Thursday, September 18, 2014

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

S&M Show Podcast

WHAT'S UP WITH CHINA COMPANIES LISTED ON BURSA?



Sifting out the reasons for disparities in valuation for most China companies listed on Bursa.



http://www.bfm.my/sm-salvatore-dali-whats-up-with-china-companies-listed-on-bursa.html


Song Pick: In line with Malaysia Day celebrations, reflecting the aspirations of most Malaysians. Sam Cooke's A Change Is Gonna Come.


Monday, September 15, 2014

China Stocks Listed Locally An Embarrassment

OK, this is the umpteenth time that I am warning not to touch China stocks listed on Bursa. Seems like an old record, but when syndicates are appointed to play up these shares, there are still bound to be followers. Bursa has kind of avoided the wreckage caused by scandalous shenanigans in some Chinese counters listed in Singapore, Taiwan and the US. Surprisingly, the ones listed as red chips in HK did not suffer a similar fate, maybe those were much larger in market cap?

What is most galling is the supposed cash in bank for these counters. Some even had the audacity to raise funds via rights issue when they supposedly have so much cash in bank, citing no more cashflow to buy raw materials. So, are you admitting that there is really no such cash balance in your bank account ... or are you telling us that there is no fucking way you could withdraw the funds. Either way, the company is crewed and so too will the minority shareholders.

The Edge did a nice table:

Shares that their "cash per share" is LESS than their share price. This is a no brainer, but to me, at least these company can and have used up their cash. To me, they are A LOT better than those with multiples of cash in hand to their share price.

                                  Share Px   Cash Per Share
Kanger                          0.37                    0.043
Sinotop                         0.08                    0.007
China Ouhua                0.11                    0.06

Shares with their price equaling their cash per share. this makes more sense. May be the better ones in the group but I would still avoid them if I can. Because its not the fundamentals that are the problem, its the whole huge tidal wave of negative sentiment that is almost impossible to turn around. Just imagine, would you buy into a new Madoff fund today?

Xidelang                       0.18                    0.21
HB Global                    0.07                    0.078
(suspended, PN17)
China Auto                   0.34                    0.409
K Star Sports                0.115                  0.14


The following are the ones that really piss you off. Their cash balance is in multiples of their share price, and some had the audacity to make rights issue. Very dubious, when things do not smell right, it is usually bad.

China Stationery          0.125                 0.795
Maxwell                       0.23                   0.34
Xinquan                       0.605                 1.77
Multi Sports                 0.225                 0.522

Cash balance - OK, that is one portion of valuing a share, what is galling is that most of them trade at PER of around 2-4 x... that has to be the cheapest shares in the world, and many are backed by cash as well. If all is true, WHY AREN'T private equity firms and IBs offering loans and Management Buyout deals??? I am sure many have done their homework ... and almost just as many declined to proceed further. Whats up man?

Although we did not have any major scandals with China listed firms here (yet), their share prices ALREADY has been adjusted to a level worse than an already erupted company with scandals. So we had our very own quiet correction.

What should Bursa do?

a) Nothing - As long as promoters/IBs keep bringing these China companies over, and as long as they fulfill the "basic requirements", fill in the blanks, you can list or do an RTO with a China company. This is because Bursa is a gatekeeper, not a market predictor or market selector or stock selector.

b) Something - From the evidence, Bursa can see that there is little or no interest from retail or institutional funds with these companies. You should be very wary of these companies STILL WANTING to list on Bursa, when all data shows very clearly that their share price will more than halve or be decimated after listing!!!

c) More Than Something - Reject rights issue if a company's cash per share is more than their share price unless reasons provided are solid (i.e. doing something that would use up their cash in hand as well). Protect the integrity of the markets by vetting and following all shares holders of promoters/owners of these companies and their transaction trail for two years after listing. Follow up with queries/fines/barring from industry if there are shenanigans.
        

Friday, September 12, 2014

Demonizing Asians (Again) For Depleting Sharks Numbers

They cleared all their forests years ago and 50 years later whack Asians for deforestation. They needed to promote their inferior cooking oils, hence did a prolonged propaganda against palm oil. Now the focus is on shark, or rather shark fins. I am OK going with or without that dish but lets get the facts cleared up. 

Western Hypocrisy In The Shark’s Fin Debate – Analysis


By

By KT Tan

Graham Land’s claim that “A UN-FAO commissioned report from last year estimated that the demand for shark fin soup in China, facilitated by a massive shark fishing industry in countries like Indonesia, was largely responsible for some 100 million shark deaths per year.” is a non sequitur, a logical fallacy in which the conclusion does not follow from the premises. ( ‘Are We Winning The War Against Shark Fin Soup?’, Eurasia Review, 22 August 2014.)

