Ambang Sehati To Make A GO for Bandar Raya?

Last year, the major shareholder, Ambang Sehati tried to buy four of Bandar Raya's prime assets. (You can refer to postings Bandar Raya Asset Sale: Yet Another Ludicrous RPT Transaction and And Ambang Sehati Is Rewarded With 73.6 Million From Their Purchase Of BRDB's Prime Assets )  Some had argued that the purchase price was grossly cheap.

That asset purchase failed.

On today's Star Biz, apparently Ambang Sehati is back. Yes, they are back!

Try again if you fail the first time around.

This time Ambang Sehati is rumoured wanting to buy the entire stock.

I guess these prime assets must surely worth heck a lot of money for Ambang Sehati!

Here's the article from Star Biz: http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/7/31/business/11761768&sec=business

• Tuesday July 31, 2012
  GO imminent for Bandar Raya shares at RM2.90 each
  
  PETALING JAYA: A general offer for property developer Bandar Raya Developments Bhd (BRDB) at RM2.90 per voting share and the corresponding indicative price of RM1.80 per warrant could be in the offing.
  
  The company told Bursa Malaysia it was informed by its major shareholder, Ambang Sehati Sdn Bhd, that the latter was in the midst of finalising the financing, including procuring the necessary approvals for the funding for a potential takeover offer of voting shares and warrants in BRDB that it did not already own.
  
  Ambang Sehati, which controls 18.5% in BRDB, is the same party that had previously attempted to take over BRDB via the assets and liabilities route. Ambang Sehati is the private investment vehicle of Datuk Mohamed Moiz Jabir Mohamed Ali Moiz, the chairman of BRDB.
  
  In September last year, Ambang Sehati proposed to buy BRDB’s properties, namely Bangsar Shopping Centre, Menara BRDB, CapSquare Retail Centre and Permas Jusco Mall for RM914mil. However, the proposal was deemed controversial and drew criticisms from various parties, who expressed concern over the lack of transparency in the deal and the fairness of the offer price, coupled with the fact that it was a related-party transaction.
  
  The outcry resulted in BRDB subsequently calling off the sale. It instead decided to call for an open tender to take into consideration the interest from credible parties to acquire its assets, and also Ambang Sehati’s intention to increase its stake in the company.
  
  In March this year, BRDB said it was one step closer to selling off its four prime assets via an open tender, with the appointment of its legal and financial advisers to assist in the deal. It told Bursa Malaysia then that it was working with Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill and CIMB Investment Bank Bhd in the proposed disposal.
  
  But not much progress was made after that.
  
  BRDB’s share price had been rallying since last week. Yesterday, it rose two sen to close at RM2.53. That was up from RM2.35 a week ago.
  
  BRDB said the current offer price from Ambang Sehati at RM2.90 per share was based on the estimated diluted net tangible assets per share in BRDB.
  
  Some said the offer price of RM2.90 per share, which represented a premium of 14.6% from yesterday’s closing price of BRDB, was attractive compared to the earlier assets and liability offer whereby the indications were that shareholders were only going to be paid a special dividend of 80 sen per share.
  
  It should be noted that in the previous deal, BRDB would still be left with other assets although many had argued that the assets Ambang Sehati was looking to buy then were the prized assets of the company.
  
  Should the curent deal go through, shareholders will have the option of totally exiting BRDB at RM2.90 per share.

Featured: SC Charges Lawyer With Insider Trading

Posted on the SunDaily: http://www.thesundaily.my/news/442225

• Senior corporate lawyer charged with insider trading Posted on 20 July 2012 - 07:47pm
  
  PETALING JAYA (July 20, 2012): The Securities Commission (SC) today charged Datuk Sreesanthan Eliathamby, a corporate lawyer who sits on the boards of several public listed companies, with seven counts of insider trading.
  
  Sreesanthan was charged with insider trading in the shares of four listed companies namely Sime Darby Bhd, Maxis Communications Bhd, UEM World Bhd and VADS Bhd between 2006 and 2008.
  
  Sreesanthan claimed trial to the charges and was granted bail of RM300,000 with one surety that he surrenders his passport to the court.
  
  In a statement today, the SC said the charges involved three counts of insider trading in the shares of Sime Darby in 2006, ahead of the acquisition by Synergy Drive of companies within the Sime Darby, Guthrie and Golden Hope groups.
  
