Dutch Court Of Appeal seems to have acknowledged that the consumption of oil is driven by consumers demanding cheap fuel, that they are not force fed product by devilish oil companies

 by Ganesh Sahathevan

In  Shell, M&M and Milieudefensie et al. the Dutch Court Of Appeal held:

At 7.99 : It is therefore too easy to say that Shell has no influence on scope 3 emissions (ie demand for oil and gas products) even though Shell’s power in this regard may be somewhat limited.

At 7.106 :There may be a causal relationship between a production limitation and emission reduction...... but (Milieudefensie et al,the respondents)have failed to put forward sufficient grounds to (demonstrate) that in this case a causal relationship (also) exists between  a sales limitation and emission reduction.

At 7.108) Shell could reduce its fossil fuel sales while Shell Trading continues to offer its services to the market. A party that would sell fossil fuels in Shell’s place would not need to have the logistical and financial capabilities of Shell Trading. If necessary, this party could purchase these services from Shell Trading or other service providers.

7.110  It has not been established in the present proceedings that downsizing the resale activities of Shell Trading will lead to a reduction in CO2 emissions. 

Milieudefensie argued instead that Shell was guilty of impossing the use of fossil fuels by provding a cheaper product that "sustainable altrenatives" cannot compete with [see 7.59].

 The above taken together suggests that the Dutch Court Of Appeal  recognises tha the consumption of oil and gas is driven by demand from ordinary consumers, and not, as many in the climate change business insist, "imposed" on users by oil company executives

END 

SEE ALSO 

Friday, July 28, 2023

Shell may exit Singapore, Singapore Strait Times blames "challenges to the global petroleum industry" - Shell however has announced swing back to oil and gas, Shell's review of business in Singapore probably due to Singapore Government wanting to kill its refining ,petrochem industries to pursue renewables, save the planet

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Strait Times Ovais Subhani says:

Shell’s decision in June (2023) to assess the viability of its plants on Pulau Bukom and Jurong Island says more about the challenges to the global petroleum industry than the future of Asia’s fifth-largest refining hub.

The “strategic review” announced by the London-based energy giant has sparked talk that the company may sell its plants or decommission them if a suitable buyer cannot be found.

Shell however, in June this year, under the leadership of new CEO  Wael Sawan announced a shift back to oil, and away from renewables.  It would want to stay, not leave , Singapore.

It does therefore  appear that Shell is being forced to review its business in Singapore given the Singapore Government's apparent policy of killing its  refining ,petrochem industries to save the planet.

TO BE READ WITH 

Friday, February 23, 2018

Singapore wants to kill its refining ,petrochem industries to save the planet: New carbon tax will kill a pillar of the economy, Singapore seems set to repeat the Lim Chong Yah " high wages shock therapy" experiment of the 1980s

EDITED ON 16 JUNE  2023

Singapore's domestic exports of oil last year firmed by 52.4 percent in nominal terms.

by Ganesh Sahathevan

There is nothing that needs to be added to the Strait Times story below , but readers are reminded that Singapore's contribution to world carbon dioxide emissions are probably negative,given its size (or rather lack thereof) and the fact of the yearly "haze" from Indonesia and Malaysia.

As to the effect of climate change on Singapore, one would think that a country that boasts of its ability to reclaim land from the sea would understand that reclamation is not without its own inherent
problems,that are of more immediate danger.

Meanwhile, Singapore's PAP seems to have forgotten that it relies on the very industries it wants to punish. On the other hand, this is a tax,it goes to government, government gains, but why this desperate measure? 

Readers might recall that Singapore experimented with a similar policy of restructuring the economy by force in the 1980s,  with disastrous results. 

That was of course the high wages policy, which reared its head again in 2012, and was quickly decapitated by Lee Kuan Yew. AsiaTimes.com.sg reported in 2012:

PM Lee rejected Prof Lim Chong Yah's "shock therapy" idea, explaining that it was better to apply sustainable measures.
Mr Lee was responding for the first time to the recent proposal for "shock therapy" by the well-known economist and former chairman of the National Wages Council, Professor Lim Chong Yah, to raise wages of the lowest-income workers by 50 per cent over three years.

