Thursday, August 09, 2012

Eng Tek awarded RM61.6m over damages from Thai floods

On Star Biz: http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/8/9/business/20120809191629&sec=business

  • Published: Thursday August 9, 2012 MYT 7:17:00 PM
    Eng Tek awarded RM61.6m over damages from Thai floods
    KUALA LUMPUR: Eng Teknologi Holdings Bhd's subsidiary has been awarded RM61.6mil in insurance claims following the damages to their operations following the severe floods in Ayutthaya, Thailand last year.

    EngTek said on Thursday its subsidiary Altum Precision Co., Ltd's insurer had confirmed it would pay out RM61.6m as compensation for inventories, property, plant and equipment damages arising from the floods.

    To date, it has received RM12mil out of the claims. It is expected to receive the balance of RM49.6mil by end September.
Extremely significant piece of news for Eng Tek minority shareholders.

Do refer previous posting: Should Eng Teknologi Revise Back Its Privatisation Offer Back To $2.50?


Wednesday, August 08, 2012

The Bolt And Manchester United.

Nice!



Source: http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/4051/cartoon-of-the-day/2012/08/08/3294220/-

Monday, August 06, 2012

About China Ouhua Winery Holdings

On 28th Feb 2012, I posted the following: China Ouhua Winery Announces Quarterly Losses. The stock was priced at 25 sen then. Few days later, the CFO quit. See More Shocking Developments At China Ouhua ( CNOUHA )

This morning, I realised that CNOUHA was trading at 10.5 sen!

The chart below shows how CNOUHA had been trading the past 6 months.


And the following chart shows how CNOUHA had been doing since its listing....


CNOUHA was priced at 0.60 for its IPO and yes, it did make a sparkling debut on Bursa Malaysia.
  • Thursday November 4, 2010

    China Ouhua makes sparkling debut on Bursa
    KUALA LUMPUR: The first wine producer to be listed on Bursa Malaysia, China Ouhua Winery Holdings Ltd made a sparkling debut yesterday, closing 5.5 sen or 9.17% higher than the issue price of 60 sen.
    The company, the fifth from China to be listed on Bursa, opened at 66 sen, with 2.8 million shares traded. It was the second most active counter yesterday with 50.7 million shares traded.

    Commenting on the performance of its share price, executive chairman and chief executive officer Wang Chao said: “I trust our shareholders and investors choice to invest into the company and wish that they would have a longer-term investment horizon. We look forward to a long-term partnership with them.”

    He said the listing underscored China Ouhua’s commitment to continuously enhance its products and bring favourable return to its investors.

    The company had said it planned to distribute a dividend of at least 35% of its net profit for the financial year ending Dec 31, 2010.

    Wang Chao said the company would expand its business after the listing exercise and it was in the process to change the operations model, enabling it to work closer with distributors and grow its brand awareness.

    “We are planning to venture into Xi’an, the capital of the Shaanxi province next year, to further expand our presence in China,” he told a press conference after China Ouhua’s listing on the Main Market yesterday, adding that it had operations in 11 provinces in China.

    On whether the company would venture outside of China, Wang said it would not discount the possibilities of expanding its business into other markets through appointing distributors but it preferred to concentrate in China in the medium-term due to the huge consumer market. ( Source: http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?sec=business&file=/2010/11/4/business/7356464 )


Saturday, August 04, 2012

Trading The Milliseconds Time Frame

On CNN Money. http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/08/02/knight-high-frequency-loss/?iid=HP_LN

  • Why Knight lost $440 million in 45 minutes
    By Stephen Gandel, senior editorAugust 2, 2012: 4:32 PM ET

    The high frequency trading battle between exchanges and market makers is resulting in big losses not just for Wall Street, but, likely, for us too.

    FORTUNE -- In life there are few coincidences, and this one probably isn't either: The day Knight Capital Group's computers nearly blew up the market and lost the firm $440 million in 45 minutes is the same day that the New York Stock Exchange (NYX) launched a new trading system that was, in part, meant to take business away from Knight (KCG).

