Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Proxies revealed on Anwar and Quek!


On March 19th, the Kuala Lumpur High Court dismissed the defense submission by businessman Low Thiam Hoe that include former Deputy Prime Minister cum Minister of Finance, Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim dan Tan Sri Quek Leng Chan in the submission to a lawsuit by Hong Leong Finance.

Read ABITW here and here.

Hong Leong Finance had sued several parties; Low, Mekuritek Sdn Bhd and Arus Murni Sdn Bhd for non payment of loans amounting RM445 million for a failed acquisition of Kewangan Bersatu Berhad from Koperasi Usaha Bersatu Berhad (KUBB) in 1998.

The lawsuit was filed by Hong Leong Finance Bhd (HLFB) in 1997 but stangely HLFB had stalled proceeding since 2005. It was only reactivated recently.

Has Quek Leng Chan and Hong Leong Group given up on Anwar Ibrahim?

The proposed amendment was rejected by Justice Hadhariah Syed Ismail on the ground that it had come too late in the course of the trial.

Raja Petra's made a revelation today of the court submission by the defense. It revealed Anwar and Quek as having the ultimate interest in Arus Murni.

Malaysia Today here disclosed this morning samples of the defense submission by Low.

The rejected item was item 4 in Page 3 of the defense submission that spelt out Anwar and Tan Sri Quek Leng Chan as the having the ultimate interest in Arus Murni. See the highlighted part taken from Malaysia Today below:


In the defense submission made under oath, Hamzah Harun and Mohd Faiz Abdullah was stated as "principals at all time acting for" or in normal parlance, proxy to Anwar and Quek in Arus Murni for the exercise to takeover KBB from UMNO-initiated cooperative, KUBB.


This revelation will be another line of blockbuster of Anwar, who on August 19, 2008 here challenged his detractors to name his cronies.

That is not difficult. Many had done so.

In his days as Minister of Finance, his cronies are publicly known. So does this revelation which merely confirmed what the bankers and market already know.

This leaked court document was submitted as a trial exhibit as proof for the defense. The material is merely rejected on procedural or technical basis and not due to it's truthfulness.

It will be hard press on Anwar to deny to the public. In fact, it would have been better off for him that the evidence is argued and disputed in the trial.

The defense could probably appeal this rejection.

Should the defense appeal and was accepted, this piece of information will be accepted as proof, strong or weak, unless disputed by Anwar and Quek Leng Chan.

How will Anwar answer to the public?

He can't say the court has decided to reject it. To turn the table on his usual psywar tactic of public perception, he can't deny based on merely technical reason.

The judge and jury in the court of public opinion need a better answer than that.

The public will also await what Faiz and Hamzah have to say on this. If Faiz and Hamzah are truly proxies, it is unlikely they are willing to take the fall to pay for Anwar's and Quek's loans.

The amount of RM224.5 million is no chicken feed to anybody.

If they are not proxies, they will still have to fend off HLFB from bankrupting them. Do they have something else to reveal to save their own skin or Anwar and Quek will pay for it?

In the court of public opinion, it is not what you say that matters sometime, but how you say it. Thus, how will Anwar, Hamzah, Faiz and Quek reply?

Quek also has to answer to save his banking business as it is as much at stake.

After much difficulty for the Quek family, both in Malaysia and Singapore, to get a banking license, what will be the implication to them for breaching a cardinal sin in banking i.e. lending to one own self?

Ask Tan Sri Teh Hiong Piow of Public Bank of the treatment he gets from the late Bank Negara Malaysia Governor, Tun Ismail Ali. If the allegation could stick, Teh could have gone to jail and get his banking license suspended.

As for Hamzah and Faiz, isn't it expensive to be proxies?

Poetic Interlude: Agama

Jabal Nur yang dilerengnya terletak Gua Hira'

Ia datang untuk mencerdikan
Bukan untuk memperbodohkan

Ia datang untuk batin dan rohani
Bukan untuk dilelong dengan serban dan haji

Ia datang untuk kedamaian diri
Bukan untuk melenting sana sini

Ia datang untuk berkasih sayang
Bukan untuk saling membenci
Ia datang melapangkan hati
Bukan untuk disempitkan lagi

Ia datang untuk di bahagi- bahagi
Bukan untuk tamak dan kepentingan diri

Ia datang dengan mudah
Bukan untuk disimpul mati

Ia datang untuk manusia
Bukan untuk binatang dan syaitan

Ia datang untuk kehambaan
Bukan untuk menjadi tuhan

Ia datang dengan kuasa
Bukan kewujudan ditentangi tapi dikenali

Apa perlu kita tadbir perkara-perkara yang telah sedia ditadbirkan
Keluarlah dari kegawatan isu, ketamakan dan kerakusan
Renunglah pada hakikat dunia

Ia datang memberi jalan hakiki
Jalan pulang kita nanti


Ilham dari Surah at-Takasur, ayat 1-8
Cikun


Monday, March 26, 2012

The last time we saw 'nyai'

The rumah pusaka of 'nyai', from great grandfather to now with her bongsu child

'Nyai' or grandmother in Javanese, passed away last Friday, March 23rd 2012 at 6:00 pm.

Her age is still being disputed among us. The official age is written as 88 with an asterick* indicating the exact age is not actually known.

My mother is 72 and the eldest living child. But she has a brother above her. If 'nyai' was married off at 16, which was the marriageable age those days, her age could fetch in the high 90s.

