Showing posts with label Related Party Transactions (RPT). Show all posts
Showing posts with label Related Party Transactions (RPT). Show all posts

Wednesday, March 06, 2013

What? What is Top Glove Trying To Do???

Posted on the Edge.

  • Top Glove to acquire tycoon’s building Business & Markets 2013
    Written by Madiha Fuad of theedgemalaysia.com
    Wednesday, 06 March 2013 08:54

    KUALA LUMPUR: Top Glove Corp Bhd will acquire a three-year-old building located in Jalan Tun Razak here from tycoon Tan Sri Law Tien Seng for RM226 million.
    However, the transaction will be done through Value Add Sdn Bhd, a company that is at present controlled by Top Glove executive chairman Tan Sri Lim Wee Chai and executive director Lim Hooi Sin (HS Lim).

    In an announcement yesterday, detailing the two-step purchase, Top Glove has proposed to subscribe to ordinary shares and preference shares that will give it 27% in Value Add for RM12.2 million.

    Following that, Value Add proposes to acquire from TS Law Realty Sdn Bhd a commercial building known as East Wing of The Icon@Tun Razak for RM226 million.

    Top Glove will fund the the subscription via an internally generated fund.

    According to the announcement, Lim is chairman of Value Add and holds a 68% interest in the company while HS Lim has a 5% interest in Value Add.

    Lim has a 38.12% of direct and indirect interests in Top Glove while HS Lim has a 38.11% of direct and indirect interests in the glove producer.

    East Wing the Icon@Tun Razak has a gross built-up area of 278,182 sq ft.

    The first phase of the subscription to Value Add shares was completed on Feb 28, 2013 with 270,000 ordinary shares of RM1 and 5.8 million redeemable preference shares of RM1.

    TS Law Realty is an investment holding company with an authorised capital of RM5 million comprising five million shares of RM1 each. Law, who is a major shareholder of Hiap Tech Ventures Bhd, holds 80% of TS Law Realty while Puan Sri Saw Geok Ngor holds the remaining 20%.

    Top Glove said although the proposed transaction is a related party transaction it does not require shareholder approval because the materiality of the transaction is less than 5% of the percentage ratio threshold.
    The company, however, said Lim and HS Lim have abstained from all board deliberations on the matter.

    “The purchase consideration of the commercial property will be funded through a combination of borrowings and equity through subscription of shares in Value Add by its shareholders,” said Top Glove in its announcement.

    East Wing of The Icon@Tun Razak, which is built on freehold land, has a gross built-up area of 278,182 sq ft and a 98% occupancy rate.

    Top Glove said the acquisition would generate a higher return on its current investment and potential capital appreciation in the future.

    “The subscription and acquisition will not have a material effect on the earnings of the group for the financial year ending Aug 31, 2013 but is expected to contribute to the group’s earnings in the future,” it added.


    This article first appeared in The Edge Financial Daily, on March 6, 2013.
Buying properties????

226 Million?????

Investment or what?????

Related Party Transaction?????

Does not need shareholder approval?????

Tuesday, March 06, 2012

Looking Back At Silver Bird

I do have many old articles on Silver Bird and because of the time issue, some of the links are broken.

But where do I start. Let's start 1st March 2012. I posted: Deep Woes For Silver Bird

  • Furthermore, Silver Bird’s major subsidiaries were in default of banking facilities repayments, with the group currently unable to provide a solvency declaration to Bursa.

    The three wholly-owned units in default are baked goods manufacturer Standard Confectionery Sdn Bhd, bakery goods and telecommunications products distributor Stanson Marketing Sdn Bhd and bread maker Stanton Bakeries Sdn Bhd.
I do remember that name Stanson.

Now this is a good starting point, which is 21st April 2003.

Posted on Bursa Malaysia website: Silver Bird Group Berhad ("SBGB" or "the Company") · Proposed bonus issue of up to RM21,585,500 comprising up to 43,171,000 new ordinary shares of RM0.50 each to be credited as fully paid-up on the basis of one (1) new ordinary share for every two (2) existing ordinary shares held in SBGB ("Proposed Bonus Issue"); · Proposed acquisition of the entire issued and paid-up ordinary share capital of Stanson Group Sdn Bhd ("SG") comprising 10,080,000 ordinary shares of RM1.00 each and 1,920,000 ‘A’ ordinary shares of RM1.00 each for a total consideration of RM54,000,000 ("Proposed Acquisition"); and · Proposed transfer of the listing of and quotation for the entire enlarged issued and paid-up share capital of SBGB after the Proposed Bonus Issue and if approved, the Proposed Acquisition from the Second Board to the Main Board of the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange ("KLSE") ("Proposed Transfer"). (Hereinafter collectively known as the "Proposals")

That was when Silver Bird BOLDLY announced that it wants to buy Stanson Group. Yeah, boldly. It was a 54 million transaction. The sticky (or shall i call it 'sicky') issue was.... the profitability of Stanson.

Here's a screen shot from the word file attached to the above announcement.


How would you interpret the financial track record of Stanson?

Me? Sceptical. My reasoning? Stanson only showed profit the very same year Silver Bird announced it wants to buy! For me, where is the justification????

And if you scroll down to section 9.0 of the word file, you would note that this is a RELATED PARTY TRANSACTION!

Yeah man. A RPT Transaction worth 54 million!!!!

That sum was later revised lower to rm46.6 million. Yeah, sadly, somehow Silver Bird's purchase of Stanson Group was approved. Mentioned on an article on Star Biz: (link broken)
  • Thursday January 15, 2004

    2004 looks promising for Silver Bird

    SILVER Bird Group Bhd looks set for an eventful 2004.

    The company expects its proposed one-for-two bonus issue and the subsequent transfer of its listing on the MSEB second board to the main board to be completed in the next 30 days or so.

    Its proposed acquisition of bread maker Stanson Group Sdn Bhd should also be completed by the first or second quarter this year.

    In addition, its new bakery plant in Shah Alam would soon boost its installed capacity by three-fold.

    Yesterday, at Silver Bird's EGM in Kuala Lumpur, shareholders approved the proposed bonus issue. Minority shareholders also voted unanimously to acquire Stanson Group for RM46.6mil, to be satisfied by the issuance of a combination of Silver Bird shares and loan stocks.

    Silver Bird group managing director Datuk Jackson Tan and parties related to him, being the vendors of Stanson Group, abstained from voting on the Stanson proposal.

    Speaking to the media later, Tan said the new bakery plant, which he described as the biggest in South-East Asia, would allow the company to churn out new products faster than its competitors.

    It would also put Silver Bird in an enviable position to take advantage of trade liberalisation under the Asean Free Trade Area and to penetrate regional markets with its range of products, he added.

    The company's growth locally looked promising, he said.

    Instead of relying on stockists, Silver Bird had its own fleet of vehicles and salesmen who go around ensuring that its products were well stocked at more than 5,000 distribution points, he said.

    Over the next two years, the distribution points would be doubled, said Tan, who expects Silver Bird's sales to grow faster than the industry average of some 10% annually.

    He declined to be more specific, but said the new bakery plant and a planned advertising campaign of a few million ringgit would make for “exciting sales growth” this year.

    For its fiscal year ended Oct 31, 2003, Silver Bird posted a net profit of RM10mil on a turnover of about RM51mil, compared with RM9.2mil and RM45mil, respectively the prior year.
Then came March 2004.

Yet another mind blowing corporate exercise for me.

On Star Biz: (link broken)
  • Thursday March 4, 2004
    Silver Bird’s RM100mil bakery to spearhead expansion plans
    BY DANNY YAP

    SILVER Bird Group Bhd, which is installing the single largest stand-alone bakery in Asean costing RM100mil, is confident it can double its net profit for the fiscal year ending Oct 31 to RM20mil, from RM10mil last year.

    “The plant will not only help Silver Bird lead the industry in Malaysia but also allow the company to expand its business offshore when the time is right,” group managing director Datuk Jackson Tan told reporters in Kuala Lumpur yesterday after the company’s transfer to the MSEB main board.

    The state-of-the-art plant, purchased from US-based AMF Bakery Systems, would also provide the leverage for the company to become a leading bread producer, he said.

    “Our first production line was completed ahead of time and the facility is already rolling out our High 5 bread,” Tan said, adding that the second line should be operational in a couple of months. .

    Silver Bird has about 30% market share of the local bread business and produces 11 products under the High 5 brand. They are distributed through its 7,000 outlets, which the company expects to expand to over 10,000 by next year..

    Silver Bird's recent acquisition of Stanson Group Sdn Bhd would enhance earnings besides widening its product range and distribution network.

    Tan said the local bakery industry was worth more than RM1bil a year, and growing in excess of 12% per annum.
    He said the transfer of the company to the main board will enhance business reputation; promote greater customer, supplier and employee confidence; and attract financiers and investors.

    “It will also enable us to compete with other major brands and, ultimately, improve our market position and market share,” he said.

    At the start of trading yesterday, shares of Silver Bird put on 3 sen to RM1.23 with 50,000 shares changing hands. The counter closed the day at RM1.15 on total volume 1,074,000 shares.
100 million for a bread factory????
100 million???
I like one comment posted on this blog the other day. "Lot's of dough for a bread factory!"
Tell me.... are you impressed?
 And then came Nilai Sept 2006. SIlver Bird's Nilai plant was forced to closed for a couple of weeks when it was alleged that the plant was unhygienic.