    For the past half decade or so, there has been a tug of war over who completes the buy and sell orders for stocks that average investors like you and I make. It used to happen in the pits of the NYSE. These days, almost none of the trades that folks like you and I make ever get to the exchange. Instead, they get cut off, diverted into the computer systems of Knight or its main competitors Citadel, Citigroup and UBS, which match those with the millions of other orders they collect.

    And the pace at which these firms have been able to divert traffic from the NYSE has been accelerating. In 2009, about 15% of all trades took place away from the NYSE. Now about a third of all the trades in NYSE-listed shares happen elsewhere.
    It's not clear why this battle over individual stock trades is so pitched. Knight pays brokers for its so-called order flow. And it guarantees that individuals get a slightly better price than what they would get at the exchange. Those stock trades get fed into Knight's computers, which use lightning fast trading algorithms to figure out how to make money off the orders the firm has just paid up for. This is, in part, the high frequency trading that you have heard about.

    Some say that market makers provide a service. Others say Knight and others seek out the orders of individual investors because they view those orders as so-called dumb flow and easier to trade against. What is clear is that Knight and others have figured out how to make money off the stock trades of you and me in ways that we can't detect but we probably pay for somehow. Eric Scott Hunsader, who runs trading research firm Nanex, estimates market makers have been able to generate $5 billion in profits rapidly trading the orders of individual investors and others in the past seven years.
    On Wednesday, the same day that Knight lost $440 million, the NYSE launched its own computer driven trading system, called the Retail Liquidity Program, that the exchange hopes will reclaim some of the trading volume it has lost to market makers. NYSE hopes RLP will create more competition among traders and brokers and market makers so that more of those orders get filled at better prices on the exchange. The new system also offers financial incentives for brokers to complete their orders on the exchange, similar to the payments long made by Knight and others that lured trades away from NYSE.

    Knight says the computer problems it ran into had to do with NYSE's new trading system, but it didn't say what. Tellingly, all of the stocks that Knight's computers did bogus trades in were listed on the NYSE. It's likely that Knight tried to upgrade its own algorithm to allow its computers to do an end around the NYSE's new system. But it messed up somehow. Instead, Knight's computer system, launched on the same day as the NYSE's, went on a trading frenzy, buying and selling millions of shares on its own shortly after both systems were switched on when the market opened at 9:30 Wednesday morning.

    Normally that shouldn't have produced any real losses. These weren't actual orders, so Knight's system should have just been buying and selling to itself. But that's not how the world of high frequency trading works. When other traders, i.e. computer systems, saw the spike in activity, they jumped in too.

    Knight disabled the faulty algorithm by 10:15. But by then the damage was done. Knight was out $440 million. Dozens of stocks, including Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway (BRKB), had gyrated up and down, and our faith in the market was shaken once again.

    In theory, we should all benefit from this competition, being able to trade at cheaper and cheaper prices. But in practice the "price improvements" that Knight and now NYSE offer are fractions of a fraction of a penny. At best, what we are getting in return is a market that is less stable. At worst, we are getting a system that is picking our pockets.

    If this isn't a clear case where we need regulators to step in, I don't know what is.

Firstly, here's BRKA chart. Notice the big jolt on 1st Aug?


What's most interesting were the comments made by Eric Scott Hunsader, who runs trading research firm Nanex . Here's Nanex posting on 1st Aug 2012.

http://www.nanex.net/aqck2/3522.html

1. EXC One second interval chart. Circles are trades, the blue coloring is the NYSE bid and ask which is mostly covered by gray lines that connect the trades.
If we zoom in and look at what happens under one second, then a clear pattern emerges. We think it's important to note that the SEC claimed there is no value to be gained from looking at data in time resolutions under a second "because it is just noise". We strongly disagree.



2. A 25 millisecond interval chart that zooms into a 27 second period of the chart above. Now the gray lines connecting trades are more clearly visible. NYSE's bid/ask is the blue shaded area (the bid price is the bottom of the shading, and the ask is the top).