Mr Lee said: "I appreciate his good intentions, I share his concerns over this group of workers. But I do not agree with his drastic approach because the only realistic way to move is step by step, with wages and productivity going up in tandem...as fast as we can, as fast as it's possible."
Mr Lee disagreed with the proposal, pointing to the 1980s when Singapore pushed up wages sharply and had "room" to do so. He said: "But even then, we ran into problems."

Mr Lee explained that in the 1980s, Singapore's economy was growing rapidly at 8 to 10 per cent a year. It also helped that the country's only competition then came from the "three little dragons" - South Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan. China and India were not on the scene, he added.
And during that period, the labour market was tight as multinational companies such as Philips entered the labour market, creating thousands of jobs.

He said: "In 1985, when the winds changed, when the conditions turned difficult, we plunged into a very deep recession...We had to cut wages sharply...so that the economy could recover."


Left unsaid is the fact that the architect of the 1980s wage increase was the same Lim Chong Yah .

END

$5 per tonne carbon tax 'fair' for 

firms: Masagos

A carbon tax is a common tool used to control the amount of earth-warming greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere. PHOTO: ST FILE

PUBLISHED

 FEB 23, 2018, 5:00 AM SGT

FACEBOOKTWITTEREMAIL

Amount as a start will give big emitters time to 'adjust and get used to compliance regime'

Samantha Boh

 

Getting large carbon emitters to pay $5 for every tonne of greenhouse gases they generate is a "fair" way to start a compliance regime, Minister for the Environment and Water Resources Masagos Zulkifli said yesterday.

From next year till 2023, all facilities producing 25,000 tonnes or more of greenhouse gas emissions a year will be taxed $5 per tonne of emissions - significantly lower than the $10 to $20 per tonne envisioned last year.

However, the Government will review the tax rate in 2023, and eventually increase the carbon tax to between $10 and $15 per tonne by 2030.

Mr Masagos called the starting $5 per tonne a "fair amount", which gives the affected 30 to 40 companies - which contribute 80 per cent of Singapore's greenhouse gas emissions - time to "adjust and also get used to the compliance regime".

He said: "They will need time to change their processes and improve their emissions."

He added that the transition period will allow the affected companies - mainly from the petroleum refining, chemicals and semiconductor sectors - to be better placed to comply with the higher tax rates to be imposed by 2030.

Mr Masagos was speaking on the sidelines of a visit to Bukit View Secondary School, where he launched a new green classroom comprising various eco-friendly features, including a green wall - covered in plants - and motion-activated fans.

A carbon tax is a common tool used to control the amount of earth-warming greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere.

About 67 countries and jurisdictions, including China, the European Union and Japan, have implemented or announced plans to implement such a scheme. They aim to encourage companies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and improve energy efficiency.

Households here could see their total electricity and gas expenses increase by 1 per cent on average due to the carbon tax, which will be offset by additional Utilities-Save rebates.

Asked how companies can be made accountable, Mr Masagos said it is necessary to pass a carbon tax Act which will require companies to submit data on their greenhouse gas emissions, and which will impose stricter requirements on large emitters such as an audit report that confirms their data.

"By doing so we will have a better grasp of how much each of these industries and companies emit and, therefore, have an idea of how we can then nudge (them) to do better," he said.

The Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources said there are no plans to make individual company emissions data public.

A version of this article appeared in the print edition of The Straits Times on February 23, 2018, with the headline '$5 per tonne carbon tax 'fair' for firms: Masagos'. Print Edition | Subscribe

Daim's death likely to spark battle of the proxies and trustees for assets that may encompass gambling operations in Malaysia to land in Singapore

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Daim Zainuddin, one of Malaysia's most powerful men, is dead.

He has been reported and beleived to have ammased a massive, highly diverse, geographically dispersed portoflio of assets encompassing  gambling operations in Malaysia to land in Singapore.

