By dawn this evening, it will be the 1st day of Ramadhan. Tonight the Terawih prayers will begin.
Tomorrow Muslims will begin a whole month of fasting from dawn to dusk. It is the opportune time to seek forgiveness and pursue spiritual bliss.
To pick from where Bigdogdotcom left off [read here], it is also time to "Tone down a bit lah" on 1MDB. To quote him:
Time. Is the single most important component and commodity in unravelling and making good the entire mess within Federal Government strategic investment corporation 1 Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).1MDB is a complex issue thus it had no traction with the public, more so among UMNO members and government supporters.
That was till Tun Dr Mahathir begin his criticism and call for Dato Najib's resignation.
The earlier champions of 1MDB issue were Sarawak Report, The Edge, Tony Pua, Rafizi and Dato Abdul Kadir Jasin but it was only getting the attention of the urbane and corporate people.
If it had not turned political, PAC would not have given a damn. It is strange and ethically wrong but that was how Dato Nurjazlan see it [read MI here, hopefully it is not a spin].
The earliest to play up this issue must be Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim and Outsyed the Box. It is believed that Outsyed met the first CEO of 1MDB, the arrogant Dato Shahrol in 2009 but had no more engagement with them since.
Allegations and replies
Outsyed was the first to insinuate Riza Aziz financed his movie using 1MDB money [posting taken off]. It was also in the so-called investigative piecce written by Sarawak Report on a latter date.
Although Tun M would not have made allegations based on Sarawak Report, he raised it in his earlier blog posting together with an Apanama-debunked allegation of Datin Seri Rosmah's owning RM23 million diamond ring.
There was an accusation by Tun Dr Mahathir in his blog that RM42 billion, later became RM27 billion, and in one of the talk, it became berbillion-billion of 1MDB money had disappeared, or could mean swindeled or siphoned, or probably unaccounted for.
Arul had explained and detailed the accounted for items in the 2014 Deloitte audited accounts [read our past posting here and here]. But Tun M refused to believe it. He prefer to believe the unqualified PAC than Accountant General [read here].
In the pursuit of justice and public accountability, the onus and responsibility now lies with him to divulge and share the documents and proof. The public believed he would not made such accusation unless he has the proof.
Yesterday, Arul issued two statements in succession with regard to Tun M's successive postings, here and here. Some 13 new factual errors was highlighted.
---------------------
Media statement issued by 1Malaysia Development Berhad on 16 June 2015
For immediate publication
Facts in relation to blog posting entitled “the 1MDB Story” by Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad
1. Tun Mahathir claims that there was “the attempt to hijack the Terengganu Investment Authority (TIA) money” and that “Terengganu accordingly withdrew as it cannot let its oil wells be put at risk”.
- There was no attempt to hijack TIA money.
- In 2009, various discussions were held between the Federal Government and the state government of Terengganu on how each party would provide its share of funding for the TIA. A number of options were discussed in this regard.
- Eventually, the Federal Government’s contribution consisted of it guaranteeing a RM5 billion sukuk issuance by the TIA. This happened on 29 May 2009, prior to the TIA being federalised.
- Subsequently, the state government of Terengganu decided to withdraw from the TIA which led to the entity being federalised in July 2009.
- Contrary to Tun Mahathir’s claim, a Cabinet paper on this matter was prepared and approved by Cabinet, in line with standard practice and as required for all government guarantees.
- Furthermore, the government guarantee is not “off budget” as claimed. It is a clear and acknowledged liability of the federal government, which is ultimately the 100% shareholder of 1MDB.
- The entire premise of this statement is incorrect as the sukuk was arranged by AmBank, not Goldman Sachs.
- AmBank fully underwrote the sukuk issuance (i.e. it took the risk to provide RM5 billion to 1MDB) and, therefore, earned any commission it received for doing so.
- It is a fact, verifiable by a check on the relevant Bank Negara Malaysia webpage, that on 29 May 2009 (the date the RM5 billion sukuk was issued), yields for Government bonds were 2.82% (3 years maturity), 3.56% (5 years maturity) and 4.27% (10 years maturity). It is clear that for every additional year of maturity, the yield is higher.
- The RM5 billion sukuk issued by 1MDB has a 30-year maturity, i.e. it would mature at a date three times later than the 10-year government bond, which was the longest maturity period for a bond at that time. There were no 30-year government bonds in issuance for comparison purposes.
- The 1MDB sukuk was issued at a discounted price of approximately 88, i.e. a discount to face value of 100, which is common for a fixed income instrument. The discount represents the additional yield benefit to sukuk investors. This discount, when added to the coupon of 5.75%, results in a yield of approximately 6.15% - not 7% as incorrectly claimed by Tun Mahathir.
- Based on the logic outlined above, 1MDB achieved 30-year financing for its sukuk at a yield of 6.15%. By contrast, 10-year government bonds had a yield 4.27%. Given the difference in the maturity period, this was a good outcome by any yardstick in the fixed income markets.
- The figures being quoted by Tun Mahathir are incorrect. To be clear; the interest cost on RM42 billion of debt by 1MDB as of 31.03.2014 was RM2.4 billion, i.e. a significant 20% less than what Tun Mahathir claims.
- 1MDB did indeed borrow RM2 billion as arranged by a subsidiary of Tanjong PLC. These proceeds were used to repay a RM2 billion loan provided by a syndicate of domestic lenders. It was not used to pay interest, as claimed by Tun Mahathir.
- As for the rationale behind why Tanjong PLC arranged the financing for 1MDB, we make reference to note 41 (iii) (h) on page 170 of 1MDB’s financial statements dated 31 March 2014.
- The note states “On 7 August 2014, PIH (i.e. Powertek Investment Holdings), a subsidiary of the Company (i.e. 1MDB), entered into a Subscription Agreement with Tanjong under which Tanjong agreed to subscribe for equity in PIH, of up to RM2.0 billion on the occurrence of certain events… which proceeds shall be used solely for the repayment or prepayment by PIH of any amount owing under the RM5.5 billion loan facility arranged by Maybank Investment Bank Berhad and RHB Investment Bank Berhad… ”
From the above, it is a clear fact that Tanjong had an obligation to subscribe to RM2.0 billion of equity in PIH, the proceeds of which would be used for repayment of the loan facility.