It is sad that she will not be part of our Hari Raya eve routine, our marriage ceremonies and various family ceremonies, and our periodical balik kampung to look-up our parents.

After she had grown old and weak, she could only perform ceremonial role as head of her family and the bigger family as last surviving member of the 'grandparent' generation.

The last time we saw Hajah Saemah binti Haji Nor, 88* peacefully in her afternoon nap

The last time we saw 'nyai' was on February 23rd. Before that, it was prior to leaving for Mecca for Haj.

She couldn't sit anymore. All she could do was lie in her bed. We were dreadful of the fact she will get pillow rashes from lying all the time.

When we visited her before Haj, she could still sit together with us to enjoy breakfast. That was really our last real conversation with her.

That last visit was indeed touching. One of the aunty had alerted everyone to visit her. Without a moment delay, we went back.

One could sense that her time is near. Of late, she had been talking about meeting my grandfather, her parents, my father, her late son and those who left earlier than her.

She couldn't remember who we were. In fact, she thought we were my mother's new husband. My father died in 1983.

Her last word were, "Terima kasih tengok nyai. Nyai mintak maaf. Maafkan nyai...." (Thank you for paying me a visit. Please forgive me. Forgive nyai ...)

The words may be odd to others but this has been her usual line for the last year or two.

This time with her body more frail than ever, it was her last.

Most touching was she has been endlessly reciting a doa verse day and night, "rabbana atina fiddunya hasanah, wa fil akhirati hasanah, wakina azabannar."

She never did this although it was part of her daily routine since she begin to have blurred vision and that prevented her from her daily routine of reciting the quran.

As far as we can recall of our 'nyai', she is not actually pious or knowledgeable on Islam but she reads the quran and fast dilligently. Only the past few years did she stopped from her infamous marathon fasting from Rejab stretching Syaban, Ramadhan and to the 2nd to 7th day of Syawal.

She is such a peaceful woman, never at odds with anybody. Unlike me as the eldest grandchild who was spoilt by the affection of our grandparents, we should be the one to seek her forgiveness than otherwise.

We will miss her.

Grandmother was a good listener. Not that she will solve your problem. She was merely someone one can talk too. Someone to subconsciously vent our frustration of our obstinate and strict disciplinarian parents.

We will miss her cooking. Her unmeasured and unwritten recipes of lauk and kueh will go along with her. She must have made the world's best kueh koci and gudir (two layered traditional jelly). Once tasted of hers, others' will be too inferior to even try.

A 'cicit' spreading 'daun pandan' and 'bunga mawar' on 'nyai''s final resting place

While we are sad, we are equally happy. Never have we saw someone so ready to return and meet God. She had only return to her rightful place near God.

We love you, 'nyai'.

For you, 'nyai', "rabbana atina fiddunya hasanah, wa fil akhirati hasanah, wakina azabannar."


* Edited 3:10 PM

Friday, March 23, 2012

Is Air Asia's acclaimed success for real?


The exact year and number could not be recalled but the event leading to Air Asia existence can still be remembered.

Air Asia was initially a Hicom company and was operating two airplanes out of Subang and later KLIA. Naturally, it is not expected to be profitable yet.

Then came these two blokes, Tony Fernandez and Kamaruddin Meranun from the music industry telling the world they can turnaround Air Asia. They submitted a paper and Government decide to sell the Airlines to them.

The company was sold to them at RM2 and the publicity machine was playing out the message Air Asia had accumulated loss of RM40 million. The part not said was Air Asia had a contract in hand of RM70 million a year.

Maybe they capitalised the losses and with a contract in hand, they could lay claim that they managed to turnaround in one or two year. Anyone not know better would have gasp in awe.

Come Pak Lah's premiumship, they allied themselves with the son in law and the official spinmeister. They were part of the conspiracy to take away the good routes as MAS was forced to slash routes from 130 to 30 routes.

They were good with gimmicks like those less than RM10 tickets but operationally, the cheap prices come with lots of inconvenience, abuse and trickery on the customers.

The public somehow or rather tolerated it. Some felt they were supporting an underdog, not knowing better that they were really dogs.

They managed to get away with their anti competition practices simply because tickets are el cheapo and Govevrnment closed one eye. Customers do not being made to wait for at least additional one and half hour.

The latest encounter with the Australian woke them up to the fact that the cheap numbers they have put on the willing victims of mostly Malaysians will not work in Australia.

The past practise to accumulate unpaid engineering bills and be difficult paymsters on Malayian Airlines Engineering Department do not work with other Engineering companies.

There are already airports that would only allow Air Asia for emergency landing but not for normal takeoff and landings. With those airports, they can't get away as though they are Malaysia Airports Berhad.

And there is more and more abuses of Air Asia on the customers that is surfacing that if there is any competitor on the domestic routes, even if it foreign airlines and at a it higher price, many are willing.

Customers are talking back to Air Asia's abuse and cheating.

Basically, Air Asia got to where they are through deceit and treachery on customers, competitor, authorities and service provider/s.

Sure they made money and achieve phenomenal growth. It is basically a hollow pyramid organisation. It has still that fly-by-night operator mindset.

If they are not able to cheat and condyct business professionally and ethically, can they make those claimed achievements? No sireee .... don't be too sure.

Read this past The Star report:
Thursday March 15, 2012

AirAsia Thai IPO expected to raise RM500mil

By TEE LIN SAY
linsay@thestar.com.my

PETALING JAYA: The listing of AirAsia Thai is expected to raise 5 billion baht (RM500mil) and will likely take place in Bangkok by early July this year, while the prospectus will be out in May, said sources close to the deal.