The following was posted by Star Biz on 16 Sep 2006: Silver Bird plans to fly past storm

And come Dec 2006: Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 31/10/2006

Silver Bird posts 51.1 million in losses for that quarter!

Their excuse?
  • Silver Bird says Q4 loss due to provisions

    December 27 2006

    SILVER Bird Group Bhd, a bakery firm, plunged into a fourth quarter net loss due to provisions or money set aside to cover potential losses from its cake and frozen products business.

    Its fourth quarter loss for the period to October 31 2006, dragged the full-year numbers into the red as well.

    “For the financial year ending 2007, given a challenging environment, the group is focused on regaining market share based on an aggressive promotion and expansion campaign,” it said in a statement to Bursa Malaysia.

    The company also planned to reduce costs further.

    Silver Bird fell into a net loss of RM51 million in the fourth quarter as against a net profit of RM7 million in the same period a year ago.

    Quarterly revenue rose 11 per cent to RM150.1 million.

    For the full year, Silver Bird made a net loss of RM48.2 million compared with a net profit of RM22.2 million in 2005.

    It blamed the fourth quarter losses on a RM28 million impairment loss and a RM7.8 million write off. The impairment losses were from its cake and frozen products business.

    “Our sales in cake and frozen products have declined significantly and the trend is foreseeable not to reverse in the near future,” it said.

    The directors decided on the provision “as the budgeted net cashflow or operating profits from the cake and frozen products, which were significantly lower than expected.” As for the write off, the amount was due to the assets of its discontinued bakery café business.
Hmmm.... remember Stanson Group? Still remember Silver Bird's purchase of Stanson Group at 46.6 million????

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

And Genting Malaysia Rewards Its Shareholders With Yet Another RPT

And so Genting Malaysia announced its 4th RPT last night.


Snippet from CIMB report:
  • What We Think
    At first glance, the news of yet another RPT by Genting Malaysia is negative. Although Genting Malaysia expects to reap cost savings from the acquisition as it is E-Genting’s largest customer, the RPT might not sit well with investors. This is the fourth RPT in four years, the others being Walker Digital, Wisma Genting and Genting UK.

    However, we take comfort in 1) the size of the acquisition, which is small at 3% of net cash
    and 0.4% of total shareholders’ funds, 2) fair pricing of 5.2x P/E and 2.0x P/BV for E-Genting, and 3) the profitability of E-Genting’s business. Genting Malaysia also accounts for close to 80% of E-Genting’s revenue. Ascend International only has minimal operations at this juncture.

    What You Should Do
    Any share price weakness from this news should be viewed as an opportunity to accumulate the stock. Genting Malaysia’s defensive earnings and strong operating cash flow are appealing in uncertain times like these.
My comments?

It's the 4th RPT lah.

When will Genting Malaysia respect its minority shareholders and stop all these Related Party Transactions (RPT) nonsense?

Is it so difficult to respect?

CIMB said '.. we take comfort in 1) the size of the acquisition, which is small at 3% of net cash '

Gosh! This deal is worth 50 million ringgit. Is 50 million ringgit small? WTH? And how could CIMB insult the intelligence of its readers by comparing it versus the 'net cash'?

50 million ringgit is 50 million ringgit is 50 million ringgit!

And the last part... it's advice "What You Should Do - Any share price weakness from this news should be viewed as an opportunity to accumulate the stock.'

Oh yeah, as usual any share price weakness is an opportunity to accumulate the stock... but just what kind of stock is one accumulating? What kind of company is this? Does the investor looks smart investing in a company who only does nothing but RPTs? Does it make sense?

And if the minority does nothing, such transactions will keep on happening over and over and over again.

Past postings:

Sigh!

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

And Ambang Sehati Is Rewarded With 73.6 Million From Their Purchase Of BRDB's Prime Assets

From Bandar Raya Development Bhd's annual report:

  • INVESTOR RELATIONS

    Dialogue Between The Company And Investors The Board recognises the need for and the importance of effective communication with shareholders as well as potential investors and the public. T he Group communicates with its shareholders and stakeholders regularly through timely release of financial results on a quarterly basis, press releases and announcements which provide an overview of the Group’s performance and operations and disclosure of material information. In addition, the Group has established a website (www.brdb.com.my) which shareholders and members of the public can access for corporate information and news/events relating to the Group and for channelling their queries.
That was their pledge. They wrote that in their annual report.



They recognised the need for and the importance of effective communication with shareholders. They also announced the importance of the disclosure of material information.

However, when Bandar Raya announced that the Chairman had offered to buy assets from the compan in yet another LUDICROUS RPT Transaction, all that was announced that the board was just given two weeks to reply to the offer.

Just two weeks. WTH!

They didn't even have the decency to disclose the offer price to the investing public.

So what's the point of making that pledge in their annual statement?

Does Corporate Malaysia ever keep their words? Or is really talk so cheap from Corporate Malaysia.

I wonder.

And the manner of the offer was utterly ludicrous. Two weeks to accept the offer! Was the world coming to an end that Bandar Raya had to make such a rush decision?

And the board decision?

http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/business/193128-flash-brdb-to-reward-shareholders-with-80c-a-share.html

  • BRDB to reward shareholders with 80c a share
    Written by Chua Sue-Ann of theedgemalaysia.com
    Monday, 19 September 2011 20:15

    KUALA LUMPUR: Bandar Raya Development Bhd's (BRDB) board has accepted the offer from major shareholder, Ambang Sehati Sdn Bhd, to acquire four of BRDB's investment assets for RM430 million net of liabilities of RM484 million.
    BDRB said on Monday, Sept 19 that following the proposed disposal, BRDB would distribute part of the proceeds to the shareholders via a net cash dividend of 80 sen per share.

    Ambang Sehati - which owns 18.88% of BRDB - had on Sept 5 proposed to acquire BRDB's four investment PROPERTIES [], namely CapSquare Retail Centre, Permas Jusco Mall, Bangsar Shopping Centre and Menara BRDB.

    The four properties have a total net lettable area of 907,817 sq ft and a total carrying value RM942.4 million, according to BRDB's latest annual report.

    Ambang Sehati's shareholders include BRDB chairman Datuk Mohamed Moiz JM Ali Moiz, Datuk Seri Akbar Khan Mohamed Khan and Abdul Sathar MSM Abdul Kadir.

    BRDB chief executive officer Datuk Jaganath Sabapathy said the board would table the offer to shareholders by the end of this year.
Four prime assets sold for RM430 million net plus liabilities of RM484 million???

Their pdf announcement can be downloaded  here

I would like to look at that so-called deal sweetener, that 80 sen per share carrot.

So BRDB is going to use 390.121 million from the sale of these assets and used it as dividends.

And each shareholder is to be rewarded some 800 ringgit for every 1,000 shares held.

But is it really a reward?

Or let me put it this way, for whom does this 'reward' benefit?

Think about this...

Ambang Sehati owns some 18.8% shares or some 92,070,812 shares. 

A 800.00 per 1,000 shares 'reward' will mean that Ambang Sehati will get some 73.6 million!

Now isn't this sweet.

They buy these prime assets, and they are also rewarded 73.6 million for this purchase of prime assets!

How?

Insanity?????

Or is it just plain ludicrous???

Goodness me!

And tell me, is this 914 million purchase of these 4 prime assets even fair?

Do check their so-called valuation method posted in the Bursa announcement here: http://announcements.bursamalaysia.com/EDMS/edmsweb.nsf/all/FF67....pdf

Is it even fair?

Do tell me!

Four prime assets sold at a time when currently there is huge demand of shopping malls from local and foreign buyers!

Sold within two weeks!

Comeon....

If BRDB wanted to sell, if they put in an effort, I am sure they would get a much better price than what's offered!

Seriously? I think RPT should be stopped!

WTH!

Just what is wrong with Corporate Malaysia????

Thursday, September 08, 2011

A Look Back At MMC Purchase Of Senai Airport Terminal

In light of  Bandar Raya Asset Sale: Yet Another Ludicrous RPT Transaction, I remembered what I wrote back on July 2011 in the posting: Just Another Feedback On Corporate Governance

One of wish was on 

  • And I want to see more done on the issue of related party transactions ( RPT ). Nowadays, related party transactions seems to be increasing more and more. It's rather shocking and sometimes I wonder how the company manage to get the votes of approval for all these transactions. I have seen so many listed companies with so many RPTs that it so unreal. Why do these major shareholders have links to almost most of the transactions done by the company?
One of the recent re-highlighted case was 

And I think it's time we revisit another past case involding MMC and

The issues (as highlighted in the local papers then) involving this deal:


  • Based on the announcement, MMC has undertaken to advance RM417.2 million which is owed by SATS to the vendors. The vendors in the deal are Semarak Sestu Sdn Bhd and Suria Kemboja Sdn Bhd which own SATS. Both companies are believed to be linked to MMC’s major shareholder Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Albukhary....
  • In the first place, does MMC need more land? Even if it does, why must the deal be done now, especially in cash? Is it necessary for MMC to undertake the deal at this juncture when asset prices are fast coming down?
  • When will Senai Airport and the land around it contribute to the bottom line of MMC positively? Also, what is the true valuation of Senai Airport and land that comes together with it?
  • The unaudited net tangible asset (NTA) of the SATS Group and loss after tax as of June 30, 2008 are RM295.5 million and RM24.8 million.
  • The proposed purchase of the 2,718 acres for RM9.45 per square foot (sq ft) is also questionable.Based on previous reports, the land was acquired from Lee Rubber at less than RM3 per sq ft. Now it is sold for three times the amount transacted less than two years ago.
  • Why does it need more long term assets?
  • Without strong cash flow, MMC will be sitting with a lot of assets but no cash to develop them.
On the back of global financial crisis that was bringing companies down to their knees, MMC wanted to buy SATS, a company that is losing tons of money, in a CASH deal??? Only rm1.7 Billion!!!! And yeah, SATS so happened to be owned by MMC boss also!!!!