- Regretfully, as previously explained, 1MDB is bound by confidentiality agreements and cannot elaborate further on why the RM2.0 billion equity investment was subsequently agreed by the parties to become an RM2.0 billion loan but we trust that the facts shared above provides some clarity on this matter.
- It is important to note that 1MDB purchased 13 different power plants with a generating capacity of approximately 5,500 Megawatts (MW).
- Of the above purchase, contrary to Tun Mahathir’s suggestion, only 2 plants had a near term “expiry of licence” i.e. a 440 MW Powertek plant in January 2016 and the KLPP (Genting) plant in February 2016.
- The “licence” of the KLPP plant was subsequently extended for 10 years, thereby proving it was a good asset purchased by 1MDB.
- Furthermore, 1MDB is awaiting a decision from the Energy Commission for extension of the Powertek 440 MW plant.
- It is important to note that 1MDB is ultimately 100% owned by the Government of Malaysia.
- Accordingly, any transfer of land to 1MDB and any subsequent benefit in land value increase is ultimately 100% for the Government of Malaysia.
- In reference to the figures quoted by Tun Mahathir, he is again incorrect. The fact is that 1MDB paid RM230 million, not RM320 million, to acquire this parcel of land.
- 1MDB is the master developer and has an obligation to fund infrastructure and strategic assets on the land. The cost of this infrastructure that 1MDB is contractually obligated to deliver in TRX is at least RM1,500 psf. This is a direct benefit to any land buyer and forms part of the purchase price paid.
- The financial statements of 1MDB clearly provide the basis for asset valuations. Furthermore, independent valuations have been conducted by professional valuers. This is a requirement by the auditors of 1MDB who have signed off on the accounts with no qualifications.
Media statement issued by 1Malaysia Development Berhad on 16 June 2015
For immediate publication
Facts in relation to blog posting entitled “More Investments by 1MDB” by Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad
1. Tun Mahathir claims that “PetroSaudi did not pay a single cent” in a joint venture with 1MDB.
- PetroSaudi, via a subsidiary company, owned assets, comprising rights to oil fields in Turkmenistan and Argentina, worth approximately USD2.7 billion. These assets were sold by PetroSaudi to another subsidiary, “JV Co”, which at the time of the asset sale, was a company formed by and initially 100% owned by PetroSaudi for the purposes of a proposed joint venture with 1MDB.
- In return for the USD2.7 billion asset transfer, JV Co had to pay PetroSaudi USD700 million. This indebtedness resulted from the asset transfer. Accordingly, there was no loan made or “to settle”.
- On 29 September 2009, 1MDB executed a joint-venture agreement with PetroSaudi. Upon completion of an independent valuation, 1MDB contributed USD1 billion of cash in return for 40% ownership of JV Co, and PetroSaudi was left with a 60% stake in the JV Co. In effect; 1MDB’s contribution was in cash, whereas PetroSaudi’s contribution was in independently valued assets worth USD2.7 billion.
- It was part of the joint-venture agreement that, of the USD1 billion from 1MDB, USD700 million would be used to pay PetroSaudi for the initial asset transfer to JV Co (see above) whereas USD300 million would remain in JV Co. Upon satisfaction with the independent valuation, as per the joint-venture agreement, 1MDB made a payment of USD700 million to a subsidiary of PetroSaudi, and obtained legal title to 40% share of JV Co, a company with independently valued assets worth USD2.7 billion at the time.
- Accordingly, PetroSaudi had full rights to the USD 700 million paid by 1MDB and these funds were for PetroSaudi to use, at its discretion.
- The joint venture with PetroSaudi was terminated in March 2010, with PetroSaudi assuming 100% ownership of JV Co. 1MDB converted its USD1 billion of equity in JV Co to murabaha notes issued by JV Co, under the terms of a Murabaha Financing Agreement. PetroSaudi, as 100% owner of JV Co, fully guaranteed JV Co’s obligations under the murabaha notes.
- 1MDB then made further investments of USD500 million and USD330 million in additional murabaha notes issued by JV Co.
- In total, 1MDB invested USD1.83 billion cash in murabaha notes issued by JV Co, a company that, by then, was 100% owned by PetroSaudi following the termination of the joint venture in March 2010.
- In June 2012, the entire USD1.83 billion amount invested by 1MDB in murabaha notes was repaid, by way of conversion into shares of Petrosaudi Oil Services Limited, for a value of USD2.22 billion.
- In September 2012, 1MDB sold its shares in PetroSaudi Oil Services Limited for USD2.318 billion and received fund units in a Cayman registered fund. The Cayman registered fund is managed by Bridge Partners, a Hong Kong-based fund manager. These fund units were owned by 1MDB via its 100% subsidiary, Brazen Sky, and held through BSI Bank Singapore as custodian.
- Accordingly, 1MDB invested a total of USD1.83 billion with PetroSaudi (initially as equity, then as murabaha notes), and ultimately owned USD2.318 billion of fund units i.e. a gain over time of USD488 million.
- The facts detailed above can be verified by reference to the notes to the audited financial statements of 1MDB dated 31.03.2010, 31.03.2012 and 31.03.2014.
- Despite Tun Mahathir’s vigorous claims, it is a fact that Arul Kanda never said he “saw the cash”. He is on the record as saying he had “seen the statements”, referring to the fund unit ownership and redemptions.
- Tun Mahathir repeats in his blog posting the original MOF answer to Parliament, but has chosen to ignore the amended answer by MOF and the clarification issued by Arul Kanda on 10 June 2015.
- There was indeed a misunderstanding on information provided by 1MDB to MOF, which required the original Parliamentary answer to be subsequently amended. This is a matter of public record and has been acknowledged by 1MDB.