According to the FAO, Indonesia was ONLY one of the 26 countries that were responsible for 84 percent of the global shark catches in 2012. [1] Mainland China was not even on the list.

What Mr Land has conveniently ignored is that developed nations such as the United States, Spain, Japan, France, New Zealand, Portugal, Britain, Canada, and Australia were among the 26 nations cited by the FAO.[2] The FAO catch statistics showed that the above developed nations ranked as the top shark-fishing nations in the West, with a total catch of 190,842 tonnes in 2008.
The claim that “the demand for shark’s fin soup in China was largely responsible for some 100 million shark deaths per year” is baseless.

This is because the biggest consumer of shark’s fin soup, on a per capita basis, is not mainland China per se but Hong Kong, which is a Special Administrative Region of China.

Shark's fin soup
Shark’s fin soup

And since shark’s fin soup is inordinately expensive and served at important events such as weddings and banquets, unlike the inexpensive fish and chips meals, made from tens of millions of pounds of shark meat and eaten daily by the working classes in the West, the majority of ordinary folks in China do not have access to it.

And in case it escaped Mr Land’s attention, in October 2013 the Chinese Government removed shark’s fin soup off the menu in state banquets ‘as part of a sweeping government crackdown on excessive spending and extravagance’. [3]

As a result, shark’s fin soup consumption in mainland China fell by 70%. [4]
Dr Shelly Clarke, arguably the only marine scientist whose doctorate is on the topic, estimated that “as of 2000, the fins of 38 million sharks per year were being traded but that the number could range as low as 26 million or as high as 73 million”. [5]

But she warned that “In 2011, with many conservation organizations escalating their campaigns and rhetoric against the shark fin trade, there are few news articles, web sites or blogs that don’t mention the millions of sharks killed each year. But I almost never see any reference to the 38 million, which was after all, my best estimate”. [6]

She stressed that she frequently sees the “73 million” figure without any reference to that being her highest estimate and added that “almost as often I see “100 million,” an estimate that was published in Time magazine in 1997 but for which I can find no scientific basis.” [7]

“Even more troubling”, she added “some sources quote these figures as ‘the number of sharks killed for their fins’, or ‘the number of sharks finned’ (carcasses discarded at sea), or the ‘number of sharks finned alive’ every year.” [8]

She warned that “The truth is that no one knows how many sharks are killed for their fins, how many have their carcasses dumped at sea, or how many sharks are alive when finned. We simply don’t have that information, nor do we know whether these numbers have been sustained every year since 2000.” [9]

‘Exaggeration and hyperbole run the risk of undermining conservation campaigns’ and ‘selective and slanted use of information devalues and marginalizes researchers, who are working hard to impartially present the data’, she cautioned. [10]

The “Global catches,exploitation rates,and rebuilding options for sharks’ report by Boris Worm et al, [11] published in the journal ‘Marine Policy’ which Mr Land alluded to in a previous article started the report on a very pessimistic note, to wit :
“Adequate conservation and management of shark populations is becoming increasingly important on a global scale, especially because many species are exceptionally vulnerable to overfishing. Yet, reported catch statistics for sharks are incomplete, and mortality estimates have not been available for sharks as a group”.

If that was indeed the case then surely the report, that ‘a total annual mortality estimate of about 100 million sharks in 2000 and about 97 million sharks in 2010, with a total range of possible values between 63 and 273 million sharks per year” has no scientific basis. [12]

It was also not an FAO commissioned report but one that was funded by grants from the National Science Foundation and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, with additional meeting support from the Pew Charitable Trust. [13]

Mr Land’s claim that “Rapid economic growth in countries like China and Vietnam has decimated the global populations of many species, threatening endangerment and even extinction,” is blindly clutching at straws.

The United Nations ‘Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora’ (Cites), whose members represent 180 governments, is the global watchdog regulating trade on endangered species. [14]

And Cites has not listed any shark species on the endangered list. Only 8 out of about 420 species of sharks are on the watchlist today, though they are not necessarily classified as endangered. [15]

Under the laws of the United States, Britain, Spain, Portugal, France, Japan, China, India, Singapore, Indonesia and Malaysia, to name a few, no shark is listed on the endangered list.

Mr Land’s claim that “This is an industry in which sharks are caught and their dorsal fin is sliced off before they are unceremoniously dumped back in the water to die” is also baseless.

Pragmatism dictates that poor fishermen in the developing nations like Indonesia, which he cited, will never ever throw away a shark when it can be used to feed their local community.