The next 2 charts illustrate trade executions that ping-pong between hitting the ask and hitting the bid. As if someone is buying at the offer and then, almost immediately, selling at the bid, then buying at the offer, then selling at the bid and so forth. It turns out, the gray shading you see in charts above are the zig-zag lines connecting the alternating buy and sell executions. That's right, almost all these trades alternate between buying at the offer and selling at the bid, which means losing the difference in price. In the case of EXC, that means losing about 15 cents on every pair of trades. Do that 40 times a second, 2400 times a minute, and you now have a system that's very efficient at burning money.

3. Zooming in to a 1 millisecond interval chart, we can see one second of data which shows 39 trades.



4. A 25 millisecond interval chart of Nokia (NOK) showing the same pattern as above.  Note: this chart shows bids and offers from NYSE as blue triangles instead of shading. There are so many trades that they appear as a coiling black mass. In Nokia, the trade rate was a steady 200 per second for many minutes.

Source again: http://www.nanex.net/aqck2/3522.html

WOW!

That's the three letter words.

We do hear some traders who trades the 5 mins and even the 1 min interval but with these machines, trades can be done 200 times per second for many minutes! These machines, they are trading the milliseconds time frame!

All hail the mighty HIGH FREQUENCY TRADING programs!

The machines. They are here.

On Bloomberg TV.: http://bloom.bg/MeOd7I


Joyce on whether Knight Capital will survive:

“On days like yesterday and today, we have a lot of work to do. We have to make sure we work with our counterparties, our clients to get the answers they want and we are pursuing that as we speak and we are also exploring other alternatives such as strategic investments or investors and other financing alternatives. We have work to do and we’re doing it now.”

On what he means by strategic investments:
“Obviously, if we were having specific conversations I wouldn’t be able to tell you that… We know we have some work ahead of us and we are diligently pursuing that, and we’re staying in close contact with our clients and counterparties as we get through the situation.”

On whether these other financing alternatives will keep Knight Capital in business:
“That’s what our goal is, and we’re working hard to accomplish that. We have all hands on deck and we understand what the issues are, we are talking to a lot of capable people, people who are in touch with situations like this. So, we’re working hard and we have all hands moving forward to address this and resolve this.”

On whether any credit lines have been pulled:
“As you might imagine, during the day to day activity, it’s hard to comment. Our general counsel would prefer I don’t go too deeply into what’s going on with the day to day action. So it’s one of those things I don’t think I can really comment on right now.”

On whether there are any firms with which Knight Capital had been trading that are not right now:
“All our clients respect what we did yesterday. They were very happy with us because once we realized we had a problem, we alerted them and got them out of the way. Our clients have a great deal of confidence in us, but much like the questions that were just asked about day to day activity, I can assure you our general counsel would prefer that I not get into any specific details.”

On what happened yesterday:
“We put in a new bit of software the night before because we were getting ready to trade the NYSE’s RLP program. This has nothing to do with the stock exchange. It had to do with our readiness to trade it. Unfortunately, the software had a fairly major bug in it. It sent into the market a ton of orders, all erroneous, so we ended up with a large error position which we had to sort through the balance of the day. It was a software bug, except it happened to be a very large software bug, as soon as we realized what we had we got it out of the code and it is gone now. The code has been restored. We feel very confident in the current operating environment we’ve reestablished.”

On why it took so long to not only fix the problem, but to identify and take responsibility for it:
“We were talking to our clients right away and got they got out of the way, which is great because nobody else except for us was wounded by this activity. So, we don’t think we actually acted in a slow fashion at all because our primary focus was on us alerting our clients and keeping them out of harm’s way.”

On how Knight Capital’s situation compares to the Facebook IPO:
“I know we’re in a similar situation, but I would argue that it’s apples and baseballs when you compare them because as I said at the time, technology breaks. It ain’t good. We don’t look forward to it, but technology breaks. What happens next is how you escalate it. We’re very proud of the fact that we escalated to it directly to our clients and got them out of harm’s way. There are two things over here that we take great pride in which is our client focus and our culture which is so involved with compliance. We have a culture of compliance and client focus and we asserted both of those things yesterday.”