Tentatively, the shares will be priced at 5 baht (RM0.50) apiece.

It is learnt that investment bankers handling the deal are flying to Bangkok today to finalise details of the initial public offering (IPO) exercise. The listing was supposed to take place last year, but was delayed due to the flooding in Thailand in October.

AirAsia Thai is 51% owned by Asia Aviation Co and 49% owned by AirAsia Bhd.

Two air-hostesses giving traditional Thai greeting. AirAsia Thai, which is 51% owned by Asia Aviation Co of Thailand, is expected to be listed by early July. — AFP
Asia Aviation is a registered Thai company that bought into AirAsia Thai in 2006 from Shin Corp (associated with family interests of Thailand's then Prime Minister, Thaksin Shinawatra).

AirAsia Thai, which started operations in January 2004, was initially a joint venture between Shin Corp and AirAsia founder Tan Sri Tony Fernandes.

In 2006, when Singapore's Temasek bought into Shin Corp, AirAsia Thai's 51% national ownership requirement was diluted, thereby requiring an ownership change to ensure compliance. That was when Asia Aviation came in to buy the stake.

If the listing exercise takes place, it is likely that AirAsia's financial year ended Dec 31, 2012 (FY12), will start recognising revenue contributions from AirAsia Thai, something that analysts have generally yet to factor in.

Consensus estimates among analysts are for AirAsia to achieve net profit of RM977mil for FY12, and this has not factored in contributions from its associates.

AirAsia Thai has been operationally profitable since the second quarter of 2010, based on the notes to the accounts of AirAsia. However, AirAsia has not been able to recognise these profits due to accumulated losses of these units that have yet to be reversed to zero.

The share of profit will only be recognised in the income statement of AirAsia when a further RM30.4mil of unrecognised losses have been reversed.


AirAsia's share of AirAsia Thai's net profit in the fourth quarter to Dec 31, 2011 amounted to RM30.2mil, while for the full year, the net profit was RM99.3mil.
AirAsia Thai is still a remarkable company but no it didn't manage to emulate parent company Air Asia to turnround in a year or two. They had to accumulate losses from the growing pains.

Two situation parent company did not undergo miraculously.

Let's talk of it's low cost model.

Yes, low cost model comes with low priced ticket which means they have to live on low margin. It only means that Air Asia is a risky company.

How did they managed to get the attention of investors and enable their share price to rise?

Most analyst are interested with Earning per share (EPS) or more important EPS growth. EPS will derive the Price Earning ration or PE as they would normally call.

Current PE ration of stocks are usually already high. Stock market is efficient to build in all the known information. Stockbroker and analyst cannot cari makan.

So they sell investment ideas of buying future PE. With certain growth, next year or the year after next, share price can be bought because future PE is low and it will eventually rise to current level.

So can make money they tell you and I. You buy, they earn commission and brokerage.

Air Asia cannot sell the idea of low PE because it is in a low margin business and relies on volume. To get investors interest, they have to claim growth.

So far they have been able to deliver growth. Although we concede to acknowledge their growth, we say they are not growing through the natural means but unnatural ways of "deceit and treachery."

Stock market punters don't care to all this moral issues. They buy low and sell high on their mother to make profit. Cut loss when adverse condition happen.

Air Asia is built on the same model or year in year out script from Ryan Air. However, when it stop growing, the trouble will begin. Read here and here.

What if growth stopped on Air Asia?

The same problem can occur.

Be mindful of the fact Air Asia rose not really out of low cost, efficiency, operational growth etc. but by taking over MAS routes through deceit and treachery, low cost and cashfow management by refusing payment, delay suppliers, engineering bill, airport tax, even sacrificing safety, bad treatment of customer, etc.

How is Air Asia going to pay for their 200 ordered Airbuses?

Dump on MAS?

That will effect MAS's product, business plan, and the whole array of issues. Had some numbnuts not refuse to upgrade fleet and that affected sales, dumping Airbuses on MAS will have worse impact on revenue.

Tony F does not care really, if Air Asia mampuih. He is only interested in the 2-5% commission to be derived for purchase of every planes.

This is on one commentators view of Air Asia:
The truth from insiders in Airasia is that it is collapsing. Another 275 aircraft to go in 14 yrs with total bill RM110Billion. Most of the bank have stop giving AA loans knowing their attitude of lack of discipline in payment. You can ask Singapore Engineering Company who service their aircraft before, too much backlog.

CIMB, Kuwait Fiance and European bank will be in trouble in case AA loan turns to NPL. At anytime Moody's, Standard & Poors and Morgan Stanley can bring down their rating which Nazir do not want it to be happen. Much of what is happening is about saving Air Asia.
Air Asia haves subsidiaries and associates in many countries in Asia. Maybe it is to get routes and raise financing. If each one goes listing, become independent operator and help flood the airline market, what can happen?

For sure, Air Asia will be in for a tighter operational margin, squeezed also on sales, and eventually one or two will go under.

Parent Air Asia may have no control over these subsdiaries or associates. But they carry the name Air Asia. The bankers will realised and some of the bankers will get jittery and pull the plug on any of these Air Asias.

Fill your own imagination.

Some of the fact may not be right, especially on the arrangement between Air Asia and their little ones, but the big picture is the same.

Try imagine what Khazanah was thinking to claim something can be learned for MAS from Air Asia. Yeah right actually, MAS has never learned to do business the conniving way. They are too professional.