Some fisheries from the developed nations, arguably, do throw overboard many dead or live sharks, accidentally caught, to save freezer space meant more valuable fish like the swordfish and giant bluefin tuna, the latter of which can fetch over US$50,000 each at the wholesale fish market in Tokyo.
The record price paid for a single 489 lb giant bluefin tuna was US$1.76 million in Tokyo in 2013. [16]

Mr Land’s assertion that since “the fins are what fetch the real money, the market makes it more profitable for this shockingly wasteful and cruel method as opposed to fishing for actual shark meat” is an empty rhetoric.

In Spain, the port of Vigo is one of the biggest and busiest fishing ports in the world and it is home to over 3,000 longline fishing vessels. In 2008, all species of unloaded fish, including sharks, reached 751,971 tonnes. They never throw away any shark overboard as there is a market for the whole fish. Finning is also banned by EU regulations. Shark meat, mainly from blue and mako sharks, make up the majority of the catch for sale to the south of Spain and for export to Greece, France, Croatia, Russia and Romania. All the fins, which form only 5% of the shark, are exported to Asia. The rest of the sharks (90%) are consumed in Europe.[17]

In case the nuance escapes Mr Land, one the biggest killers of sharks are the industrial-scale longline fisheries in the developed nations like the United States, Spain, Japan, France, New Zealand, Portugal, Britain, Canada, and Australia using up to 140km of longlines, deploying up to 10,000 hooks to target the more valuable swordfish and giant bluefin tuna but millions of sharks are killed as a by-catch.

Even if all the world stops eating shark’s fin soup from tomorrow onwards, millions of sharks will continue to be killed as a by-catch in longlines unless legislation or regulations are in hand to stop these wanton killings in the West.
There are over 420 species of sharks ranging in size from a foot to more than 50 feet, like the whale sharks. The claim that eating shark’s fin soup will somehow cause the 420 species to become extinct flies in the face of logic because only the fins of about 30 to 40 species of sharks are used in this traditional Asian cuisine.

And it is also reprehensible to imply that only Asians consume sharks. This is not true.
A catch of Spiny dogfish caught during a trawl survey off California. Photo credit John Wallace, NOAA/NMFS/NWFSC/FRAMD
A catch of Spiny dogfish caught during a trawl survey off California. Photo credit John Wallace, NOAA/NMFS/NWFSC/FRAMD

In the USA, 20 million pounds of just one species of sharks, the spiny dogfish, were consumed in 2011, marketed as “steakfish” or “grayfish”. That was a 33 percent spike over 2010, even after President Obama signed the Shark Conservation Act into law that year. This is appalling as the female dogfish sharks have a long gestation period and only give birth to a few pups at a time.
In the EU, including the UK, another 44 million pounds of the spiny dogfish shark species were consumed in 2011, disguised as rock salmon [18] fish & chips meals in the UK, as “saumonette” in France, as “seeaal” or as “schillerlocken” in Germany and “palombo” in Italy. In Canada it is called something else.

Typical plate of Fish& Chips, which in Australia and New Zealand is commonly made from 'Flake', a generic term used for several species of small shark.
Typical plate of Fish & Chips, which in Australia and New Zealand is commonly made from ‘Flake’, a generic term used for several species of small shark.

In Australia and NZ more than 33.6 million lbs of shark meat called flakes (mostly gummy sharks) are made into fish & chip meals every year. [19]
Why are the wildlife activists not campaigning for the West to stop consuming fish & chips meals made from shark meat? Why the double standards?

Would Mr Land be more sanguine if fish & chips, made from shark meat, are served at Asian weddings and banquets in future, instead of shark’s fin soup?
If Western consumers can feast on 95% of the shark (the meat) why are they demonizing Asians for consuming the other 5% of the shark (the fins), which are unappreciated and discarded in the West anyway? Why the hypocrisy?
Is this a new form of Cultural Imperialism, dictating what Asians should or should not eat? Trying to stop a traditional culinary practice in Asia, especially when sharks are not an endangered species, is culturally insensitive and is bound to fail.

It is like asking the Japanese to give up their tuna sashimi, the French their frogs’ legs, Western socialites their caviar canapes or the Englishmen and the Australians their fish and chips meals, again made from tens of millions of pounds of meat from sharks like the porbeagle, the spiny dogfish in the UK and gummy sharks in Australia.

The efforts by wildlife activists and NGOs to save sharks are commendable, but sadly, millions of sharks will continue to be caught as a by-catch in longlines and killed by the industrial-scale fisheries in the West.
Excoriating Asia will not lower the deadly by-catch; only legislation or regulation will.