He has always been known to operate via proxies (or trustees) and his death is likely to spaar a battle of the proxies and trustees to reatin control of assets they hold under his direction. 

Giventhe poltical nature of these holdings it is unlikely that these will ever get to court, but that does not mean that battle cannot be engaged extra-judicially. At the end of it,  some individuals in Malaysia and Singapore are likely to get extremely wealthy.

END 

SEE ALSO 

Tuesday, December 26, 2023

Curious that Anwar Ibrahim's investigation into Daim Zainuddin's businesses has excluded Vincent Tan Chee Yioun's B&B Enterprises, and the privatisation of Sports Toto, despite Lim Kit Siang describing that transaction  as theft or piratisation

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

 

 It is curious that in his pursuit of Daim Zainuddin , Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has remained silent on the matter of  Vincent Tan Chee Yioun's B&B Enterprises, and the privatisation of Sports Toto, despite Lim Kit Siang describing that transaction  as theft or piratisation.That privatisation took place when Damim Zainuddin was Finance Minister. Business Times Singapore told the story, which has never been challenged,.

Lim Kit Siang complained loudly, in Parliament, about the "piratisation" in 1987, but has been silent ever since: 

Sports Toto is the best example as to how privatization has degenerated into piratisation where a select few had been allowed to raid the government domain for their self-interest at public expense

Speech by Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General and MP for Tanjung, Lim Kit Siang, in Dewan Rakyat on Friday, March 13, 1987 on the 1986 Supplementary Estimates

Sports Toto is the best example as to how privatization has degenerated into piratisation where a select few had been allowed to raid the government domain for their self-interest at public expense

The Government has come to the House for approval for three sets of supplementary estimates, the second supplementary operating estimates for 1986, and supplementary estimates for 1985 as well as for 1986 – all totaling some $1,300 million.

At this time of great economic hardship for the country and people, the government must satisfy Parliament that it had exercised all possible economies, avoided all possible wastes, and extracted maximum efficiency of the government service, to justify committing the government in more expenditure.

If economic mismanagement if the nation continues to be the order of the day, with wasteful and extravagant expenditures on white-elephant projects, rampant corruption and conflict of interest situations in public service, inhibiting economic recovery because the inability of the government to fully restore the grave and prolonged crisis of confidence afflicting the government, then Parliament should tell the government that requests for also more appropriations of monies for supplementary estimates, the Government must also really and truly addresses itself to the root problems of the crisis of confidence in the country.

Parliament will be failing in its duty if it does not make it clear to the Government its displeasure at receiving more requests for supplementary appropriations of public funds for operating and development expenditures for 1985 and 1986 when various major issues raised during the debates on the 1985 and 1986 Budgets in Parliament had not been given the attention they deserved.

For instance, the government has repeatedly said that it is committed to privatization because this will reduce the government’s financial and administrative burden and the size of the public sector.

Two days ago, during question time, I asked the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamed, why there was no open tender for the privatisation of the Sports Toto. Dr. Mahathir said the idea of the privatization of the Sports Toto came from a private sector group and that “it would have been unfair if their unique proposal had been accepted by the Government and been awarded to someone else.”

I find this a most extraordinary definition of public interest. In fact, it appear that ‘public interest’ in Malaysia today is defined, not I terms of what is good for the people at large, but what is in the interest for a select group or chosen individuals.

The Sports Toto was privatised in June 1985, and it has been estimated that in 1985, the privatised Sports Toto made $8 million for six months of operation, as it donated $800,000 to the National Sports Council, representing 10 per cent of its profits.

Based on 1985 results, the privatised Sport Toto would make $16 million net profit for 1986. For 1987, Sport Toto’s profit is expected to exceed $30 million as it has been allowed to introduce three new types of gambling, including Chee Fah or 36 numbers which is drawn every day of the week.