- As the President of the company, Arul Kanda takes full responsibility for this misunderstanding and will ensure better communication with all stakeholders. Furthermore, as clarified by the MOF, appropriate steps have already been implemented to prevent this happening again in the future.
- We must accordingly question why must Tun Mahathir keep repeating his earlier statement, when clarification has been provided and responsibility has been accepted.
- As for Tun Mahathir’s reference to Bank Negara Malaysia, it is a fact that Bank Negara Malaysia is presently conducting an investigation on 1MDB. It is only appropriate to await the outcome of this investigation instead of casting doubt and sharing half-truths in the public domain.
- From the answer to question (2) above, it should be clear that from September 2012, 1MDB owned, via its subsidiary Brazen Sky, fund units in a Cayman Registered Fund, with a valuation of USD2.318 billion as of31.03.2015. These fund units were held through BSI Bank Singapore, as custodian. This has been the case since 2012.
- The existence of USD2.318 billion in fund units has never been questioned, and this value was included in the audited financial statements dated31.03.2014, which must provide a true and fair value of the assets of the company.
- In fact, the first tranche of USD1.22 billion fund units was redeemed in cash in 2014 and the cash proceeds were used to pay for termination of options relating to the energy business, granted to Aabar, working capital and interest payments - as outlined in the company’s publicly available financial accounts.
- As for the remaining USD1.1 billion of fund units, these have also been redeemed, as previously announced by 1MDB. All “documentary proof” on this redemption will be provided to auditors of 1MDB and the lawful authorities.
- Despite repeated public clarifications, Tun Mahathir chooses to ask the same question again and again. One must question the motive behind why he keeps saying that the “USD1billion is missing” when it is obvious that the funds have been accounted for and audited.
- Furthermore, Tun Mahathir has been quoted on the record as stating “RM42 billion is missing”. He now states that “USD1 billion is missing”. This continuous change in figures is perplexing, and raises questions as to the motivation behind these ever-changing claims.
- “Documentary proof” for all the assets of 1MDB, including the fund units and other financial assets of 1MDB, has been presented to the auditors of 1MDB. It is based on this that 1MDB’s accounts have been signed off by the auditors, without qualification.
- In addition, “documentary proof” has now been presented to the Auditor-General and Bank Negara Malaysia, the lawful authorities, who we would expect to carefully scrutinise these documents.
- We are fortunate in Malaysia to have rule of law which states a party is “innocent until proven guilty”. Due process requires that the lawful authorities first undertake investigations, establish the facts and take action accordingly.
---------------------
Wrongful fact only makes an allegation defective
In the first sodomy case of Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim, the sentence was thrown out in a judicial review by three Federal Court judges on the ground that the case fact are wrong thus making the charge defective.
The allegations on 1MDB have been made in the court of public opinion in which the majority of the public is unable to understand the complexity and legality behind high finance deals.
So the public's understanding is based on the belief in a person than fact of the allegations. Will the public as judges in the court of public opinion able to appreciate that allegations are defective when facts are wrong?
Let their conscience be their guide in this holy month of Ramadhan.
Taking a quote from a past posting here, below:
On the subject of 1MDB, this blogger admit to being defensive against slander made against 1MDB for wrongful fact, manipulation of fact and argument, and fabricating of documents. But never it was to say all are OK with 1MDB.This blogger have heard of the many stories and rumours on 1MDB, Petrosaudi, Jho Loh and TIA from many credible people.
There are issues of governance, bad decision making, maybe mismanagement, and presence of some questionable Mickey Mouse doing insider trading and flipping commission. And that need to be proven.
Mismanagement and bad decision could arise out of stupidity but stupidity is not a crime. Wrongful accusation can be. RPK used to be charged for criminal defamation.
The suspicion is there but unfortunately, most of the stories are disjointed, lack sensibility and as bizarre as the RM42 billion disappearance. Let alone there was no documents to back allegations.
In another quote from another posting here, we wrote:
In the meanwhile, Tun M is rewriting his excuses to whack at 1MDB. He is consolidating while on offensive retreat. (What is that?) He could be repeating himself because he realised his "adviser" was too presumptous and made many factual errors. He need to take cognizance of developments on 1MDB.That may have upset an "adviser", just do not know who trolled us.
At least, an able critic of Dato Najib acknowledged the new revelation by Arul in his criticism by not being lengthy [read JMD here]. He still cast his doubt. Respectably, his major contention is governance, which we agree.
Again, allegation has to be specific and factual.
This is not a case of someone fleecing 5-10% commission or bribe of an IT or construction deal or a Ketua Bahagian trying to blackmail RM16 million for a developer.
To bring down an elected government, the allegations must be right and not cooked up for political expediency. If it is time for Najib to go, then he has to submit to the will of Allah.
For quite sometime, we were in the know that there was reluctance by the Najib camp to answer Tun M and reveal all these.
We asked them of few major factual errors spotted but they were silent. Not being pro-Najib, we expressed our disagreement with that attitude. Why should they not answer and present the truth or at least the fact?
That way public discussion on the issue is not misguided by lies and slanders, wrongful fact and manipulation. Their answer was they did not want to shame Tun M.
Rightly or wrongly, we end this posting.
Hopefully, it is read by Tun M because we beg his forgiveness in the spirit of Ramadhan. Our conscience cannot agree with him on this.
Maaf zahir batin.
Selamat berpuasa
ABITW - wishing you a blessed & peaceful Ramadan.
ReplyDeleteLet's hope that the spirit of moderation prevails in keeping with passing of the SEA Games flag in Singapore to Tunku Imran and Khairy Jamaluddin.
When you put a picture of SS, it makes you look desperate. This guy said despite BN getting 48% of votes in the last ge, it held majority since those that didnt vote, if voted, would have meant a bigger margin for BN. What a joke. so now, everything has always been in units? I thought arul kanda said he'd seen those statements and they were in cash? So was he duped by a fake statement or what? Or was he lying? I read the statements thrice. And all i can say is, Dr. M was right in ALL of his concerns. He stole 3 apples. The issue is stealing. If it turns out that the guy stole 3 oranges, it doesnt give him moral victory in claiming it was oranges and not apples. I dont believe in the toning down during Ramadhan.