KT Tan is a private researcher in the maritime disputes in the South China Sea and a regular reader of Eurasia Review. He is based in Singapore. Email : cmsavi@protonmail.ch

Notes:
1 ‘State of the World’s Fisheries and Aquaculture’ 2014, Box 7, p.143 http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3720e.pdf
2 Ibid
3 In Oct 2013, China removed shark’s fin soup off the menu
in state banquets. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2013-12/10/content_17163142.htm
4 Shark’s fin soup consumption in mainland China fell by 70% http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2013-11/04/content_17078938.htm
5 Dr Shelly Clarke’s website. http://www.seaweb.org/getinvolved/oceanvoices/ShellyClarke.php
6 Ibid
7 Ibid
8 Ibid
9 Ibid
10 Ibid
11 Global catches,exploitation rates,and rebuilding options for sharks’, Boris Worm et al. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X13000055
12 Ibid, Abstract.
13 Ibid, p.202.
14 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/how.php
15 Cites Appendix II-CLASS ELASMOBRANCHII (SHARKS) http://www.cites.org/eng/app/appendices.php
16 A 489 lb giant bluefin tuna sold for US$1.76 million in Tokyo in 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/05/bluefin-tuna-sells-for-incredible-record-tokyo-fish-auction_n_2415722.html
17 The Untold Truth : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EzDrcr84Oo
18 Spiny dogfish sharks marketed in the UK as rock salmons in fish & chips meals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_salmon
19 Two Sides to a Fin : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLK-Q0iVMlM

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Gutter Food Fail Blog

This blog was quite happening a couple of years back then went quiet, and now they are back. The blog has a group of contributors who will blog about places they have eaten and the food/service/decor/dining experience had been PATHETIC. The quirky part is that they write in Malaysian broken English but still recognisable with a plethora of Cantonese foul language - its sooo funny. Their England also must be pretty good to write in such a sing song talk cock way - great effort guys/gals.

My recent favourite posting of theirs was when they reviewed the faddish Boat Noodle ... damn funny, and I think they are just being realistic and not just ketuk for ketuk's sake.


http://thegutterfood.blogspot.com/

Tuesday, September 9, 2014


Thai Boat Noodle in Jaya One Is Not For Human Eats One

Hi Children
I see people many in fesbook post about Boat Noodle, so I wented to try in the nearest outlet, in PJ Jaya One.  I oso see many people stack many bowls on top, thinking wah, these people manyak fatso eated alot one. So being a big eater myself, i go try la.
Place ok la, many people. Is located same floor as Cold Storage.
RM1.90 per bowl, wah i think is so cheap, no wonder many people go order.
But this Jaya One outlet has no dry nodle, so dont put yr hopes high if you wan eated dry one. 
So i order the chikan and beef kwoay teow to try try. 



 TUNA MA FU LAT.... They come gip me this KIDDIE BOWL???

to see how small is small, see pic above. See how small you see? you see??? i tell you, you seee!!!
I normally don't curse one infront of children, but this one die die also must kasi kurse.
See the pic above? Thats just ngam ngam for ONE SPOON FULL of kwoay teow!!!! How eat??? You tell me??? No wonder people order damn lot of bowls! Imagine if i eated 10 spoons only full, that will be RM19 already! Somemore only one spoon, even children also eat like no eat liddat!!!
Somemore is COLD! You know why cold? Because to cater for many bowls, they make many bowls before hand, and waiter standing waiting for cook pour soup and boil nodles, bowl by bowl, until when reachness you, its cold! 
I eated this cold Kwoay Teow at night I sleep i macam pei gwai teow!!! Very sucks.
 see? this pic i curik from their FB and i purposely don wan kasi credit link coz i tulan.
Then got one fella eated more than 60 bowls.
Again, pic curik and no kasi kredit, u blow?
66 bowls amounts to RM125.40!!! Siao ar??!!!
See, children, aunty give you some lesson....
History say thai people on boats serve nodle not so many, sked burn thumb since boat always goyang goyang coz got water below, so put small amount... ok...BUT NOT THAT SMALL LA!!! And since its COLD... burn matt chatt also kenot la!
You go thailand you see they put so small amount? Somemore restoran in thailand serve more leh..
this one i curik from gwai lou blog, later kasi kredit coz he make aunty wet liao..hehe
See, restaurant in thai they give more portion. At least 3 to 5 spoon fulls la.
http://www.bangkokbeyond.com/blog/thai-cuisine-and-culture-boat-noodles-the-process -> u see this, actual use blood mix with soup to make black kaler plus spices for taste. ok la.
See the actual boat noodle in thailand...
see, is actually MORE than ONE SPOON of kwoay teow!!!!
Boat Noodle of Malaysia, you go pei gwai teow laaaa....  PTUI!!!PTUI!!!PTUI!!!
Verdict:  Food portion too small, too EXPENSE! But taste wise not bad...flavourful with lots of herbs and spice can feels when touchness your tongue, plus you can add sugar, chili flakes, sour sos, and fish sos to make more oomph macam thai people.
Conclusion: NEVER COME BACK AGAIN... Taste once, taste them all. No want come kena pei gwai teow at night coz you eat like you no eated liddat. How to eat la! Might as well eat air!!!! This place i fakau off no come no more. Is confirm not for human eat (for ghost maybe).
Location: PJ JAYA ONE (you go google gps la)



