Tabung Haji reduced to a Ponzi Scheme

In the previous postings, curiosity on the trading of Top Glove led to suspect that EPF's surprising return of 4.9% to 5.2% could be either a Ponzi scheme like operation to discourage withdrawal or the return from script lending to foreign funds to short shares and bash the Malaysian market down. 

Investopaedia described Ponzi scheme as below: 

A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investing scam promising high rates of return with little risk to investors. A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investing scam which generates returns for earlier investors with money taken from later investors. This is similar to a pyramid scheme in that both are based on using new investors' funds to pay the earlier backers.

Back in April 6, 2019, the current CEO of Lembaga Tabung Haji (LTH), Dato Nik Mohd Hasyudeen Yusoff tweeted in Malay to be translated as:

Remember the Pak Man Telo scheme? Why is this scheme wrong? It pays dividend from deposit it collect, not from the profit as per their claim. Similar in meaning, right?

Now that he is CEO of LTH, he is probably doing exactly it.  

 

Is Agong shareholder of Green Packet?

On February 8th, it was announced that DNex won the bid for Silterra. [Edge reported here] An announcement was made to Bursa Malaysia [Read here] Local media reported positively for Silterra to remain within local hands. [Read Dagang News and Berita Harian here and here, respectively]. 

After a long struggle, it is encouraging for DNeX, a company controlled and spearheaded by professional Bumiputera professionals and technocrats together with their China partner to hopely do another turnaround success story such as Proton and Geely. 

Decison had to be made by January. Khazanah considered DNex proposal to develop local semiconductor industry through its Wafer fabrication. 

Apparently, Green Packet have not given up and could be behind recent attempt to foil the already officially announced decision. 

Do they have Agong as shareholder that they could still attempt to reverse the officially announced decision?    

Did EPF lent shares for foreigners to short the market?

Stupid or something fishy?

That was the comment on the Facebook Group Citizen Voice to this blog's yesterday posting, Why would EPF be selling out Top Glove?

Zam Yahya's comment to question the dividend announced for 2020 remained on the back of many astute professional investors and market traders. 

The fact that almost 40% of the portfolio is stuck in equity for salvaging the crashing market from loss in investors confidence after GE15, the balance 60% in cash, money market and bonds need to make up for the substantial shortfall from equity return throughout 2018, 2019 and 2020.

That portfolio cannot make up for the poor dividend and capital loss. Zam Yahya fairly estimate should be about 4%. EPF under former CEO Tengku Alzakri Alias may have found some innovative ways to generate return from the equity portion to get 4.9 to 5.2%. 

One possibility is to do shares lending for foreign investors to short the market. That would have detrimental effect on the Malaysian equity market. 

Why would EPF be selling out of Top Glove?!

Top Glove Berhad shares closed out at RM4.75 per shares yesterday. From a one year horizon double peaks at above 9.50 in August and October 2020, the shares seemed to be on a downtrend. 

This is not believable because the six glovemakers are sitting on a pile of cash, order books that takes it to 2023, and could afford giving money to government effort to combat the Covid 19 pandemic. They are diversfying like crazy and buying properties on the cheap. 

     

Among reason cited was the worldwide vaccination and puzzle over the cash raising exercise for fear of dilution. On the contrary, a month or two ago, a market player was flabbergasted over shorting by foreign players. There was an opportunity for a short squeeze but was aborted due to developments. It adds to the curiosity. 

One explanation for this behaviour is probably EPF. They have a bit more than 6% direct interest in Top Glove which is equivalent to about 492 million shares. Sometime ago, they had 8%.

EPF were actively transacting in the market. [Refer to Bursa Malaysia's company announcement here]. From the series of transactions in February, they seemed to be net buyer. 

Here is the surprise bit of information. It is "reliably informed" that EPF is selling out and Singapore is buying at market dip. Apparently, a Singapore government institution is buying a strategic interest. Do they know something EPF do not know?

Wishing a hopeful and safe CNY

Its the second day for the relaxed MCO for dine-in eateries. 

If all is relaxed, might as well call it CMCO. Still figuring out the need for emergency since talk.of a June election is in the air. What a farce! 

Today one member of the breakfast group was missing as he attended a temple ceremony. Only knew, he lost his first born to Covid.

Its Chinese New Year's eve and family dinner is this evening. So it would be a sad New Year for him and his family. Its been a sad and dreadful year to many.

Still it is not just about being customary to wish good tiding for the occasion, but also an expression of hope that the present predicament to our health, livelihood and disrupted life will come to an end.

We are wishing all friends and readers, Xian Kwai Ler. Gong Xi Fa Chai. Happy New Year.

Please be safe.

Allegation linked to S'ngor royal, questions on Covid stat as rumour of Conference of Ruler meeting

Last Thursday's posting on six corvette contract for RMN has yet to be answered by Istana Negara media. Perhaps their approach is to ignore and hope it would die down. 

Rumour going around that there is a Conference of Ruler meeting for tomorrow Tuesday February 2nd. It partly explained for SteadyAku47 timely release of division among brother rulers on the decision for emergency and his motivation to update on the contract and revive decade old exposes. 

According to SteadyAku, Sultan of Selangor is in agreement with Agong on the emergency decision. Consequently last week, it was exposed that Penjana Kapital VC Fund are being managed by Fund Managers linked to the Selangor royal household. 

Penjana denied the accusation, but held back from providing any information to dispute the revealed information to instead resorted to legal threat. That is suppression rather than engagement and explanation. It does not discredit the revelation but raise more suspicion.  

There are questions being raised on Social Media on the methodology or precisely the transparency of the escalating Covid number that has reached above 5,000 and Director General Tan Sri Noor Hisham Abdullah forecasted to reach daily level of 8,000 for March 2021. 

Is that to scare off the apparently more number of sceptical brother rulers to support Agong's decision for emergency and albeit save the premiership of Tan Sri Muhyiddin? 

NGV Tech expose: Not "derhaka" then, "derhaka" now?

Since the proclamation of the emergency by the DYMM Yang Di Pertuan Agong Sultan Abdullah Ibni Sultan Ahmad Shah, ("Agong"), "derhaka" label have been conveniently labelled to anyone raising views not favouring the emergency measure or to seek any request from Agong. 

There is no legal definition for "derhaka", but conveniently applied to suppress debate and discourse. Its a referee's red card to have final say without any dissenting view. The 1990 edition of Kamus Lengkap by Pustaka Zaman translate it as "unfaithful, disloyal, traitorous, treacherous" and derivative words could mean "treason, rebel, betrayal". 

Undoubtedly, declaring emergency is the prerogative of Agong, but the fact that it is on advise and practically at the request of the Prime Minister, there should be room to raise issues against the executive branch. More so, Agong's declaration has room for Parliament to be in session since constitution is not suspended and Parliament not dissolved. Constitutionally mentioned personal liberties remained relevant. Left to Agong to make the wise and fair call.   

In a 3-series posting by Melbourne-based Malaysian blogger, Steadyaku47, it is creating a disturbing undercurrent and reviving past events. The claims and accusations are serious, but it has been widely reported in the business, and shipping media as well as military watch websites.

There was no labeling of "derhaka" then. Would it constitute as "derhaka" to discuss it now?