Adakah kita harus sedih tentang Proton? Proton sudah lama tidak lagi dimiliki kerajaan Malaysia dan/atau syarikat milik kerajaan... Pada lebih kurang tahun 2012, Proton telah dijual kepada syarikat swasta... tapi yang perlu dikhuatiri adalah pinjaman kerajaan kepada Proton - Adakah itu wang rakyat yang akan 'hilang' - tak guna akhirnya dapat saham Proton, yang tak ada nilai atau aset bernilai? Baca kerisauan Tony Pua dibawah...
Proton was formerly owned by Khazanah Nasional, the investment holding
arm of the government of Malaysia. In January 2012, it was taken over by
DRB-HICOM, a Malaysian conglomerate in a transaction amounting RM1.2
billion. Adakah DRB-HICOM syarikat milik kerajaan Malaysia - saya lihat ini bukan lagi, kini orang yang mempunyai 'control' seorang individu yang mungkin rakyat Malaysia...eartinya sebuat syarikat swasta bukan lagi syarikat dimiliki kerajaan Malaysia...Dia mungkin 'kroni' tetapi berdasarkan undang-undang, dia tak perlu dengar kata Perdana Menteri atau kerajaan...
In 2012, Malaysia's state investment firm sold its 43 percent stake in Proton...The sale, to Malaysian conglomerate DRB-Hicom Bhd. for 1.29 billion ringgit ($412 million)
PROTON - sudah lama kerajaan Malaysia tidak lagi memiliki lebih daripada 50% saham, yang diperlukan untuk memberikan kerajaan kuasa penuh mengawal perjalanan syarikat. Ya, DRB-HICOM, di percayai sudah lama dilepaskan kerajaan Malaysia. Walaupun seorang ahli perniagaan Melayu menjadi orang yang berkuasa kerana beliau secara terus atau tidak langsung memiliki lebih 50% saham - dia berkuasa penuh menentukan arah-tuju dan perjalanan syarikat...
Jika sesuatu syarikat (atau pemegang saham dalam syarikat) mahu jual sahamnya atau bahagian syarikat kepada Donald Trump pun, itu hak beliau...kerajaan tidak boleh menghalang perjualannya...
PROTON SUDAH LAMA TIDAK DIMILIKI KERAJAAN MALAYSIA
SENTIMEN LAMPAU bila Proton dimiliki kerajaan Malaysia - jadi kenapa pula ramai di Malaysia kini sedih bila ia dijual kepada syarikat luar negara...
KENAPA TAK BOLEH AMBIL PINJAMAN BANK SAJA - KENAPA KERAJAAN MALAYSIA BERIKAN 'PINJAMAN' KEPADA PROTON?
Justeru, saya rasa pelik mengapa kerajaan Malaysia telah memberikan pinjaman sebanyak RM2.1 billion(atau 1.5 billion?) kepada Proton...Kalau kerajaan Malaysia ada pemilikan lebih 50% atau 75%, ada lojiknya tetapi kini ianya hanya syarikat biasa...dan kerajaan(atau badan kerajaan) mungkin ada beberapa peratus saham sahaja. Jika syarikat biasa, pergi sahaja dapatkan pinjaman bank...Yang menakutkan adalah sama ada, syarikat pergi bank minta pinjaman tetapi bank takut beri pinjaman kerana tak yakin syarikat itu stabil dan boleh bayar balik hutang ...Bank tak mahu ambil risiko...dan kerajaan Malaysia pula 'bodoh' memberikan pinjaman[Najib dan UMNO-BN lupa bahawa itu duit kami rakyat Malaysia - justeru PM dan kerajaan mungkin tak prihatin sama ada ia langkah bijak atau sama ada wang pinjaman itu boleh diperolehi kembali...]