Wednesday, September 10, 2014

S&M Show Podcast

Megabank Merger - Merits & EPF's Role

On this segment of the S&M Show, we discussed the merits of the deal and questioned the attractiveness of MBSB. Should EPF vote?

http://www.bfm.my/sm-salvatore-dali-megabank-merger-merits-and-epfs-role-140910.html

Song Pick:  The Real Thing, back in the 70s, had one mega hit in You To Me Are Everything. This is their lesser known hit, just as good, Can't Get By Without You.

Tuesday, September 09, 2014

Not Ipoh Mali... But Very Good Bakery & Design Artistry Skills


... 146 Jalan Taming Sari, Taiping ... its called IPOH BAKERY, and they are churning out wonderful looking cakes, so realistic ... just wondering why call it Ipoh Bakery when you are obviously in Taiping?

Check out their full portfolio via Facebook, type in Ipoh Bakery. Here are some great photos:



10433939 254348708108533 2241282411760843552 n






















We Are The Real Majority

Yes we do ketuk one another every now and then ... but when it comes down to being absolutely serious, how racist are we? I had tears in my eyes the longer the clip went on ...

Remember... we are in the majority, don't fucking listen to the propaganda shit that tears us apart to rule us.

Sunday, September 07, 2014

You Say Tomato, I Say Tomato ...

How long have we been calling for an abolishment of APs, still around I see ... and wait, they now came up with an Economic Cost Benefit Analysis ... OK, people, lets do an Economic CBA then.

IF ABOLISHED
a) cost government (Malaysian public) RM2.8bn in revenue
b) AP holders' corporate/individual tax, maybe RM200m, assuming they make only RM900m a year

IF ABOLISHED
a) car purchase savings RM2.8bn to Malaysian public
b) trickle down, multiplier effect from HAVING a lower car installment plan, more funds to meet other necessities or other loans, maybe buy a bigger and better property
c) more variety in cars that can be purchased by more Malaysians
d) DO NOT NEED TO PLONK DOWN LARGE FUNDS for reconditioned cars, which will clog the environment, result in much higher maintenance cost

The government MUST not view tax/fees collected as theirs', it belongs to the Malaysian public. So the argument here is moot. The government does not loses if the public benefits by the same quantum. You want to raise back RM2.8bn in revenue, go increase petrol RON 97 by another 15%-20%, you will be taxing people who can afford expensive cars.

As for business opportunities for Bumiputras, I think any person with some semblance of an economics degree will be able to tell you that the APs is a created industry out of thin air THAT yields no "real value" in terms of contribution to PRODUCTIVITY, SKILLS, CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, VALUE ADD to the real economy. I am all for encouraging business opportunities and skills development, but make sure its in areas where we are adding real value, such as oil & gas, private equity, academic scholarships, etc...

Pekema: Abolishing Aps Would Affect Government's Revenue

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 29 (Bernama) -- The abolishment of approved permit (AP) for cars would not only give a negative impact to the Bumiputera entrepreneurs in the automotive industry, but could also affect the government's revenue through tax collection from the AP holders.

The Malay Vehicle Importers and Traders Association Malaysia (Pekema) president Datuk Zainuddin Abdul Rahman said the annual tax collected from members of the association amounted to over RM2 billion, eventhough the number of cars sold constituted only five per cent of the overall market.

"From the number of imports, the quantity that are brought in is not big however in terms of tax collection, our contribution is commendable. For example, in 2011 the government's import tax collected from our members totalled RM2.8 billion, and this increased to RM3.3 billion in 2012.

"This did not include the annual corporate and indvidual taxes. Moreover, the government receives new revenue from the fees of each AP for used cars of RM10,000 which now amounts to more than RM1 billion," he said in a statement in conjunction with Pekema's annual general meeting here Friday.

Zainuddin said the irony was that this was the only AP that the government had imposed a fee out of the more than 800 types of APs issued.

Early this month, the Minister of International Trade and Industry Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed said the government is still studying the proposal to abolish the AP for the import of vehicles as it would affect the country's revenue.

He was reported as saying that whatever policy that would be introduced to replace the AP would be able to compensate the loss of government revenue.

