In Malaysia, possession of fire arms and bullets is a serious crime punishable by death. Howeve, instead of the person who obtained M-16 bullets and mailed them as threats, the intellectually superior recipient was the one hauled up by the police.
http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/2010/09/cops-grill-tony-pua-over-bumi-house.html
"They asked me to recap what I said, and I explained that I was referring to the discounts for luxury residential properties (for bumiputras) to be stopped and that these benefits be channelled to the poor instead," he added.
If a person democratically elected to participate in policy formulation of the country can even be hauled up for posing a suggestion on this particular topic, then what about articulating and implementing a firm decision pertaining to the same topic?
UDA Chairman Nur Jazlan mentioned the following salient points (copied verbatim from the article) in The Business Times, Singapore edition.
(The full article is appended below and note subsequently the Bernama article which seems to omit a lot of stuff reported by the Singapore press vis-a-vis the PM and the BTN Deputy Director's concurrent speeches)
IT CAN no longer subsidise its bumiputra agenda without considering returns on investment, said the head of a Malaysian government agency that is supposed to raise bumiputra real estate ownership in urban areas.
- hence UDA has departed from its original aim and who are responsible for this shift?
Read further below and the answer is
Previously a state mandated authority, UDA was listed on the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange in 1996 only to be privatised about 10 years later.
As it is no longer a state mandated authority, but a privatised agency owned by the Minister of Finance, the government cannot subsidise its bumiputra agenda by direct allocations regularly. Its tight fiscal position is another factor.
You tell me who shifted UDA's emphasis from its original aim then.
So what's the new ball game?
Now, the Urban Development Authority (UDA) will instead make profitability a greater consideration by reviewing bumiputra quotas and pitching its products to non-Malays.
Profit, profit, profit (and where does the profit is channel to, I wonder) plus.....
'This new economic reality forces UDA to depart from the usual practice of setting fixed quotas for bumiputra ownership in our projects . . . Its business model now will have a more optimal mix of purchasers with greater purchasing power to ensure future appreciation of the value of the properties.'
I don't think Malays will feel too left out as the article quoted him as saying
'Bumiputras today have money to buy expensive properties,' he told BT, noting in one of its housing projects in Kuala Lumpur, bungalow lots went for RM1.7 million but 90 per cent of the buyers were bumiputras, or mainly ethnic Malays who receive discounts for property purchases under the government's affirmative action policies.
I believe the Malays purchasers above fall into the following categories:
1) self made millionaires who on merit able to afford such houses for their loved ones
2) recipients of government projects hence already received aid once, so is there a need for double whammy?
Compare 1) and 2) above to Muthu, Letchumy, Ah Beng, Ah Lian, Mohd and Siti who are on RM150 or RM300 per month from Jabatan Kebajikan Masyarakat....now who has more pressing needs and deserve assistance?
Now UDA, after departing from its original aim to assist bumi ownership in urban area, has also abolish the traditional quota as seen in the last sentence below
Mr Nur Jazlan said that UDA would look to build 'higher-value properties' which may be beyond the reach of the average middle-income bumiputra but not necessarily richer bumiputras. But because there might not be sufficient bumiputra purchasers for a mixed development of that scale - its estimated gross development value is RM5 billion (S$2.1 billion) - UDA does not plan to set a quota on the level of bumiputra ownership as it wants the project to be financially feasible
In a manner reminding me of Tony Pua's suggestion, Nur Jazlan added that
'I understand that there could be many bumiputras who might be unhappy at the reduction of bumi ownership and thus bumi participation in the project. But this can be fulfilled in other ways by awarding contracts to competent bumiputras in construction and consultancy works.
Now I do see some similarities in what UDA is doing and what Tony P is saying. Should the PDRM at least clarify this with UDA?
If Perkasa is free to visit Chinese Assembly Hall over a certain rapper, surely they can spare some time to visit UDA's office as well. Land and building may seem a bit more important than somemusic video you can't even buy its DVD off the shelf of supermarkets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/sub/news/story/0,4574,406077,00.html?
Published September 29, 2010
Govt agency veers from bumiputra agenda
UDA chairman: soaring land costs forcing it to become market-driven to ensure its financial viability in long run
By PAULINE NG
IN KUALA LUMPUR
IT CAN no longer subsidise its bumiputra agenda without considering returns on investment, said the head of a Malaysian government agency that is supposed to raise bumiputra real estate ownership in urban areas.
'Having non-bumiputras and foreign investors in the development would enhance its value and allow UDA to subsidise the retail portion taken up by bumiputra entrepreneurs.'