MAS need to learn to cheat?

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Media taking sides


The MAS issue is gaining prominence as public issue. Rocky Bru's "Malaysian Airlines has arrived!" posting yesterday puts it well.

It is also pitting newspaper companies against each other.

On one side, Utusan Malaysia seems to be lending a hand to the voices from the union and public (read here), particularly those from East Malaysia (read here) against the MAS-Air Asia-collaboration.

The anti-collaboration side appear to be in sync with PM's pro people slogan and recently using the anti-trust issue to gain further credibility. Read here

While on the other side, The Star, The Edge and Malaysian Insiders are giving MAS management, particularly to Chairman Tan Sri Mohd Nor Yusof the space and support.

That can only be understood by knowing the whose who at The Star, The Edge and The Malaysian Insiders. Read Uppercaise here.

From left: Ho, Lee, Fernandes and Star Publications executive director and group chief editor Datuk Seri Wong Chun Wai
The Chief Executive of The Star, Ho Kay Tat moved from The Edge to The Star two years ago. He is a friend of Dato Kalimullah and naturally to Tony F.

He could be the reason the news on Kalimullah-Rocky settlement was distorted to hide the fact that the settlement arise from Kalimullah's apology to Tun Dr Mahathir. In other words, it is Kalimullah's admittance of guilt since Tun is not a party to the dispute.

With Air Asia in collaboration with The Star in content partnership, the more reason to back them. Read here.

The Star has been backing MAS management and they are using analyst to back their claim (read a sample here).

Careful with analyst. In the words of Gordon Gekko, the leading character in the movie Wall Street, "They're analysts, they don't know preferred stock from livestock." Trust us, we were in the market as both professionally and as a hobby.

Read Wong Sai Wan's here.

BK Siddhu is for the collaboration since back in December here. Only Gunasegaram has an opposing view here. But that is Guna, who does not fear controversy.

Nevertheless, his view is for a totally unregulated free for all open sky policy. That would not help ailing MAS neither. It comes with more wasted resources.

With former regional correspondent for the Straits Times, Leslie Lopez as the Deputy Editor-in Chief to new Editor-in-Chief, Kevin Khoo, one can predictably expect which way they are going on the issue. Read a sample here.

Friends in Singapore are lending their hands too. Read Flightglobal.com here

Just as one can predict which one The Malaysian Insiders is going. Samples here and here.

In typical TMI spinning ability, they trying to quiet the union by saying the collaboration as Najib's idea. Or is it really Nazir's. Read here.

The common factor between The Malaysian Insiders and The Edge is Kalimullah.

To counter the negative sentiments against the collaboration in East Malaysia, Borneo Post is doing the pitching. Read sample here.

Wall Street Journal is still neutral judging from this news here.


By the look of it, the only argument for is only to "give the collaboration a chance."

However it is losing grounds to public out roar, be it due to the cannibalisation of MAS, negative news on Air Asia practices, terminating services by MAS is encoraging monoply, unethical Air Asia and inefficiencies, and cheating MAS human resource practices.

There is also the alternative media that is generating more news and hard hitting information for the unwinding. Even small blogs like this here helping the cause.

MAS and Air Asia choose to ignore the alternative media and it will come at their own peril.

Free Malaysia Today here highlighted Wee Choo Keong's expose, the "buying cheap Air Asia-X ticket and fly MAS" scandal:

Has MAS lost millions carrying Air Asia X passengers?

Teoh El Sen, March 17, 2012

Wangsa Maju MP Wee Choo Kiong has alleged that MAS carried Air Asia X passengers to London Paris Mumbai for free except for fuel charges.

KUALA LUMPUR: National flag carrier Malaysia Airlines(MAS) may have allegedly suffered huge financial losses as a result of carrying AirAsia X (AAX) passengers for ‘almost’ free, claimed independent Wangsa Maju MP Wee Choo Keong.

Wee lodged a police report against the top management of MAS alleging that there may have been “criminal elements” involved.

Wee named Ahmad Jauhari Yahya, (MAS Group CEO), Mohammed Rashdan Mohd Yusof (MAS Group Deputy CEO), Rozman Omar (MAS Chief Finance Officer), and Shane Nollan of Plane Consult (Acting Commercial Director) in his report filed at Kampung Baru Subang police station.

In his police report yesterday, Wee referred to two passengers from AAX who both allegedly traveled on March 3, 2012 on a MAS flight (MH 194) to Mumbai.

“The MAS tickets numbers for both ex-AAX passengers are as follows: Ms Noorezatti Matyacob, 2322416844159; Mr Jain Abhinav,2322416844150,” wrote Wee.

Wee said both tickets showed no fare and airport taxes being charged by MAS except for fuel surcharge of RM390 for each of the two passengers.

This was despite the MAS internet fare for Kuala Lumpur – Mumbai being at RM618 per passenger at the time.

“There was an obvious no corporate governance and possible criminal elements involved in the way in which these two tickets were issued which has caused financial loss to MAS,” said Wee in the report.

He added that under normal business practice of MAS, a corporate guarantee had to be given before MAS uplifts any other airlines passengers but this was not in the case of AAX passengers.

Wee said that AAX had terminated its London, Paris and Mumbai routes in February 2012. Some 30,000 passenger were affected by these cancelled flights.

On March 13, AAX also terminated its Christchurch routes from May 30.

“AAX did a block booking for its passengers with MAS for its European and India routes,” said Wee, and listed down several names of other passengers that he obtained.