Kerajaan Malaysia mesti mendedahkan berapa sebenarnya peratus saham yang dimiliki dalam syarikat-syarikat yang ramai memikirkan masih syarikat milik kerajaan Malaysia melalui Khazanah, MOF, dsb... Kalau layari internet, maklumat ini sukar dicari...kalau pergi laman web syarikat berkenaan pun, tak nampak butiran ringkas pemegang saham pun...[Maklumat pemegang saham utama khususnya apa yang dikatakan GLCs mesti didedahkan secara terbuka...]
PROTON - MEMBELENGUKAN RAKYAT
Harga semua kendaraan lain tinggi kerana Malaysia mahu bantu 'kereta nasional'. Jika syarikat mengeluarkan 'kereta nasional' ini milik kerajaan, atau kerajaan memiliki lebih 50%, ada lojiknya mengapa 'kereta nasional' semua masih diberikan kelebihan - cukai tinggi dikenakan kenderaan lain di Malaysia (walaupun kini mungkin dikurangkan sikit).
In addition to import duties, Malaysia also imposes an excise tax of between 65 percent and 105 percent—among the highest in the world— as well as a 10 percent sales tax on foreign automobiles sold in Malaysia. These duties and taxes have made foreign cars very expensive for consumers in Malaysia. Some foreign cars to cost almost three times more than the original price.- http://factsanddetails.com/southeast-asia/Malaysia/sub5_4e/entry-3698.html
In 2013 Malaysia began taking steps to gradually scrap an import tax on cars shipped from Japan and Australia. Jason Ng wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “Analysts say, however, that the move toward opening up the automotive sector isn’t enough to bring down barriers that stifle the industry. The government recently began dismantling some of the duties levied on imports under a free-trade agreement signed with the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN. Malaysia slaps cars imported from Japan and Australia with a duty of 15 percent and 13.6 percent, respectively. Under measures announced this week, the Southeast Asian country will reduce import duties and eliminate the tax by 2016 for cars from the two countries. [Source: Jason Ng, Wall Street Journal, March 4, 2013]
Ada yang mengatakan bahawa untuk menambahkan jualan kereta-kereta nasional, kerajaan UMNO-BN juga tidak memberikan tekanan tinggi untuk menambahbaik perkhidmatan awam - bas, teksi, keretapi,...di mana akibat ini kebanyakkan rakyat Malaysia TERPAKSA membeli kenderaan sendiri....(di mana saya percaya, jika ada perkhidmatan awam berkesan dan murah, ramai tidak akan membuang wang membeli kenderaan sendiri. Di bandar-bandar kecil, teksi bermeter pun tidak ada (tak boleh juga orang panggil teksi kerana tak ada 'radio teksi', perkhidmatan bas bandar pun berkurangan (di mana sepatutnya ditambah, dan terpaksa melalui semua taman/kawasan perumahan - tak lojik minta orang berjalan kaki berkilometer untuk sampai 'bus stop', Bus stop pun kini tak ada 'jadual bas' dan ramai tunggu...dan tunggu...akhirnya terpaksa ambil teksi...atau 'kereta sapu').
Apa yang saya takut mengenai kerajaan UMNO-BN adalah kemungkinan besar aset rakyat Malaysia semua dilupuskan kepada 'individu' atau 'syarikat swasta' - Najib mungkin bukan PM selepas 15 tahun - dan rakyat akan tanggung 'kesilapan?' UMNO-BN?
Mengapa bank swasta tak mahu beri pinjaman - mungkin mereka berpendapat ianya ada risiko tinggi...Kenapa pula kerajaan UMNO-BN beri pinjaman sampai berbillion bila kerajaan tak lagi memiliki atau menguasai syarikat Proton...dan mungkin juga DRB-HICOM lagi? Ada lojik atau tidak?
Saturday, 27 May 2017
The driving force behind Proton
Win-win
deal: With Geely intending to hit sales of three million cars and
500,000 Proton vehicles in South-East Asia by 2020, there is every
likelihood that more models apart from the maiden SUV will be made
available for rebadging by Proton.
