide to not write down even a single cent of the thing. If say, the RM300mil debt is by different parties rather than one party, one may presumably would have write down the debt.
      And I had commented the following:


      But back in 2009, things changed and my perception of the stock turned negative. The first warning came back in Feb 2009: Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 31/12/2008.

      It made some huge loss which was rather unexpected and Muhibbah said the following in its earnings notes.

      • The Group achieved a consolidated revenue of RM804.0 million for the quarter under review as compared toRM488.8 million consolidated revenue in the last quarter, representing a 64% increase.
        The consolidated loss before tax for the Group is RM26.4 million for the current quarter under review. The loss is mainly due to the revision made for revenue and estimated costs on prudence basis for the construction division in view of the challenging economy condition resulted from high oil price, escalated construction material cost and volatility in foreign exchange rates during the period.
      I wasn't impressed at all.

      Sales increased substantially. A 64% increase was too damn impressive. However, how and why they posted loss was a big no-no for me.

      And it was the year 2009.

      And the biggest warning came from its receivables. ( Yeah, the good old receivables indicator)

      Receivables stated at the end of the quarter showed 738.662 million. The previous quarter ( Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 30/9/2008 ) , the receivables was only some 546.775 million. Ok, it was not a 100% get out warning but it was rather dodgy for me.

      The following quarter, in May, Muhibbah reverted back to profits - it earned some 14 million, however, I was not convinced and in Nov 2009, Muhibbah reported losses again. Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 30/9/2009. Receivables had now soared to some 841 million.

      On Feb 2010, Muhibbah continued to post losses. Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 31/12/2009. Receivables now stood at 941 million.

      How?

      That was more than being dodgy. It's rather scary. Just way too scary for me. And that was the last I watched Muhibbah

      This morning, I decided to search some old news on Muhibbah and AHP.

      Back on 14 Sep 2009, there as this article on the Edge:

      • Muhibbah cut to sell
        Written by Financial Daily
        Monday, 14 September 2009 10:48

        ECM Libra Investment Research has downgraded MUHIBBAH ENGINEERING (M) BHD [] to a sell at RM1.33 with a target price of RM1.11, due to company-specific issues — cost overrun, project implementation hiccups and potential funding issue due to its high leverage.

        The research house said Muhibbah’s second-quarter (2QFY09) CONSTRUCTION [] margin contracted to 1.7% due to further cost overrun from the Yemen LNG jetty project.

        “Asia Petroleum Hub (APH) and South Klang Valley Expressway (SKVE) are another two projects with implementation hiccups. Work progress of APH has slowed down significantly following the pullout by the financier of the project owner, which resulted in uncollected receivable in excess of RM200 million,” it said.

        ECM Libra said that removing these projects would see Muhibbah’s current order book of RM3.8 billion being slashed by 30%.

        The research house also said the company’s high gearing has been a concern, especially when its profit margin has been thin.

        “We carried out an ROE DuPont analysis, which revealed that much of Muhibbah’s return on its equity, depend largely on the use of leverage vis-à-vis its peers. Muhibbah has the lowest net profit margin but the highest equity multiplier.

        “It also faces funding risk as it has relied heavily on short-term financing (86.8%) for its working capital as well as to finance its capex over the last few years.”

        ECM Libra cut its FY09 and FY10 earnings forecast for Muhibbah by 20.6% and 26.5% respectively, to mainly account for losses from the Yemen project and implementation hiccups from APH and SKVE.

        There was still further downside risk if APH’s debt turns bad as FY09 earnings per share (EPS) may fall by 194.6% into the red while net tangible asset (NTA) per share will fall by 30.1% to 86 sen.

        The research house said that while some may argue Muhibbah’s current undemanding price to earnings (P/E) of 7.7 times meant that all these negative factors have already been priced in, it begged to differ.

        “Due to its exceptionally high leverage, we prefer to compare Muhibbah’s valuation with its peers using EV/Ebitda. At 9.7 times based on FY10 earnings, it is more expensive than small-cap average of 5.3 times and just slightly below big-cap average of 11.1 times,” it said.

        Muhibbah closed at RM1.34 last Friday, up one sen.