‘It’s daylight robbery’

Speaking to FMT, Wee said it seems like AirAsia passengers can now fly MAS.

“Now you can book a cheap AirAsia flight and fly under MAS when AirAsia has problems? This is unheard of.

“If this is part of the collaborative deal, then MAS is doomed from the start. It is on the losing side all the time. Who is helping who?

“Is MAS helping AirAsia or is AirAsia is helping MAS? By the looks of it, I think its more of a case MAS paying Air Asia. Clearly this is unfair,” he said.

Wee said that it was illogical that MAS, knowing that AAX was desperate to appease its customers, had allowed AAX passengers such low fairs.

“Under normal circumstances, MAS should have insisted that the airline they were helping pay up the full fares, and provide a bank guarantee. Meaning MAS would get guaranteed payment. But no, that’s not the case here,” he said.

Wee said Abhinav was just one of the 30,000 of AAX passengers who were uplifted by MAS recently.

“This is only Mumbai tickets. What about London where you are talking about tickets up to RM2,000-RM3000 per passenger. I can see maybe involving RM300million? This is not even considering the Christchurch flights which is out of the 30,000 people we’re talking about.”

“Now I hear that they are trying to backdate their documents. I call for the police to immediately investigate this based on the evidence.

“This is more or less cheating. Something I would describe as daylight robbery,” he said.

MyCC must investigate

In his blog posting yesterday, Wee posted what appeared to be an online MAS ticket obtained from internal sources that showed details of Abhinav’s flight, who is charged RM390 only with zero fare cost.

“MAS uplifted this AirAsia X Sdn Bhd passenger with the only payment of RM390 for fuel surcharge.

“From this passenger alone, MAS has incurred losses of at least RM618 without taking into account the airport tax, which MAS had to pay out and other cost.

“Would this be a case of AirAsia X Sdn Bhd having the luxury of keeping the fare paid by
this passenger and the other 30,000 passengers that MAS have to uplift due to the terminations of its routes to London, Paris and Mumbai?

“Not a bad business deal after all! Now everyone can take MAS for a ride’” Wee wrote.

“No wonder AirAsia X Sdn Bhd officer announced with confidence that those affected 30,000 passengers can still travel to their destinations without having to pay extra charges in fare.”

“A formal complaint must be lodged with Malaysia Competition Commission(MyCC) as this blatant act of not charging fare by MAS for uplifting the 30,000 passengers of AAX is against the spirit of competition and therefore has contravened the Competition Act, 2010,” said Wee.

Aside from asking MACC and other government agencies to act, Wee also pleaded with Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak to step in immediately in the light of this evidence and remove all top guns in the company for failing in their duties to look after the interests of MAS and, “most of all, their inertia have contributed to the existing leakages, which is the main problem in MAS”.

Wee said he cannot believe such a “losing business arrangement” was part of the comprehensive collaborative framework(CCF) between MAS and AirAsia after the inking of the MAS-AirAsia share swap.

Review of MAS-AA alliance

Earlier this month, it was reported that Najib was said to be reviewing the MAS-AirAsia alliance igniting speculations that the controversial share-swap between the carriers could be scrapped entirely.

MAS’s poor financial performance had resulted in the MAS-AirAsia share swap last August.

It saw state investment arm Khazanah Nasional taking a 10 per cent stake in Asia’s top budget carrier in exchange for a 20.5 per cent stake in the flag carrier.

The much debated share swap deal is also reportedly being investigated by Bursa Malaysia, the Securities Commission as well as the newly set up (MyCC) for possible insider trading or monopolistic abuses.
Apart from exposing the fraud by Air Asia, Wee should be credited for playing up the anti trust argument.

Perhaps we could seek credit for exposing Air Asia's weakness. Remember we said their growth model will face problem and they are a future Pan El in the process.

Interestingly, more for protecting SIA and Tiger Airline interest (not to mention the Indonesian too for the Jakarta Globe here), Straits Times Singapore is helping our cause.
AirAsia Scrapping Long-Haul Flights

AirAsia X chief executive Azran Osman-Rani said, "We're not shrinking the business. We're growing and redeploying, moving our planes to different routes." (Bloomberg Photo)
Hazlin Hassan - Straits Times, March 19, 2012

Kuala Lumpur. London, Paris, Mumbai, and New Delhi were the first to go.

Now Asia's biggest budget airline, AirAsia, is scrapping its flights to Christchurch too, in a drastic retreat that shows how deeply high fuel costs and the global economic crisis have crippled the once-thriving sector.

Other airlines in the region are in trouble, too, with India's Air India, Jet Airways, and Kingfisher Airlines all seeking government help. Kingfisher has not paid salaries in months, while Jet Airways had its accounts frozen after failing to pay its taxes.

"It's not just us," said Azran Osman-Rani, chief executive of AirAsia X, the long-haul arm of Malaysia-based AirAsia. "Even the full-service model is not working right now. It's not about the low-cost model."

AirAsia's profit fell 47 per cent to RM 564 million (US$ 185 million) last year, after average fuel prices rose 36 per cent over the year.

Its unit AirAsia X was launched in 2007 with Australia's Gold Coast as its first destination. Analysts said AirAsia may have overestimated the viability of the low-cost model when it comes to long-haul flights.

"Long-haul is a tougher business model," said aviation analyst Ahmad Maghfur Usman from OSK Research. "You don't get as much travel frequency (for planes) as you would with short-haul."