ReplyDeleteWould like to wish u a merry ramadhan and keep em coming.
The thieves and pirates are requesting for time off so that they can continue to savor their stolen loots.
ReplyDeleteAfter RM42b went "missing" and rakyat had to pay for this 42b while the beneficiaries of this "missing" money are frolicking, we are asked to tone down? Should we wait until the figures reach 100b before making noise? or when petrol pump prices is RM 10/liter and GST 30%?
ReplyDeleteWhat have you got to say about JMB's response?
ReplyDeleteBrick and BigDog must also ask Lim Kok Wing not to DEMONISE the great statesman, a genuine pendekar in his own right.
ReplyDeleteLKW and bloggers pro-Najib will lose ALL credibility.
1MDB started in January 2009 - that's SIX years. Too much time given. If TDM had not started his queries, for all you know, the debt WILL have risen to more than RM42 billion.
In the Name of Allah Most Compassionate & Merciful
ReplyDeleteBy the passage of Time,
Man is at loss to himself,
Except for him with True Faith and Righteous Deeds,
And he who mutually enjoins others to Noble Truth and Patient Constancy.
but i don't remember that you really want all factual when you go against Pak Lah and Tingkat 4.
ReplyDeleteEven if there is some factual inaccuracy on the 1MDB, the main issue is the same. why najib as the PM, the finance minister and chairman of the advisory board of 1MDB allow all this screwed up. Lets not talk about the wrong doing yet. Fine, lets wait for the investigation eventhough it seems strange that the investigator report to the same person that might have something to hide.
Aren't you scared that our PM is so incompetent to handle the nation's finances. This is how the world financial community is looking at our PM right now. And this is one of the reason why our foreign exchange is deteriorating in value. Ok fine, there are other reasons, but one of the major concern is how the investors perceived the leadership of the nation. Even the rating agency that Pemandu and EPU are trying to please, aren't buying. They are not ok with the way najib handles 1MDB and the overall economy.
Habe a good Ramadhan.
So most of the issues that were brought open by Serawak Report and the Edge were true. How can we Malaysian let this happen. How can we allow our government to do all this kind of shitty deals and get away with it. It is just mind boggling how we allow a third party using our money to invest in "assets" as bizzarre as mentioned in 1MDB statements. Oil fields in Argentina and Turkmenistan? Did this people even do due diligence on all this assets?
ReplyDeleteMahadey is right. These people are crooks, and a lot of people see it.
salam tuan voice.
ReplyDeletesaya tak mau banyak lah pasal 1MDB ni.
sebenarnya banyak soalan kalau dirujuk jawapan 1MDB kepada PAC dan yang telah diguna oleh Dato Husni masa soal jawab 1MDB: kemana wangnya kat tv1 dulu. kita lupa kan dulu yang banyak banyak.
satu persoalan berkenaan kenyataan ni ... saya quote dari posting tuan sendiri.
Despite Tun Mahathir’s vigorous claims, it is a fact that Arul Kanda never said he “saw the cash”. He is on the record as saying he had “seen the statements”, referring to the fund unit ownership and redemptions.
saya tak mencari banyak ... simple google je ni ... dan ini yang saya jumpa.
merujuk kenyataan Arul Kanda pada februari 2015 kepada Business Times Singapore
Arul menyatakan
"The cash is in our accounts and in US dollars. I can assure you (about that) . . . I have seen the statements," said Mr Arul in an apparent attempt to calm rising anxiety over the status of these funds parked offshore which were managed by little-known fund managers.
adakah yang dimaksudkan Arul disini adalah unit or apa apa sahajalah dan bukan merujuk kepada cash? pada saya jelas sekali ... jika kita menyimpan didalam mana mana bank ... kita hanya melihat penyata ... bukan duit cash kita.
soalan saya sekali lagi ...secara jujur ... didalam bulan bulan Ramadhan ni ... pada pendapat tuan ... berdasarkan statement Arul diatas ... adakah Arul meyakinkan semua orang bahawa penyata itu menunjukkan yang disimpan didalam bank adalah cash atau unit?
siapa sebenarnya berbohong dan memfitnah tuan? dan sanggupkah kita terlibat sama dalam pembohongan dan fitnah ini?
Dear Sifu,
ReplyDeleteWishing you Selamat berpuasa in the holy month of Ramadhan
5:29, 6:03, and 7:13
ReplyDeleteGuilty without proofs? One is talking of RM42 billion here. How could it slip out and not be seen?
Its Ramadhan month or you guys written it at end of Syyaban. Selamat berbuka.
Media statement issued by 1Malaysia Development Berhad on 18 June 2015
ReplyDelete1MDB: Documents with authorities
1MDB notes a statement made today by Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad in a blog posting. This follows the publication of two earlier blog postings by Tun Mahathir containing a number of factual errors about 1MDB, which the company had immediately responded to, in detail and with verifiable facts. Now, having been presented with the facts by 1MDB, Tun Mahathir has asked for documentary evidence. As 1MDB has clearly stated, all evidence and proof relating to 1MDB’s business and financial transactions has been shared with independent auditors and Malaysia’s lawful authorities. These authorities can then take action accordingly, per due process, and the laws of our country.
Notwithstanding the above, 1MDB remains fully focused on the delivery of its rationalisation plan. As has already been achieved with Edra Energy, this will see TRX and Bandar Malaysia becoming standalone companies, with full accountability for their operational and financial performance. The recent repayment of a RM3.6 billion loan reflects 1MDB’s commitment to reducing its overall debt levels and, with the implementation of the rationalisation plan, the company is confident of generating maximum value for its 100% ultimate shareholder, the Government of Malaysia.
.... Tun M looks cornered and playing to street psychology.
He had accused Arul of lying.