        “Pegging a nine-times multiple based on our implied EV/Ebitda valuation for a comparable small-cap construction stock, we derive our revised target price of RM1.11 (previously RM1.77),” it said.

        Muhibbah closed at RM1.34 last Friday, up one sen.


        This article appeared in The Edge Financial Daily, September 14, 2009 

      Now this article can also be viewed on ECM website: http://www.ecmlibra.com/investor/index.asp?mode=newsroom&year=2009&id=pr2009091400

      It puts things into a new perspective, doesn't it?

      Think about it.

      APH is an old problem. Back on Sep 2009, ECM Libra Investment Research had already noted AHP financier pullout issue and its states this pullout resulted in uncollected receivable in excess of RM200 million.

      Can you see what I am thinking already at this point?

      Remember Muhibbah's own statement on Bursa website yesterday.
      • The receivables for certified work done and related costs amount to RM 370.8 million as at 31 Dec 2010
      What are these two statements saying to you?

      Me?

      I, seriously, do not know what on earth Muhibbah management is thinking in regards to APH!

      APH back in 2009, already had this financier pullout issue. As stated by ECM Libra Investment Research, Muhibbah is having payment issue with its customer APH and the amount owed to Muhibbah back then was already in excess of 200 million. And back then, "“It (Muhibbah) also faces funding risk as it has relied heavily on short-term financing (86.8%)".

      So what did this company do?

      It just carried on and the amount owed by APH is now some 370.8 million!

      OMG!!! ..... what was that hit the fan?

      Totally unreal.

      How would you rate such management?

      How now brown cow?

      Would you bet NOW that this APH debts can now be collected???

      And while searching for Muhibbah's old news articles, I realised that CIMB Research only started covering Muhibbah back on 11 Nov 2010. Nice date 11/11/10. (ps: remember the size of report thingee? LOL! this report, which had colored photos included, has 19 pages. :P )


      CIMB said:
      •  Initiate with TRADING BUY. Our search for construction laggards throws up Muhibbah Engineering, a midsized contractor that has diversified into cranes, shipbuilding and airport/road maintenance concessions. In addition to riding on the improving outlook for project flows in both the local and overseas markets, Muhibbah may soon see a resolution to the payment issue for the Asia Petroleum Hub (APH) project, which has been a major drag on its share price. We begin coverage with a TRADING BUY call and target price of RM2.00, pegged to a 20% discount to its RNAV. In addition to the likely resolution of the APH project, the share price could be catalysed by (i) better-than-expected quarterly performances, (ii) more contract wins, and (iii) a recovery in investors’ sentiment on the stock as its foreign shareholding has plunged from 41% in 2007 to a low of 6% now.

      Page 9 of the report:


      Two things stood out.

      1. Another reason was the unpaid sum of c.RM300m from the RM817m Asia Petroleum Hub project in Tanjung Bin Johor due to an internal issue with the client’s bankers. The project was awarded in 2006 but saw cost overruns in 2008. In 2009, and at 40% of physical progress, the project’s bankers expressed concern over the need of additional funding. This resulted in the suspension of payments to Muhibbah from May 09.
      2. Cash stood at RM266m at end-2Q10 while borrowings totalled RM338m. ( will come to point 2 later)
      OMG! Payments to Muhibbah was suspended since May 2009!!!!!!!!!

      OMG!

      Think about it again. APH had suspended payment to Muhibbah since May 2009. ECM in Sep 2009 was talking about Muhibbah's uncollected money from APH to be about more than 200 million.

      And as pointed out by snowball, Muhibbah states in its 2009 annual report that the amount owed was 337 million.

      So how did the amount owed by APH grow to 370.8 million?

      Yes, I am sure Malaysia Inquiry Mind would want to know how come? APH suspended payment to Muhibbah from May 2009. Why did Muhibbah allow more contract work done when payment to them is suspended? Why? Work for free? Why didn't Muhibbah issue a stop work order?

      And the most AHEM factor of this report is on page 5.


      Lookie...look at where the arrows are pointing!

      Look who's the paymaster of APH?