There was this one nice table published on Star papers.


The very glaring part was SATS was MMC forecasted SATS to make some 93.3 million for its fy 2010!

Needless to say I was shocked since SATS was losing money all the while and minute MMC suggested that they wanted to do this RPT deal, SATS suddenly was forecasted to make a whopping 93.3 million. ( Later on this issue)


Hwang DBS decided to use implied price per passenger as one of their yardsticks to justify this RPT!

Price per passenger? ( Huh? Exactly! )

I guess with SATS having a history of losses, they ran out of yardsticks to use. Yeah, a loss making company was sold for 1.95 Billion.
And MSWG did try to fight against this clear lopsided deal. See MSWG Gains Vital First Victory In Its Battle Against MMC's Senai Airport Terminal Purchase

But sadly... Another Sad Day For Corporate Malaysia As MMC's Senai Airport Deal Is Approved!

Let me highlight an article on Business Times back then.

  • MMC shareholders say Yes to Senai Airport deal

    By Adeline Paul Raj Published: 2009/03/21

    MMC Corp Bhd's (2194) shareholders approved its controversial plan to buy Senai Airport Terminal Services Sdn Bhd (SATS) for RM1.7 billion despite strong objection from minorities.


    At an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) yesterday, which dragged on for four hours,
    minority shareholders were vocal, making it clear they were against MMC paying such a hefty price in the related-party deal.
    MMC is owned by Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary, who is also a shareholder in SATS.

    "The minorities were very unhappy and almost wanted to stage a walkout. But we managed to tell them not to do so, and vote," said Minority Shareholder Watchdog Group (MSWG) chief executive officer Rita Benoy Bushon, who attended the EGM.

    Bushon said the MMC chairman had invoked his discretion to have a poll instead of a vote by hands and, in the end, 97 per cent voted in favour of the deal.

    This was because minority shareholders were few in number.
    The majority of the non-interested parties who could vote on the deal comprised institutional investors.

    MMC is to pay RM580 million for SATS' loss-making Senai Inter-national Airport and RM1.12 billion for land which will be developed as an "airport city".

    "I'm not against them buying SATS; it's just the price. It's a valuation argument, that's all," a minority shareholder said.

    He, and others, was irked that valuations were based on projected values rather than the current value.

    Some felt that MMC, which has some RM20 billion debt, should be preserving its cash now that the economy was slowing down. Others felt that it should wait for a better price.

    For MMC, the buy enables it to exploit SATS' potential to become a regional cargo and logistics hub.

    MMC chief executive officer Hasni Harun did not face the press yesterday, but in a statement reiterated that the SATS purchase was commercially viable and in the long-term interest of the group and stakeholders.

    "With this, MMC will own the only privatised airport in the country and it will create value to the group's transport and logistics business," he said.

    Asked if she was happy the deal would go through, Bushon replied: "I had expected that the board would have somehow looked at the valuation again."

    She said the board had given assurance, however, that it would be accountable for the purchase
    . The deal is expected to be accretive in two years.

Today, I would like to focus on the very last passage.
  • She said the board had given assurance, however, that it would be accountable for the purchase.The deal is expected to be accretive in two years.
This deal was expect to be accretive in two years.

That was March 2009.

Today, its Sep 2011.

It's more than 2 years since this deal took place.

Here's MMC Q4 earnings posted on March 2009: Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 31/12/2008. MMC had net profit of 527.319 million then.

So after this deal... surely MMC earnings would improve yes?

After all, MMC did say that they said SATS could be earnings some 93 million for its fy 2010.

So this is MMC earnings reported on Feb 2011: Quarterly rpt on consolidated results for the financial period ended 31/12/2010 MMC's net profit? 344.940 million.

Ahem!

I then looked at MMC's segmental earnings. I was curious to find out SATS contribution to MMC. From the pdf file attached to that Feb 2011 quarterly earnings:



I guess SATS is classified under 'Transport and logistics'.

But then MMC also has its own port business and also Smart. And these would probably be classified under as 'Transport and logistics' business too. ( Err... not very clear, yes? )

I then proceed to search its Annual Report.

And I am glad to say the info is there and Senai Airport is indeed not losing money.

But...



Quote: "The company recorded a PAT of RM63.2 million, due to the recognition of a substantial deferred tax income during the year."

Ahem... back in 2009, MMC promised 93.3 million in profits from SATS.

How?

Well, no matter what's said here again, this related party transaction, worth some 1.95 billion is a done and dusted deal.

But then I thought about it...
The current corporate governance feedback seeked by SC came to mind.

I am confused.

They keep asking for feedbacks but what good is feedback without ENFORCEMENT of corporate governance?

Exactly!

We can have all the nice blue prints and feedbacks... but what's most important is... I want to see action la.

Can ah? Can I wish for better ENFORCEMENT?

That's not asking too much, yes?

We have all this guidelines and rules but if the enforcement isn't there, then what's the point?

Think about it....

Current Bandar Raya current attempt to do a related party transaction involving its chairman and its key prime assets.

How?

Board is given one week to accept the offer.

But... no price is stated.

Like this also can?


PS: Just in case, you have better feedbacks, email your opinions and views to Gblueprint@seccom.com.my.  You need to do this by 15 September 2011.


Or if you prefer to send in writing, mail it to:

CG Blueprint Team
Securities Commission Malaysia
3, Persiaran Bukit Kiara, Bukit Kiara
50490 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Wednesday, September 07, 2011

Bandar Raya Asset Sale: Yet Another Ludicrous RPT Transaction

I have always been against

And on Monday, Bandar Raya decided to do one SMALL little related party transaction.

  • KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Mohamed Moiz Jabir Mohamed Ali Moiz, chairman of Bandar Raya Developments Bhd (BRDB), has proposed to buy three properties from the group for a yet to be determined cash amount.
    Moiz, through Ambang Sehati Sdn Bhd, plans to buy The Bangsar Shopping Centre and Menara BRDB, CapSquare Retail Centre, and Permas Jusco Mall. The properties are valued at RM942.37 million based on BRDB's latest annual report.
    Ambang, which holds 18.88 per cent of BRDB, will buy the assets based on fair value as determined by an independent valuer to be mutually agreed.

    "Ambang Sehati believes that this would enable the group to monetise these assets and achieve a more efficient utilisation of its capital," BRDB said in its statement to Bursa Malaysia yesterday.
Arrrrghhhhh!!!!

Incredibly unreal. ( Those statements were taken from Business Times article yesterday.)

Think about it.

Chairman's own company... plans to buy Bandar Raya's 3 prime assets ... and says that this purchase would enable Bandar Raya to monetise these assets and achieve a more efficient utilisation of its capital.

Errrr... correct me if I am wrong or STUPID here but isn't the Chairman saying that currently Bandar Raya is badly managed since the need to monetise these assets means that Bandar Raya has a bad management of its cash and Bandar Raya needs  a better utilisation of its capital!

Do you agree? Or I am wrong here?

But then... my problem is...... he's the Chairman for crying out loud!

And the Chairman's idea to solve this problem is to have Bandar Raya dispose of these prime assets to his own company?????

What? What? What?

Is this a joke or what?

Comeon....

And yeah.. it's a
































  • Questions over Bandar Raya property offer

    By Shahriman Johari
    Published: 2011/09/07

    Should Bandar Raya Developments Bhd (BRDB) sell choice assets to its major shareholders?

    Ambang Sehati Sdn Bhd, which holds 18.88 per cent of BRDB, has offered to buy selected properties from the group.

    These are arguably the best of the lot within BRDB's stable of assets, with The Bangsar Shopping Centre and Menara BRDB top of the list. The rest are CapSquare Retail Centre in Kuala Lumpur, and Permas Jusco Mall in Johor.

    The assets are worth close to RM1 billion with BSC and Menara BRDB making up 70 per cent of the total value, according to its 2010 annual report.

    Does BRDB need the money? It probably does. As at June 30 this year it has total debt of some RM769 million. It paid about RM35 million in interest last year, which is more than a quarter of its net profit in the same period.

    Analysts also agree that it needs cash for further property development. It only has some RM73 million in cash and short term deposits.

    But should the board of BRDB restrict the buyer to just Ambang, owned by four investors led by BRDB chairman Datuk Mohamed Moiz Jabir Mohamed Ali Moiz?

    It shouldn't. If the objective is to raise as much money from an asset sale, it should invite other bidders. Indeed, rumour has it that a lot of parties have approached BRDB about buying just the BSC. Having other bidders would probably help BRDB to get more money which would also benefit its shareholders.

    Industry executives also say that shopping malls are currently in demand by local and foreign investors. In May, Hong Kong's Cheung Kong Group bought three Malaysian malls for more than RM400 million.

    Another important question is why would BRDB want to offload assets that provide steady income to the group. It is now a common theme for developers to have that recurring base to offset lean years.

    BRDB's property business made a pre-tax profit of more than RM146 million in 2010, its biggest contributor. Its manufacturing and construction business made pre-tax profits of less than RM3 million last year.

    This means that Ambang or any other interested party must fork out quite a sum to compensate BRDB for lost future earnings.