On what Knight Capital’s situation says about the integrity of the U.S. equity markets:
“If you get involved in the day to take minutia and not invest for the long term, this will give you a headache, no question about it. We’re not happy that we added to that pile around days there were difficult for the individual investor. But it is also just affecting us. It does not affect the individual investor and we did not harm any investors and got them out of the web.”

On whether he’d buy shares of a company that within a day or two could be wiped out, like Knight Capital:
“Of course not, this was an anomaly. You cannot immunize people from making mistakes. You cannot keep people from doing stupid things whether it is writing some imperfect code or buying the wrong stock at the wrong time. That is what happens when you have a culture of risk. If you do your homework and do the right job, you’ll be rewarded over time. If you stay away from the day-to-day minutia and look for the long term, as an equity investor, it will work out.”

On whether Knight is still steering clients to other places:
“As you can see behind me, we are open for business today. We are reasonably busy and keeping active. By the end of the day yesterday, many clients had started to route back. We’re open for business. We got rid of the bad trade and that freed up a lot of capital. We actually have excess capital right now. We have worked to get ourselves in good shape and communicated that to our clients. Clients are making their decisions with full transparency as to how to interact with us.”

On whether voice trading should be brought back:
“This had very little to do with voice trading versus electronic trading. This software problem was an infrastructure problem. It had nothing to do with our quantitative models and nothing to do with our market-making models. This was something that was separate and distinct from trading. It was more of a networking problem as opposed to using quantitative tools to trade.”

On Knight Capital’s search for more capital:
“It is hard to give anybody a timeline when you are working through it, but we are focused and doing all the work I believe need to be done as we speak. We’re kind of pushing ahead and we hope to have the news and then we will share it immediately with our shareholders, our regulators and stakeholders.”

On what kind of investor Knight Capital is looking for:
“It is kind of hard to isolate what kind of structure we prefer. We’re keeping an open mind and talking to some counterparties and relationships as we speak.”

On how to restore confidence in the company’s employees:
“We tried very hard over the last decade to build a culture here that people admire and enjoy coming to work and people are supportive and there’s teamwork. During the trials and tribulations of the last 48 hours, this team has been nothing short of remarkable and the people at Knight Capital group are a team I am incredibly proud to be a part of.” (transcript taken from: http://wallstreetpit.com/94521-knight-capital-kcg-ceo-says-all-hands-on-deck )

Friday, August 03, 2012

And Now Silver Birds Sues Its Extrernal Auditors

I am really pleased to see what's happening. The fraud in Silver Bird is simply massive and disgusting ( see The Said 12 Accounting Irregularities Found At Silver Bird! ) and Bursa Malaysia, too should be more active in cracking down all these book cookers! Too see the current board of Silver Bird slapping lawsuits againts its former directors ( see Silver Bird Sues Its Former Directors ) is something other companies should consider if ever another fraud case should happen. File criminal chrages against them crooks and slap them silly with mega lawsuits. Ensure that white collar crimes does not pay!

Today, on SunDaily Business: http://www.thesundaily.my/news/453704

Woah! Yet another lawsuit. Intersting!

  • Crowe Horwath denies Silver Bird’s claims
    Posted on 2 August 2012 - 11:20pm
    Last updated on 3 August 2012 - 02:06am

    sunbiz@thesundaily.com

    PETALING JAYA (Aug 2, 2012): Crowe Horwath has "categorically denied" claims filed in a lawsuit by Silver Bird Group Bhd that it was negligent and had breached a duty of care as the group's external auditor for failure to discover and/or detect the financial irregularities in the group.

    Crowe Horwath was the external auditor of Silver Bird when news of the financial irregularities surfaced in February last year. It had then refused to provide a basis for an audit opinion to the bread maker's financial report for the year ended Oct 31, 2011.