AirAsia X said it is in the midst of adding flights to more profitable routes elsewhere, mostly involving flights not longer than eight hours.

Last week, it announced that it was increasing the number of flights to Taipei and Perth in June, routes which have seen average passenger loads of better than 85 per cent.

Azran said that the long-haul routes work well in markets such as Australia and Greater China, where AirAsia X has multiple destinations.

It will be setting up AirAsia Japan in August this year, with domestic flights within Japan.

"It's not just slashing routes; it's re-definement," Azran told The Straits Times. "We're not shrinking the business. We're growing and redeploying, moving our planes to different routes."

The airline problems in Europe had to do not just with high fuel prices, but were compounded by a drop in demand following the euro zone crisis, as consumers cut luxuries and long-haul leisure travel, he said.

Azran also puts the blame on the higher taxes for passengers in Britain and the rest of Europe.

The British government has been slammed by the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines, which includes Singapore Airlines, for taxing air travel in the form of the Air Passenger Duty, which will be raised by 10 per cent from April 1.

European aviation bosses have also criticized a European Union carbon levy on airlines, which took effect in January, for threatening the industry.

Some observers also wonder if the cutting of European routes may have something to do with avoiding competition with national carrier Malaysia Airlines, which did a share swop with AirAsia last year.

Whatever the case, AirAsia X may simply be going where the passengers are.

UOB Kay Hian Research regional aviation analyst K. Ajith said, "The focus has come back to Asia, primarily because that's where the growth is."

Outbound China travel is also expected to increase as more Chinese holiday abroad, and this will benefit the airline, he added.

In the next two years, as it doubles its fleet, AirAsia X plans to add flights to Japan and open routes to Sydney, Adelaide, Fukuoka, and Busan. In three years, it is looking to fly to South Africa and Turkey.

"Airlines are usually slow and loath to make changes," said Azran. "The reality in today's climate is that we need to make changes."
Such negative news of Air Asia will be unheard off in Malaysia but it is okay to be negative of MAS.

More such news should be brought forward to make the public aware that Air Asia is trying to save it's own skin at the expense of MAS and this should add pressure to stop the collaboration.

For the union, the General Election is a strategic carrot for the PM to decide in their favour but voting opposition may not be wise. Pakatan Rakyat will not be sympathetic ear for MAS and will clearly be bias for Air Asia.

Maybe it is because MAS is being seen as a Malay company and Air Asia as a more representative of Malaysian racial composition. But it is more because Kalimullah is a DAP supporter cum intelligence gatherer for Singapore's PAP.

Nevertheless, PM need to be given more information and furnish the list of abuses by Air Asia, like the one Wee Chee Keong had done, to substantiate and justify the common "not Tony F" dissatisfaction.

For that, all MAS employees must speak up. Or at least, comment in this blog so we can compile and bring it forward to somebody.

That is the only way to get that heartless, dishonest and conniving short and medium haul CEO fired.

Looks like one of our mole in MAS is either lazy or in fear to list down and email us the list.

Maybe at the border of paranoia. MAS monitor in and outgoing emails using company's system but not as Big Brother in
George Orwell's 1984; able to monitor the movement of their staff and communication through e-mail, SMS and handphone.

Nevertheless, do wake up from your fear, my friend. The choice is between your job, career and children to feed or "A Beautiful Mind" fear.

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

More Anwar and Quek story: Translation required


Not many realised the graveness of yesterday's posting about the risk of being proxies.

The related stories of Aras Murni got lost by attempts to sermonise the statutory of declaration by former Deputy Governor of Bank Negara, Dato Murad. Thus the reason to censor the sermons.

Only adult read this blog. Thus, they should have clear conscience why they do things. Sermonising is a distraction and a subtle attempt to censor and stifle free flow of discussion.

Save it for your own children.

Back to Arus Murni, the relevence of the case lies in the fact that there seem to be a basis by the defense counsel to include Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim in the defense statement or perhaps affidavit but was technically rejected by the High Court because it is too late.

It is also strange that this case filed in 1999 but has been held proceeding by Hong Leong Finance since 2005, was reactivated recently.

The important point is what does that say about Anwar's claim he has no crony.

Hope someone can translate this news from Sin Chew here to add to the news report in our posting here yesterday:


豐隆銀行起訴商人案‧商人要求修改答辯書被拒

(吉隆坡19日訊)高庭今日駁回一名商人,要求修改他於1997年涉及一宗高達4億4千500萬令吉企業聯合組織貸款案而被起訴後所入稟的答辯書申請。

要把安華郭令燦加入答辯書

【世華‧奇聞】巴西罪惡之城邀“蝙蝠俠”夜間巡邏,助警方打擊罪行!

商人劉添和的代表律師峇瑪林甘披露,其當事人欲把國會反對黨領袖拿督斯里安華及豐隆集團執行主席丹斯里郭令燦被指為幕後指使者一事加入其答辯書內,法官不批准。

峇瑪林甘在庭外受訪時說,當年豐隆計劃收購一家金融機構——Kewangan Bersatu有限公司(KBB),惟計劃最終泡湯;當時安華是財政部長。

承審本案的高庭司法專員哈達麗雅是基於代表豐隆金融有限公司(HLFB)的律師趙恩偉已提出反對,及商人劉添和無法在法定期限內入稟有關申請,而宣判駁回劉添和要求修改答辯書的申請。