      *whistle*

      How now brown cow?

      And one comment posted last night:
      • solomon said...

        APH is not a new issue one should be worried, neither changes in shareholding.

        I think if the business is profitable then the cash-flow should rise. Yes indeed the case for it's latest quarter by naked eye. In fact, I see not and express some concern if not for the cash-flow from financing of RM80mil.

        Loan for short and long term stand at Rm400 mil for last Q and this Q, but the finance cost 4x higher this quarter. This might reaffirm some depleting sign of financial which need to be revisit and monitor for next 2Q.
      Ok let's refer back to CIMB report on Nov 2010. ( Lazy method. :P)

      CIMB said:
      • Cash stood at RM266m at end-2Q10 while borrowings totalled RM338m
      Let's do a simple comparison with Muhibbah's most recent quarterly earnings report on May 2011. Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 31/3/2011.

      Remember, let's compare current cash, borrowings with what CIMB had noted in its Nov 2010 research report on Muhibbah.


      And the borrowings.

      How?

      Did the cash/borrowings improved since Nov 2010? Or has it worsen a lot?

      Has solomon made an excellent comment?

      And then look at the receivables stated.



      Receivables is now some 903.653 million!

      Remember.

      Back on Nov 2008: Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 30/9/2008 - the receivables was only some 546.775 million.

      Feb 2009: Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 31/12/2008 - receivables soared to 738.662 million.

      Receivables today is some 903.653 million!

      Think about it.

      Even if one minus out APH receivable issue of some 370.8 million, Muhibbah still have an incredible high receivable issue!

      How?

      Should one be weary?

      Why is Muhibbah having so much problem with its receivables?

      Considering the fact that management had to borrow more and more money, why can't the management realise and acknowledge the receivables IS THE ROOT of the problem?

      Not too difficult to comprehend, yes? Collect these receivables money and you don't need to borrow from the bank!

      How?

      If you ask me, in my flawed opinion, Muhibbah's future lies on its ability to collect its debts. It cannot simply carry on like how it's run right now. Look at the case of APH. Payment was suspended. Yet the money owed increased! Why didn't Muhibbah do a stop work oder? Why carry on knowing very well that you might not be paid? And judging from Muhibbah's receivables, clearly APH is not the only problem. So how? What if these debts have to be reclassified as bad debts? And what again is the potential damage to Muhibbah if these debts is classified as losses? Remember as it is, total receivables is at a mindblowing 903 million!

      And the APH issue. Could APH find that 'investor'? Would that investor be a kind soul and pay the outstanding amount owed to its contractors? Would there be a haircut on the amount owed?

      How?

      Would you want to bet on Muhibbah now?

        Friday, June 17, 2011

        Featured Post: The Muhibbah Fiasco : How Lousy Disclosure Cost Shareholders Monies

        Here's an extremely good reply to the posting: And Muhibbah Comes Crashing Down.

        Friday, June 17, 2011


        The Muhibbah Fiasco : How Lousy Disclosure Cost Shareholders Monies
        This is an extension of the discussion I have in Moolah blog post : And Muhibbah Comes Crashing Down. Since it is too long of a reply and it has attachment and stuff, I have to do it here. Do give his blog post a read.

        First and foremost, this whole thing is preventable if one take a good look at the annual report. But, poor disclosure standard in Bursa as well as what I think is some non-compliance of Bursa Listing Rule by Muhibbah reduces the chance of shareholders of discovering the receivables issue. But, it is alright, I have my own fair share of stupid preventable mistakes. Early last year, I made an investment into Choada Modern Agriculture (0682:HK) despite my brain tell me to do otherwise as there are a tad bit too many aggressive accounting practices and some dubious management actions. However, the numbers like PE and ROAs and stuff looked a bit too good and I just drank a dose of Jim Rogers that I rationalize everything that is wrong with the company. By the middle of last year, I am starting to get a bit too uncomfortable and think the whole thing is a fraud as they have been avoiding to answer or deflecting some of the questions that I asked. So, I sell and took a 20+% loss. On hindsight, I have some really good luck as this whole Chaoda thing is being discovered a fraud by HK Next magazine this year and I would have lost my pants if I had not sold it at a loss. With the Chaoda experience, you would have think that this idiot will learn some lessons. But, this idiot again make an ill-thought out blog post stating that I may go long on China MediaExpress without actually looking much into the company and try to rationalize too much. China MediaExpress turn out to be another fraud. I am again lucky that some kind soul actually talk me out of going long after reading my post. The key lesson learnt is to always read the footnotes, bring your brain with you when analysing companies and do not rationalize too much.