Although the Ministry of Finance holds 30 per cent in the privatised Sports Toto, its controlling share of 60 per cent is held by B and B Enterprise Sdn. Bhd whose largest shareholder is Vincent Tan Chee Yioun more well-known in his ownership and control of Berjaya Corporation Bhd, while 10 per cent is held by Melewar Corporation.

What “unique idea” did Vincent Tan come up for the privatisation of Sports Toto that it would be unfair to have an open tender? I can think of Chee Fah, the 36 numbers, and other forms of gambling, which cannot be very unique. I stand to be corrected, but I understand that there had been umpteenth but unsuccessful applications for the operation of Chee Fah in the past years – so what is so unique about Sports Toto running Chee Fah?

If Sports Toto is to ve given a free hand to be able to introduce new forms of gambling, to make $30 million net profit a year, the entire earnings should go to the state coffers, and not to private pockets. Or at the very least, there should be regular bidding for the operation of Sports Toto, say very two or three years, the franchise to go to the highest bidder.

The Sports Toto case us very clear example of how privatisation has degenerated into piratisation where a select few had been allowed to raid the government domain for their self-interest at public expense, channeling the tens millions of dollars a year into private pockets which should go to government coffers.

I challenge the Minister of Finance to tell Parliament and the House the basis for the privatisation of Sports Toto to B & B Enterprise Sdn Bhd. – what ‘unique idea’ the Prime Minister referred to when he said it would be unfair to submit the privatization to open tender?

I have no doubt that if the government made it clear to the public that the government welcomes ideas about making money through gambling, the Treasury would liberally be flooded with proposals and ingenious ideas from the public.

Can the Finance Minister explain on what basis and what are the terms and conditions Sports Toto was privatised to B & B Enterprise Sdn. Bhd. A search in the Registry of Companies showed that B & B Enterprise Sdn Bhd. Owed a total of $82 million, involving five loans from Co-operative Central Bank amounting to $24 million!

Further breakdown of the government’s commitment to the principles of accountability and efficiency as illustrated in the unlawful Investment of $50 million of EPF funds in non-trustee stocks

Parliament must be very concerned at the requests for increased appropriations for supplementary expenditures for the past two years when there is at the same time an increasing breakdown of the government’s commitment to the principles of accountability and efficiency. The best case of illustration is the unlawful investment of $50 million of EPF funds on non-trustee stocks as highlighted by the Auditor-General, Datuk Ishak Tadin, in the 1985 EPF audited accounts.

Yesterday, the Deputy Finance Minister, Datuk Sabarrudin Cik, gave an evasive answer when I asked why the Government and in particular the Finance Ministry had taken no action on this matter although the Auditor-General’s comment on the 1985 EPF accounts were completed in September last year.

A government which could allow more than six months to pass without taking any action or decision on the unlawful investment of $50 million of EPF funds on non-trustee stocks, in violation of the EPF 1951 Act, is not government which could be trusted with the stewardship of public funds and workers’ monies.

In this connection, I call on the Finance Minister or his Deputy Minister to make a clear-cut stand as to whether the Government accepts the Auditor-General’s comments that it was unlawful for the EPF monies to be invested in non-trustee stocks, or whether the Government is contesting this position of the Auditor-General.

What is noteworthy is that the Deputy Chairman of the EPF Investment Panel, which is not answerable to the EPF Board, is none other than the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman, himself. How could the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Abu Talib, get the EPF Investment Panel to break the law by violating the EPF Act in investment of EPF funds?

Is Tan Sri Abu Talib the Attorney-General going to take action against Tan Sri Abu Talib the Deputy Chairman of the EPF Investment Panel for such illegality, and for reimbursements for whatever losses suffered by the five million EPF contributors arising from such unlawful investment in non-trustee stock?

Let me inform the House that if Tan Sri Abu Talib as Attorney-General is not prepared to protect the interest of the EPF contributors by filing proceedings against the Investment Panel of EPF, including himself, the DAP lawyers will consider the possibility of filing action against him and the EPF Investment Panel to ensure that the rights and interests of the unlawful actions of the EPF Investment Panel.