Obviously he is the one lying and trying to wiggle himself out. 15 errors does not make an apple into an orange but a rotten one.
you want real proof, let the agencies; AG, MACC, the PDRM white collar crime unit, BNM, SC and even Interpol investigate without fear. Not report to the same person that started it all. Not to the PM who holds Finance Minister post. Have a royal commission for the agencies to report to independently. No interference from the govt, then only najib can get credibility back to lead the country.
ReplyDeleteBTW if you judge from the twitter records, the most twitt this year is on #nothing to hide events where 95.5% have negative things to say about najib, 2.5% are neutral and only 2% is with him.
Facebook? Lets not even start.
How are you to govern your country when most of your countrymen have negative perceptions on you and your cabinet members.
resign la najib for the betterment of this country.
9.34
ReplyDeleteIf you have the convinction that lim kok wing should be told off, do it yourself. What sort of a man or woman are you tell other to do your bidding? Hey ... We are not your staff to be told what to do?
Heck we dont even know the weird haircut chinaman and never agree to the special treatment he gets!
5.29 pm
Was it the person SS or the quote that got you annoyed. :)
Hech with what other things he said. The point he said has relevence.
8.10
We appreciate the issue raised by Jmd. Some of his points relevent and some are not. To us personally. Allegations have to clear and specific to be credible. Otherwise it is merely an opinion.
If his view need reply, let those in authority reply to him. Why should we? We are not their PR or corp comm or on 10k payroll. We write on matters that we want to write and not demanded upon to write. We do not give a *uck about grammar or ranking or length or whatever. Its my party and I can cry or laugh as I want to.
8.39
You are entitle to believe what you want to be believe and be sinister about. It the absolute, doubt there many countries that will suit your standard. Some of the agencies you mentioned have no damn business to get directions and orders for any investigations from PM. Why civil servant so stupid and balless?
Unless you can have a specific story and well back claims, it is your own personal opinion.
1.58
We know the cayman island, bsi, cash or unit issue well. Whether it is a unit or cash is a small matter compared to the bigger storyline from petrosaudi to cayman involve jho loh and then end up in bsi then taken up for cash by ipic.
Tun m touched on it by going back to tia. That is good cause the majority of public have no heAd or tail knowledge on the issue but just go bang bang bang. Let us find out on one tiny bit first. Maybe it is a posting if it is worthy.
There is also of an interesting document to sight next week ... Jeng jeng jeng.
Now we are hearing more arguments questioning why take up rm42 billion borrowing. Thats much better than accusing without proofs and changing figures many times.
Lets get to the bottom of this together. Those just out to politicise just confuses the issue. May we should not allow politically slanted comments. Its nuisance and does not add to better understanding. One can spot such comments that is too anxious to ask najib to step down. Usually unschooled.
Until next general election, your only avenue is from within umno. Work yourself inside umno than intrude into discussion among genuine people with concern and trying to understand the issue. Such intrusions only reflects psychological insecurities.
Hi AOB
ReplyDeleteHope you are in good health. I have my views on the issue and have sent an article to TMI.
Have a great week ahead
Cheers
SWK
Try explain these lies by 1MDB/MOF:
ReplyDelete1. Ahmad Maslan and Arul Kanda said the Exim Bank RM540 million loan is not meant to buy Tadmax's land but was for maintenance of IPP. Tony Pua going berserk because he got evidence that the money was meant to buy that land.
If you do your research and since Tadmax is a PLC, you will easily found on 14 Dec 2014 the supplemental S&P is done between Tadmax's subsidiary and Ivory Merge, a subsidiary of 1MDB with a revised sale value. The announcement clearly stated the following " It added that the completion of the deal shall be on or before June 30 next year, and that Ivory Merge shall bear all financial and related costs payable to Exim Bank and all outgoings in relation to the land, from August 28 this year until the full settlement of the disposal consideration".
2. In a televised show to explain on 1MDB matters, DS Husni conveniently answered that the change of auditors are normal among big corporation. Now KPMG and EY had answered that they were sacked from being auditors. Change of auditors is a big issue. For a PLC, any changes of auditors must get the approval during the AGM. You don't change your auditors half way during a financial year, especially when you have not complete your audit report for the year. 1MDB are late in filing its audit report in FY 2014 due to the sacking of auditor. And Husni again reiterated that because of the late audit completion, the IPO for EDRA has to be canceled. A lot of bullshit here, if the audit is so important for the IPO, and the IPO is so important for the survival of 1MDB why sack your auditor while they are doing the audit?
These 2 are only examples why people think that 1MDB have a lot to hide. The scrapping of assets and the restructuring of its debts won't take away the ambiguity of the whole transaction in the company. So far, the more they explain the more confusion and questions remained unanswered.
salam tuan voice.
ReplyDeletebagus lah kalau ada penjelasan yang meyakinkan minggu depan. boleh lah kita sama sama baca (mungkin tuan voice dah baca) dan fahamkan cerita sebenar.
jangan jadi macam penjelasan Husni sudahlah.
regarding cash atau unit tu kecil. pada saya ia tidak kecil. RM1b+ bukan kecil dan ia hanyalah sebahagian daripada the bigger picture sepertimana yang tuan sebutkan. jika ia cash. maka ia boleh diguna untuk bayar hutang. after all. hasil daripada 1MDB selepas 6 tahun hanyalah hutang semata mata. belum nampak pulangan kepada kerajaan.
maka tidak perlulah digadai sekeping tanah kepada TH untuk membayar hutang. dan khabarnya, dari posting blogger pro 1MDB (tuan voice tak suka dikata pro najib), ada lagi yang dah tergadai dekat syarikat indon. begitu juga hutang tambahan dari ananda krishnan sebanyak RM2b+ dan hutang baru dari Dubai yang mana telah diguna untuk membayar konsortium bank jerman.
dan hutang tu confirm tak datang pokok sahaja kan? mestilah berbunga bunga.