  The two counts of insider trading in the shares of Maxis, which were preferred under the Securities Industry Act 1983, were alleged to have taken place during the privatisation of the mobile service provider in 2007.
  
  Two other charges were preferred for insider trading under section 188(2) of the Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 involving the shares of UEM World and VADS in 2008.
  
  Sreesanthan's trades in UEM World were said to have been made with his knowledge of the corporate restructuring of the UEM group, while his trades in VADS allegedly involved his knowledge relating to VADS's proposed privatisation. The offences under both Acts carry a punishment of a fine of not less than RM1 million and imprisonment of a term not exceeding 10 years.
  
  The SC said it has been proactively pursuing market misconduct cases and will continue to be vigilant and take whatever action necessary to protect investors and to maintain a fair and orderly capital market.

Featured Article: Major shareholders must provide fair exit to minorities

On Star Biz: http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/7/19/business/11689882&sec=business

• Thursday July 19, 2012
  Major shareholders must provide fair exit to minorities COMMENT
  By RITA BENOY BUSHON
  
  LAST week we had news of three privatisations, two from the Tan Sri Syed Mokthar Albukhary's stable United Malayan Land Bhd (UMLand) and Aliran Ihsan Resources Bhd (AIRB) while the other is rubber glove maker Adventa Bhd. All three are retail-based stocks.
  
  Interestingly, all three involve slightly differing methods of privatisation.
  
  The first being UMLand by way of takeover offer which does not require an EGM but requires a threshold of 90% of total issue capital of the company held by offerors to be privatised.
  
  For this case, the offerors already have a 77.52% stake and thus need only 12.48% from the remaining shareholders. In addition, to compulsorily acquire the company, the offeror need 20.2% of the minorities' stake.
  
  Tradewinds Corp Bhd, another company controlled by Syed Mokthar, and UMLand executive director and nominee of Chee Tat Holdings (Singapore) Pte Ltd, Datuk Ng Eng Tee, have equal equity interest in Seleksi Juang Sdn Bhd, which announced this takeover offer of RM2.50 a share.
  
  Specialists in township and niche development, UMLand has about 1,800 acres of undeveloped land and three mixed township developments in high growth areas of Bandar Seri Alam and Taman Seri Austin within Iskandar Malaysia, Johor and Bandar Seri Putra in Selangor.
  
  Seleksi's announcement came after the news that it had bolstered its position by buying CapitaLand Ltd's 20.75% stake for RM156.45mil. The offer by Seleksi's group has two implications. One, that it does not comply with the public shareholding spread (and does not intend to do so in future), and two, regardless of the take-up level of the offer, Seleksi will delist the company.
  
  Our analysis is based on the offer price of RM2.50 versus net assets per share of RM3.04. And on the financial metrics: a current ratio of 3 times and a small debt-to-equity ratio of 0.16 times.
  
  Valuation-wise, at RM2.50 a share, it is 13.2 times 2011 earnings of 18.87 sen a share. The valuation could drop for its 2012/2013 earnings.
  
  Is Seleksi's offer acceptable, especially given the March reports of its plans for RM1.4bil of mixed property developments within Iskandar Malaysia?
  The second privatisation is by way of selective capital repayment, where a special resolution at an EGM involving approval by 75% of the remaining minority shareholders voting and attending is required. It involves the High Court giving confirmation on the capital reduction exercise after the EGM approval.
  
  The above privatisation is by MMC Corp Bhd to take private AIRB, Johor's top water concessionaire, in a deal valued at RM181.12mil, or RM1.84 a share.
  
  AIRB, which is already 62.82% controlled by MMC, is the third largest supplier of treated water in the country. Upon successful completion of the proposed exercise, AIRB will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of MMC, and thus will be delisted.
  
  Although the offer price is a tenth higher than the five-day VWAP (volume-weighted average price) and a 5% premium to its last traded price, a closer look at AIRB shows that it has cash deposits worth RM273.124mil, low borrowings of RM137,000, and announced expectations that revenue should increase during the year due to anticipated higher production from its water treatment business as well as an increase in construction revenue.
  
  In short, MMC is paying RM181mil for a company that has RM273mil in cash, negligible debt and an improving outlook. In terms of PE (price earnings), the price offered amounts to a 11.6 times 2011 earnings and a discount of 38.6% from the average industry PE of similar companies. Further the proposed exercise would benefit MMC as it would be able to consolidate the entire earnings of AIRB.
  
  And on to Adventa Bhd, which appears to be offering a more generous deal than the previous two mentioned. This is by way of asset-liability method, which requires the approval of 75% of shareholders at an EGM, This will then bind all the rest of the shareholders to accept the privatisation.
  
  Last week, Adventa managing director Low Chin Guan and Mulberry Asia Fund II jointly offered to acquire Adventa's business for a total of RM320.85mil, equivalent to RM2.10 per share. Low holds a 38.25% stake in Adventa. Here, the Adventa board's approval is required.
  
  On the face of it, the offer price of RM2.10 does appear attractive, reflecting a 30.4% premium to Adventa's last traded price of RM1.61. However, the offer price also amounts to only 7 times 2013 EPS (earnings per share), which is a discount to the average PE ratio of 11.6 times for its peers.
  Perhaps, this factors in the company's smaller size and (perceived) higher earnings risk, since results have generally disappointed over the past four quarters.
  
  While Adventa's might appear a sweeter deal, shareholders should still press management to distribute the full cash proceeds of RM2.10 to them, as it will be a cash company post-acquisition.
  
  All three privatisations require independent advisors' opinions.
  
  Overall, however, concern must be voiced that these small(-ish) yet profitable companies are leaving the exchange. Clearly, the major shareholders of these companies want to take matters into their own hands, which is within their prerogative to do so as long as they provide a fair exit to the minorities. And all minorities would need to exercise their right as owners to vote by attending in person or by way of proxy.
  
  ● Rita Benoy Bushon is CEO of the Minority Shareholder Watchdog Group
  

Manchester United's IPO Comes Under Fire

On IrishTimes.com: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2012/0711/1224319790474.html

• United's float figures don't add up for some
  
  DAVID CONN
  
  THE GLAZER family’s timing for floating Manchester United is facing criticism from some analysts who argue the Glazers are deliberately avoiding having to present United’s expected decline in financial performance in 2011-12.
  
  The Glazers have filed with the New York Stock Exchange, to float a Manchester United company registered in the Cayman Islands tax haven, United’s financial accounts for the year before that, to June 30th, 2011.
  
  United’s income is expected to have suffered a significant decline last year, principally due to Alex Ferguson’s team being eliminated from the Champions League at the group stage, whereas in 2011 they earned €53m from Uefa after reaching the final.
  
  Presenting accounts more than 12 months old fails to comply with US Securities and Exchange Commission requirements, and United have had to apply for special dispensation to have the out-of date accounts allowed.
  
  In a letter dated July 3rd, Edward Woodward, United’s executive vice-chairman based in London, points out the accounts for United’s most recent financial year, to June 30th 2012, are not overdue in the Cayman Islands – “its jurisdiction of incorporation” – or any other country. Having to present the 2011-12 accounts, Woodward claims in the letter, would be: “impractical and involve undue hardship” for United.
  
  United spokesmen both at their Old Trafford offices and representing the Cayman Islands-registered company in New York are not commenting on the proposed flotation until it is complete and declined to explain why the Glazers had chosen this timing for the float, and to deliver out-of-date accounts.
  
  Owen Wild, deputy editor of International Finance Review, has criticised the timing, suggesting it is because United’s financial performance in 2011-12 is likely to have been significantly worse than for 2010-11.
  
  “It is very often unnecessary to do this, and investors are rightly suspicious when companies do it,” Wild said. “We have several times seen companies file out-of-date accounts, then when the more recent accounts come out, they show a decline in financial performance.”
  
  United’s 2011-12 accounts are almost certain to show the club made less money than in 2010-11. That year, Ferguson’s team won the Premier League and lost in the Champions League final at Wembley, to Barcelona.
  
  With full houses at Old Trafford regular and the team’s success marketed for global sponsorships by a team Woodward oversees in the London office, United posted a record income of €420m in 2010-11.
  
  Despite paying interest and other finance costs of €67m on the debts, then standing at €580m, which the Glazers loaded on to United to buy the club, United returned a €15m profit in 2010-11.
  
  The club’s income from European competitions will be significantly reduced for the most recent season, when United were dismissed from the Europa League by Athletic Bilbao after their Champions League failure. Uefa are due to release figures on Friday for how much each club was paid for Champions and Europa League participation last season. United’s payment can be expected to be around half that of the previous year.
  
  Many United fans feel that last season was the one in which the debts loaded on to the club by the Glazers, now at €535m, finally started to bite into the performance of Ferguson’s team.