- Mr Nur Jazlan
Now, the Urban Development Authority (UDA) will instead make profitability a greater consideration by reviewing bumiputra quotas and pitching its products to non-Malays.
In an article for the Financial Daily, the UDA's chairman, Nur Jazlan Mohamed, pointed out that soaring land costs in areas such as Kuala Lumpur makes it impossible for UDA to develop land exclusively for bumiputras since it means incurring a loss which would impair its financial viability in the long run.
'This new economic reality forces UDA to depart from the usual practice of setting fixed quotas for bumiputra ownership in our projects . . . Its business model now will have a more optimal mix of purchasers with greater purchasing power to ensure future appreciation of the value of the properties.'
Previously a state mandated authority, UDA was listed on the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange in 1996 only to be privatised about 10 years later.
As it is no longer a state mandated authority, but a privatised agency owned by the Minister of Finance, the government cannot subsidise its bumiputra agenda by direct allocations regularly. Its tight fiscal position is another factor.
Mr Nur Jazlan said that UDA is planning to build more 'market driven' properties, starting with the proposed Pudu Jail redevelopment project sited on 20 acres (8.09 ha) in the city centre.
'Bumiputras today have money to buy expensive properties,' he told BT, noting in one of its housing projects in Kuala Lumpur, bungalow lots went for RM1.7 million but 90 per cent of the buyers were bumiputras, or mainly ethnic Malays who receive discounts for property purchases under the government's affirmative action policies. These policies also require developers to allocate a certain percentage of housing for bumiputras, the quota varying from state to state.
Mr Nur Jazlan said that UDA would look to build 'higher-value properties' which may be beyond the reach of the average middle-income bumiputra but not necessarily richer bumiputras. But because there might not be sufficient bumiputra purchasers for a mixed development of that scale - its estimated gross development value is RM5 billion (S$2.1 billion) - UDA does not plan to set a quota on the level of bumiputra ownership as it wants the project to be financially feasible.
Even so, it is only forking out about RM150 million in land premium while an open tender would have netted the government a lot more.
There is still the bumiputra agenda to consider, he pointed out, but it would be balanced by profit considerations to enable UDA to build its reserves for future land acquisitions.
'I understand that there could be many bumiputras who might be unhappy at the reduction of bumi ownership and thus bumi participation in the project. But this can be fulfilled in other ways by awarding contracts to competent bumiputras in construction and consultancy works.
'Having non-bumiputras and foreign investors in the development would enhance its value and allow UDA to subsidise the retail portion taken up by bumiputra entrepreneurs.
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsbusiness.php?id=530982
http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/9/28/business/20100928170011&sec=business
UDA aims to increase land reserves
KUALA LUMPUR: Uda Holdings Bhd is actively looking at opportunities to increase its land reserves currently left at an estimated 1,000 acres.
This would be to develop more mixed development projects, particularly for Bumiputeras, its Chairman Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed said.
Uda Holdings will continue to concentrate on acquiring land in Klang Valley, Johor and Georgetown. "We are looking at land with sizes of a minimum of 200-300 acres for the development of single projects in these areas. "We are also looking at opportunities in the secondary land areas such as in Melaka," he said after officiating Uda Land Central Sdn Bhd's new office building here today.
He said the demand for property, especially from Bumiputeras was on the rise and that was the reason for Uda Holdings actively seeking to develop affordable properties for the community.
On the development of Bandar Tun Hussein Onn, he said there was only 100 acres of land left there, with 85% of the land already developed. "About 90% of the residential units and more than 70% of the shophouses had been sold to Bumiputeras," he said.
On the development of the Bukit Bintang Commercial Centre, he said Uda was reviewing the price and type of development in view of the growth of the property industry in the country. "The previous proposal was made last year, but now the property market in the Klang Valley is dynamic and has gone up 20%.
Therefore, we need to restudy to assess the real value of the development," he said.- BERNAMA
An alternative Economic Transformation Plan
I can’t help but being cynical about the grand splendour that is the ETP rolled out with much glitz, glamour, promises and vagueness. The loopholes in the ETP has been well commented elsewhere.
All I can add on it is a sense of déjà vu; more empty promises ala 1Malaysia and more opportunities for the few and privilege to get onto the gravy train. It does not address the needs of the majority. Greater KL might sound like a great idea but I doubt people in Gua Musang, Batu Pahat, Bahau might not get too excited
A simple case in point, what is the point of having a gigantic mall from KLCC to Bukit Bintang when only 15% of the population have sufficient qualification and opportunities to earn enough to pay income tax?