dan bayaran kepada konsortium bank jerman juga suatu tamparan kepada kenyataan Husni didalam bualbicara tersebut dimana beliau menyatakan, jika 1MDB bermasalah, tentulah bank peminjam antara yang pertama menarik balik pinjaman mereka.
apa yang saya nampak, hutang je yang bertambah setakat ni. hasil belum ada walau pun 1MDB telah beroperasi lebih 6 tahun. perniagaan apa selepas 6 tahun masih perlu suntikan modal (bahasa lembut untuk hutang)? gila apa berniaga tak untung. kos pulak berbilion.
dari jawapan 1MDB dan Husni dalam TV1. kos pengurusan adalah RM4.5b. jika dikira secara kasar, setahun bersamaan lebih RM700j dan sebulan lebih RM60juta.
kos operasi apa yang sebesar ni? berapa ribu kakitangan 1MDB? saya tak pandai sangat berniaga ni. dan saya takde privilege kepada dokumen peringkat tertinggi.
ini yang menggusarkan rakyat. pada kami, wang sedang dibazirkan dan dibelanjakan sesuka hati dan dengan sangat boros tanpa pulangan. dan dari jawapan 1MDB sendiri, seolah olah wang di'siphoned' melalui 'dubious' accounting macam perbelanjaan mengurus tersebut dan juga bayaran kepada brazen sky yang tidak dijelaskan apa tujuan dan kenapa sebanyak tersebut.
[saya sambung]
ReplyDeletepembelian IPP Genting Sanyen contohnya, kenapa IPP yang dinilai RM400juta dan lesen akan expire tahun depan (2016), dibeli pada harga RM2.3b. itu hampir 600% dari book value.
The Star - 1MDB to become 2nd largest IPP in M'sia - 15 Ogos 2012
yang lebih damning adalah pernyataan wartawan Tee Lin Say
" This would also see Genting booking in a tidy extraordinary gain of RM1.9bil for its financial year ending Dec 31."
adakah pembelian pada 600% book value adalah transaksi biasa sahaja? saya tak pernah berniaga bilion bilion ni, kurang pastilah. pada kami yang tidak diberi maklumat yang jelas, transaksi ini berbau ikan.
kita boleh argue bahawa ia telah disambung 10 tahun lagi. adakah sambungan kontrak itu 'in spite of' atau 'despite of' pemilikan IPP Genting oleh 1MDB? lalu ada orang mempertikaikan, kenapa tidak ditunggu tamat kontrak supaya TNB boleh mengambilalih pada harga yang lebih rendah?
pembelian IPP Tanjong pada RM8.5b juga menarik kerana ini juga satu lagi IPP yang hampir expired lesennya.
Setahu saya, IPP Tanjong ini merupakan milik ananda Krishnan. jadi saya confuse bila ada orang kata tun marah sebab kroni dia (antara yang nama yang sering disebut adalah ananda) rugi. sedangkan kalau MO transaksi seperti IPP Genting, extraordinary gain tu. No wonder ananda pantas ‘membantu’ dengan RM2b
tapi saya belum rajin nak mencari detail pembelian ini. begitu juga banyak IPP luar negara yang hampir tamat lesen atau sudah separuh hayat dibeli oleh 1MDB.
mungkin tuan voice boleh jelaskan dari dokumen peringkat tertinggi yang tuan voice dah baca. atau saya masih kena tunggu minggu depan jugak. saya tunggulah.
rakyat sering disuruh tunggu PAC, laporan Audit dan sebagainya sedangkan 1MDB terus menambah hutang dan menggadai tanah tanpa menunggu PAC dan laporan Audit.
ini rumusan dari apa yang saya baca/ikuti dari blog pro 1MDB, anti 1MDB, dari akhbar main stream (saya cuba mengelak akhbar politik untuk mengelakkan bias) dan jawapan Husni Hanadzlah di TV1.
saya tidak tahulah kalau semua posting yang bertanyakan kemuskilan tentang 1MDB akan dikira politically slanted. hanya yang menyokong sahaja rasional dan bijaksana.
kalau kerajaan tidak menanggung dan takde risiko kehilangan beratus ratus ekar tanah prime di KL. kalau 1MDB syarikat sendiri, dia nak meminjam ke, nak tertonggeng ke, nak melingkup ke, kami tak kisah.
jangan dibuat kenyataan seolah mencabar rakyat menterjemah ketidakpuasan hati pada peti undi. pada saya, itu tindakan yang sangat kurang bijak.
tuan voice pun tahu apa berlaku dizaman pak lah, apabila pak lah mencabar rakyat menterjemah perasaan di peti undi. dan semasa itu, tuan voice di pihak tun (masa tu schooled people adalah dari golongan yang mahu menjatuhkan pak lah) dan dipanggil sebagai iblis dan beruk oleh pimpinan tertinggi kerajaan. saya pasti tuan voice masih ingat peristiwa itu dan natijahnya.
OPEN LETTER TO THE NEW YORK TIMES EDITOR
ReplyDelete1. It is regrettable to see Tun Mahathir seeking to undermine his own country in the international media as part of a personal political vendetta.
2. It is irresponsible of any citizen, let alone a former prime minister, to spread lies and distortions about state owned companies – saying for example that RM42 bn is missing from 1MDB to create public anxiety, when in fact these are audited debts backed by RM51 bn assets. These reckless claims have affected market sentiment towards Malaysia.
3. Furthermore, it is telling that he continues to mount his attacks, rather than wait for the findings of the enquiries currently being undertaken by Malaysia’s central bank, Auditor General, and parliament’s bipartisan Public Accounts Committee. This shows that Tun Mahathir is not interested in answers from the appropriate lawful authorities. Rather, he is just using 1MDB as an excuse to topple the serving prime minister, Najib Tun Razak.
4. And all because his personal demands, as Tun Mahathir himself has acknowledged, are not being met. Prime Minister Najib, as Malaysia’s democratically elected leader, will do what he thinks is right for the nation, and will not allow rule by proxy.
5. Tun Mahathir told the New York Times that UMNO “lacks vision and talented people”, that it “has become a repository of patronage-seeking politicians”, and that members “try to keep out people who are more intelligent than themselves”. But it is Tun Mahathir who led the party for 22 years. It was he that, during his time, worked to cultivate ‘yes men’ and entrench his position – even introducing a quota system for the UMNO presidency to prevent challengers – rather than bringing in talent and strengthening the party. It is Prime Minister Najib who democratised the party constitution to make it far easier to challenge him for his job.
6. For Tun Mahathir to accuse Prime Minister Najib of acts “verging on criminal” is simply outrageous, and entirely false. It is a measure of the reforms put in place under Prime Minister Najib’s administration that Tun Mahathir has the freedom to be so vocally critical of the party and government he once led.
7. But Tun Mahathir is abusing that freedom, and his privileged standing as a former prime minister, to indulge in reckless and baseless personal smears against Prime Minister Najib and his family. Most Malaysians would rather see Tun Mahathir retire gracefully than continue to damage the standing of his own country for personal political gain.
Y.B. Dato’ Sri Anifah bin Haji Aman
Minister of Foreign Affairs, Malaysia
Sir Wenger
ReplyDeleteThanks for the alert. Yup, lets go after them together albeit on the right platform on governance and along corporate and legal line, the streets politics.
12.06
Like said last night we are not the PR or corp comm for 1mdb. We will wrie what we like to write. Unless 1mdb pay us ... Hehehe :)
Believe you meant read is cause our reminder before you comment is plainly state your opinion ... No need for hostilities, insult or bad languages. Need level headed commentaries and not emotional ones. This should be a place for ladies and gentleman.
3.26
Neither are we pro najib. Sick of being pro anything. As said before, we rather be issue or cause base. In midst of dropping every other affiliations. Its suffocationg to be associated with anything. On 1mdb it is the simple notion of truth. Issue must be on right fact and not for such ulterior motive of politics.
A politically motivated argument would usually be one or two line of arguable statement to debunk answer and quickly it jumps to najib must go. Tone usually in anger and obviously emotional or agitated that they cant rollout their view. You will know.
No promises.
7.08
Now anifah make sense also. We ve been disputing media like sarawak report and now up the ante to nyt.
12.06
We will find 1mdb statement. See if you are right.
12.06
ReplyDeleteThe statement talked about:
Two statements today.
1. Media statement by Arul Kanda, 1MDB President and Group Executive Director
Clarification on EXIM loan
I refer to media reports on USD150 million loaned to 1MDB by the Export-Import Bank of Malaysia (EXIM). It is a well-known fact that the 1MDB Group includes Edra Energy, a leading international independent power producer, with a portfolio of 13 power and desalination plants in five countries.
1MDB confirms that loan proceeds were utilised per the terms of the agreement, which is to “finance the general corporate purposes including but not limited to the working capital requirements, future capital expenditures and equity infusion of the energy business within the 1MDB Group of Companies”.
- Arul Kanda, President and Group Executive Director
Patience with husni. He had just been thrown in the deep end of the pool. Trying to be able to communicate at all level at one go and not to be confusing. Should leave it to the media to reinterpret his statement. He shd be giving the facts and nothing more.
Someone was commenting on auditor? Read TMI, seemed to be preferred online media these days:
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/kpmg-terminated-from-auditing-1mdb-auditors-tell-pac#sthash.k5iPDISK.gMDE5Zn0.dpbs
Anon 3:26,
ReplyDeleteYang jual IPP: IPP Genting Sanyen dan IPP Tanjong. Dua dua nak expiredkan. Dua dua adalah anugerah dari zaman Tun Dr. Mahathir. IPP ini semua dapat sepesel concession PPA agreement with in-out cost purchase guarantee from Petronas. So no problem about cost of gas. And both have lock in deal dgn TNB. TNB meraung nak bayar per KWh dari this 2 IPP.
Ada lagi satu IPP dari YTL anugerah dari Tun kenapa tak nak jual.
Sekarang tanya cost; is a willing buyer willing seller. Ballpark figure to construct IPP is about 1KWh is 1million USD, Maknanya kalu nak buat 3 Mega Wat kena ada 3 Billion USD. And the argument is what it got to do with the above 2 IPPs. Any owner want to make profit and they will loose their future profit, even if it is going to expire. They will demand that they lost future value. Next argument if it expired the owner can demand for another concession extension. They have build up and is their right full owner of the plant. TNB cannot just take over the IPP without paying the cost as per negotiation. Than comes with what is inside the engagement within the PPA concessionaire. You have to ask Tun what he have concluded as is so secretive that the PPA is not open to the public. Only the recent PPA have some adjustment not the time with Tun. It is said water tight.
If you say why not leave and let the IPP plants rot to the ground than strategically, Malaysia will loose power supply. It will goes back to power shortage and to build up new power will take time at least about 3 to 4 years.
Then why YTL did not sell. Why did not sell because his IPP is a cash cow for him. The real cash that make him so stuck up yang dulu hanya china beng contractor saja. YTL plant located in Johor Pasir gudang is still running and is part of grid to Singapore and Malaysia. So dia jual juga kat Singapore kalu Singapore shortage of power. Dia pun dah buat satu IPP kat Singapore so dia complement IPP kat Singapore dalam grid. Sebab itu dia ber iya iya nak IPP lagi kat Johor sebab tempat tanah murah and over head murah boleh jual kat Singapura juga. Malah dia sanggup JV dgn Sultan Johor for 30% stake.
Than you will ask IPP kan depreciate in value, so tak kan tak letak harga murah. Kita cakap willing buyer willing seller and the owner of IPP all of them know Malaysia depend on them as all these IPPs are strategically privatize, Yang owned by TNB hanya berapa saja dan tak muncukupi. So the owner of IPP is not stupid to sell cheap. Basically kena black mail. Oh yes do you think Tun is not in the know of all what is going on. Why don't Tun intervene and tell the owner to buck off and give away at cheap price.
Now we can say it politically motivated to negate the current PM.