    In less than two weeks, the board of BRDB will have to decide on Ambang's offer. Although the promise of quick cash is tempting, ultimately, minority shareholders will have to decide since the offer is a related party deal.
And that's another shocker!!!!

Less than two weeks for the board of BRDB to decide???????

What the......

2 weeks to decide?????

Comeon..... are we talking about lobsters here?????

Holy cow!!!!

And best of all, the price is yet to be determined!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How can la!

Come on Bursa.... what kind of stock exchange is this???

2 weeks to decide this deal and no pricing?????

If I am on the BRDB board, I would tell the board where to stick this proposal ........

Sigh!

Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Johor Port: Related Party Transaction, Underwater land And Privatisation

Flashback.... 13 Nov 2004.

  • Johor Port diversifies into property

    November 13 2004

    JOHOR Port Bhd, controlled by Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary, is diversifying into property development to broaden its earnings base.

    The company has proposed to buy land in Pontian, Johor, for RM403 million cash.

    The five parcels of leasehold land of about 890ha are designated for petrochemical and maritime industry use. The land is located opposite the Port of Tanjung Pelepas.

    Johor Port is also buying the entire stake in Seaport Worldwide Sdn Bhd, which owns the land, from Indra Cita Sdn Bhd, also controlled by Syed Mokhtar.
    “The development of the land into a petrochemical and maritime industry centre is expected to contribute positively to the existing business of the group as shipping, warehousing and other logistic and distribution activities are expected to rise in tandem with such development,” Johor Port announced on Wednesday.

    However, the company said it has no operating history in property development.

    “Therefore, there is uncertainty as to whether this new business would be successful or the cost of investment in Seaport would be recovered,” it added.

    “Nevertheless, Seaport may leverage on Johor Port’s vast experience and skills in maritime-related activities, which are inherent in the existing business of the group,” it said.

    Johor Port also said that it had entered a conditional subscription agreement with Indra Cita and Seaport to buy one million new shares of RM1 each in Seaport at RM403 per share.

    Under the terms of the agreement, Johor Port will subscribe for the Seaport shares in three portions. It will pay RM141.05 million for the first two portions in the first quarter of next year and RM120.9 million for the third portion in the first quarter of 2006.

    Johor Port said it will finance the acquisition with internally-generated funds.

    Upon completion of the proposed acquisition, Johor Port’s consolidated net earnings per share (EPS) will be reduced by about 4.48 sen per year arising from the settlement of the interest- bearing debt owed by Seaport Terminal and the reduction in interest income to the company due to the payment of the purchase consideration.

    For the six months ended June 30 2004, Johor Port reported a net profit of RM44.9 million on the back of a revenue of RM160.2 million. EPS was at 13.62 sen.
Johor Port was trading at 2.49 then.

And Johor Port is what one would call a clean cash company, flush with cash and no debt.


Now if one checked on the quarterly earnings (note the importance of quarterly earnings) , one would note that Johor Port had 266 million net cash. BUT it also has an existing 178 million owing from holding company. (*cough*) How much is that worth? Well, 178 million would equate to around 53.9 sen cash per share. So instead of the holding company owing money to Johor Port, why can't Johor Port get the money back from the holding company and return the cash back to the minorities?

And out of the blue, Johor Port announces they are investing into property. A business with they has no experience in. A business which one of the majority shareholder has vested interest in. The left hand sell to the right hand, the right hand sells to the public.

( Isn't this yet another highlight proving yet again one cannot rely SOLELY on cash per share yardstick. Yes, it is very good to know that the company u want to invest in is in a nett cash position BUT this should NOT be the main reason why one invest into the stock. Because the owner can just do anything they want with the cash!! )

The market wasn't impressed and RHB Research came out strongly opposing the deal.

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

17 November, 2004


RHB Highlights

Johor Port Bhd (RM2.46) : Acquiring 2,256 Acres Of Land From Controlling Shareholder For RM403m Downgrade to UNDERPERFORM

Johor Port has proposed to acquire from ultimate controlling shareholder Indra Cita Sdn Bhd (Indra Cita) five parcels of leasehold land measuring a total of 2,255.5 acres in Mukims of Serkat and Sungai Karang, Pontian District, Johor, at the south western tip of Peninsular Malaysia, for RM403m. Designated for petrochemical and maritime industry use, the land is located at the river mouth of Sungai Pulai and opposite of the Port of Tanjung Pelepas. The southern part of the land adjoins to the project site for the Tanjung Bin power plant.

Indra Cita holds a 100% stake in Johor Port’s parent Seaport Terminal (Johore) Sdn Bhd (Seaport Terminal) which in turn owns a 51.7% stake in Johor Port.

As the deal will be bundled together with the settlement of the RM182.1m inter-company loan owed by Seaport Terminal to Johor Port, Johor Port will effectively only fork out RM220.9m for the acquisition.

Independent valuer Henry Butcher puts a market value of RM540m to the land. After accounting for "estimated deferred taxation attributable to the fair value of the land" amounting to RM137m, the net value is assessed to be RM403m or about RM179,000/acre or RM4.10/sf. Indra Cita has invested or incurred a total sum of RM50.7m (including payment of land premium) in relation to the land. This means Indra Cita will walk away with RM352.3m profits.

Rationale for the proposed acquisition, according to Johor Port, is to "diversify its business portfolio to include property development activities". Johor Port also believes its existing businesses, i.e. shipping, warehousing, and logistics and distribution activities will rise in tandem with the development of the land into a petrochemical and maritime industry centre. Johor Port estimates that the acquisition will erode its EPS by 4.5sen due to interest income foregone.

We find Johor Port’s rationale for the acquisition lame. We do not think the acquisition makes commercial sense to Johor Port based on the following reasons:

1. Given the defensive nature of the port business, we find it unnecessary for Johor Port to "diversify" its earnings base in order to counter sector-specific cyclical downturns, more so, to diversify into property development that is totally unrelated and provides no synergy to the port business;

2. While Johor Port did have cash balances of RM266m as at 30 June 2004 that it can spend, there are other top priorities. Johor Port Corporate Affairs Director Dr. Lim Meng Soon was quoted by the press on 7 October 2004 as saying that Johor Port has plans to invest RM200m over the next two years to build five new warehouses and upgrade wharfs, jetties, equipment, warehouse infrastructure and computerised systems, in anticipation of a significant rise in throughput. In addition, Johor Port’s outstanding long-term loans amounting to a total of RM200m are due for repayment by instalment from now to July 2008, including a bullet payment of RM70m in January 2006;

3. The acquisition will turn Johor Port from an asset-light-cash-rich company into an asset-rich-cash-strapped company.   In consideration for the land, Johor Port will not only forego some RM182m inter-company loan owed to it by Seaport Terminal, it will also part with some additional RM221m. This will almost deplete its cash balances of RM266m that are earmarked for capital expenditure over the next two years and loan repayment over the next four years. Johor Port will turn from a net cash of RM66m as at 30 June 2004, to a net debt of RM154m, translating into a net gearing of 0.2x after the acquisition;

4. We doubt if the industrial plots/properties at the proposed "petrochemical industrial centre" on the land will be selling like hot cakes, given the already crowded playing field. There are now already three designated petrochemial centres in Malaysia, i.e. Kertih in Terengganu, Gebeng in Pahang, and closer to home, Pasir Gudang/Tanjung Langsat in Johor;

5. Assuming the petrochemical centre project on the land is indeed viable, Johor Port’s immediate upside potential is nonetheless fully exhausted. This is because the land will be acquired in its converted form and at the market rate for converted land in the Pontian area. Assuming an efficiency of 90%, i.e. 90% of the land area is saleable after providing for infrastructure, the adjusted cost of the land to Johor Port will be about RM198,500/acre or RM4.55/sf. Several small plots of industrial land of less than 10 acres in the Pontian area have changed hands at about RM200,000/acre or RM4.60/sf in recent years.

As an aspiring first-time property developer, we find Johor Port extraordinary gung-ho by committing itself to 2,255.5 acres of land (equivalent to the size of two self-contained townships that take at least 14 years to complete, even at Klang Valley’s pace) at the market rate for converted land. The annual holding cost alone will be RM12m (based on interest income foregone at 3% p.a.) to RM24m (based on borrowing cost of 6% p.a.) that will erode Johor Port’s FY12/05 pretax profit by 8-16%.

Seasoned conventional developers do it differently. They buy agriculture land at cheap prices, convert the land themselves and probably in phases in order to minimise cash outflow (payment of land premium). They do buy converted land sometimes, but only if they are confident of flipping it, i.e. launching and selling the property, almost immediately to manage cashflow.

We view the latest corporate move of Johor Port negatively. We are downgrading Johor Port to UNDERPERFORM from Outperform with a view to cease coverage altogether. While the minority shareholders of Johor Port may still stand a chance of defeating the proposal at the EGM (Seaport Terminal will abstain from voting as it is a related party), we believe irrespective of the outcome of the EGM, the damage is already done!

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

Yeah, with this RELATED PARTY TRANSACTION, Johor Port soon traded below 2.00! If not mistaken, Johor Port soon sank to a low of 1.90. ( Remember it was trading at 2.49 before this)

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

Now the Edge Weekly came out with the following article.