    "Crowe Horwath categorically denies these allegations and firmly believes that it had discharged its duties and responsibilities as the auditors of Silver Bird Group in accordance with approved auditing standards. According to the engagement partner, Onn Kien Hoe, the financial irregularities were in fact discovered by Crowe Horwath and were immediately reported by us to the audit committee and board of directors of Silver Bird. We have also proactively informed the relevant authorities thereafter," it said in a statement today.

    Silver Bird and its subsidiaries, Stanson Marketing Sdn Bhd and Standard Confectionery Sdn Bhd, had on Wednesday filed a suit against Crowe Horwath and nine others alleging, among others, negligence and breach of duty of care.

    "We believe that the suit by Silver Bird Group is frivolous in nature and without basis. We strongly believe that we have fully discharged our duties professionally and will vigorously defend our position in court," said Crowe Horwath.

Facebook has no friends..

On CNN: http://buzz.money.cnn.com/2012/08/02/facebook-stock-fidelity/?iid=Popular

  • Facebook has no friends: Stock slides below $20
    By Hibah YousufAugust 2, 2012: 2:52 PM ET

    Facebook is not very popular among investors these days. Shares of the social media giant hit a new low of just $19.82 Thursday, nearly 50% below their initial offering price.

    The stock has been under pressure since last week, when Facebook (FB) reported its first earnings as a public company, and failed to relieve investor worries about slowing sales growth and its plan for mobile advertising.

    As Facebook's stock continues to bleed, institutional investors are beginning to unload their stakes. Fidelity Investments, which owns both public and private shares of Facebook, sold more than 1.9 million public shares in June across 21 different mutual funds, according to Morningstar data.

    Of those 21 funds, 16 dumped more than 25% of their Facebook stakes, including the Fidelity Puritan fund (FPURX), which still owns 1.9 million shares. The Fidelity Disciplined Equity fund (FDEQX) sold almost 50% of its Facebook stock.

    Of course, more than a dozen Fidelity funds also added shares of Facebook in June -- about 2.2 million shares combined -- including the Fidelity Contradfund (FCNTX), which boosted its stake by 264,000 shares, or almost 2%.

    While Fidelity declined to comment on Facebook specifically, the firm's spokesman Stephen Austin said "portfolio managers make investment decisions every day for what they believe is in the best long-term interests of their funds' shareholders."

    Meanwhile, a number of JPMorgan (JPM) mutual funds and a handful of funds managed by Turner Investment Partners sold significant parts of their stake in Facebook in June, according to Morningstar.

    Facebook's stint as a public company has been rocky since day one, when a trading glitch at the Nasdaq (NDAQ) turned its public debut into a public fiasco.

    Even prior to that botched first impression, investors and analysts alike have been questioning how the company will bring in more revenue from its 955 million users, particularly through its mobile platform which is becoming increasingly popular but lacks a strong advertising strategy.
Could it drop below $12.00?

ps: I think it could happen and when it happens, would you be interested in buying?



Thursday, August 02, 2012

Feature Article: Making A Killing On Manchester United

Source: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/nationworld/sns-rt-us-manchesterunited-ipobre871081-20120801,0,1408065.story

  • Analysis: Glazers may make a killing on Man Utd investment 1:09 a.m. EDT, August 2, 2012

    (Reuters) - Manchester United Ltd's owners stand to make about three times their investment in the British soccer club if it successfully goes public.

    The club, one of the most popular in the world, has kicked off the marketing for its U.S. initial public offering, which will value the club at $3.3 billion if the sale is at the high end of the pricing range of $16-to-$20 per share.

    The owners, the Glazer family, bought the team for 790 million pounds ($1.2 billion) in 2005 in a leveraged buyout. In terms of equity, the Florida-based family, whose other interests include shopping centers and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers football team, has invested at least 521.1 million pounds ($813.7 million) in Manchester United.

    Through the IPO, they will initially get up to $167 million from their sale of 8.3 million shares. They will also still own 89.8 percent of the shares, which will be worth nearly $3 billion at a $20 a share price. The Glazers have already received a 10 million pound dividend, which was used to pay back money they borrowed from the club in 2008.