        Lousy Financial Reporting Standard
        That aside, back to Muhibbah. If one actually take the opportunity to read their disclosure in their annual report, one would not have face this problem. In their FY 2009 audited account, Muhibbah actually discloses this:
        A trade debt of RM337.0 million (including retention sum of RM22.5 million) and an amount due from contract customer of RM28.3 million in relation to a project undertaken by the Company for the engineering, construction, installation, commissioning and completion of a bunkering facility has been outstanding for more than a year.
        The project has temporarily ceased during the financial year ended 31 December 2009 due to financing difficulties encountered by the project owner. The last progress payment received by the Company was in February 2009. The project owner has continued to approve the progress billings submitted by the Company and had acknowledged its obligations under the contract signed with the Company. The project owner has informed the Company that it is in the process of arranging an alternative source of financing and expects the arrangement to be completed by mid 2010.
        The Directors have evaluated the situation and other evidence available, including the assessment of the status of the project owner’s refinancing arrangements, and are of the view that no allowance for doubtful debts or a write down in the amount due from contract customer is required at this moment.
        The account is audited by KPMG and is issued at 30/4/2010. KPMG, short of qualifying the account (for those of non-accounting background: Unqualified means good, qualified means bad), actually emphasize the issue in their audit opinion in addition to the disclosure in the notes. The audit opinion, meanwhile, is something that most investors do not read although most bad stuff that the auditor do not agree with the management normally end up there. Take note that by the time this audited account is being issued to shareholders, APH (the trade debtors) has not paid Muhibbah for more than a year. Plus, by the time the audited annual account is issued, it has reached mid 2010, the time frame that the whole financing thing supposed to be done. The fact that the opinion of the auditor remains the same means that the financing is not being completed yet. In addition, pay attention to the management reason for not providing for any doubtful debts : APH acknowledge the obligation under contract signed by the company. It is just an acknowledgement. A normal thing. It did not elevate Muhibbah position in the debtors packing list or provide them with any security. Just because APH acknowledge the debts, Muhibbah decide to not write down even a single cent of the thing. If say, the RM300mil debt is by different parties rather than one party, one may presumably would have write down the debt.

        It is still okay if you hold on to the company at that point of time, as it is the first time the disclosure actually appeared. But, I would not be comfortable to invest at that point and if I invest, I would be constantly bugging their IR for progress. To be fair to our super star Bursa's finest analyst at CIMB, they do touch on the issue in their 19-page initiating coverage of Muhibbah with one paragraph out of that 19 pages of crap and do not discuss the serious damage done to their equity in the event of a default but rather put a positive spin on the whole thing. They maintain that the issue will be resolved within 1-2 months. Note, by the time that the initiating coverage is being produced, it is already in mid-November, well beyond the timeline stipulated in the audited account. Our Bursa finest continued to report that the issue will be resolved within 1-2 months for one or two more reports until he conveniently forgotten about the issue in the subsequent buy call that he issued thereafter. Perhaps, it is 1-2 months too long.

        Then, on 29/4/2011, Muhibbah issued another audited accounts, this time for FY 2010. The same crap again is being said..blah blah blah...acknowledge its obligation..blah blah blah, but this time, one sentence is being altered:
        The project owner is confident that alternative arrangement can be completed in 2011, as negotiations with interested party have reached an advanced stage.
        Last time, they says that it is mid-2010, now they says is in 2011. No early, mid or late, just 2011. Take note also that all this while, it is the project owner says, not Muhibbah says. Muhibbah is a good lender. I do hope that they have a loan sharking division, if I ever end up borrowing money from loan shark, I will borrow from them. If I delay payment for two year plus, I think any loan shark would probably chop my hand off or something. But, this Muhibbah is apparently fine with more than two years of delay in payment. No provision, not even a single cents is being provide against this possible default. If you are a shareholder, if you saw this together with the sudden disappearance of reassuring words from our Bursa finest analyst on the issue, you should just sell. If you didn't, that is really padan muka.