It is not only in the EPF affair that the people note the increasing breakdown of the governement’s commitment to the principles of accountability and efficiency, but in a whole range of issues, including the long-standing but unresolved scandals like the $2.5 billion BMF scandal, the UMBC shares transaction of the Finance Minister, Daim Zainuddin and his family; the $660 million losses incurred by the Maminco tin-buying operation in London; the $1.5 billion Co-operative Finance Scandal; the Co-operative Central Bank Scandal; the spectacle of Barison Nasional leaders, including Ministers and Deputy Ministers, suspected of conflict of interest situations or criminal breach of trust or grave pecuniary indebtedness and embarrassment – where the Finance Minister Daim Zainuddin had to fly to Singapore to plead with the creditor banks of the Deputy Agriculture Minister, Alex Lee, for clemency. These are not the stuff to restore confidence, but to spread further demoralisation and despair!

Posted onMarch 13, 1986Author

Monday, February 5, 2024

In pursuit of Daim Zainuddin and Mokzhani Mahathir, how will Prime Minister and Finance Minister Anwar Ibrahim avoid investigating UOB-Kay Hian and its parent company , Singapore's UOB Banking Group

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Malaysia’s anti-graft probe against Daim expands to Singapore’s defunct Malaysian stock-trading platform CLOBchannelnewsasia.com 

In his pursuit of Daim Zainuddin , Prime Minister and Finance Minister Anwar Ibrahim is reported to have decided to pursue Daim's CLOB transactions. 

CLOB trading included some of the biggest names in Singapore and the former Singapore King Of The Remisiers, the billionaire Peter Lim's Ketrel Capital group of companies might be a good place to start. The Ketrel Group involves Mokzhani Mahathir, who is also in Anwar's cross-hairs, and other big names  including Wee Ee Chao and his UOB-Kay Hian stockbroking group, which is ultimately owned by his family's UOB Banking Group.

According to a company search   extracted  on 11 March 1999 at the Registrar of Companies, Hong Kong, the Annual Return of Kestrel Capital (HK) Pte Ltd ("Kestrel") made up to 12 January 1995, showed the issued share capital to be 30,000,000 ordinary shares of HK$1.00 each.  Among its prominent  shareholders were the following:
Kestrel Capital Investments Ltd (British Vigin Islands)    9,000,000 
Kestrel Capital Partners (M) Sdn Bhd (Klang)               1,500,000
Berjaya Group (Cayman) Ltd (British West Indies)           1,500,000 
K.I.P. Inc (Republic of Liberia)                           6,000,000  Lim Cheok Peng (Malaysian)                                            Tony Tan Chong Keat (Singaporean)                          1,500,000

In its lineup of Directors were the following high profile
well-connected individuals: 

Mokhzani Mahathir -- also Director/Shareholder of Kestrel Capital
Partners (M) Sdn Bhd;

(Peter) Lim Eng Hock -- also Director/Shareholder of Kestrel Capital Partners (M) Sdn Bhd;

Lim Cheok Peng -- also Managing Director of Parkway Healthcare Ltd;;

Wee Ee Chao -- also Director/Major shareholder of K.I.P. Inc and Kay
    Hian Holdings Ltd

Kay Hian Holdings merged with UOB Securiites in October 2000.. Wee Ee Chao is  son of Wee Cho Yaw who passed away recently and whose family controls UOB Banking Group.

In light of the above it is difficult to see how the Prime Minister and Finance Minister Anwar Ibrahim is going to avoid investigating UOB-Kay Hian and Sinagpore's UOB Group while investigating Daim.

UOB-Kay Hian has a presentence in Malaysia.  UOB-Kay Hian is backed by Singapore's UOB Group.

END 

Zahid Hamidi's Bumiputera Land Corporation (Perbadanan Tanah Bumiputera) and Section 11, Petaling Jaya- An example of the type of properties Bumiputeras would be silly to let pass

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

P.Gunasegaram writing in Malaysiakini reported:

One proposal announced by no less than Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi went relatively unnoticed at the recently concluded Bumiputera Economic Congress (BEC), where a slew of proposals for helping well-off bumiputera was unveiled.

According to Zahid, who is also the rural and regional development minister, the government plans to set up a Bumiputera Land Corporation (Perbadanan Tanah Bumiputera) to preserve land ownership, as part of an effort to strengthen the community by boosting its land ownership.

According to a report quoting Zahid, if the lease size exceeds 50 acres (20.23ha) for agricultural land or 20 acres for industrial use, the proposal calls for 20 percent of the land to be handed back to the government upon lease renewal or extension.

The proposal is indeed insidious and the numbers involved, mind numbing. Taking but one small example, properties in Section 11, Petaling Jaya iare  understood to be leasehold with tenure of 60 to 90 years. The leases are understood to have been granted in the 1960s, so may be near or have already expired.

This is residential land, but redesignation to industrial, commercial   or agricultural land can in Malaysia be a matter of mere formality. In fact, it is understood that some or all residential properties in Section 14, which is just 5 minutes drive away, have already been re-designated as commercial or industrial.

The proposed  Bumiputera Land Corporation (Perbadanan Tanah Bumiputera) would be negligent in its duties if it did not seek control of all that land. It should be worth very, very , very many billions.

END 

Vincent Tan's UMobile the UEM of the times - the financially troubled U Mobile being awarded the contract to build and operate Malaysia's second 5G network not unlike awarding the PLUS Highway to UEM, which was then a dormant company

by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                                         Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Vincent Tan Chee Yioun ,Chairman, U Mobile

The Malay Mail reported over the weekend: 

 The second 5G network in Malaysia will be implemented by U Mobile Sdn Bhd, Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) said in a statement today.

According to MCMC it conducted a detailed technical and commercial evaluation to select the mobile network operator (MNO) for this project.

This thorough process aimed to ensure that the full benefits of 5G technology reach the people, industry and the nation.

However, Vincent Tan Chee Yioun's U Mobile is not a well company, and is probably in need of a cash infusion, to remain solvent. 

Readers are reminded that in 2014 Vincent Tan convinced ST Telemedia to invest in what all involved would be a fabulously lucrative IPO. 

However  the  IPO never happened,and its losses are thought to be quite substantial.

According to Malaysia's The Edge U Mobile'a accumulated losses as at end-2020  totalled  RM 4.14 billion. It does not appear that U Mobile's fortunes have improved since and therefore it does appear tha the MCMC has awarded a large infrastructure project to a compnay which does not have the resources. In that sense it is like the 1987 awarding of the PLUS Highway contarct to what was then in essence a dormant company named UEM. 

TO  BE READ WITH 

Naza Communications looking to buy U Mobile’s assets

By Jose Barrock / The Edge Malaysia

27 Jun 2022, 03:30 pm

Naza Tower in Platinum Park in the city centre is one of the group’s key assets. (Photo by www.nazatower.com)

This article first appeared in The Edge Malaysia Weekly on June 20, 2022 - June 26, 2022

NAZA Communications Sdn Bhd, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the diversified Naza Corp Holdings Sdn Bhd, is understood to be in talks to acquire the assets of digital services provider U Mobile Sdn Bhd, sources say.

In response to questions from The Edge, Naza Communications says, it is “unable to comment”. Similarly, U Mobile says it is “unable to comment on your queries”, when asked about a possible sale of U Mobile’s assets to Naza Communications.

While details of the assets in question remain scarce, U Mobile had total assets of RM6.33 billion as at end-December 2020, of which RM1 billion was current assets.

Another source says U Mobile had called for a request for proposal (RFP) and Naza Communications, the front runner to acquire the former’s assets, was among the companies that responded.

“The process [of the sale of U Mobile’s assets] is still ongoing, but I hear Naza is likely to get it,” he says.