Corporate: Johor Port's plan draws flak


By Lim Ai Leen

It reeks of a bailout."
This statement comes from one fund manager, but it seems to reflect what most of the investing community thinks of Johor Port Bhd's plan to pay RM403 million for 2,255.5 acres of land in Pontian, Johor.
On Nov 10, Johor Port announced that it had entered into a conditional agreement with Indra Cita Sdn Bhd (IC) and Seaport Worldwide Sdn Bhd (SW) to acquire the entire equity interest in SW for RM403 million. SW owns five parcels of 99-year leasehold land measuring 2,255 acres, which has been designated as a petrochemical centre and for the maritime industry. This land is located opposite the Port of Tanjung Pelepas.

Two factors irk these fund managers.

First, this is a related-party transaction. IC is the majority shareholder of Johor Port, via its wholly owned subsidiary Seaport Terminal (Johore) Sdn Bhd (ST). ST, in turn, has a 51.7% stake in Johor Port. SW is another of IC's wholly owned subsidiaries. Business tycoon Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary sits at the top of this hierarchy of companies, as the ultimate owner of IC.

ST also owes Johor Port RM182.1 million as at Oct 31, this year. This debt will be settled by IC from the RM403 million, hence the bailout allegations. It is understood that this inter-company advance was first given to ST in 1999, when Johor Port had hopes of buying a 30% stake in Pelabuhan Tanjung Pelepas Sdn Bhd (PTP), which operates Port of Tanjung Pelepas. This plan was aborted subsequently, but the money remained at ST. PTP is now controlled by Malaysia Mining Corp Bhd, Syed Mokhtar's flagship company.

David Ng, portfolio manager at Hwang-DBS Asset Management, says Johor Port has been in his portfolio of stocks for the last six months, due to its low valuations. "The stock has always traded at a discount because of the outstanding loan. So it's been priced in. But the company was earning good interest in the books and we were hoping that some resolution would come through. But this is not the way we expected [the loan to be resolved]," he says.

Second, the RM403 million price tag seems a tad high, especially when compared with the RM50.7 million SW incurred to settle the land premium and registration fees with the state government. "There are no hints on what value IC has added since its acquisition [less than seven months ago]," says Hwang-DBS Vickers' research report dated Nov 17.

According to Hwang-DBS Vickers, the buy works out to RM4.10 psf, which, says a professional valuer, is expensive.

"Much of the land is under water. So whether the price is fair depends on who's paying for the reclamation costs and how much earth is needed," he says. According to Johor Port's announcement, there will be further capital expenditure required for the planning and development of the land such as soil reclamation and infrastructure works.

Which means that Johor Port will bear the cost.

"Reclamation will cost between RM6 to RM8 psf. Even assuming a conservative reclamation cost of RM6 psf, and assuming that only 50% of the land is used, this will translate into a net land value of RM20 psf [RM6 plus RM4, divided by half]," he estimates. He says this is double the net value for Tanjung Langsat, a petrochemical zone built on solid soil in Pasir Gudang, Johor.

However, Johor Port's independent valuation, conducted by property consultant, Henry Butcher Malaysia (Johor) Sdn Bhd, estimates the market value of the land at RM540 million. This means that at RM403 million, Johor Port is getting the land at 25% below market value.

Good cash flow

In any event, it appears that Johor Port is looking beyond the immediate horizon. It believes that the land is strategically positioned for the future. "Its location… is another added advantage in terms of its possible linkage to the transportation infrastructure put in place by the Johor state government in an attempt to make Senai Airport [a regional cargo centre], Port of Tanjung Pelepas and Johor Port [both to function as major international shipping cargo centres], into a regional transportation hub…", it states in the announcement.

The fund managers, however, are not taken by the view. "Investors are concerned because the company is buying land from a private entity belonging to a major shareholder. And they are wary because of the price that's being paid," surmises Ng.

He believes that this purchase, to be paid for from internal funds, is not in the best interest of a company that currently trades at decent valuations and generates strong cash flows.

According to a shipping analyst, Johor Port generates between RM90 million and RM100 million free cash flow per annum. It is also sitting on a RM266 million cash pile (as at June this year), which will be reduced once it forks out RM221 million (RM403 million less RM182 million loan set-off) for this venture.

"It is making good profits even though it charges the cheapest port rates in Malaysia. And now that there is talk that the tariffs will be revised upwards across the board, it stands to make even better profits," says Ng.

This won't happen, though, if the cash is sucked up in infrastructure and reclamation costs. And as yet, there is no indication of how long the project will take to give returns, or whether a port services company can turn itself into a successful property developer. Even Johor Port acknowledges the uncertainty.

It states in the announcement: "The Johor Port group has no operating history in the property development business. Therefore, there is uncertainty as to whether this new business would be successful or the cost of investment in SW would be recovered. Nevertheless, SW may leverage on Johor Port's vast experience and skills in maritime-related activities, which is inherent in the existing business of the group which consists of shipping, warehousing and other logistics and distribution activities."

For the immediate term, the market is reacting negatively. The company stock fell from its six-month high of RM2.46 on Nov 10, to close at RM2.17 last Friday.

A local research house says its sensitivity analysis shows that earnings per share (EPS) for financial years ending Dec 31, 2004, to 2006, could fall by between 3% and 5% upon the completion of the deal. "This is mostly from the reduced inter-company loan interest and lower interest income from the net cash outflow," it states.

In the announcement, Johor Port states that the proposed acquisition is expected to decrease the consolidated net EPS of the company by approximately 4.48 sen.

It is early days yet, as Johor Port is still waiting for a feasibility study and due diligence review to be completed. Then the proposal has to pass muster with the regulatory authorities and the Minister of Finance Inc, who is Johor Port's special shareholder. On top of these approvals, the deal has to go before the 48.3% of shareholders who are not conflicted on the issue.

The dissenting voice is already getting louder. Ng believes that the minorities' ability to vote down the idea is "quite strong". He says: "The minority shareholders have to show that shareholder activism is growing in Malaysia. The days of minority shareholders just accepting their fate are gone."

The management of Johor Port declined to answer questions from The Edge, stating: "We trust that the information as provided in the announcement will address all the queries…"

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

Ah... the minorities ability to vote down the idea.... let's see what happens next as time goes by.... hmm... is time the friend or enemy of mine?

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

Analysts: 'No' vote may boost Johor Port stock


By KANG SIEW LI

August 3 2005

JOHOR Port Bhd's share price will likely return to its previous record of RM2.49 last year if its shareholders vote against its proposal to buy Seaport Worldwide Sdn Bhd at the company's extraordinary general meeting on August 15, analysts say.

The share price has dropped 25 per cent since it announced plans to acquire Seaport Worldwide from Indra Citra Sdn Bhd for RM403 million last November. The stock closed yesterday at RM1.90 per share, up 0.01 sen from Monday.

Seaport Worldwide owns five parcels of 99-year leasehold land measuring 913ha in Pontian, Johor, opposite Port of Tanjung Pelepas. The land is designated for petrochemical and maritime industry use.

Avenue Securities Sdn Bhd head of research Noor Azwa Mohammad Noor said analysts and investors did not like the deal and they made their feelings known through Johor Port's share price performance after announcement on the proposed deal was made.

"So, probably if the deal did not go through, the share price could even go back to the pre-announcement level which was between RM2.15 and RM2.50 per share," he told Business Times yesterday.

Noor Azwa reiterates an "outperform" rating on Johor Port's stock as he feels the negative news with regards to the controversial deal has been reflected in the share price given current undemanding valuation, which is even below historical lows.

"But if the deal goes through, I see no impact (on the company's earnings) for the financial years ending December 31 2005 and 2006," he added. ( Moolah: huh? No impact? But what about all the cash? Where will it go if the deal goes thru? )

Hwang-DBS Vickers Research Sdn Bhd senior analyst Wong Ming Tek also predicts that Johor Port's share price will return to pre-announcement price levels if shareholders were to reject the proposal.

He said the near-term earnings dilution and long-term uncertainty make it difficult to justify the acquisition cost of RM403 million over Seaport Worldwide's original cost of the land of RM51 million incurred seven months before Johor Port's proposal. The premium over Seaport Worldwide's cost is 18 times the dividend Johor Port will pay for 2004.

"Until there is new information, we maintain our view that the proposed acquisition of Seaport Worldwide will result in near-term earnings deterioration (for Johor Port). In the longer term, there is too much uncertainty for us to be convinced of the acquisition's feasibility," Wong said, maintaining a "fully valued" recommendation on the stock with a RM2 price target, based on six times the financial year 2006 earnings per share of 32 sen.

OSK Research Sdn Bhd manager Chris Eng said he remains positive of the company's management and operational capability, but views the proposed acquisition negatively.

"If the deal is voted out, we expect Johor Port's share price to move," he said, maintaining a "buy" rating and fair value of RM2.50 for the stock


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

And then... comes the shocker....

-------------------------------
Watchdog group now advises minorities to approve Johor Port proposal


August 9 2005

THE Minority Shareholder Watchdog Group (MSWG), in an about- turn, is advising minority shareholders of Johor Port Bhd to vote for its proposal to buy Seaport Worldwide Sdn Bhd for RM403 million.

"Although there are risks associated with venturing into port-related property development, the proposed acquisition would present good potential for enhancing Johor Port's profitability, hence shareholder value," MSWG chief executive officer Abdul Wahab Jaafar Sidek said in a statement yesterday.

He said its latest view was derived from Johor Port's recent circular to its shareholders as well as the watchdog's observation during a site visit to the port and Johor Port's management representations last Wednesday.

"We learnt that Johor Port is unable to expand its activities as there is no additional space for expansion in its current site in Pasir Gudang. In this regard, the proposed acquisition will provide an alternative site for Johor Port's future expansion," said Abdul Wahab.