    The huge profit for the family could make Manchester United the latest poster child for potential problems faced by companies that become targets of leveraged buyouts. To critics, such deals load companies with debt to supercharge the owners' profits, while sometimes leaving the companies worse off than they were before.

    The risk may be greater for a sports team, where finances can turn on how well the team does on the field, which can depend on a club having enough money to buy and pay top players.

    Poor performance can quickly feed through to lower revenue from ticket sales and TV rights, and eventually hurt commercial revenue from sponsorships and sales of merchandise, such as team shirts.

    Manchester United, which was debt-free before the Glazers bought it, had 437 million pounds ($682 million) of debt as of June 30.

    Fans of the 134-year-old team have long reviled the Glazers, worrying that reduced financial flexibility because of the debt would come at the expense of investment in players and the team's performance.

    Their dissatisfaction with the Glazers has only grown after the team, English champions a record 19 times, failed to win a trophy last season for the first time since 2005.

    Manchester United Supporters Trust, a group of almost 180,000 fans, plans a mass mail campaign against the IPO.

    "From the Manchester United Supporters' Trust point of view, we want to send a message to U.S. banks that this IPO is very unpopular, and they should not underwrite it," said Sean Bones, 52, a member of the group who describes himself as a life-long fan of the club.

    "We see the Glazers as using the club as a cash cow, and this IPO is milking time," Bones said.

    A Manchester United spokeswoman declined to comment for this article or on the Glazers' behalf. The Glazers could not be reached through the Buccaneers either.

    GREAT EXPECTATIONS

    There is no guarantee that the Glazers will be able to reap a big return. Manchester United is betting that it will be able to command an exceptionally high valuation, but investors and bankers said achieving that number could be a reach.

    At an IPO price of $20 per share, Manchester United's enterprise value would be 8 times revenue, rivaling one of the richest sports deals in recent years.

    Earlier this year, a group spearheaded by former basketball great Earvin "Magic" Johnson paid 8.3 times revenue to buy the U.S. baseball team, the Los Angeles Dodgers, according to a source familiar with the situation. The $2 billion price for that deal marked the largest sum ever spent for a major league U.S. sport franchise.

    Looked at another way, Manchester United will be valued at around 26 times its adjusted earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) in the 12 months through June 30.

    Traditional media companies, which the company's bankers are trying to pit it against, trade at much lower multiples. Walt Disney Co, for example, trades at around 10 times its trailing 12-month EBITDA, according to Thomson Reuters data. The Madison Square Garden Co, which owns the New York Knicks basketball team and the Rangers hockey team, trades at roughly 11 times its trailing 12-month EBITDA.

    "Manchester United is probably the crown jewel of sports franchises, but even it shouldn't get the valuation it's seeking here," said Josef Schuster, who helps manage $2.5 billion for Chicago-based financial services firm IPOX Schuster.

    The owner's valuation expectation was one reason why Morgan Stanley dropped out of the underwriting syndicate, sources familiar with the situation told Reuters last month.

    WEAKENED FINANCES

    The company's latest financials, disclosed in an amended U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing on Monday, also paint a picture of a club with money problems.

    By June 30, 2010, the Glazers had seen their equity in the club wiped out as losses piled up over the years, and injected 249.1 million pounds in November that year to pay down expensive debt.

    While the club projects its profit for the fiscal year ended June 30 will climb 62 percent to 77 percent, this was the result of a tax credit, without which it would have posted a loss.

    Moreover, its revenues are volatile and depend on how well the team does.

    Broadcast revenue, which accounts for about a third of the club's overall revenue, comes from contracts with the Premier League and Champions League, and payments depend on the number of matches for broadcast. Similarly, the team's match day revenue, which also accounts for a third of overall revenue, depends on the number of games it plays.

    In the fiscal year ended June 30, Manchester United's match day revenue is expected to fall 11 percent to 12 percent because the team played four home games less in the most recent season when compared with the previous one. Broadcast revenue is seen down 11 percent to 13 percent.

