TTB keeep saying that he is waiting for the coming market crash then only he will start to invest, however does Icap Biz states clearly states this investment strategy as it policy in every Annual Reports which serves as a reminder for current as well as future prospective investors that they are only willing to start to invest heavily during the time of crisis. I have not been informed for such a strategy even though I am a shareholders since its IPO in 2015.
I have its prospectus as well, I peruse through the prospectus , unfortunately I couldn’t find such a strategy or investment policies.

If such a strategy is formulated, I am sure as a shareholder , we must be informed or updated either in any AGM or publish in its annual report is the least. The informed shareholders will be able to determine whether to continue invest in this company or look for other greener pasture.
Further, Immediately after IPO, It raised its $140m capital, it invested substantially while no any crisis was happening then. It raise questions to me why such a strategy or policy exist or implemented out of blue moon.

Now, out of sudden we are accused of shortsighted shareholders couldn’t wait for long and only look for short term profit. Is it fair?

AS a fund manager, he must be treated like any ordinary staff in any company. Any workers performance is good, he must be praised and rewarded accordingly , but if underperformed, he must be reminded or reprimanded and given time to change, however for Icap Biz, if TTB continued being rewarded with such substantial management and advisory fees, it is just like stealing the money from the owner. what make it worse is that he does not even acknowledge his own mistake with his arrogant attitude.

We as a shareholder must exercise our rights and voice our worries, he shall not take for granted of our hard-earned money!

Posted by nhy6 > Sep 22, 2016 10:26 AM | Report Abuse

u hold so many shares u dont make money. u r so stress u hav to do so much work. simple advice sell your shares n have a happy life!!!


I believe that guy is not stress at all, and the work from the post above looks very simple and clear cut, doesnt really take much work and already reflect the weakness in TTB managing ICAP.

What you are saying is just similarly like Malaysian Politician that tell other races to go back their own country when they are not happy with their government. Does the people (shareholder) not able to question the government (management) in their performance?

Somehow i feel u are more stress, people comment more on the ICAP weakness the more u want to argue, are u scared of ICAP share price dropping more? You might make more right now if the shareholder are able to dissolve the fund and get back their money right now.

http://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/kianweiaritcles/104771.jsp
This article made me more concerned about ICAP....

It is very serious that Mr.Tan only holds 1% of I-CAP shares, but he has exerted more controlling power and dominate the I-CAP than combined Laxey Partners and City of London of 12%.

Kindly be reminded that Mr. Tan is actually employed to work for I-CAP, however, it seems he is the only key person that gets to decide whom to sit on the board of directors, and history has shown he does not welcome any other person other than his own selection. This worries me a lot, that this will jeopardize the interest of shareholders, where even the major shareholder's sole purpose is to safe guard their investment is being denied by Mr. Tan.

Are there anyone here whom will be going to this adjourned AGM on the coming 30 November 2014 at Wisma MCA, 9:00am? I definitely will be going and cast my vote against the re-appointment of YM Tungku Abdul Aziz.

To be frank, as a shareholder of I-CAP, I was disappointed and not pleased with how Mr.Tan handle the situation of laxey partners during the previous AGM, not to mentioned as well the past 4 years performance of fund.

I recalled Mr. Tan, a very well known fund manager, demanded a reason from laxey partners whom are the biggest shareholder of his fund on the vote against the re-appointment of YM Tungku Abdul Aziz. It is very ironic that a manager requesting the shareholders on their decisions, aren't we, the shareholders "real boss of the fund" should be the ones demanding the reason from him to seek his re-appointment. Moreover, as laxey is one of the major shareholders of I-CAP, they should be treated fairly just like other shareholders. It's their own decision to cast whomever they wish to vote, and their are only required to be responsible for their decision. Am I required to give a reason to Mr.Tan as well since I will be voting against the re-appoint in the coming adjourned AGM? Or should all of the shareholders whom against the vote required to come forward and inform Mr.Tan respectively?

The story of AGM moves forward with one of the shareholder asking what is YM Tungku Abdul Aziz's role within I-CAP. What had surprised me most was that the reply from him pis just only integrity!

From the point as the owners of the fund, it should be stress that the key person to be appointed as the director must be able to show their expertise and relevant experiences in order to assist the growth of the fund, does integrity is able to prove his usefulness towards the growth? What will be his other contribution other than just a simple integrity?

A brief browsing on the history of YM Tungku Abdul Aziz shows as follows:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunku_Abdul_Aziz_Ibrahim
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/209609
http://www.mole.my/content/youre-taking-wrong-man-tunku-abdul-aziz-karpal
http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2014/06/02/Dyana-leave-DAP/

There are more stories about him shown in the Internet. My sharing is that a person whom has left a party should act as a gentlemen especially he is a public figure and a politician. Using an example of a divorced couple, should the man go around criticizing how terrible is his ex-wife after they have divorced? This shows the limit of how much his integrity can achieve.

Dear readers, please be patience as the stories gets more interesting.

The AGM continues with Mr. Tan's intention to let the resolution of reappointment gone through with a show of hands from shareholders instead of going through the process of a poll that is required by the Companies Act 1965.

I used to respects Mr.Tan's knowledge as well as his reading skills, however, the intention to let resolution to be approved via just a show of hands proves that our fund manager is not aware of our country's governing law that the voting should be dominated by the number of shares held by the shareholders! If a person with 1,000 shares has similar commanding power with another shareholder of 100,000 shares, do we consider that as fair?

Luckily of one the independent director, Mr.David Loo whom has the integrity and practice good corporate governance that he highlighted to Mr. Tan the voting should be properly conducted and according to Companies Act 1965, to ensure that all shareholders should be treated fairly. I was really amazed and impressed by Mr. Tan.

While Mr. Tan was questioning on why was the Laxey's proxy not attending throughout the entire AGM, at the final phase of AGM, it was known that the I-CAP chairman, YM Tungku Tan Sri Dato' Seri Ahmad bin Tungku Yahya is indeed the proxy representing Laxey Partners!

More questions now are flowing though my head. Shouldn't all the directors have a discussion prior to the AGM and discuss the resolution? Why is Mr. Tan aware that the laxey partners voting against the re-appointment but not aware that the proxy is sitting right beside him?

It leads to another question on Mr.Tan's honesty, in-fact I believe he has already known that Tungku Yahya is the proxy for laxey partners, yet the AGM was purposely adjourned to provide him more time to gather his loyal supporters, it is inconsiderate to those shareholder whom travelled from all over the country to attend this AGM.

It all sounds too fishy to me.

My post is to inform those shareholders who did not attend the AGM and will be attending the coming adjourned AGM on what exactly happened in the previous AGM.