So siapa nak jual IPP murah. Cash cow and very profitable.
Sorry, Errata: Construction cost ball park figure is 1MWatt is 1Million USD. So for 3000 Mwatts or 3 GegaWatts should be 3 Billion USD.
ReplyDeleteBy the way the purchase cost include cash in reserve if there's is any.
Apologize for the error.
Another point I would like to give, If you read TMI, Malaysia Kini. All comments tend to be negative. Some are outright negative as if our Malaysian system or government are so stupid. Lebeh lebeh lagi penguasa yang menjalankan tugas Melayu. Basically nak kutuk Melayu dan Melayu tak layak. Cuba baca TMI berikut:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/tanker-hijackers-escape-with-ships-rescue-boat#sthash.C7MXptgX.dpbs
The comments are all negative as if Navy Melayu bodoh lepas kan lanun. Try to give positive input bias to the government and you will be censored by moderator. But the truth is the ship is in Indonesian water and the laws of Indonesian applies. No assets of RMN or any country cannot shoot without approval by the host country that is the maritime law. Unless the you are in international water.
So kalu kita nak ikut saja mentality TMI yang di belakang nya Tong Chinabeng kawan baik Anwar Al juburi maka kita lah yang bodoh.
Dan lagi satu ada melayu dalaman yang berkerja dalam GLC dan institusi kewangan Kerajaan sanggup jadi baruah dan dalang untuk jatuh kan PM Najib. Malah ikut merancang untuk menunjukan Najib Adalah Pemimpin Yang bodoh. Rancangan yang di buat dari 2013 lagi.
Tak semua yang di putar dalam 1MDB ada lah benar. Memang 1MDB ada masaalah cash flow, so it is an issue of Structure of investment. Jadi jangan lah terlalu taksub ikut ikutan.
salam tuan voice.
ReplyDeletenak jawab anon 10:33 AM je.
"Sorry, Errata: Construction cost ball park figure is 1MWatt is 1Million USD. So for 3000 Mwatts or 3 GegaWatts should be 3 Billion USD."
kau tahu berapa besar kapasiti Genting Sanyen? kalau kau baca. confirm kau tahu.
720MW, therefore, USD720m sahaja. tukaran masa tu RM3.1 to USD1. bersamaan RM2.232b, at RM2.3b, pembelian power plant tu lebih mahal dari buat baru.
kalau kau baca lagi. kat perenggan lagi bawah, ada dinyatakan. Power plant di Prai, berkapasiti 1000MW, 25% lebih besar daripada Genting, dibida pada USD1b sahaja, bersamaan RM3.1b sahaja. ini power plant baru.
kemudian diheret cerita perjanjian zaman Tun berat sebelah.
1- takde bukti pun. hearsay sahaja.
2- kalau ada bukti. cakap je kat orang tua tu, ini salah guna kuasa. boleh masuk dalam. confirm orang tua tu senyap. sapa nak masuk dalam beb. tak payah cerita hormat orang tua, negarawan yang banyak jasa. mitos je tu.
3- kau tak sedar kot. argumen ni sebenarnya counter productive untuk kau. sebab argument ni bagi lebih leverage kepada buyer untuk mintak kurang harga. dengan lesen yang dah nak tamat dan tiada jaminan untuk sambung. dan juga perjanjian baru (kononnya) akan kurang menguntungkan IPP. why not jual murah murah kat 1MDB. cabut je. tak sakit kepala. risiko kurang.
book value syarikat dikaji oleh penganalisis pasaran. maksudnya, berdasarkan perjanjian berat sebelah Tun, Genting akan bagi pulangan RM400m sehingga akhir konsesi. so, the best yang Genting boleh dapat dari power plant ni adalah lebih kurang RM400m, tidak mengambilkira risiko lain yang boleh mengurangkan margin. dengan risiko tidak disambung kontrak. dan kalau ikutkan popular claims, perjanjian baru akan merugikan IPP berbanding perjanjian dulu, then, the business will be much less enticing. kenapa bayar sampai hampir 600%? kalau 200% (RM800m) pun dah agak mahal. 300%, RM1.2b, pada aku dah melampau. there are possibilities, orang sanggup bagi diskaun pun.
since aku rasa kau tak baca pun artikel tu, aku petik
"“The book value of Genting Sanyen is roughly RM400mil. Pricing wise, it has a really good deal, considering the power purchase agreements (PPAs) for first generation independent power producers (IPPs) are expiring by 2016. This also solves Genting's headache. It doesn't need to worry whether or not the PPA agreement will be renewed or not,” said a power analyst."
para kat bawah, apa kebaikan yang 1MDB dapat?
"However, is it positive for 1MDB?
Certainly, this purchase has made 1MDB the second largest independent power producer (IPP) in the country after Malakoff Bhd. Genting Sanyen has a capacity of 720MW, while Malakoff has a capacity of 7.9GW. On the surface, it looks like 1MDB is paying full price for a power plant that is about to expire soon."
dalam bahasa mudah, hampir takde untung bagi 1MDB.
RM380m pada 2012 tentu lebih bernilai daripada RM400m pada 2016.
FYI, RM380m pada 2012 bersamaan USD122m, berbanding RM400m tahun ini, 2015, which only gives you USD107m. itu belum factor in inflation rate yang mengurangkan daya beli wang. contohnya, harga rumah 2012 berbanding harga rumah 2015/2016, tentu purata harga rumah 2012 lebih rendah. dan kau dapat cash seketul, berbanding RM100m setahun.
tak tahu lah kalau kau consider negotiator 1MDB semua cap ayam. pada aku, diorang ni pandai. bahkan sangat pandai.
memanglah konsep jualbeli ni willing buyer dan willing seller. masalahnya bila nampak macam buyer terlalu willing untuk lavishly spend the money without due consideration. therefore, the scheme looks more like a scam.
ada tak bahagian broker?
kalau duit sendiri, kita tak bisinglah. masalahnya, duit tu hutang dan hutang tu kerajaan tanggung.