According to filings with the Companies Commission of Malaysia (SSM), U Mobile as at end-2020 had also amassed total liabilities of RM7.83 billion. It is unclear whether the liabilities will be included in the sale to Naza Communications, if such a deal materialises.

For FY2020, U Mobile reported after-tax profits of RM69 million on the back of RM3.18 billion in revenue. It is noteworthy that this was its first after-tax profit in five financial years and that it suffered a loss before tax of RM341 million for FY2019. As at end-2020, U Mobile had accumulated losses of RM4.14 billion.

Naza Communications is a telecommunications infrastructure company with total assets of RM86.34 million and total liabilities of RM68.49 million as at end-2020.

For FY2020, Naza Communications registered an after-tax profit of RM535,991 from revenues of RM17.85 million. In the last five years, its highest after-tax profit was in FY2017, when it raked in RM8.47 million from RM40.51 million in turnover.

Its parent, Naza Corp Holdings, has interests in automobile distribution, property development and food and beverage, among others. For its last publicly available financials for its financial year ended December 2019, Naza Corp suffered after-tax losses of RM695.65 million from RM1.47 billion in revenue. As at end-2019, Naza Corp had total assets of RM4.61 billion and total liabilities of RM2.59 billion.

In February 2018, Naza Corp sold a 56% stake in its Naza Automotive Manufacturing plant in Gurun, Kedah, to France’s Groupe PSA (now known as Stellantis after a merger with Fiat Chrysler Automobiles) for an undisclosed sum. Last November, Stellantis acquired the remaining stake in the plant, which would indicate that Naza Corp is flush with cash. There have been murmurs that the group is selling parcels of land as well.

If the acquisition of U Mobile’s assets does go through, Naza Communications will be joining the big league of telecommunications companies, as U Mobile is the fourth-largest telco after Maxis Bhd, Axiata Group Bhd, which wholly-owns Celcom Axiata Bhd, and Digi.Com Bhd. Celcom Axiata and Digi.Com are undergoing a merger slated for completion in the second half of the year, after the various approvals are obtained.

Checks on CTOS show that U Mobile’s major shareholders are Singapore-based Straits Mobile Investments Pte Ltd, a subsidiary of Singapore’s ST Telemedia Pte Ltd, controlling 48.26% shareholding; the Sultan of Johor, Sultan Ibrahim Sultan Iskandar, with a 22.31% stake; businessman Tan Sri Vincent Tan Chee Yioun, via U Telemedia Sdn Bhd, Singer (M) Sdn Bhd and Berjaya Infrastructure Sdn Bhd, with a 18.54% stake; Magnum Bhd (in which billionaire businessman Tan Sri Surin Upatkoon has a 36.71% stake), which controls 7.84%; Tan Sri Paul Koon Poh Keong of Press Metal Aluminium Holdings Bhd, with 2.35%; and Koperasi Angkatan Tentera Malaysia Bhd, with 0.71%.

According to earlier news reports, Koon and Koperasi Angkatan Tentera are new shareholders in U Mobile and likely to have acquired their stakes from Tan.

It is also noteworthy that Tan’s daughter Chryseis is married to SM Faliq SM Nasimuddin, who is a director and shareholder of Naza Communications and the youngest son of the founder of the Naza group, the late Tan Sri SM Nasimuddin SM Amin, who passed away in May 2008.

Tan knows and understands the telecommunications and related industries, having been an early investor in Digi in the mid-1990s but sold out in 1998 during the Asian financial crisis. He still has a 50.44% stake in REDtone Digital Bhd (formerly known as REDtone International Bhd), a publicly traded telecommunications service provider, in which he bought a substantial stake in early 2008.

In August 2020, speculation was rife that U Mobile’s shares would be floated on Bursa Malaysia and it would undergo an initial public offering (IPO) at year end. It was known that the telco had appointed CIMB Investment Bank Bhd as its adviser for the flotation exercise and was targeting a valuation of RM10 billion to RM11 billion. Plans for an IPO, however, seem to have been shelved.

 

Save by subscribing to us for your print and/or digital copy.