On NY Times: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/in-manchester-uniteds-i-p-o-a-preference-for-u-s-rules/

• Manchester United, the English soccer team with an adoring fan base in Europe and Asia, is filing to go public in the United States.
  
  But the initial public offering is not a reflection of Americans’ increasing love of soccer. Instead, it is a reflection of American regulators’ light touch.
  
  I’m not kidding. The United States, which has long been criticized for its harsh rules surrounding I.P.O.’s, is now the place where foreign companies go to avoid regulation.
  
  Manchester United may be the world’s most popular soccer club, with 659 million fans according to the team’s own estimates. In 2005, the American businessman Malcolm Glazer and his family bought control of the team, loading it up with hundreds of millions of dollars in debt. Now, the company is selling shares to raise money and reduce its debt, which stands at about $655 million.
  
  But the Glazers do not want to give up voting control since, among other reasons, Manchester United fans appear eager to buy back the team from the still-unpopular family. In 2010, a prominent group of Manchester United fans were said to have tried to form a consortium to repurchase the club. The Glazers have uniformly given the same response: the team is not for sale. Now, the Glazers are venue-shopping for their stock.
  
  They passed over the Hong Kong Stock Exchange because it would not give the team a waiver to allow two classes of shares, with different voting rights. The London Stock Exchange also does not allow such share structures, perhaps the reason this natural home was skipped over by the Glazers.
  
  Manchester United declined to comment for this article.
  
  The Singapore Exchange seemed more amenable to the Glazers’ plan to list Manchester United and keep control through a dual-class structure. But after the exchange delayed final signoff on the dual-class shares and the Asian markets cooled, the Singapore plans were derailed, according to an article in Reuters.
  
  The soccer team has recently found a home for its stock in the United States. Manchester United filed the papers this month for its initial public offering on the New York Stock Exchange, and the Glazers are taking advantage of the country’s willingness to be more flexible when it comes to shareholder rights. Manchester United is proposing a corporate structure that would give the Glazers shares with 10 votes apiece. Public investors would receive one vote for each share.
  
  While the Securities and Exchange Commission tried to ban this type of dual-class voting stock in the 1980s, a federal appeals court struck down the rules. Since then, the structure has become increasingly common. Facebook, LinkedIn and Google all have dual-class shares. The New York Times also has a dual-class voting structure. In 2011, 28 offerings featured dual-class structures that gave greater voting rights to certain shareholders, according to the research firm Dealogic.
  
  The Manchester United offering is a case study in how the American markets have evolved toward deregulation in the past decade.
  The company is a beneficiary of the newly enacted Jumpstart Our Business Start-Ups Act, known as the JOBS Act, designed to help private companies raise capital and go public. Although the team was founded in 1878, the JOBS Act classifies Manchester United as an emerging growth company since it has less than $1 billion in revenue. As such, the company, which is incorporated in the Cayman Islands, does not face the same hurdles as American businesses.
  
  The JOBS Act builds on earlier efforts by the S.E.C. to loosen the rules governing I.P.O.’s of foreign companies. Under pressure from stock exchanges and other market players, the agency has exempted foreign issuers like Manchester United from large parts of American securities laws.
  
  Manchester United will not need to file quarterly reports, report material events, file proxy statements or disclose extensive compensation information, all of which American companies must do. Under a different S.E.C. rule adopted in 2008, Manchester United also does not need to report financials under the generally accepted accounting principles used in the United States, but can instead rely on international financial reporting standards.
  
  Because Manchester United will be a controlled company, it does not need to follow the New York Stock Exchange rules adopted in 2003 that require a public company to have a board composed mainly of independent directors. The board of Manchester United will have four directors, two of Malcolm Glazer’s sons and two executives of the company.
  
  The legal environment, which investment bankers and lawyers have long argued deterred I.P.O.’s, also appears to be more conducive. This may be because securities litigation reforms put in place by Congress and the Supreme Court have meant fewer cases in recent years. Even after the financial crisis, only 16 companies on the Standard & Poor’s 500 were subject to this type of litigation in 2011, the lowest number since 2000, according to the Stanford Securities Class Action Clearinghouse.
  
  It’s all a bit unsettling.
  
  After the enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2001, critics claimed that the new regulation was driving away foreign companies, although at least one academic study rebutted this claim. But as regulators have slowly loosened the rules, the American markets are attracting foreign issuers seeking watered-down rules.
  
  This does not mean that this deregulation is wrongheaded.
  
  The JOBS Act and other initiatives may not have been designed to attract the likes of Manchester United, but such I.P.O.’s do provide work for investment bankers, lawyers and the exchanges. They also build up American prestige by bringing well-known foreign companies to the United States.
  
  At the same time, the deregulation effort means lower compliance costs for businesses. Presumably, that extra money can be invested, bolstering the economy.
  
  The question is whether deregulation is worth the price.
  
  I have little sympathy for investors who buy Manchester United shares. The risks are mainly disclosed.
  
  The bigger question is whether lowering the bar for foreign issuers will come back to haunt the American markets.
  
  Even before the JOBS Act, Chinese companies took advantage of new S.E.C. rules and started going public en masse in the United States. While some of the I.P.O.’s have worked out, there are now more than 100 newly public Chinese companies facing accusations of fraud by either investors or regulators.
  
  The risk is that American exchanges will become more like London’s Alternative Investment Market, a lightly regulated stock exchange that has fostered some spectacular flops. If so, investors may lose faith in American markets, and the United States may end up sacrificing long-term stature for short-term gain.
  
  Either way, the next time someone calls the American markets overregulated, you might want to point them to the Manchester United I.P.O. — and remind them that the English soccer club came to the United States to avoid more burdensome foreign rules.
  

Yes, I won't be an investor.

MMC Privatisation Offer For Aliran Ihsan

MMC is taking its 62.8% owned subsidiary Aliran Ihsan private in a deal valued at RM 181.1 million.

On Business Times:

• MMC to take AIRB private
  
  By SHAREN KAUR Published: 2012/07/10
  
  EARNINGS CONSOLIDATION: RM181.12m deal will be conducted via selective capital reduction and repayment exercise
  
  MMC Corp Bhd plans to take Johor's top water concessionaire, Aliran Ihsan Resources Bhd (AIRB), private in a deal valued at RM181.12 million, or RM1.84 a share.
  AIRB, which is 62.82 per cent-controlled by MMC, is the third largest supplier of treated water in the country.
  
  Its core subsidiaries are Southern Water Corp Sdn Bhd, Southern Water Technology Sdn Bhd, Southern Water Engineering Sdn Bhd and Aliran Utara Sdn Bhd.
  
  These companies are involved in the operation, maintenance and management of water treatment plants, rehabilitation of water treatment plants and construction of water works.
  
  The offer price of RM1.84 by MMC is a five per cent premium on AIRB's closing price of RM1.75 last Friday. Based on the closing price, AIRB's market capitalisation was RM463 million.
  
  The securities of both MMC and AIRB were halted from trading yesterday. MMC closed last Friday at RM2.61.
  
  In a filing to Bursa Malaysia yesterday, MMC said it planned to take AIRB private via a selective capital reduction and repayment exercise.
  
  The plan will result in the reduction of the issued and paid-up share capital of the company from RM264.74 million, or 264.7 million shares, to RM83.8 million, or 83.6 million shares.
  
  This is by way of cancelling 181.1 million shares comprising all outstanding AIRB shares amounting to 98.4 million held by the shareholders and 82.7 million held by MMC.
  
  MMC said upon the completion of the exercise, it would hold 83.6 million AIRB shares, representing the entire issued and paid-up capital of the company.
  
  MayBank Investment Bank Bhd is advising MMC on the deal.
  
  MMC Corp group managing director Datuk Hasni Harun said the privatisation exercise was timely, given the near-term expiry of its main concession/contract, coupled with the illiquidity and lower trading volume of AIRB shares.
  
  "This move will allow MMC to fully consolidate AIRB's earnings into its accounts and also enable both companies to derive more benefits from each other," he said in a statement.
  
  The proposed selective capital reduction and repayment initiative is expected to be completed by the first quarter of 2013.
  
  Besides AIRB, MMC's other core businesses are Port of Tanjung Pelepas (Malaysia's largest container terminal), Johor Port (the country's leading multi-purpose port), and Malakoff Group Bhd (the largest local independent power producer).
  
  It also has interest in Gas Malaysia Bhd (sole supplier of natural gas to the non-power sector) and Senai Airport Terminal Services Sdn Bhd, among others.

The offer carried a 5% premium over last traded share price!!!!

On Star Business: http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/7/10/business/11632585&sec=business

• Tuesday July 10, 2012
  MMC to privatise AIRB
  
  It proposes to take Aliran Ihsan private via capital reduction, repayment
  
  PETALING JAYA: MMC Corp Bhd has proposed to privatise its 62.82%-owned subsidiary Aliran Ihsan Resources Bhd (AIRB) via a selective capital reduction and repayment exercise (SCR).
  
  Upon completion of the proposed SCR, expected to be by the first quarter of 2013, MMC would emerge as the sole shareholder of AIRB, whose other significant shareholders at present include Lembaga Tabung Haji, Effective Strategy Sdn Bhd and Public Dividend Select Fund.
  
  In a statement to Bursa Malaysia, MMC explained that the proposed SCR entailed a reduction of the issued and paid-up share capital of AIRB from RM264.7mil, represented by 264.7 million units, to RM83.6mil, represented by 83.6 million units by way of cancelling a total of 181.1 million AIRB shares.
  
  Shares to be cancelled comprised the 98.4 million units held by the shareholders other than MMC, and 82.7 million units held by MMC.
  
  Upon successful completion of the proposed SCR, MMC said it would hold the entire remaining 83.6 million shares in AIRB, resulting in the latter becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of MMC.
  
  It would delist AIRB from Bursa Malaysia.
  
  MMC said pursuant to the proposed cancellation of 181.1 million AIRB shares, qualified shareholders would be entitled to receive a capital repayment of RM181.1mil, which was equivalent to RM1.84 per AIRB share, while MMC would waive its own entitlement for the capital repayment of RM82.7mil under the proposed SCR.
  
  The capital repayment exercise would be funded through the internal funds of AIRB.
  
  “The intention of privatising AIRB is timely given the near term expiry of AIRB's main concession/contract, coupled with the illiquidity and lower trading volume of AIRB shares,” MMC said in a statement.
  
  “This move will allow MMC to fully consolidate AIRB's earnings into its accounts and also enable both companies to derive more benefits from each other,” it added.
  
  It was noted that the bulk of AIRB's operating revenues are generated from its concession-related businesses, namely, Southern Water Corp Sdn Bhd (SWC), Equiventures Sdn Bhd (ESB) and Aliran Utara Sdn Bhd (AU).
  
  The concession/contract for SWC and AU would be expiring within the next 24 to 28 months, while the concession for ESB had already expired last month.
  
  Both MMC and AIRB were suspended from trading yesterday. AIRB was last traded at RM1.75, and MMC at RM2.61.
  
  Both counters will resume trading today.

A quick look at Aliran Ihsan's last reported quarterly earnings: Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 31/3/2012 

Aliran's Balance Sheet:

Aliran Ihsan said it had cash deposits worth 273.124 million.

Hardly any borrowings.

Better earnings and the prospects is said to be good with the group's revenue expected to increase....

So how?

MMC will be forking out 181.12 million for a company that has 273.124 million in its piggy bank!!!!

Now is this a great deal or is this not a great deal?

(ps: Good for a read: MSWG Asking Why So Much Money Donated By Syed Mokhtar Firms To Albukhary International University )

Euro 2012: Final

I thought Italy were by far the better team in their group match and I believe they will win tonight.

I checked what I wrote so far ...

• Day 3: 4-6-0??!! and Super Mario!
  Spain vs Italy: Seriously? Spain playing with no strikers? 4-6-0 formation? No faith with Torres?
  
  Spain 1 Italy 1. Italy was far the better team for me. They should have won. Cassano was superb and Mario? No Super Mario in this match. A petulant Mario? Yes. Spain was seriously lacking. They looked tired and out of ideas. Do they think they can win a third major championship, playing without a striker. Incredibly Torres decided to proof his coach right when he come on as a sub. Nice miss Torres!
• Germany thumped Holland 2-1 and Portugal scraped past Denmark 3-2. Good night of football.
  
  Some thoughts so far...
  
  Spain. 4-6-0? I see them struggling. How could they start a match without a striker? Torres hasn't the best of season with Chelsea despite winning the Champions League. His confidence level is probably low and here we have the Spanish coach, starting without a striker. What a message sent out to Torres. This is like telling him that Fab is a better option. A midfielder playmaker is better playing a striker than him. And when Torres finally came on as sub, his confidence level is clearly down a couple of notches. What an own goal. I see them struggling.
  
  Germany. They woke up and they looked good. Schweinsteiger was awesome. Really awesome. And Germany now have Super Mario! They now look much stronger than the Spanish.
  
  Italy: I thought Cassano was superb. Credit should also go to Pirlo. I think this team can go far.

2-0 for Italy that's my prediction...