Elaborating, Zainuddin said the criticism that the continuation of the open AP policy would be seen as the government taking a 'step backwards' was unfounded.

"The issue of 'going backwards' do not arise as the open AP policy has succeeded in ensuring the participation of Bumiputera entrepreneurs in the automotive industry. This is one of the government's affirmative action in the implementation of the New Economic Policy," he said.

In this regard, Zainuddin said Pekema was thankful to the government for considering the problems that could be encountered by the AP holders, especially its members.

"Pekema has consistently said that the huge implication on Bumiputera entrepreneurs if the open AP policy is abolished is that it would kill the Bumiputera participation in the nation's automotive industry...if the proposal is adopted," he added.

-- BERNAMA


Abolishing  approved permits (AP) for cars would not only have a negative impact on Bumiputera entrepreneurs in the automotive industry, but could also affect government revenues, said an industry player today.
Malay Vehicle Importers and Traders Association Malaysia (Pekema) president Datuk Zainuddin Abdul Rahman said the annual tax collected from members of the association amounted to more RM2 billion, even though the number of cars sold constituted only 5% of the overall market.
"The number of cars brought in is not big, however, in terms of tax collection, our contribution is commendable. For example, in 2011 the government collected almost RM2.8 billion from our members and this increased to RM3.3 billion in 2012.

"This excludes annual corporate and individual taxes. Moreover, the government also derives revenue from the fees of each AP for used cars of RM10,000 which now amounts to more than RM1 billion," he said in a statement in conjunction with Pekema's annual general meeting today. Zainuddin said the irony was vehicle AP was the only one hit by a fee out of the more than 800 types of AP issued.
Early this month, the Minister of International Trade and Industry Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed (pic) said the government was still studying the proposal to abolish AP for the import of vehicles as it would affect the country's revenue.
He was reported as saying that whatever policy that would be introduced to replace the AP must be able to compensate the loss of government revenue.
Zainuddin said criticism that an open AP policy meant the government was taking a “step backwards” was unfounded.
“The open AP policy has succeeded in ensuring the participation of Bumiputera entrepreneurs in the automotive industry. This is one of the government's affirmative actions in the implementation of the New Economic Policy."  – Bernama, August 29, 2014.
- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/government-will-lose-rm2-billion-if-aps-abolished-says-pekema-bernama#sthash.l65Szmul.dpuf
Abolishing  approved permits (AP) for cars would not only have a negative impact on Bumiputera entrepreneurs in the automotive industry, but could also affect government revenues, said an industry player today.
Malay Vehicle Importers and Traders Association Malaysia (Pekema) president Datuk Zainuddin Abdul Rahman said the annual tax collected from members of the association amounted to more RM2 billion, even though the number of cars sold constituted only 5% of the overall market.
"The number of cars brought in is not big, however, in terms of tax collection, our contribution is commendable. For example, in 2011 the government collected almost RM2.8 billion from our members and this increased to RM3.3 billion in 2012.
- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/government-will-lose-rm2-billion-if-aps-abolished-says-pekema-bernama#sthash.T8vFcsVz.dpuf
Abolishing  approved permits (AP) for cars would not only have a negative impact on Bumiputera entrepreneurs in the automotive industry, but could also affect government revenues, said an industry player today.
Malay Vehicle Importers and Traders Association Malaysia (Pekema) president Datuk Zainuddin Abdul Rahman said the annual tax collected from members of the association amounted to more RM2 billion, even though the number of cars sold constituted only 5% of the overall market.
"The number of cars brought in is not big, however, in terms of tax collection, our contribution is commendable. For example, in 2011 the government collected almost RM2.8 billion from our members and this increased to RM3.3 billion in 2012.
- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/government-will-lose-rm2-billion-if-aps-abolished-says-pekema-bernama#sthash.T8vFcsVz.dpuf

Saturday, September 06, 2014

Happy Mid Autumn Festival

Amazing sand painting/artistry celebrating the Mid Autumn Festival ...


Friday, September 05, 2014

Gotta Love 'Em Goldman Bankers

Want to know how the top 2-3% looks at life .... how disdainfully ... (facepalm). Heard the following conversation snippets inside GS elevators.


#1: Some chick asked me what I would do with 10 million bucks. I told her I'd wonder where the rest of my money went.

#1: The fact that most people are too stupid to know how dumb they really are is the fabric holding our society together.

#1: Whenever someone asks how I'm doing, I usually just lie and say 'good', even though I'm doing a lot better than that.

#1: Checking your phone after someone else pulls out their phone is the yawn of our generation.

#1: ‘Do what you love' is great advice for making 30k a year.

#1: Some people assume I am quiet, boring, or shy, without ever realizing that I just don't like them.