My piece here is not about the professionals and upper middle income group. Sure, the businessmen and professionals have other pressing needs. They are more concern about business and investment climate and chances to actualize their potential as a professional. Improving the business climate, safety issues, education and employment opportunities would adress a lot of their concern.
I am writing and thinking about the 85% . By improving their standard of living and purchasing power, the multipler effect of that can only benefit local businesses and employment seeking professionals hence a win-win situation.
An elected government has the moral obligation to ensure its citizens live in safe environment and with dignity.
For me, to achieve high income population; let’s think out of the box. A certain ex-PM recently said that high income means high cost of living. (Incidentally that ex-PM did create a high income albeit exclusive society) Well, high income can also mean lower cost of living and value for money in terms of purchase power parity.
Successive Barisan Nasional administrations have never been big on cost control. As a result we have mounting national debts and well documented tremendous leakage but it’s not what I am writing about here.
Malaysians should rightly and loudly ask for their money’s worth. Our purchasing power is horrible. In Singapore you can get things for almost half of the nominal value compared to Malaysia. E.g. a pack of vegetable in NTUC can be less than S$1.00 but in Malaysia, the same quantity can reach well over RM1.80.
A viable ETP for the rakyat should focus on the following:
1) lowering cost of living for all Malaysians
2) creating business and job opportunities across Malaysia for all and sundry and not only to cronies
3) creating a more dynamic work culture and education system that makes Malaysians more employable
4) having a system in place where a working Malaysian can expect to have fair remuneration package in relation to his or her efforts
Lowering cost of living for all Malaysians
Lowering cost of living would involving doing away with the gravy train contracts started by Mahathir administration and improved upon during successive BN administrations. IPP, toll concessions, approved permits etc need to be removed. The rent seekerss should see the final days of their gravy train rides.
Something that is not apparent to Malaysians is the length of supply chain in Malaysia. The meat we get in our wet markets is nowhere as fresh as I have seen in Hong Kong and Singapore. In Hong Kong, I can purchase swimming fishes at the wet market but in Malaysia, I can only look at fishes that have perished for sometime.
Something does not look right. Sometimes middlemen are necessary part of the supply chain but too many of them would hold up the supply chain, push up cost and affect the quality of the goods delivered to end users
It’s time for the BN administration to come clean on how our foodstuff and necessities get to the public, including housing and utilities.
I would favour shifting of economic focus on crony dominated big corporations to people owned and people operated entities. I believe co-operatives have been under utilized.
Federal and State Economic agencies should assist in setting up co-operatives to venture into, among others, production of food and other daily necessities so that people can produce for themselves what they need to live at a lower cost.
Co-operatives can be a more democratic organization in a democratic country compared to say, a top down management listed company which leadership can actually be un-democratic – the major shareholders have all the say. Also, co-operative enable its members to have more say, and that itself can motivate and empower the people.
This model can allow rural Malaysia an alternative form of economic clout and also benefit urban Malaysia by presenting a viable and more economical source of goods.
Creating business and job opportunities across Malaysia for all and sundry and not only to cronies
Open and transparent tender for government procurement would create a competitive environment amongst Malaysian entrepreneurs.
More radically, instead of focusing only on a fixed equity percentage target, the focus should be shifted to creating bigger economic pie and providing learning opportunities for the rakyat to gain the knowledge, skill and experience to be able to take up a variety of jobs.
Malaysia has had experience doing away with share ownership quota. During the economic crises of 1987, the Industrial Co-ordination Act was amended to exempt foreign companies from fulfilling bumiputra share ownership provided that 80% or more of the sales are export in nature.
In order to be an attractive investment destination, we have to realize that our competitors do not have such non-business case restriction unto foreign investors.
Creating a more dynamic work culture that makes Malaysians more employable
Creating a more dynamic work force admittedly it is hardest part. There is a fair number of hard-working Malaysians but how often do we wish that our employee/co-worker/subordinate could put in more effort that you are seeing now?
I believe, however, if an employee can see he or she will be getting more rewards for his or her efforts, then he and she would work harder. Crony-base economy is a killer of initiative and opportunities.
Money can be the best motivational tool, which brings to my next point.
Having a system in place where a working Malaysian can expect to have fair remuneration package in relation to his or her efforts
I observe that the Gini co-efficient for Malaysia is not something we can be proud of. The income gaps between the rich and privilege against the middle class, and the middle class against the blue collar are very big.
Wage scale is essentially a commercial decision best left to the entrepreneurs and professional managers. Really? I have blogged about living wage scheme before and I believe its wide spread benefit could and would benefit more than the present system which allow excessive reliance on lowly paid foreign workers. It is time we Malaysians think of Malaysians first.