起訴人豐隆金融有限公司是於1998年因劉添和無法償還貸款而入稟高庭提出訴訟,劉添和較後於 1999年入稟高庭,對豐隆金融有限公司、HLG CapitalMarkets私人有限公司和蕭倫豪(譯音,豐隆銀行信貸有限公司前首席執行員)等3造提出“反起訴”要求賠償;劉添和聲稱,有關3造錯誤 勸告他及犯下疏忽的錯誤。

豐隆另一訴訟索償2800萬

另一方面,豐隆金融有限公司也入稟另一項訴訟起訴Mekuritek私人有限與3名擔保人胡先阿都卡林、阿古斯沙林及阿都拉阿都卡林,要求他們償還高達2千800萬令吉的貸款。

劉添和在其訴訟中宣稱,豐隆金融有限公司與HLG CapitalMarkets私人有限公司聯手把高達4億4千500萬令吉的企業聯合組織貸款批核予持有Kewangan Bersatu有限公司的Arus Murni私人有限公司(AMSB),以協助AMSB完成收購Arus Murni企業有限公司(AMCB)的股權工作。

案展3月28日續審。

(星洲日報)



Google Translator not doing a good job.

The last we would like to do is to make a mistake like the one by Ministry of Defense. Read here.

Monday, March 19, 2012

High price of proxies


One weekend event and a late night tip-off.

One lesson from the two to young wannabees eager to be proxies to some corporate players or politicians, be careful of easy money.

Thinking that it is one way to earn that easy quick money to lead a life of luxury or that capital needed to fund one's pursuit, wannabees - young and old - get sucked into traps that get dragged into long court battle or financial ruins.

Remind ourselves, if it is quick money, why would those corporate players and politicians share with you? Have that devil advocate within ourselves to ask and doubt our easily made up decisions.

Over the weekend, we met up with someone close to Dato Eskay, the leading Dato of the triumvirate Dato T, that exposed the sex tapes of Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

As far as we are concerned, the video is Anwar's. It is just too convincing. Anwar's responses and refusals to response substantiate it further.

The attempt to spin by Haji Hadi to say video is not acceptable witness under syaria law because it is inanimate objects, seal it up. Off course it is not a witness but evidence.

With Eskay confessing and describing in person, it is sufficient for us.

After that weekend night, now we know why Anwar was walking front and back before the main actor calls, "Action!"

Our purpose to hear out this guy was for something else. It was on something the opposition had used to slander back against Eskay.

We wanted to know why is a guy who does not morally judge his friends and he befriends everyone, irrespective on which side of the political divide, finally had a calling to expose Anwar wrongdoings.

Also, we were aware of a court case between Eskay and Dato Yahya Jalil, the controversial businessman who was recently entangled in a series of pay off to couple of politicians by a blog called The Whistleblower.

Yahya or Pakya to many Johoreans, is entangled in many financial commitments with many groups, including a member of the royal family which he cannot deliver. He may have stretched himself thin.

Read here first this Malaysian Insider's slanted report to twist it into a tale of crooks and cronies, which in actual fact are part and parcel of the lobbying process in any public work project procurement any where in the world:
Businessman’s tale of how he won ‘crooked bridge’ deal

By Yow Hong Chieh

KUALA LUMPUR, March 10 — A businessman offered a glimpse into how government contracts are secured when he told the High Court today his access to senior officials and influential ministers secured him the rights to the Malaysia-Singapore International Gateway bridge project, better known as the “crooked bridge”.

“It was all based on my effort,” Datuk Shazryl Eskay Abdullah told the court today.

Shazryl Eskay said that, in addition to approaching the late Tan Sri Megat Junid Megat Ayub for help, he had also helped second defendant, Datuk Yahya A. Jalil, gain access to then-deputy prime minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

But Shazryl Eskay was quick to stress that he did not have any power over either Megat Junid or Anwar, and insisted that he got the contract through the merits of the project and the companies involved.

“I did not influence them, but convinced them,” Shazryl Eskay said.

He had filed a lawsuit in January 2002, claiming breach of contract by Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd and Yahya for failing to pay him RM20 million after he procured the project for them.

In his statement of claim, Shazryl Eskay said Yahya, executive director and major shareholder of Merong Mahawangsa, had enlisted his help to procure the project from the government and to secure RM640 million in foreign funds for the project.

He claimed the second defendant had sought his help for his “discretion and good relations” with the government.

Shazryl Eskay said the second defendant suggested RM20 million in remunerations for his services, which has not been paid.

The “crooked bridge” project was terminated by the Abdullah administration in 2006.

Shazryl Eskay is seeking a RM20 million payment from the defendants as well as interest, costs and other relief deemed fit by the court.

Yahya, however, in his defence statement denied using the plaintiff’s close ties with the government and Megat Junid’s family as it was “against public policy, wild and illegal”.

The court was also told today that Shazryl Eskay and Yahya had started talks to settle the matter out of court to avoid “embarrassing some personalities involved”.

Justice VT Singham, however, ordered the trial to continue until such a settlement is reached.

He also rejected a request by Yahya’s lawyer to adjourn the matter until the latter returns from a business trip to Jeddah with former prime minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

The trial continues tomorrow at 8.30am.
Naturally Yahya has to deny and battle it out in court.

What happened was Eskay and Yahya were partners in a company bidding for the "jambatan bengkok".

Then Yahya brought in a member of the royal family as shareholders and turned to Eskay to buy up his shares. He may have told Eskay that it ie better than him having to deal with the royal family.

It turns out that Eskay's shares in the company may not be just of Eskay's but also of Anwar's. Yahya had paid Eskay in installments until he stopped few years ago.

