Something that I learn today. In this current government which has been around for 8 years - a contract can still be terminated. No matter how foolish it was when one signed them during then. It is probably the only deal that one government should not make - and they had to do it as it was under immense pressure. I actually would like Malaysia to own Bandar Malaysia rather than a consortium which comprise of a tycoon, Chinese state company and Johor state.
There is no other better land left other than Bandar Malaysia which has immense value. This is a 486 acre land in the city - or near the golden triangle. In any case, if we have sold the controlling rights - I have also made to believe that the government still has a lot of says in the development order.
I was also being brought to think that the current government would not terminate a deal. One thing I thought (until today) that the current government has been doing well is its consistency - consistent in making good promises as well as consistent in making mistakes. Whatever it is, one has to be consistent - so that there are no surprises. Trustworthiness is worth many tens of billions (to a country), if you know what I mean. And it is priceless in fact.
What I have liked before (so far) is in the present government - A deal is a deal, that's what I was brought to have thought on. But yes today, things changed - a contract can be terminated as well. Yes, there has been statements that the other party have yet to fulfil its promises, but we investment public is caught unaware.
Doesn't matter that the investment involves a Chinese party. How then would it impact say other projects that China's investment parties are involved in? Forest City? ECRL? Port projects? What about other countries? such as the recent deal between Saudi and Petronas in Pengerang?
Decisions are decisions - once a promise been made, we have to live by it.
No matter what, I have always been brought up and later telling the story (to convince other people ) that the Malaysian government would make promise on what it signs on. Why? This is because we are an open economy that has always been open to investment - since the 1970s. We are different compared to many African government. We are different compared to India. We are also among the more trustworthy countries and commit to its agreement.
This I have to take back - for the moment.
This lesson will make me readjust on my investment too, as would it happen to any other projects that the government has signed on?
Well, we are also living in a times where US is also considering pulling back NAFTA. But yet again, Malaysia and US are different - right? One has an immensely large local economy. Another has a much interdependent economy.
moneySIFU
I don't agree with Felicity this time. A contract is subject to null & void if any one party fail to observe the terms & conditions of a contract. Simple as that.
If a buyer sign a contract to buy a house but fail to obtain bank loan within stipulated time period, surely vendor can call off the deal according to the terms in the S&P agreement. Nothing is wrong.
2017-05-04 11:19