Giving more to the have-less and they can spend more and a strong domestic market can't do much harm to businessmen and ambitious professionals.
In Singapore there is already a Tripate Alliance for Fair Employment Practices and Malaysia do need this, to compensate for the lack of a labour union culture.
I believe the ETP is just like the previous reckless expansionary economic policies which has exhausted national confers and cemented perpetual budget deficits. We have had enough of cheque book prime ministers
Malaysians need structural changes that gets to the core of the issues faced by the majority, not another round of gravy trains that churn through crony neighbourhood which drop some crumbs for the slightly luckier few to pounce on.
All I can add on it is a sense of déjà vu; more empty promises ala 1Malaysia and more opportunities for the few and privilege to get onto the gravy train. It does not address the needs of the majority. Greater KL might sound like a great idea but I doubt people in Gua Musang, Batu Pahat, Bahau might not get too excited
A simple case in point, what is the point of having a gigantic mall from KLCC to Bukit Bintang when only 15% of the population have sufficient qualification and opportunities to earn enough to pay income tax?
My piece here is not about the professionals and upper middle income group. Sure, the businessmen and professionals have other pressing needs. They are more concern about business and investment climate and chances to actualize their potential as a professional. Improving the business climate, safety issues, education and employment opportunities would adress a lot of their concern.
I am writing and thinking about the 85% . By improving their standard of living and purchasing power, the multipler effect of that can only benefit local businesses and employment seeking professionals hence a win-win situation.
An elected government has the moral obligation to ensure its citizens live in safe environment and with dignity.
For me, to achieve high income population; let’s think out of the box. A certain ex-PM recently said that high income means high cost of living. (Incidentally that ex-PM did create a high income albeit exclusive society) Well, high income can also mean lower cost of living and value for money in terms of purchase power parity.
Successive Barisan Nasional administrations have never been big on cost control. As a result we have mounting national debts and well documented tremendous leakage but it’s not what I am writing about here.
Malaysians should rightly and loudly ask for their money’s worth. Our purchasing power is horrible. In Singapore you can get things for almost half of the nominal value compared to Malaysia. E.g. a pack of vegetable in NTUC can be less than S$1.00 but in Malaysia, the same quantity can reach well over RM1.80.
A viable ETP for the rakyat should focus on the following:
1) lowering cost of living for all Malaysians
2) creating business and job opportunities across Malaysia for all and sundry and not only to cronies
3) creating a more dynamic work culture and education system that makes Malaysians more employable
4) having a system in place where a working Malaysian can expect to have fair remuneration package in relation to his or her efforts
Lowering cost of living for all Malaysians
Lowering cost of living would involving doing away with the gravy train contracts started by Mahathir administration and improved upon during successive BN administrations. IPP, toll concessions, approved permits etc need to be removed. The rent seekerss should see the final days of their gravy train rides.
Something that is not apparent to Malaysians is the length of supply chain in Malaysia. The meat we get in our wet markets is nowhere as fresh as I have seen in Hong Kong and Singapore. In Hong Kong, I can purchase swimming fishes at the wet market but in Malaysia, I can only look at fishes that have perished for sometime.
Something does not look right. Sometimes middlemen are necessary part of the supply chain but too many of them would hold up the supply chain, push up cost and affect the quality of the goods delivered to end users
It’s time for the BN administration to come clean on how our foodstuff and necessities get to the public, including housing and utilities.
I would favour shifting of economic focus on crony dominated big corporations to people owned and people operated entities. I believe co-operatives have been under utilized.
Federal and State Economic agencies should assist in setting up co-operatives to venture into, among others, production of food and other daily necessities so that people can produce for themselves what they need to live at a lower cost.
Co-operatives can be a more democratic organization in a democratic country compared to say, a top down management listed company which leadership can actually be un-democratic – the major shareholders have all the say. Also, co-operative enable its members to have more say, and that itself can motivate and empower the people.
This model can allow rural Malaysia an alternative form of economic clout and also benefit urban Malaysia by presenting a viable and more economical source of goods.
Creating business and job opportunities across Malaysia for all and sundry and not only to cronies
Open and transparent tender for government procurement would create a competitive environment amongst Malaysian entrepreneurs.
More radically, instead of focusing only on a fixed equity percentage target, the focus should be shifted to creating bigger economic pie and providing learning opportunities for the rakyat to gain the knowledge, skill and experience to be able to take up a variety of jobs.
Malaysia has had experience doing away with share ownership quota. During the economic crises of 1987, the Industrial Co-ordination Act was amended to exempt foreign companies from fulfilling bumiputra share ownership provided that 80% or more of the sales are export in nature.
In order to be an attractive investment destination, we have to realize that our competitors do not have such non-business case restriction unto foreign investors.
Our education system needs to be re-modelled to incorporate more vocational contend as well as shifted to emphasing moulding ability to think, reason and debate, rather than just a slug fest for number of As and scholarships. However, if our schools are led by the likes of Siti Inshah and the unwilling education minister.....I am not optimistic.
Creating a more dynamic work culture that makes Malaysians more employable
Creating a more dynamic work force admittedly it is hardest part. There is a fair number of hard-working Malaysians but how often do we wish that our employee/co-worker/subordinate could put in more effort that you are seeing now?
I believe, however, if an employee can see he or she will be getting more rewards for his or her efforts, then he and she would work harder. Crony-base economy is a killer of initiative and opportunities.
Money can be the best motivational tool, which brings to my next point.
Having a system in place where a working Malaysian can expect to have fair remuneration package in relation to his or her efforts
I observe that the Gini co-efficient for Malaysia is not something we can be proud of. The income gaps between the rich and privilege against the middle class, and the middle class against the blue collar are very big.
Wage scale is essentially a commercial decision best left to the entrepreneurs and professional managers. Really? I have blogged about living wage scheme before and I believe its wide spread benefit could and would benefit more than the present system which allow excessive reliance on lowly paid foreign workers. It is time we Malaysians think of Malaysians first.
Giving more to the have-less and they can spend more and a strong domestic market can't do much harm to businessmen and ambitious professionals.
In Singapore there is already a Tripate Alliance for Fair Employment Practices and Malaysia do need this, to compensate for the lack of a labour union culture.
I believe the ETP is just like the previous reckless expansionary economic policies which has exhausted national confers and cemented perpetual budget deficits. We have had enough of cheque book prime ministers
Malaysians need structural changes that gets to the core of the issues faced by the majority, not another round of gravy trains that churn through crony neighbourhood which drop some crumbs for the slightly luckier few to pounce on.
Najib says everyone should contribute to Transformation
Najib says on 19th Sept 2010:
"I want to see a Malaysia where everyone will have their rightful place under the sun."
"We have to ensure that systems are fair and every single Malaysian can recognise his or her own value."
"In the multi-religious cultural context, diversity also means we recognise the strength of each community."
"Inclusive means we have to make sure that our policies benefit all Malaysians, we have to ensure that the system is fair, we have to ensure that every single Malaysian can realise their potential talent to the maximum, and inclusive within the context of 1Malaysia also means that we can take it up even further at a strategic level,"
Whilst while I support the 1Malaysia idea, I do not see any of the above points materializing into action just as yet. 1Malaysia is becoming a farce slogan like Mahathir's "Malaysia Boleh". In fact the country is under more racist onslaught than ever in the blogs and the mainstream media. Dailies such as Utusan Malaysia and blogsites under ParpuKari, Mahaguru, Ridzuan Tee should be made illegal- if Najib means what he says, this is the first easiest task to carry out.
This financial year, my achievement is successfully keeping a few dozen jobs in Malaysia which could have otherwise went to India or China. Also, we have managed to make a few million ringgit for our country. But what do I get in return from my country?
"I want to see a Malaysia where everyone will have their rightful place under the sun."
"We have to ensure that systems are fair and every single Malaysian can recognise his or her own value."
"In the multi-religious cultural context, diversity also means we recognise the strength of each community."
"Inclusive means we have to make sure that our policies benefit all Malaysians, we have to ensure that the system is fair, we have to ensure that every single Malaysian can realise their potential talent to the maximum, and inclusive within the context of 1Malaysia also means that we can take it up even further at a strategic level,"
Whilst while I support the 1Malaysia idea, I do not see any of the above points materializing into action just as yet. 1Malaysia is becoming a farce slogan like Mahathir's "Malaysia Boleh". In fact the country is under more racist onslaught than ever in the blogs and the mainstream media. Dailies such as Utusan Malaysia and blogsites under ParpuKari, Mahaguru, Ridzuan Tee should be made illegal- if Najib means what he says, this is the first easiest task to carry out.
This financial year, my achievement is successfully keeping a few dozen jobs in Malaysia which could have otherwise went to India or China. Also, we have managed to make a few million ringgit for our country. But what do I get in return from my country?
True and Fair View of Utusan Malaysia's financial position
Utusan Melayu (Malaysia) Berhad is a listed company on the Bursa Saham Malaysia hence its annual accounts and reports are open for public viewing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The “other expenses” in consolidated income statement decreased from RM53,732,825 in 2008 to RM44,253,718 in 2009. However, if you look at the individual holding company level, the “ other expense" actually ballooned up to RM74,563,651 in 2009, up from RM48,854,351 in 2008.