#1: Poor people eat so much fast food you'd think their time was valuable.

 #1: The people with the loudest social media conscience conveniently forget that their iPhone is made by slave labor in China.

 #1: Work hard. Eat right. Exercise. Don't drink too much. And only buy what you can afford. It's not rocket science.

 "Money can't buy happiness but it solves 95% of the problems that make you unhappy."

 #1: Dinner with my wife’s friends is such a chore. It’s impossible to remember which ones she secretly hates.

 [At the gym] #1: What machine should I use to impress the girls? #2: The ATM.

 #1: Most celebrities barely have high school diplomas so who gives a shit what they think on substantive issues.

 “Hot girls will never know if they are actually interesting or not."

 #1: Only idiots get bored when we've all got handheld devices containing infinite knowledge at our fingertips.

 #1: I start every cell conversation with 'my phone's about to die' so they don't waste my time.
 Fox News panic over Ebola. 100% of scientists say not to. 99% of scientists panic over climate change. Fox News says not to.

 #1: The NSA is the only branch of the government that actually listens to people.

 #1: Starbucks needs a separate line for people who have their shit together.

 #1: I don't have an iPhone case. I'm not irresponsible or poor.

 #1: The grass is greener on the other side because it's fertilized with bullshit.

 #1: The new standard of cool is hanging out with friends and not ever looking at a phone.

 #1: Don't apologize for being late with a Starbucks latte in your hand.

 #1: You shouldn't retire until your money starts making more money than you made in your best year.

 #1: I love how politicians complain about tax loopholes as if they didn’t write the laws.

Wednesday, September 03, 2014

S&M Show Podcast

IS MAS RESTRUCTURING PLAN WORKABLE?


We look at the merits of the proposed plan by Khazanah. We explore why it may work, as well as its pitfalls

http://www.bfm.my/sm-salvatore-dali-malaysiafinance-is-mas-restructuring-plan-workable-140903.html


Song Pick: Wanna know what your parents were listening to when they were falling in love? 1958 ... the very lovely Till The End of Time by Earl Grant.


The Next Gem - Goh Ban Huat

I had kept the details of the Heads of Agreement between Goh Ban Huat and Dynac, waiting to write about it. As is the case with most previous RTOs, the shares would only start to move once the ACTUAL date of signing of the RTO has been firmed up. The other factor to know by heart is that they have 60 business days to follow up on the Heads of Agreement and must sign within that 60 days.

Since the agreement was mooted on 2 July 2014, I though it would be sometime in September. But the shares started moving today in a big way, so I guess the deal is on. The question then is there more upside?

People in the investment banking side would have known that Dynac is one big gem among unlisted oil and gas players. They could have gone on its own IPO if they wanted to but an RTO is cleaner and faster. The terms of the deal has to be good as well for them to take GBH over.

Basis for comparison: Barakah's latest PAT RM9m, Cekap/Mecip (Ideal Jacobs) RM11m... Dynac RM40m. Barakah is already a billion ringgit company as they obtained a lot of contracts after they did the RTO. Let's just say the people behind Dynac are a lot more BSDs, and they have a lot more assets to pump in eventually.

The run today probably was due to the likelihood of actual signing of the RTO soon. 

The new owners will be buying 36% of GBH from Robert Tan at RM2.00 and will undertake a GO at RM2.00. Dynac will be injected at RM638m, satisfied by RM210m cash to the owners and issuance of new shares @ RM2.00.

The lucrative landbanks inside GBH will be divested to Keladi Maju for RM192m cash. After the exercise, assuming all warrants also converted as the exercise price of the warrants is at RM1.00, GBH will be left with 461m shares and RM90m in cash in bank.

The big attraction will be GMOS which is a 40% subsidiary of Dynac, while GBH will be holding a 35% direct stake = giving GBH a 75% stake in GMOS. 

The purchase consideration was derived upon taking into consideration the expected profit of the secured order book based on the estimated net profit margin ranging from 20% - 30% as represented by the management of GMOS to the Company. The purchase consideration was also derived taking into consideration the intangible value of the licenses owned by GMOS such as license by PETRONAS etc and the various tenders submitted for FPSO and related 
consultancy services. 

To ascribe a fair value is difficult as the valuation on injection is not demanding at 15x. The prospects of later injecting the remainder of GMOS is a plus. It is also likely that the company shares will go for a split after approval as RM1.00 shares is a bit bulky and 600m shares is obviously not liquid enough. Having said all that, it would be very surprising to find GBH still below RM3.00 over the near and mid term.

To me, this is immensely more attractive than Barakah.