    To be sure, it is not all doom and gloom for the club. A seven-year club jersey sponsorship deal with General Motors Co, starting in 2014, will be a consistent source of revenue for the team. The deal is worth roughly $600 million.

    In Manchester United's roadshow, which has been posted on the internet, executives argue that the team is in the early stages of making more money off the strength of its brand around the globe. Emerging markets in particular comprise a valuable commercial opportunity for the franchise, the team's management says.

    "It's a global media company that participates in the most watched sport in the world. Investors don't have easy access to a company like that," said Michael Obuchowski, a portfolio manager with North Shore Asset Management in Cold Spring Harbor, New York.

    Still, investors face a lot of risks.

    Potential investors are "buying equity in something that is already heavily leveraged and doesn't have a sustainable profit," said Bob Boland, a professor of sports management at New York University. "This is like buying a piece of land with a mortgage already on it."

    (Reporting By Olivia Oran in New York; Additional reporting by Keith Weir in London; Editing by Paritosh Bansal, Martin Howell and Leslie Gevirtz)


Silver Bird Sues Its Former Directors

Another lawsuit has been filed. This time it is Silver Bird who is suing its former excutive directors.

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/452680

  • Silver Bird sues former executives for RM125m fraud Posted on 1 August 2012 - 11:42pm
    Last updated on 2 August 2012 - 02:16am

    PETALING JAYA (Aug 1, 2012): Silver Bird Group Bhd and its subsidiaries, Stanson Marketing Sdn Bhd and Standard Confectionery Sdn Bhd, have lodged a lawsuit against its former group managing director, executive director and eight others alleging, among others, breach of fiduciary duties, breach of duty of fidelity and loyalty, abuse of power, conspiracy to commit fraud and for facilitating misappropriation of funds.

    The bread maker filed the RM125 million suit in the Kuala Lumpur High Court yesterday, and case management is fixed for Sept 3.

    The suit claims Datuk Jackson Tan Han Kook, Ching Siew Cheong and Lai Poh Mei had breached their fiduciary duties as group managing director, executive director and general manager of accounts and finance of the three companies, respectively, and is seeking to collect damages caused by their action to be assessed.

    The suit is also seeking a declaration that one of its defendants — Asia Food Link Sdn Bhd — had allegedly made fictitious sales of sweetened creamers amounting to RM44.287 million to Stanson Marketing and as such, it is not entitled to claim the sum of RM44.188 million from it.

    A declaration is also sought that the purported purchase of machinery for a new bread line by Lai from Triremis (M) Sdn Bhd and Triremis Asia Sdn Bhd for RM25.8 million is fictitious and non-existent.

    Asia Food, Triremis (M), Triremis Asia and Bill Davis & Associates Sdn Bhd are also alleged to have knowingly received payment out of the funds of Silver Bird and its subsidiaries, which were misappropriated by Tan, Ching and Lai in breach of the duties owed to the the three companies, among others.

    Apart from the seven defendants, the suit is also seeking a declaration that external auditor Crowe Horwath and internal auditors — Audex Governance Sdn Bhd and Focus Internal Audit Solutions — had conspired to defraud Silver Bird, Stanson Marketing and Standard Confectionery in reckless disregard of the interests and/or to injure the interests of the three companies.

    "The company will make the necessary announcements on further developments of the matter as and when necessary," said Silver Bird in a filing with Bursa Malaysia yesterday.

    On Tuesday, Ching had taken legal action against Silver Bird and its directors for alleged wrongful termination from the group and is seeking damages for alleged slander against him.

    However, in his statement of claim served to Silver Bird, Ching had clearly admitted that he, in his capacity as then executive director, had "dressed up" the financial accounts of Stanson Group from 2003 till 2010, albeit allegedly under the instructions of Tan, who he stated had a gambling addiction.
    In one paragraph, Ching had admitted to inflating the assets of Stanson Group by some RM31 million and by adjusting a combined loss of RM15 million for the period 2002-2004 to a profit of RM16 million
    .

    He further stated that the "dressing up" of the accounts was divided between himself and other senior management staff.
This is a good development. Sue them for fraud!