.jpg)
While the Group recorded a profit of RM7.8 million, the Utusan holding company showed a pre-tax loss of RM18,401,459 for 2009, a reverse of RM30 million compared to pre-tax profit of RM12,012,817 for 2008.
Normally the total expenses of the group should exceed the total expenses of the holding company alone. This anomaly can be explained by looking at note 40 of the accounts which explained that the allowance for doubtful debts relating to subsidiaries amounting to RM27,713,788 was eliminated on consolidation of accounts.
Ah…ignore the problem and then there is no problem. :-)
On a happier note, at group level, employee benefits expense decreased to RM103,136,942 in 2009 from RM111,529,012 in 2008.
According to note 6, the directors' remuneration fell within the following bands below:
Executive directors:
RM250,001 – RM300,000 (2009: 1 director; 2008: nil)
RM650,001 – RM700,000 (2009: 2 directors; 2008: nil)
RM700,001 – RM750,000 (2009: nil; 2008: 2 directors)
RM750,001 – RM800,000 (2009: nil; 2008: 1 director)
Non-executive directors:
Below RM50,000 (2009: 7 directors; 2008: 6 directors)
The directors have taken a hit in their pockets. I wonder if there is anything to do with the quality of the paper's content.
Utusan Group has a very impressive list of properties under their name which occupied 3 pages of its annual accounts and report from page 126 to page 128.
As at 1 January 2009, the group held land and buildings at cost amounting to RM121,746,329, which have appreciated marginally around 10% by RM12,287,700. We all know land and building appreciate fast and given Utusan’s long history, surely this valuation is dubious?
Note 12 of the accounts has this to explain:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) The land and buildings and plant and machinery stated at valuation were revalued on 22 July 1986 by the directors based on professional valuation carried out by an Independent firm of valuers on the fair market value basis for land and buildings and on replacement cost basis for plant and machinery.
Due to the absence of historical records some years ago, the net book value of the land and buildings that is required to be included in the financial statements of the Group and of the Company as at 31 December 2009 at historical cost less accumulated depreciation, is not disclosed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think something happened in 1987....some assets identification and registration exercise after some in-house dispute somewhere....my memory is failing.....
Anyway, in all public companies, there is this standard obligatory paragraph:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STATEMENT OF DIRECTORS’ RESPONSIBILITY
IN RELATION TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
This statement is prepared as required by the Listing Requirements of the Bursa Malaysia Securities Berhad.
The directors are responsible for ensuring that the Company maintains accounting records that disclose with reasonable accuracy the financial position of the Group and the Company, and which enable them to ensure that the financial statements comply with the Companies Act, 1965.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Breaking the law are we?
One thing puzzles me in Note 9 of the accounts:
The advances to employees relate to advances given to employees of the Group to purchase motorcycles and computers under the Staff Motorcycle Loan Scheme and Staff Computer Loan Scheme (‘Loan Schemes’). The Loan Schemes bear interest at rates ranging from 5.0% to 7.0% (2008: 5.0% to 7.0%) per annum and are recovered through salary deductions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not a religion expert so I can’t comment much but I know that companies can offer interest free-loans since staff remuneration packages and it is entirely at the management’s discretion.
And only motor cycles? Utusan should support project Proton, Che Det's favourite pet. I just wonder if the motor cycle loan scheme runs a bit too close to hire purchase scheme, which we have a Hire Purchase Act to comply with.
After another attention grabbing writing about about murderers and their political affiliation, substantiated or not, Utusan is faced with another law suit threat. The directors are probably numb to all these or know something we don't.
See this notes to accounts from the directors: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES
Given the nature of the Group and the Company, there are several libel suits which involve claims against the Company of which the outcome and compensation, if any, is currently indeterminable and the directors, based on legal advice, are of the opinion that the probability of the liabilities crystallising is remote. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the balance of cash and cash equivalent of the Group as at 31 December 2009 of RM56.7 million, if the directors are confident and feeling secured, do we need this?
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=11214944403&topic=5397
Kempen selamatkan Utusan
Ir Mohd Petikan dari UtusanRM32,000 diterima serta-merta
KUALA LUMPUR 12 Okt. – UMNO Bahagian Cheras hari ini melancarkan Tabung Azan untuk bersama-sama akhbar Utusan Malaysia memperjuangkan kebebasan melaungkan azan di masjid dan surau di negara ini.