Geely plans to make the car maker the No.1 brand in Malaysia and leading marque in South-East Asia
ABOUT 10 years ago, the decision on whether
to sell a controlling stake in Proton’s manufacturing business to
Volkswagen AG (VW) was nixed at the last minute. The decision confounded
many who expected the decision of pairing Proton with VW to be a
formality but a final political manoeuvre killed the deal, and that
directly sealed Proton’s fate.
Khazanah Nasional Bhd has since proceeded to sell its stake in Proton to DRB-Hicom Bhd
and the tribulations of an unforgiving market on Proton’s market share
began to erode the financial health of the national auto maker.
On Wednesday Proton took a vital step in resuscitating the company.
Big push: Li says Geely intends to make available its R&D centres worldwide to Proton.
This time, however, it was not doing so in a
position of strength. When the merger with VW was called off, Proton
believed it could make a success of itself without the help of another
party. Since then, Proton’s fortunes have been sliding. Its market share
plunged. It has many models in the market but can’t breach sales of
80,000 a year and worse yet, its net assets of the end of March this
year was a razor-thin RM29.5mil.
Another quarter of horrendous financial
loss, which Proton has been experiencing for some time, would have
plunged the automaker into insolvency. Getting money then from banks
would be near impossible and creditors could have pulled credit lines if
that had happened.
In picking Zhejiang Geely Automotive Co Ltd
(Geely) as its foreign partner, Proton made the best of a terrible
situation. There were many options between the shortlisted candidates
that had put in bids for Proton through an international tender.
It was Geely that ticked all the boxes and
then some. Its willingness to get Proton back on track as fast as
possible swayed the decision in favour of the China company.
Geely’s proposition
Analysts briefed by DRB-Hicom’s management
after the head of agreement between Geely and Proton was signed have
estimated that Geely would pump RM170.3mil and grant the licensing
rights for Proton to produce Geely’s Boyue SUV at a minimum cost of
RM600mil as the basis for it paying for a 49.9% stake in Proton. That
would mean that Proton was valued at RM1.54bil.
Geely was not interested in the vast tracts
of land Proton holds in Shah Alam and Tanjung Malim and had valued the
Tanjung Malim plant at a discounted cash flow basis. It’s objective is
clear: it wants to sell cars and use Malaysia as the launch pad to
South-East Asia.
Technology-driven: Visitors looking at Lotus
cars in a showroom in Kiev, Ukraine. Proton-owned Lotus may also
generate synergies. – Reuters
Maybank Investment Bank in a note says the
partnership can provide Geely with tax-free access to Asean by producing
in the region.
“This is in keeping with its international
expansion plans. Accessing the lightweight chassis technology held by
Proton-owned Lotus may also generate synergies.
“In the longer term, we believe it can
facilitate Geely’s and its new car brand Lynk & Co’s overseas
expansion. Geely’s parent will likely hold the asset and provide its
plants for Geely’s international expansion.”
Geely’s proposition to DRB-Hicom as a
partner is multi-fold. Its track record as an investor gives Proton
assurances that growth and investment are the two pillars of what it
will provide in line with the revamp undertaken in Volvo and Londan Taxi
Cab (LTC).
Geely, apart from taking control of Volvo
and LTC, has invested large sums of money to revitalise and modernise
production of the two cars. The results have since paid off and in the
case of Volvo, sales grew by 6% to 534,332 vehicles in 2016, the highest
in the company’s history. Profit wise, Volvo’s return to profitability
too has been remarkable. It made a profit of RM5.4bil in the last
financial year.
What will encourage the regulators in
Malaysia is that employment at Volvo too has grown from the time Geely
took over the Swedish manufacturer in 2010 for US$1.3bil.
In the presentation, Geely executive
vice-president and chief financial officer Daniel Li says it intends to
keep Proton as an automotive brand with research and development
(R&D) capability, with design and production in Malaysia.
The China auto company will also make
available to Proton global resources, knowledge and management skills.