NOTE: The above opinion is not an invitation to buy or sell. It serves as a blogging activity of my investing thoughts and ideas, this does not represent an investment advisory service as I charge no subscription or management fees (donations are welcomed though). I may already have positions in the stock mentioned above. The content on this site is provided as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. All site content, shall not be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any security or financial instrument. The ideas expressed are solely the opinions of the author. Any action that you take as a result of information, analysis, or commentary on this site is ultimately your responsibility. Consult your investment adviser before making any investment decisions.

The main drivers for Dynac/GMOS:

DATO’ ABDUL RAHMAN BIN MOHAMED SHARIFF and Zahar (GMOS)


Zahar, a Malaysian, aged 53, is currently the Chief Executive and Principal Consultant of GMOS.

Zahar spent more than 30 years with MISC Berhad (“MISC”) and Petroliam Nasional Berhad (“Petronas”). Zahar was the Senior Management representative of MISC and a member of MISC’s Management Committee. He pioneered and established the offshore business for MISC in 2003 and headed the growing business in MISC to establish business and projects for six (6) FPSOs, six (6) floating storage and offloading units(“FSO”), two (2) mobile offshore production units (“MOPU”), one (1) Semi Sub, until he retired in March 2010.




Price Chart

ZoomFromJun 3, 2014ToSep 3, 2014PricesVolume4. Jun12. Jun20. Jun28. Jun6. Jul14. Jul22. Jul1. Aug8. Aug16. Aug24. Aug2. Sep21.61.82.22.42.60M2.5M5M7.5M201020112012201320141m3m6mYTD1yAllklse.i3investor.com

Datuk Abdul Rahman Mohamed Shariff, the MD and 99.8% owner of oil and gas (O&G) service company Dynac Sdn Bhd, will become the largest shareholder of Goh Ban Huat Bhd (GBHB) with a controlling stake of 51% upon the completion of a reverse takeover (RTO) of the ceramic and sanitary ware manufacturer.

In a corporate manoeuvre announced yesterday, GBHB will buy 100% of Dynac from Abdul Rahman and Normala Mohd Shariff for RM632 million, to be paid for with RM210 million cash and the remaining RM422 million with the issuance of 211 million new GBHB shares at RM2 per share.

Pursuant thereto, Abdul Rahman will undertake a mandatory general offer (MGO) to acquire the remaining shares he does not own in GBHB at an offer price of RM2 each.

GBHB’s chairman and substantial shareholder Tan Sri Tan Hua Choon has given an undertaking to accept the proposed MGO in respect of the 66.8 million (36%) GBH shares he owns.

Simultaneous to the above proposal, GBHB has entered into a share sale agreement to acquire for RM38 million a 35% stake in Globalmariner Offshore Services Sdn Bhd (GMOS), a company specialising in floating production storage and offloading (FPSO) and offshore marine services.

“The acquisition of GMOS and Dynac is in line with the intention of the group to broaden its earnings base while maintaining the ceramic buildings materials business.

“Through the acquisition of GMOS and Dynac, GBHB will be able to tap the growing FPSO and O&G sector,” said Tan in a statement yesterday. According to GBHB, GMOS is a Petroliam Nasional Bhd’s licence holder, which is expected to have competitive advantages in bidding for any FPSO tenders in the future.

Dynac has been in operation since 1982. Consolidated net profits for Dynac and its group of companies for financial year ended June 30, 2013, is RM40.4 million while GMOS has an outstanding secured orderbook of approximately RM304 million.

In conjunction with the RTO by Dynac, GBHB has proposed to divest its 13.93-acre land together with a warehouse erected thereon to Keladi Maju Bhd, a Main Board-listed company related to Tan for a cash consideration of RM192.4 million, with the divestment proceeds to be used to part finance the acquisition of Dynac.


Dynac Sdn Bhd looks back at a company history of more than 30 years in experience. The company's wide range of products and services goes from oil and gas, chemical refinery, rig building industry to telecommunication.
Our primary activities are in the O&G industry in the fields of HVAC Systems, Air Cooled Heat Exchangers, Cable Support System, LV Switchgear and Telekom JKH.

GMOS - Global Marine and Offshore Sdn Bhd (GMO) is a diversified Marine Trading & Service Company dedicated to serve the leading companies of the Marine and Oil & Gas industries. This organization carries the responsibility for all sales and services operation involving marine. GMO is an exclusive representative and a trading Company that supplies specialist Lifeboat & Rescue Boat, Life Saving Appliances (LSA), Fire Fighting Equipment and Marine Pumps .
As offshore and marine trading or supplier, GMO can demonstrate in-depth experience and expertise relating to the behavior of oil and gas facilities. GMO have concentrated activities in areas directly compatible with this experience and expertise. Accordingly, GMO provide trading & services following areas:.