According to the source, Eskay has a common lawyer with Anwar as in Dato Phabakaran. Eskay had asked Phabakaran to ask Anwar but was told that the money was paid long time ago to Anwar.

Yahya had honoured his deal but did not know that the RM20 million was Eskay's portion and not Anwar which he had given to.

As a proxy of Anwar, Eskay was cheated out.

Naturally Anwar will deny he has business proxies as he once challenged to name his cronies in August 2008. Read The Star here.

Oh pleaseee... just because it is not easy to proof in court, it does not mean he doesn't have crony, in fact lots of cronies.

Just recall the list of names that secured privitasation projects that Tun Dr Mahathir put up at the 1998 UMNO General Assembly. Anwar was speechless as many saw his cronies and corporate boys were getting quite a fair share.

Read Rocky Bru here

Picture: Khalid Jaafar, Faiz Abdullah and Aasil Kazi Ahmad

All we need to do to call Anwar's bluff is to refer to a Statutory Declaration by former Deputy Governor of Bank Negara Malaysia, Dato Abdul Murad bin Khalid dated Oct 26, 1999 [read in full here].

Our interest is on 12 e, where Murad described a corporate deal involving Faiz Abdullah, Arus Murni, KUBB and Hong Leong, below:
(e) I was directed by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to help Encik Faiz Abdullah (Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s ghost writer), together with Seow Lun Hoo of Hong Leong to buy into Kewangan Usaha Bersatu Berhad (KUBB), then owned by ldris Hydraulic Berhad. The scheme involved using Arus Murni Berhad formerly known as Timuran Berhad, a company listed on the Main Board of the KLSE as the holding company. I approached the following banks to help syndicate the loan for the purchase of KUBB shares costing above RM400 million: 1. Hong Leong Bank. 2. Hong Leong Finance. 3. Sime Bank 4. RHB Bank. 5. Southern Bank. 6. BSN Commercial Bank. Faiz Abdullah is a verv clever ghost writer and political operator for Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. He is also a lawyer, ex-joumalist and ex-SpecialBranch police officer.
Since Anwar's released, Murad has turned around to deny his Statutory Declaration. It's actually a crime to change one's Statutory Declaration. Let that be for awhile.

Raja Petra has another version of it, a spinned version claiming some character forced Murad to admit. Read Malaysia Today here.

Alas ... it's too late.

Except for the contribution to various NGOs and Think Tank, the information tallies with what the market talk and development back then.

Anyone interested can read this 2004 analyst report on Arus Murni here. Sounds rosy hehehe ...

The above excercise occurs in 1995 to 1996.

We remembered how they played up the shares using a ridiculous rumour of Nova Scotia Bank selling their Kuala Lumpur branch to Arus Murni in 1994. That way the shares rose sufficiently for them to meet their margin.

By 1997, they couldn't carry the fiancial burden of KUBB and also KUBB's problem.

They cut a deal with Hong Leong Finance Berhad to acquire KUBB from Arus Murni in 1998 but may have been rejected by BNM because KUBB was acquired by BNM from Arus Murni the following year.

That may have been a barganing chip used to spare Hong Leong from being acquired by other Bank in the first round of Bank consolidation exercise. It was Anwar that finally helped the Hong Leong to acquire Mui Bank Berhad. They have been denied banking license by both the Malasysian and Singaporean Government since time immemorial.

Arus Murni had made several acquisition related to their core activities. But by 2001, Arus Murni was under PN4 and were sold off. It is today Naim Indah Corporation Berhad.

The shareholders of Arus Murni are still caught in a legal battle with Hong Leong Finance for loans owned, mostly to buy Arus Murni shares back then. The latest Free Malaysia Today report from the High Courts this morning, below:
Trade dispute: Judge rejects bid to include Anwar

G Vinod, March 19, 2012

The High Court dismisses businessman's application saying it's too late to include Anwar Ibrahim in his case.

KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court today dismissed an application by a businessman to include former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim in a suit involving a failed acquisition process in 1998.

In her verdict, Justice Hadhariah Syed Ismail told the legal counsel for businessman, Low Thiam Hoe, that the proposed amendment had come too late in the course of the trial.

In 1997, Hong Leong Finance Bhd filed a suit against Low, Mekuritek Sdn Bhd and Arus Murni Sdn Bhd over non-payment of loans amounting to RM445 million.

The loans were given to the parties in a bid to acquire financial institution, Kewangan Bersatu Bhd.

Anwar was serving as the finance minister at that point of time and one of Arus Murni’s directors, Mohd Faiz Abdullah, was purported to be Anwar’s speech writer.

Each defendant was sued for over RM28 million plus interest for the non-repayment of the loans.

On why the case was being heard now when it was filed in 1998, the lawyer serving for all three defendants, D Paramalingam, said Hong Leong had not pursued the matter since 2005.

“All of a sudden, the plaintiff (Hong Leong) decided to proceed with the case,” said Paramalingam.

The hearing of the case would resume on March 28.
Has Hong Leong decided that Anwar is a lost cause and it is time to swing something for BN?

Ask also why is Anwar being considered for lawsuit? He must be involved and possibly like Eskay's case, he also has a cut. Otherwise, why would the three defendents want to drag him now?

He may be relieved from being called to court. The mystery will linger on but it is the three alleged proxies that will be saddled with the loan to pay up.

By the way, it is believed Eskay is going to drag him to court too. He should subpoena Anwar.

Now, did Anwar say he has no crony and proxy?

My Say