Both companies have agreed that Geely’s expertise would be utilised in
the maufacturing side and the company would bring to Malaysia top talent
within its group to handle that operations.
Li also says Geely intends to revitalise
Proton, make available its R&D centres from around the world, and
thrust the car maker to become the No.1 Malaysian brand and leading
marque in South-East Asia.
Boosting sales: Syed Faisal says Proton will need to spend heavily on advertising and promotion.
With Geely intending to hit sales of three
million cars and 500,000 Proton vehicles in South-East Asia by 2020,
there is every likelihood that more models apart from the maiden SUV
will be made available for rebadging by Proton.
“In our view, Proton will likely adapt
Geely’s cars and rebadge them under its own brand for launch in
Malaysia. This could provide upside to Geely’s two million car-sales
target by 2020. Other potential benefits for Geely include Lotus’
lightweight technology which may help to improve its overall fuel
efficiency amid tightening requirements in China,” says Maybank. Geely
will take a controlling stake in Lotus after the British car maker and
engineering company was sold by Proton.
In terms of execution risks of the deal,
Maybank Investment Bank notes that Proton is loss-making. “We see the
execution of its new business plan as its key risk as Geely’s parent is
only acquiring 49% of Proton, short of a controlling stake. In addition,
manufacturing in Malaysia may not be as cost-competitive as in other
regional countries.”
“Still, the deal is being executed at the
parent level and we see Geely potentially capturing upside without
financial commitments at this stage.”
Proton’s challenge
With Geely taking a stake in Proton, the
challenge for the national car maker is to ensure that it sells more
cars. With Geely to be rebadged as Proton cars for the Malaysian and
possibly the Asean markets, the task ahead is to make sure it sells
those cars.
Perception issues have bogged down Proton’s
ability to sell cars and despite the company introducing new models,
sales have headed south. The next challenge for Proton is to ensure that
the rebadged China cars it will sell receive the market acceptance it
hopes.
Proton, in the deal with Geely, will take
responsibility for distribution. Distributing margins tend to be higher
than manufacturing margins as seen in the days when Edaran Otomobil
Nasional Bhd was selling the cars Proton manufactured.
The problem that awaits Proton is public
acceptance of China-made cars. Last year, the best-selling China
passenger car marque was Cherry, which sold 441 cars. Those numbers
won’t cut it for Proton and Geely who have much higher aspirations for
the Malaysian and Asean markets.
DRB-Hicom group managing director Datuk Seri
Syed Faisal Albar admits that is an issue Proton needs to tackle head
on. He says Proton will need to spend heavily on advertising and
promotion to win over Malaysian consumers so its sales can improve.
The
burden will be heaped on Proton Edar. With Proton still keen on pursuing
its own vehicle development programme, analysts think Geely’s entry
will only help in that respect.
“The partnership offers Geely an expedited
route into growing Asean markets and access to weight-saving technology
and engineering at Lotus. Meanwhile, Geely brings a strong suite of
production expertise, best practices, ready-made models to leverage off
in the short-term, including an effective distribution and after-sales
business model,” says RHB Research Institute in a note.
What DRB-Hicom, which will still retain
control of Proton, will gain from the entry of Geely is the ability to
develop land at around the Tanjung Malim plant and the Shah Alam
facility.
“The main property assets include the land
on which the Proton factory is located in Shah Alam and the Proton City
in Tanjung Malim (4,200 acres). The business plan includes the
relocation of the Shah Alam plant and facilities to Tanjung Malim within
six years coinciding with the expiry for existing models produced
there,” says RHB Research. Institute.
Read more at http://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2017/05/27/the-driving-force-behind-proton/#2Xs1mu9wuXtcCzg1.99
Pua wants Proton shareholders to guarantee RM1.5b soft loan
Published Updated
DAP
lawmaker Tony Pua is of the opinion that the RM1.5 billion soft loan to
Proton must be recalled unless the company's shareholders can jointly
and severally guarantee the loan.