        The reason that shareholders may not have paid much attention to the issue may be due to something that I just found out today about our financial reporting. Apparently, in the audited accounts released by Malaysian listed company, there is no need for companies to report their account receivable ageing analysis. Initially, I thought it was Muhibbah that purposely do not disclose only to found out that other listed companies in Malaysia do not disclose their accounts receivable ageing. No wonder there are so many receivables-related blow up in Malaysia. Listed companies in SGX, HKEX ,even Indonesia and I believe the Philippines have to disclose their receivables ageing like this picture:


        This sort of easy to read disclosure would certainly make shareholders pay attention to the RM337 million that pop up at the past due for more than 2 years column. Apparently, in Malaysia, we do not need to produce such disclosure. If the situation is very serious like Muhibbah case, we are flooded with a long chunk of text that regular, non-accounting background investor, may be too intimidated to even read it. If situation is serious, but not that serious, we may not even have a disclosure. You would have thought that, with so many receivables-related blow up in our country, those overpaid and useless buggers at our accounting standard board would adopt the best practices of their regional neighbours like Indonesia, but, instead, they are busy convincing the press that they should not be blame for any sort of fraud. Rather, the management should be blame, they say. It is like Polis Raja Di Malaysia attributing their inability to catch any thief by blaming the thief for stealing. It is the thief's job to steal, it is also the job of some questionable management to steal from shareholders. Sometimes, it makes you wonder why we need this sort of useless auditors.

        The Change in Auditor

        Another interesting point is that, Muhibbah actually change their auditors. They downgrade from a big 4 auditor- KPMG to a tier-two auditing firm Crowe Horwath. If a company upgrade their auditors, from a tier-two firm to a big 4, it is usually fine. But, if they downgrade, you need to pay attention. It could be that KPMG is too afraid to sign the accounts because the receivables size is too bloody big, so, they drop Muhibbah as a client. Sometimes, companies will give you crappy explanation like the big 4 is overcharging them, so, they drop them to save shareholder money. Most of the time, this is not the case. If Big 4 do not like the risk of auditing your accounts, they will purposely inflate the auditing cost to a price that you could not afford, a decent way for the Big 4 to tell you that, "we do not want to audit your company, it is too risky". As there are 4 big 4 auditors out there, it is impossible for them to raise the prices too high as there is always competition. When high prices is being used as a reason for switching auditors, you should be careful.

        That is the case if a company provide any explanation for changing auditors. In Muhibbah case, they did not even tell you that they change their auditors! This lack of disclosure by Muhibbah, I believed, have contravene our Bursa Listing Rule Chapter 12 Rule 1201.1(3) :
        Each Participating Organisation shall notify the Exchange, in writing, of any change to -
        (a) the date of its financial year end; and
        (b) the name of the statutory auditor who will furnish the Annual Report
        Since the wording is "name of auditor", rather than "auditor", I am not sure whether any rules is broken. But, if there is no rules being broken, then, our Bursa Listing Rule have another grey areas that need to be plugged. Most, if not all, regional exchanges discloses their change of auditors.

        Muhibbah also changes their company secretary, someone who should be responsible for all this disclosure stuff. Did Muhibbah purposely replaces an experience company secretary to a not-so-experience one? Lol, I don't know.

        The Non-Disclosure and Management Selling Stocks Like Nothing Have Happened

        Another point that troubled me is that, according to the CIMB report, the receiver on APH is being appointed in May. So, it is already one month. You would think that, when a customer enter into receivership, it is almost close to bankruptcy. Since Muhibbah have so much uncollected receivables from APH, it is their duty to disclose this. But, they seems to think that it is business as usual, nothing have really happened. It took a report from Business Times Singapore to brought our attention to that matter. Till now, still no news from Muhibbah.