Ketua UMNO Bahagian Cheras, Datuk Syed Ali Alhabshee berkata, kutipan tabung itu akan digunakan untuk membantu mana-mana masjid dan surau membeli peralatan pembesar suara selain keperluan lain yang berkaitan.
Tambahnya, hasil tabung itu juga akan digunakan untuk membantu program melahirkan muazin muda yang dilihat boleh menjadi pelapis kepada golongan berumur di masjid dan surau.‘
‘Kita wujudkan tabung untuk turut membantu Utusan Malaysia yang disaman Ahli Parlimen Seputeh, Teresa Kok RM30 juta baru-baru ini.
I need not mention that Utusan Malaysia is UMNO’s mouth piece as confirmed by the top 30 shareholders listing as per its annual reports and accounts for the financial year ended 31 December 2009.
The top shareholders include:-
1. RHB Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn Bhd
(Pertubuhan Kebangsaan Melayu Bersatu or UMNO (United Malays National Organisation) 55,113,956 shares (49.78%) - exceeding the bare NEP minimum target of 30%
2. Nilam Setar (M) Sdn Bhd 16,343,000 shares (14.76% )
……..
5. TA Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn Bhd (Pledged Securities Account for Chua Eng Ho Waa @ Chua Eng Wah) 879,900 shares (0.79%)
…….
8. Meng Hin Holdings Sdn Bhd 345,600 shares (0.31%)
9. The Teaw Kee 340,900 shares (0.31%)
10. Cheah Yee Lin 314,500 shares (0.28%)
11. Tan Jin Tuan 291,200 shares (0.26%)
I can see that even some people from Utusan's usual punching bag did not mind investing in Utusan Malaysia. Good business is good business. Perhaps the public should not take what Utusan says too seriously?
After all, we also pay good money to watch powerful movies knowing that the plot delivered are far from reality of life.
According to the Chairman Tan Sri Mohamed Hashim Ahmad Makaruddin's statement:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
Group
For the financial year under review, the Group recorded total
revenue of RM348.6 million, lower by 6.7% against the previous
year’s revenue of RM373.8 million. The lower revenue is mainly
due to the decline in contribution from advertising. Despite
this, a more effective cost management saw only a slight drop
in pre-tax profit from RM7.8 million in 2008 to RM7.3 million
for the financial year under review.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The “other expenses” in consolidated income statement decreased from RM53,732,825 in 2008 to RM44,253,718 in 2009. However, if you look at the individual holding company level, the “ other expense" actually ballooned up to RM74,563,651 in 2009, up from RM48,854,351 in 2008.
While the Group recorded a profit of RM7.8 million, the Utusan holding company showed a pre-tax loss of RM18,401,459 for 2009, a reverse of RM30 million compared to pre-tax profit of RM12,012,817 for 2008.
Normally the total expenses of the group should exceed the total expenses of the holding company alone. This anomaly can be explained by looking at note 40 of the accounts which explained that the allowance for doubtful debts relating to subsidiaries amounting to RM27,713,788 was eliminated on consolidation of accounts.
Ah…ignore the problem and then there is no problem. :-)
On a happier note, at group level, employee benefits expense decreased to RM103,136,942 in 2009 from RM111,529,012 in 2008.
According to note 6, the directors' remuneration fell within the following bands below:
Executive directors:
RM250,001 – RM300,000 (2009: 1 director; 2008: nil)
RM650,001 – RM700,000 (2009: 2 directors; 2008: nil)
RM700,001 – RM750,000 (2009: nil; 2008: 2 directors)
RM750,001 – RM800,000 (2009: nil; 2008: 1 director)
Non-executive directors:
Below RM50,000 (2009: 7 directors; 2008: 6 directors)
The directors have taken a hit in their pockets. I wonder if there is anything to do with the quality of the paper's content.
Utusan Group has a very impressive list of properties under their name which occupied 3 pages of its annual accounts and report from page 126 to page 128.
As at 1 January 2009, the group held land and buildings at cost amounting to RM121,746,329, which have appreciated marginally around 10% by RM12,287,700. We all know land and building appreciate fast and given Utusan’s long history, surely this valuation is dubious?
Note 12 of the accounts has this to explain:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) The land and buildings and plant and machinery stated at valuation were revalued on 22 July 1986 by the directors based on professional valuation carried out by an Independent firm of valuers on the fair market value basis for land and buildings and on replacement cost basis for plant and machinery.
Due to the absence of historical records some years ago, the net book value of the land and buildings that is required to be included in the financial statements of the Group and of the Company as at 31 December 2009 at historical cost less accumulated depreciation, is not disclosed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think something happened in 1987....some assets identification and registration exercise after some in-house dispute somewhere....my memory is failing.....
Anyway, in all public companies, there is this standard obligatory paragraph:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STATEMENT OF DIRECTORS’ RESPONSIBILITY
IN RELATION TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
This statement is prepared as required by the Listing Requirements of the Bursa Malaysia Securities Berhad.
The directors are responsible for ensuring that the Company maintains accounting records that disclose with reasonable accuracy the financial position of the Group and the Company, and which enable them to ensure that the financial statements comply with the Companies Act, 1965.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Breaking the law are we?
One thing puzzles me in Note 9 of the accounts:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Income not subject to tax:
2009 RM10,821,314; 2008 RM12,233,552
2009 RM10,169,025; 2008 RM16,248,997
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The notes 4 & 8 explaining details of income and expense did not divulge anything on the above.
According to Income Tax Act, 1967, expenses not incurred wholly and exclusively to generate business income are not allowed to be offset against revenue to derive at taxable income, i.e. if the Inland Revenue Board thinks the money you spend got nothing to do with your business, IRB would kick it out of your income and expense income when they compute your tax liability.
As far as I know, expenses not deductible for tax and not a schedule 9 disclosure item per the Companies Act, 1965 includes donations and entertainment expenses.
There is no apparent income from disposal of property which is not subject to income tax...so I have no idea how Utusan can have tax free income of RM24 million over 2 years.
Utusan Malaysia has been consistent in upholding, how they perceived, as Malay rights and the integrity of Islam. I believe they have been steadfast, vocal and proactive in these respects.
According to note 20 to the accounts:
The advances to employees relate to advances given to employees of the Group to purchase motorcycles and computers under the Staff Motorcycle Loan Scheme and Staff Computer Loan Scheme (‘Loan Schemes’). The Loan Schemes bear interest at rates ranging from 5.0% to 7.0% (2008: 5.0% to 7.0%) per annum and are recovered through salary deductions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not a religion expert so I can’t comment much but I know that companies can offer interest free-loans since staff remuneration packages and it is entirely at the management’s discretion.
And only motor cycles? Utusan should support project Proton, Che Det's favourite pet. I just wonder if the motor cycle loan scheme runs a bit too close to hire purchase scheme, which we have a Hire Purchase Act to comply with.
After another attention grabbing writing about about murderers and their political affiliation, substantiated or not, Utusan is faced with another law suit threat. The directors are probably numb to all these or know something we don't.
See this notes to accounts from the directors: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES
Given the nature of the Group and the Company, there are several libel suits which involve claims against the Company of which the outcome and compensation, if any, is currently indeterminable and the directors, based on legal advice, are of the opinion that the probability of the liabilities crystallising is remote. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the balance of cash and cash equivalent of the Group as at 31 December 2009 of RM56.7 million, if the directors are confident and feeling secured, do we need this?
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=11214944403&topic=5397
Kempen selamatkan Utusan
Ir Mohd Petikan dari UtusanRM32,000 diterima serta-merta
KUALA LUMPUR 12 Okt. – UMNO Bahagian Cheras hari ini melancarkan Tabung Azan untuk bersama-sama akhbar Utusan Malaysia memperjuangkan kebebasan melaungkan azan di masjid dan surau di negara ini.
Ketua UMNO Bahagian Cheras, Datuk Syed Ali Alhabshee berkata, kutipan tabung itu akan digunakan untuk membantu mana-mana masjid dan surau membeli peralatan pembesar suara selain keperluan lain yang berkaitan.
Tambahnya, hasil tabung itu juga akan digunakan untuk membantu program melahirkan muazin muda yang dilihat boleh menjadi pelapis kepada golongan berumur di masjid dan surau.‘
‘Kita wujudkan tabung untuk turut membantu Utusan Malaysia yang disaman Ahli Parlimen Seputeh, Teresa Kok RM30 juta baru-baru ini.
.jpg)
So where did the money go?
Lee Lam Thye's off-the-mark comments
"...brutality, revenge and outright cruelty were becoming a norm in many of our movies and dramas which feature brutal killings and grisly murders...."- Tan Sri Lee Lam Thye.
When I saw Lee Lam Thye's comments in the news yesterday- I really tried hard to recall which "violent" movie or movies could have provoked the suspects to do such a nasty act on Datuk Sosilawati and her friends.
This is more of art imitating life, and not vice versa right. The root cause of the killings is greed, and not movies?
However, I can think of few movies or TV shows which had lots of revenge plots and their characters brutally killed; some killed over and over again 'cos they wouldn't die:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)