Pua said this was the only way to ensure that the government is "protected" and that Malaysians can be assured that Proton would not end up in their unwitting hands again.
"The only way [...] is to elicit a joint and several guarantee from both shareholders of Proton - DRB-Hicom and Geely (Automobile Holding Ltd). This will be nothing less than what any commercial bank would demand from Proton.
"We hope that the Ministry of Finance can provide an official undertaking to concerned Malaysians that such a shareholders guarantee for the RM1.5 billion soft loan, or whatever outstanding amounts, will be secured before Geely’s 49.9 percent acquisition of Proton can be officially completed," said Pua in a statement today.
Finance Minister II Johari Abdul Ghani yesterday had given assurance that the RM1.5 billion loan to Proton "will be fully secured".
Johari had said that the deal with Geely requires the redeemable convertible cumulative preference shares (RCCPS) of RM300 million to be redeemed immediately after completion and that the balance of RM1.2 billion will be secured with various assets.
He also said that the government was treating the deal as a "strictly private" one and that whatever was promised before Geely came in would be fulfilled.
Pua however pointed to the "confusion and contradiction" of Johari's remarks.
"First the second finance minister says that the terms of the RCCPS is no longer valid post-Geely acquisition.
Then he says that whatever the government has promised and committed before Geely came in, it will fulfill them.
"So which is which? If the deal is now 'strictly private', then why does the government need to continue with the soft loan to Proton which has a tenure of up to 15 years?"
Pua also questioned the need to set a new repayment timetable for this.
"On the contrary, the government is proceeding to disburse the final instalment of RM250 million from the RCCPS to Proton.
Pua said this was the only way to ensure that the government is "protected" and that Malaysians can be assured that Proton would not end up in their unwitting hands again.
"The only way [...] is to elicit a joint and several guarantee from both shareholders of Proton - DRB-Hicom and Geely (Automobile Holding Ltd). This will be nothing less than what any commercial bank would demand from Proton.
"We hope that the Ministry of Finance can provide an official undertaking to concerned Malaysians that such a shareholders guarantee for the RM1.5 billion soft loan, or whatever outstanding amounts, will be secured before Geely’s 49.9 percent acquisition of Proton can be officially completed," said Pua in a statement today.
Finance Minister II Johari Abdul Ghani yesterday had given assurance that the RM1.5 billion loan to Proton "will be fully secured".
Johari had said that the deal with Geely requires the redeemable convertible cumulative preference shares (RCCPS) of RM300 million to be redeemed immediately after completion and that the balance of RM1.2 billion will be secured with various assets.
He also said that the government was treating the deal as a "strictly private" one and that whatever was promised before Geely came in would be fulfilled.
Pua however pointed to the "confusion and contradiction" of Johari's remarks.
"First the second finance minister says that the terms of the RCCPS is no longer valid post-Geely acquisition.
Then he says that whatever the government has promised and committed before Geely came in, it will fulfill them.
"So which is which? If the deal is now 'strictly private', then why does the government need to continue with the soft loan to Proton which has a tenure of up to 15 years?"
Pua also questioned the need to set a new repayment timetable for this.
"On the contrary, the government is proceeding to disburse the final instalment of RM250 million from the RCCPS to Proton.
"Even if we were to agree to continue to lend Proton the sum of RM1.5
billion, which we should not, what is this new 'security' for the loan
Johari is talking about?"
Pointing out how Geely was acquiring 49.9 percent of Proton for only RM170 million, Pua wonders what were the assets left in Proton that were worth RM1.5 billion which could secure the borrowings from the government.
"Hence even if the RCCPS 'conversion to shares' terms are modified, ultimately the failure of Proton to produce the necessary assets valued at RM1.5 billion to repay the loan would still mean the government taking possession of Proton once again," he added. - Malaysiakini, 1/6/2017
Pointing out how Geely was acquiring 49.9 percent of Proton for only RM170 million, Pua wonders what were the assets left in Proton that were worth RM1.5 billion which could secure the borrowings from the government.