In late February, the MSWG urged Johor Port's minority shareholders to vote against the proposal as it saw the plan as an attempt to settle an interest-bearing inter-company loan amounting to RM182.1 million as at October 31 2004.

-----------------------
No additional space to expand? So expand at the cost of the minorities? And we are talking about UNDER WATER land! Oh my! And that was MSWG sole reasoning to flip its earlier objection?

Let's read what MSWG said on Feb 2005!
---------------------
New Watchdog showing its teeth again!


’No’ to JPort

By Yap Lih Huey

Minority shareholders of Johor Port Bhd have been urged to vote against the company’s proposal to diversify into property development at a shareholders’ meeting to be convened later.

In making the call, the Minority Shareholders Watchdog Group (MSWG) sees Johor Port’s plan as an attempt to settle an interest-bearing inter-company loan amounting to RM182.1 million as at Oct 31, 2004.

“MSWG would like to advise minority shareholders that the proposed acquisition is not in their best interests and in that they are encouraged to vote against the proposed acquisition,” its chief executive officer Abdul Wahab Jaafar Sidek tells FinancialDaily.

“The proposed acquisition is a scheme to settle in full the inter-company loans owed by Seaport Terminal (Johor) Sdn Bhd (ST) to Johor Port,” he adds.

MSWG says the proposed acquisition is expected to reduce Johor Port’s free cash flow, its capacity to maintain an average dividend payout of 5% to 6% per annum, and reduce its earnings per share.

Johor Port has performed profitably, generating free cash flows of between RM90 million and RM110 million per annum and is cash rich, having fixed deposits totalling over RM231.2 million as of Sept 30, 2004.

Besides its consistent dividend, it posted an earnings per share of 21.39 sen for the nine months to Sept 30, 2004. The counter closed at RM1.99 on Feb 24.

On Nov 10, 2004, Johor Port announced that it had entered into a conditional agreement with Indra Cita Sdn Bhd and Seaport Worldwide Sdn Bhd (SW) to acquire the entire interest in SW for RM403 million to diversify into property development as an objective to broaden its earnings base.

SW has five parcels of leasehold land measuring 902ha at the river mouth of Sungai Pulai and opposite Port of Tanjung Pelepas, which are designated for petrochemical and maritime industry use.

Johor Port’s proposed acquisition is a related-party transaction. Indra Cita is the majority shareholder of Johor Port, via its wholly owned subsidiary, Seaport Terminal (Johore) Sdn Bhd, which in turn has a 51% stake in Johor Port. SW is Indra Cita’s subsidiary.

Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary is the ultimate owner of these companies via his ownership in Indra Cita.

Abdul Wahab says although the land is acquired at 25% below market value of RM540 million, the additional capital and reclamation expenditure of between RM6 and RM8 per square feet will likely make the land more expensive.

“Taking these costs into account, the total cash consideration for the proposed acquisition would amount to more than RM20 per square foot. The market sentiment is going to be negative in view of the above factors,” he adds.

MSWG expects Johor Port to register an improved performance due to higher revenue for its financial year ended Dec 31, 2004.

Last year, Johor Port was given the certification by London Metal Exchange, which allows the port operator to handle more non-ferrous metal containers and consignments passing through its port.

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

Sigh! First he say NO giving all the valid reasoning and then he changed it by saying YES!

Needless to say.... guess the outcome of the voting?

Do you reckon the minorities stand a chance with the MWSG changing its opinion just like that?

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

Johor Port gets 5% discount for SWW acquisition


By Tamimi Omar

Johor Port Bhd has successfully negotiated for a 5% discount to the RM403 million purchase price for its proposed acquisition of Seaport Worldwide Sdn Bhd (SWW) through the subscription of new shares in SWW.

“In addition, the payment terms for the consideration are proposed to be staggered over two years” Johor Port said on Aug 15.

On Nov 10, 2004, Johor Port entered into a conditional subscription agreement with Indra Cita Sdn Bhd (IC) and SWW to effectively acquire the entire equity interest in SWW.

It said the acquisition would enable JPB to diversify its business portfolio to include property development activities in order to broaden the future earnings sources of the group.


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

SUCCESSFULLY? :(

a 5% discount for underwater land????? :(

And RHB had this to say.....

---------------------
16 August, 2005


RHB Highlights

􀁘 Johor Port Berhad (rm1.89) : EGM Approves Controversial Land Deal, FY12/06-07 Earnings Downgraded UNDERPERFORM

􀁘 Johor Port’s minority shareholders at yesterday’s EGM gave the company go-ahead to acquire from ultimate controlling shareholder Indra Cita Sdn Bhd (Indra Cita) five parcels of leasehold mangrove land measuring a total of 2,255.5 acres in Pontian, Johor. Johor Port also announced that it has successfully negotiated for a 5% reduction in price from RM403m to RM382.9m and that the payment will be staggered over two years. Indra Cita holds a 100% stake in Johor Port’s parent Seaport Terminal (Johore) Sdn Bhd (Seaport Terminal) which in turn owns a 51.7% stake in Johor Port.

􀁘 Recall, we are against the deal due to the steep pricing which means Johor Port’s upside is exhausted. The land will be acquired in its converted form and at the market rate for converted land in the Pontian area. Assuming an efficiency of 90%, i.e. 90% of the land area is saleable after providing for infrastructure, the adjusted cost of the land to Johor Port will be about RM188,600/acre or RM4.35/sf (after accounting for the latest 5% discount in price). Several small plots of industrial land of less than ten acres in the Pontian area changed hands at about RM200,000/acre or RM4.60/sf in recent years.

􀁘 We are also against the deal because we do not think the acquisition makes commercial sense to Johor Port. Given the defensive nature of the port business, we find it unnecessary for Johor Port to “diversify” its earnings base in order to counter sector-specific cyclical downturns, more so, to diversify into property development that is totally unrelated and provides little synergy to the port business.

􀁘 Also, in consideration for the land, Johor Port will not only forego some RM186.9m inter-company loan owed to it by Seaport Terminal, it will also part with some additional RM196m cash. This will almost deplete its cash balances of RM242.2m that are earmarked for capital expenditure such as for the construction of five new warehouses and upgrading of other port facilities over the next two years.

􀁘 The consultants hired by Johor Port, IPC Island Property Consultants Sdn Bhd, is projecting an IRR of 12% from the investment, based on fairly aggressive assumptions, namely: (1) The land will be fully developed and sold in seven years; and (2) The land will be sold as industrial plots priced at an average of RM19psf, against a total cost of RM12psf consisting of the land cost of about RM4psf and land development costs (i.e. infrastructure and land reclamation costs) of RM8psf.

􀁘 We find it hard to visualise a property project in excess of 2,000 acres in size to be fully developed and sold within seven years (translating to about 300 acres per annum), especially, under the current economic conditions. While not strictly comparable, a mixed property project measuring about 1,000 acres in the Klang Valley, for instance, will take at least seven years to be fully completed. We also find the projected average selling price of the land of RM19psf unrealistic given that industrial land in the Pontian area changed hands at below RM5psf in recent years.

􀁘 While the Board of Directors of Johor Port supposedly approved the land deal based on the favourable outcome of the feasibility study done by the consultants, i.e. an IRR of 12% that is in excess of Johor Port’s historical average ROE of 10.6% by developing the land into reclaimed industrial land, Johor Port has a different plan for the land. Johor Port intends to dispose of a substantial portion of the land as bare land or on a “as is where is” basis. The rationale is to cap Johor Port’s cash outflow at the purchase price with no further investment in land reclamation (Based on the consultants’ model, Johor Port is supposed to fork out RM1.1bn in land reclamation cost over the 7-year period).

Logically, by selling a substantial portion of the land in its bare form (as against reclaimed and developed), it will result in a lower overall IRR that makes Johor Port’s investment in the land less worthwhile.

􀁘 The 5% discount in price does little to mitigate Johor Port’s risks in relation to this huge investment, so is the payment that will now be staggered over two years. We are downgrading Johor Port’s FY12/06-07 net profit forecasts by 6% and 12% largely to account for the holding cost of the land. Until and unless Johor Port starts to register sales from the land, the annual holding cost alone will be RM9.4m in FY12/06 and RM18.8m in FY12/07 based on our estimate.

􀁘 Meanwhile, Johor Port independent director Ooi Teik Huat who chaired yesterday’s EGM was quoted by the press as saying that only minority shareholders who owned 74.5m shares or 54% of the total shares held by minority shareholders who turned up yesterday voted in favour of the deal. As such, it could be deduced that “disgruntled minority shareholders” out there hold a total of at least 63.5m shares. We expect a new wave of selling from some of these “disgruntled minority shareholders” over the next few days or weeks.

􀁘 Maintain UNDERPEROFM. Indicative fair value of RM1.61 based on 5x FY12/06 EPS. The low PER rating is to reflect Johor Port’s vulnerability

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

Now Johor Port story did not end here, not on Aug 2005.

Dec 2005....... came the privatisation issue!

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

MMC Plans to Buy 52 Percent of Johor Port, Take It Private


(Bloomberg) -- MMC Corp., a Malaysian builder and engineering group controlled by Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary, agreed to buy his 52 percent stake in Johor Port Bhd. for 427 million ringgit ($113 million), expanding its port business.

MMC is buying 170.8 million Johor Port shares at 2.50 ringgit apiece from his Seaport Terminal (Johore) Sdn Bhd., it said today in a statement. MMC will later offer to buy the rest of Johor Port and delist it. The takeover values the company at 825 million ringgit.

Acquiring Johor Port, the country's second-biggest port, will help Syed Mokhtar consolidate his port operations under MMC, which owns half of the Port of Tanjung Pelepas, and diversify its transport and logistics divisions.
---------------------------

Now this is where.... I will say.... think about it!

Yes.. just think about what had happened.

Look at the chain of events.

Nov 2004, Johor Port ( cash rich, trading at a price of 2.49) announced it's RELATED PARTY TRANSACTION underwater land deal.

Johor Port of course tanked big time...

A year later.... MMC says wants to take Johor Port private.... at 2.50.

And yeah...  just think about it.

How?

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Perisai: Life Is Too Damn Good!

The following is taken from Star Biz: Perisai acquisition draws interest


  • On Tuesday, Perisai said it was acquiring Garuda Energy (L) Ltd from Nagendran Nadarajah for a total of RM212mil, to be paid for in cash and shares. Nagendran will end up with 11% in Perisai, having just sold his 19% stake in Perisai to Singapore-listed Ezra Holdings Ltd a year ago at 48.5 sen a share for a total of RM64mil. It isn't clear why he is coming back into a company that he left not long ago. Nagendran declined to comment. More significantly, at the time of Nagendran's exit from Perisai last year, he had acquired Garuda from Perisai at only US$5mil. “On the face of it, the transaction does raise eyebrows over whether the valuation is fair and whether it is a related party transaction,” said an analyst....

So let me get this straight up.

Nagendran Nadarajah had sold his stake in Perisai for 64 million.

He bought Garuda from Perisai for US$5 million.

Apparently that was a year ago.

And now Perisai is buying back Garuda from Nagendran for a nice tidy price of US$70 million!!!

Ok, apparently Garuda is now slightly different.

From the edge, Nagendran returns to Perisai



  • Garuda Energy owns a jack-up rig, namely Rubicone, which is being converted into a mobile offshore production unit (MOPU) and the makeover works are expected to be completed by May.

So it's gonna be a jac-up rig but... hey... makeover works are not even completed yet!


And yet Perisai is buying back Garuda for US$70 million!!!

In a news flash yesterday morning from the Edge (strange I can't find the url of the article but that article can be viewed here: http://my.news.yahoo.com/flash-rhb-research-raises-concerns-over-perisais-acquisition-20110329-181406-445.html )

  • RHB Research said on Wednesday, March 30 that this was an unusual transaction which brings the former CEO back into the company, and more so given Perisai had sold Garuda to him in mid-2010 for just US$5 million cash. In early-2010, Garuda had acquired a jack-up rig for US$5m cash, which Perisai now appears to be targeting in this acquisition. Other than a change in name (from Hercules 191 to Rubicone) the rig is currently being converted into a MOPU. The rig has also been chartered out to Gryphon on a 2+1 year bareboat charter basis for US$25 million per annum. “We are concerned about the transaction and the new issue of shares, which will give Nagendran a 13.5% stake at a 20% discount to the current share price of 81 sen. “This will dilute current major shareholder Ezra Holdings' 19% stake to 17%. Moreover, we believe there is a corporate governance issue relating to the effective purchase of the asset at 14x premium to the original disposal price of the same asset,” it said.
WOW! A 20% discount!

Anyway... apparently ... the market is loving Perisai way too much! Let's fly up, up and awayyyyyyyyyyyyyy!

Here's the announcement on Bursa website on 9th April 2010. PERISAI PETROLEUM TEKNOLOGI BHD ("PERISAI" OR "THE COMPANY") SALE OF SHARES BY NAGENDRAN C. NADARAJAH OF ALL HIS DIRECT AND INDIRECT SHAREHOLDINGS IN THE COMPANY TO HCM LOGISTICS LIMITED



  • The Board of Directors of Perisai wishes to announce that Mr. Nagendran C. Nadarajah, the Managing Director/Substantial Shareholder of the Company has entered into a Share Purchase Agreement dated 9 April 2010 with HCM Logistics Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ezra Holdings Limited, Singapore, for the sale of his entire direct and indirect shareholdings in the Company representing approximately 19% of the capital of the Company ("the Disposal"). The Disposal is expected to be completed on or before 7 May 2010. Save for above, none of the other directors and persons connected to them have any interest in aforesaid disposal. This announcement is dated 9 April 2010 .
Sold 9th April 2010....

And in regarding Garuda... a few months earlier, back in Dec 2009. From the Star Biz Perisai acquires jackup drilling rigs for rm34mil



  • PETALING JAYA: Perisai Petroleum Teknologi Bhd has acquired two jackup drilling rigs for US$10mil (about RM34mil). In a filing with Bursa Malaysia, Perisai said its units Garuda Energy (L) Inc and Hummingbird Energy (L) Inc entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Cliffs Drilling Co and The Offshore Drilling Co for the acquisition. It said the acquisition would provide a platform to convert the rigs into mobile offshore production and storage units and to generate robust earnings by hiring them to oil and gas field owners. “The acquisition is synergistic to the evolved activities of Perisai to serve as a one-stop centre for its planned marginal field development and deepwater activities,” it said.

Garuda bought 2 jackup drilling rigs for US$10 million.


And that was Dec 2009.


And in 2010... how much did Perisai sold Garuda to Nagendran for? Answer? US$5 million!


ps: Life is simply too damn good and I think I am in the wrong freaking business!!!!!

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

Do see update on this posting: RHB Clarifies Its Statement On Perisai

Tuesday, November 02, 2010

And The KFC Chicken Is Related!!

Sorry but I simply could not resist that title for this posting!

On the Edge: KFC buys another asset from JCorp


  • KFC buys another asset from JCorp
    Written by Financial Daily
    Tuesday, 02 November 2010 12:20

    KUALA LUMPUR: KFC Holdings Bhd (KFC), via its wholly owned Ayamas Food Corp Sdn Bhd, has proposed to acquire four poultry broiler farms from companies under Johor Corp (JCorp) for RM1.11 million.

    This is the latest in the series of related party transactions (RPTs) between JCorp and KFC, with the value of the transactions in the last 12 months totalling RM30.8 million.

    In an announcement to Bursa Malaysia yesterday, KFC said that Ayamas proposed to acquire Southern Poultry Farming Sdn Bhd, Synergy Poultry Farming Sdn Bhd, Ventures Poultry Farm Sdn Bhd and Agrotech Farm Solutions Sdn Bhd from Johor Ventures Sdn Bhd and Johor Franchise Sdn Bhd — two wholly owned subsidiaries of JCorp.

    JCorp is the major shareholder of plantation group Kulim Bhd. The plantation group is the holding company of QSR Brands Bhd which, in turn, is a major shareholder of KFC.

    According to the announcement, Ayamas had built eight broiler farms on 400 acres of land in Kulai, Johor. An “intrapreneur scheme” was established where intrapeneurs are encouraged to participate and own the broiler houses in the farm. In total, the eight farms have a total of 16 broiler houses with a total capacity of 800,000 broilers per cycle.

    Ayamas currently manages over 90 contract farmers and two company-owned broiler farms in Negeri Sembilan and Johor, where seven farm intrapreneurs participate in managing the broiler houses.

    Four out of the seven intrapreneur farms are owned by JCorp’s Johor Franchise and Joor Ventures and the remaining three are owned by Ayamas. Ayamas has proposed to centralise and implement a corporate structure where all the farms will be managed by one company so as to enable it to reap the advantages of a single structure in managing cost.

    All the four farms started operations only last year and are still loss making. According to the announcement, the acquisition will not have any material effect on the earnings of KFC for the current year of operations.

    “Nevertheless, the acquisition is expected to contribute to the future earnings of KFC,” it stated.

    The RPTs between JCorp and money-spinner KFC have always drawn scrutiny. According to the announcement, in the past 12 months, the RPTs amounted to RM30.8 million with the biggest item being the purchase of KPJ Reit Bhd shares by KFC that amounted to RM20.87 million.


    This article appeared in The Edge Financial Daily, November 2, 2010

Ahem... the RPTs involved....!!!!!!!

Why so like this one?



Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Shame On The 60.39% Who Voted For Genting Malaysia's UK Casino Purchase

On Star Biz: Genting M’sia gets nod for UK casino purchase


  • Wednesday August 25, 2010
    Genting M’sia gets nod for UK casino purchase
    By FINTAN NG

    Shareholders approve the deal after initial misgivings

    KUALA LUMPUR: Shareholders of Genting Malaysia Bhd voted yesterday in favour of resolutions to acquire the British casino operations collectively known as Genting UK from Genting Singapore plc despite initial misgivings over the related party transaction nature of the deal.

    It is understood that shareholders mainly asked questions on the rationale for the acquisition and on profitability, as Britain is not seen as a growth market due to prevailing economic conditions and tougher operating conditions.

    “Shareholders wanted more clarification on the acquisition and whether it’ll be profitable,” a shareholder said, adding that HSBC Nominees and Cartaban Nominees called for a poll before the voting.

    The vote was 60.39% or 1.17 billion shares, for the acquisition, which was worth RM1.67bil. Genting Malaysia, the owner and operator of Resorts World Genting, is 47.33% owned by Genting Bhd, which also owns a 52% stake in Genting Singapore.

    The over-lapping shareholding among certain institutional shareholders in Genting Malaysia and Genting Singapore could have been a major catalyst in the way the voting turned out as it did. Blackrock Fund Advisors and Vanguard Group Inc were among those with stakes in both companies.

    Genting and its chairman cum chief executive officer Tan Sri Lim Kok Thay did not take part in the voting.

    An analyst with a foreign investment bank told StarBiz that the voting pattern showed that these shareholders preferred to see the British casino operations, which faced quite a few obstacles including higher taxes and a tougher operating environment, under Genting Malaysia.

    Analysts in recent reports said the British casino operations were a better fit for Genting Malaysia rather than for Genting Singapore.

    As for Genting Singapore, the analyst said this would look good for the company, which would be able to concentrate on the integrated resort business.

    Moreover, the gaming industry in Singapore was recently re-rated with Genting Singapore showing sterling results.

    A market observer noted that in a situation where there were overlapping institutional investors and better prospects in Singapore, it was “normal to make Genting Malaysia a sacrificial lamb to help Genting Singapore”.

    He added that based on the number of shares, it appeared that these institutional shareholders were quite active in voting.

    Meanwhile, Genting Malaysia deputy chairman Tun Mohd Haniff Omar said all proposals to expand the business were looked at based on merits by the company’s board, including those involving related party transactions.

    “We’ve this opportunity in Europe (with Genting UK), we hit the ground running with a going concern that is already cash flow positive following the remedial measures taken by Genting Singapore,” he said.

A terribly sad day for corporate Malaysia.

Quote: "Shareholders approve the deal after initial misgivings"

Well, lets be more accurate and state it boldly that 60.39% voted for the deal.

Which means some 39.6% voted against!!!!

Which means some 39.6% understands the utter nonsense in this RELATED PARTY TRANSACTION!


Yeah... Genting Malaysia's UN Fortunate Entry Into UK Casino Business

And this 2nd July 2010 news flash said it all...

  • DJ MARKET TALK: Genting Singapore +1.7%; Fortunate UK Exit -Citi
    Dow Jones Newswires 02 Jul 2010 9:50am

    0150 GMT [Dow Jones] Genting Singapore (G13.SG) +1.7% at S$1.20 as proposed GBP340 million (S$688.8 million) sale of money-losing U.K. operations to sister company Genting Malaysia (4715.KU) fuels hopes for stronger earnings profile. While Genting Singapore will book FX translation loss of S$338 million this year, bottom-line excluding exceptional item expected to improve. "Considering that the U.K. gaming operating business remains very tough, we view this exit as an escape for Genting Singapore and we view it as fortunate in that there was a buyer in the market," says Citigroup; "it means Genting U.K. will no longer drag on the performance of Resorts World Sentosa." Still, keeps Sell call, S$0.65 target on valuation grounds. Orderbook quotes suggest minimal upside beyond S$1.23.

Fortunate that the buyer was related to Genting Singapore!

Fortunate that Genting Malaysia is buying a business which operates in a very tough business environment!

Good to be related, eh?

Good that the deal is voted through, eh?

ps: For the BRAVE 39.6%, you can still VOTE with your feet!

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Can Polling Solve Abusive Related Party Transactions?

One of the best investment advice regarding a corporate management was given by legendary investor Philip Fisher.


  • The management of a company is always for closer to its assets than its shareholders. And without even breaking any laws, there are number of ways that the management can benefit themselves and their families at the expense of the minority shareholders, for example employing their relatives, buy-and-selling of properties between relatives at above market rates or the issuing common stock options.

Management benefiting themselves and their families at the expense of the minority shareholders. That means that the minority shareholders are considered OPM (Other People's Money) and they are there to be taken advantage off, they are there to be screwed!

And yes, buying-and-selling of properties between relatives or as they now calls it ''.

But before I continue, why is the management issue important? Why is the issue of trust in a management important?

Now if the company is not a traded entity or a stock, do you want to invest in a company which has a management or owner you do not trust? Would you buy a stock or enter a joint partnership in a company with someone that you do not trust completely?

Now I am pretty sure the answer is you WOULD NOT make such an investment because you would simple be afraid that your partner could find every possible way to benefit themselves and not you.

So why should it be any different when it comes to investing in stocks?

That's why I find it so strange that investors forgets about this issue when it comes to investing in stocks! I mean it's like telling the management, the owners, the major shareholders that it's perfectly ok that they take advantage of the minority shareholders and that they can embark on corporate exercises that will benefit themselves and not the minority shareholders.

Does it make sense?

No, it does not. Not for me and I would not prostitute myself in any such circumstances! Hell no! I would not allow the major shareholders to make a fool out of me and my money.

Now back to . What is this RPT?

This is a corporate transaction or a business deal between two parties that are related. What's wrong with such deals? Well since the deals are done within related parties, there is no way the minority shareholder can ascertain that both parties are not in collusion to seek monetary benefits for themselves and not for the minority shareholders. Yes, the interest of the minority shareholders are ignored. Simply put, the deal is aimed to benefit themselves at the expense of the minority shareholders.

Now if this wasn't a listed company, would you want to be a business partner? Do you want to be a business partner with a partner who constantly seeks ways to benefit himself/herself more than benefiting you?

I am sure again the answer is NO. So why should it be different with investing in a stock?

Past examples of RPT: Lion Diversified Acquisition of Subsidiary at RM61.55 million!, Flashback On Lion Diversified's RPT Transactions.

The recent Genting Malaysia RPTs. MSWG Slams Genting Malaysia For Its RPT Land Deal! and Genting Malaysia's UN Fortunate Entry Into UK Casino Business

The famous MMC-SAT saga!

MMC And Its Senai Airport Terminal Purchase! and More On MMC And Its Senai Airport Terminal Purchase!.

In regards to the MMC and SAT deal, MWSG did tried it best: MSWG Gains Vital First Victory In Its Battle Against MMC's Senai Airport Terminal Purchase but sadly it was not to be, Another Sad Day For Corporate Malaysia As MMC's Senai Airport Deal Is Approved!. Why? This was because minority shareholders were few in number when it came to the crucial voting time!

Yes, the minority shareholders did not come to vote and the deal that was clearly lopsided was approved! :(

Now on today's Business Times.

  • 'Call for a poll when voting on related party transactions'

    By Adeline Paul Raj Published: 2010/08/10

    SHAREHOLDERS should insist on a poll when voting on related party transactions (RPTs), says an expert on the subject.

    A poll, rather than the usual show of hands, would be a fairer way of voting particularly when it comes to questionable RPTs, said Lee Kha Loon, the Asia Pacific head of the CFA Institute, a not-for-profit association of investment professionals.

    Shareholders don't realise how important a role they can potentially play in voting out "abusive" RPTs, he told reporters on the sidelines of the Financial Market RPT conference in Kuala Lumpur yesterday.

    "Malaysia is still voting by hand, but you can call for a vote by poll. You have to go in and demand for a vote by poll," he remarked.

    Lee was part of a task force that helped the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) come up with a guide on fighting abusive RPTs.

    Stock market regulator Bursa Malaysia Bhd, which is seeking to enhance its listing rules, has included this matter in a consultation paper issued three weeks ago.

    "This issue of poll voting...we've not mandated it now but it's something which we will look into," its chief regulatory officer Selvarany Rasiah said after speaking at the conference.

    Investors need to be vigilant when RPTs are tabled for shareholder approval. Only non-interested shareholders can vote on such deals and, under present rules, they can request to vote by poll, she said.

    Selvarany pointed out, however, that RPTs, while prevalent in Asia given that there are many family-owned and state-owned companies, are not all bad.

    Some RPTs do not exploit minority shareholders and are actually beneficial to the companies involved, she said.

    Both Selvarany and Lee felt that Bursa had a regulatory framework that was comprehensive enough to safeguard investors from abusive RPTs.

    "Where there is non-compliance, we take enforcement action. We don't see any concerns with regard to abusive RPTs, as such," Selvarany said, when asked if RPTs deemed detrimental to minorities were on the rise in Malaysia.

    RPTs here need shareholder approval only when they breach at least 5 per cent of relevant ratios like the value of assets or shareholders funds.

    If they don't breach the 5 per cent threshold, then the company need only make a disclosure about the RPT, which Bursa will monitor.

    Entities that have undertaken RPTs in recent times that have come under close investor scrutiny include the Genting group.

    Genting Malaysia Bhd, a casino and hotel operator, late last year bought two firms which owned properties in Kuala Lumpur - the 25-storey Wisma Genting and two parcels of land in Segambut - for RM228.6 million from its parent, Genting Bhd.

    It did not need to get the approval of shareholders or regulators for the purchases as the price did not exceed 5 per cent of its shareholder funds.

    The Minority Shareholder Watchdog Group, however, felt that it should have, under the spirit of good corporate governance, sought shareholder approval given the dominant board structure, common major shareholders and directors involved.

Sadly when it comes to POLLs and VOTEs, I am sceptical.

Yes, needless to say that as a minority shareholder, one should really use their common sense and vote against all these abusive RPTs because these transaction clearly benefited the owners and not the minority shareholders but sometimes our minority shareholders does not want to help their own self because they fail to show up during the crucial voting time.

So if I am forced to give my one worthless one sen advice, I would say avoid companies that have had a history of abusive RPTs!

Yes, we need to learn to forgo any opportunities in such stocks. Treat the companies as business and not stocks and avoid them like plague!

This way, one is guaranteed NOT to be disappointed with poor polling results, like in the case of MMC-SAT deal!

And yes, sadly, I do not think that polling can solve these abusive Related Party Transactions!