        It is really nothing have happened? Well, at least something is happening. As highlighted by Moolah, the management is selling off their stock more frequently within this month than any other month in the year. Here's the snapshot from Bursa website:


        Don't you think the timing is a bit suspicious? In a more litigious society like the US, these buggers may get sued from the shareholders. But, in Malaysia, shareholders law suit are way too costly to bring these buggers to court. Even if these buggers are brought to court, you may not know whether the judicial system is clean enough to give a fair hearing.

        So how? Shareholders just lost 20% in a day and those folks at CIMB still call it a buy even though, if there is a real default, as they are unsecured creditors, they may take a huge hit in their equity. BTW, the CIMB analyst, I think he should learn some accounting, I think he mixed up asset and liability. He said that this whole crap will not affect his valuation because it had been provided it in the liabilities. I think he did not understand what is asset and liability. When people owe you something, it is a liability according to this analyst. By the same reasoning, Greece would be the richest country in the world. I look at his valuation, he did not provide for impairment either in his valuation, it makes you wonder where he come up with that crap.

        When I was younger, some old man tells me that SC and Bursa have very stringent ruling. But, as time goes on, I could not help but feel that our regulation is actually much shitter than those of Indonesia and the Philippines. Come to think of it, that old man is a MLM fella, he may try to convince me that Bursa has stringent ruling and that his company is listed means his MLM company is good. It is probably the reverse case, Bursa sucks and his company sucks too. Just another day in the very uneven playing field called Bursa Malaysia....haiz..

        P.S.: I just realised that the CIMB analyst that I always make fun of in this blog is the same person..lol..so not all their analysts are funny like that guy. Shareholders of Muhibbah, if you have not sold your shares, meanwhile, should pray for another government bailout of APH.
        Snowball,

        Many thanks for the posting. As mentioned to Mun Wai , my last look at Muhibbah was back in 2009.

        Muhibbah had been a nice stock for me back in 2006 to 2007. Made some. :)

        But back in 2009, things changed and my perception of the stock turned negative. The first warning came back in Feb 2009: Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 31/12/2008.

        It made some huge loss which was rather unexpected and Muhibbah said the following in its earnings notes.
        • The Group achieved a consolidated revenue of RM804.0 million for the quarter under review as compared toRM488.8 million consolidated revenue in the last quarter, representing a 64% increase.
          The consolidated loss before tax for the Group is RM26.4 million for the current quarter under review. The loss is mainly due to the revision made for revenue and estimated costs on prudence basis for the construction division in view of the challenging economy condition resulted from high oil price, escalated construction material cost and volatility in foreign exchange rates during the period.
        I wasn't impressed at all.

        Sales increased substantially. A 64% increase was too damn impressive. However, how and why they posted loss was a big no-no for me.

        And it was the year 2009.

        And the biggest warning came from its receivables. ( Yeah, the good old receivables indicator)

        Receivables stated at the end of the quarter showed 738.662 million. The previous quarter ( Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 30/9/2008 ) , the receivables was only some 546.775 million. Ok, it was not a 100% get out warning but it was rather dodgy for me.

        The following quarter, in May, Muhibbah reverted back to profits - it earned some 14 million, however, I was not convinced and in Nov 2009, Muhibbah reported losses again. Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 30/9/2009. Receivables had now soared to some 841 million.

        On Feb 2010, Muhibbah continued to post losses. Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 31/12/2009. Receivables now stood at 941 million.

        How?

        That was more than being dodgy. It's rather scary. Just way too scary for me. And that was the last I watched Muhibbah.

        Now remember, my first warning came in Feb 2009.

        Look at the following Muhibbah chart from Jan 2009 to Feb 2010.



        See the incredible run from March 2009? Muhibbah had a low of 0.645 sen then. That run peaked around 1.66+.

        How?

        The company's fundamentals worsen but the stock soared as if it was on a misson to the moon.

        How?

        Cows don't jump over the moon, do they?

        That was what I thought and yes, I have not seen Muhibbah books since Feb 2010.

        ps: Here's the nice big chart of Muhibbah - note the price is already adjusted for its split cum bonus issue back in 2007.