"Hence even if the RCCPS 'conversion to shares' terms are modified, ultimately the failure of Proton to produce the necessary assets valued at RM1.5 billion to repay the loan would still mean the government taking possession of Proton once again," he added. - Malaysiakini, 1/6/2017
Is the Proton deal an asset-stripping exercise?
Despite the assets being stripped from Proton, the Government’s RM1.5 billion soft loan to Proton will remain outstanding.
COMMENT
By Tony Pua
The Second Finance Minister, Dato’ Seri Johari Abdul Ghani announced that the Ministry of Finance (MoF) agreed to pay RM1.1 billion in “research grant” and drawdown the final instalment of RM250 million of its RM1.5 billion soft loan to Proton.
However, as I wrote earlier, I found it inexplicable that Geely needed only to pay RM170 million for a 49.9% stake in Proton which is about to receive the above RM1.35 billion in cash from the MoF.
Worse, despite the high profile acquisition signing by the respective parties, Geely made no mention at all on its future plans for Proton, particularly if it plans to invest more funds into Proton to, in the words of Dato’ Seri Johari, “bring back the glory days”.
In fact, when you study the transaction in detail, Malaysians are concerned that the deal is essentially an asset-stripping exercise with Proton’s skeletal remains to be returned to the Malaysian government in time to come.
Under the deal, Proton will dispose of it’s entire stake in UK-based Lotus car manufacturer to a Geely-led joint venture company for GBP100 million or approximately RM556 million. It should be remembered that Proton had paid RM1.96 billion to acquire Lotus in 1996. From the above transaction details, it is obvious that Geely is more interested in Lotus in which it will become the majority shareholder, as opposed to Proton.
In addition, we have also discovered that as part of the disposal exercise, the valuable landbank previously held by Proton worth an estimated RM540 million in book value will also be fully-transferred to DRB-Hicom, who acquired Proton from Khazanah Nasional in 2012. Property analysts interviewed by the Edge Weekly suggested that the market value for these assets are significantly higher.
The problem is, despite the above assets being stripped from Proton, the Government’s RM1.5 billion soft loan to Proton will remain outstanding.
Under all sensible circumstances, with Geely’s acquisition of Lotus and the transfer of property assets to DRB-Hicom, the Government’s soft loan must be repaid in full. At the very least, the “new” joint-shareholders of Proton – DRB Hicom and Geely must provide full corporate guarantees for the loan in the event of default by Proton.
However, we have since discovered that in the event of default, the soft loan will be converted into 2.1 billion new shares in Proton, which constitutes at least 65% of the company!
In other words, if Geely and DRB-Hicom chooses not to continue investing and sustaining Proton, and as a result, the latter fails to repay the Government’s RM1.5 billion soft loan, then the bleeding company will once again be owned by the Government!
The clear winners in this outcome are Geely which got what it wanted out of the transaction – the Lotus car and brand; and DRB-Hicom which got all the valuable property assets. In the event that Proton fails to recover, then the loss-making baby will be inevitably returned to the unwitting arms of the Malaysian taxpayers.
If Proton for whatever reason becomes very profitable, the private companies will keep all the profit. However, if Proton, in the plausible scenario continues to make hundreds of millions of losses annually, the losses will ultimately be “socialised” by the Malaysian Government.
The Ministry of Finance must answer as to why the Government has provided two private companies – one local and one foreign, such a fantastic financial failsafe. It’s heads, Geely and DRB-Hicom wins; and tails, the rakyat loses.
Tony Pua is MP for Petaling Jaya Utara and DAP National Publicity Secretary.
With a firm belief in freedom of expression and without prejudice, FMT tries its best to share reliable content from third parties. Such articles are strictly the writer’s personal opinion. FMT does not necessarily endorse the views or opinions given by any third party content provider. - FMT, 29/5/2017
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment