https://klse.i3investor.com/web/blog/detail/dragon328/2022-04-22-story-h1621549755-YTL_Power_is_potentially_a_10x_Bagger

Pls refer to the article again for calculation of Wessex valuation and PowerSeraya should YTLP decide to list up either of them

I reckon that YTL Power should consider listing of Wessex if it can get a valuation of minimum 1.3x RCV.

Otherwise, I would rather wait for another 2 years when UK interest rates will come down and Wessex RCV will increase to 3.89 billion pounds in 2025. Then it may get a valuation of 1.5x RCV or 3.5 billion pounds or RM20.8 billion or RM2.57 per YTLPower share.

Just checked again on valuation of the 3 water companies listed in the UK, United Utilities, Svern Trent and Pennon. Last May when I first calculated, these 3 water companies were trading at PER of 20x to 36x and at 1.27x, 1.42x and 1.488x RCV respectively.

The share price of United Utilities has been hovering around similar level since, while Svern Trent has come down by 10% and Pennon down 20%. This makes their valuation closer at 1.2x to 1.27x RCV.

Now assuming same valuation of 1.2x RCV, Wessex is potentially worth an enterprise value of 3.68 billion pounds (RCV) x 1.2x = 4.416 billion pounds. Minus off net debt of 2.315 billion pounds, the equity value will be about 2.1 billion pounds or RM12.5 billion or RM1.54 per YTLPower share.

Now the valuation of water companies in the UK has come down slightly due to higher interest rates (now 5.0% vs 2.1% last year), but pounds sterling has appreciated some 13.6% against ringgit in past few months to 5.94 now, partially offseting the lower RCV multiple.

At 1.3x RCV, Wessex is worth 2.47 billion pounds or RM14.7 billion or RM1.81 per YTLPower share.

At 1.5x RCV, Wessex is potentially worth 3.2 billion pounds or RM19.0 billion or RM2.35 per YTLPower share.

haha observatory, they have got world class bankers on their side. I was just suggesting some sensible things to do for YTL, am glad that they have listened.

@super911, YTLPower earnings drop since 2017 was due to:
1) fallout of earnings from Malaysia power plants after its PPA expired
2) PowerSeraya was making losses or minimal profit in 2017-2019 due to over-supply situation in Singapore and Gencos' over-contracting of LNG supply
3) start-up losses in Jordan Power
4) losses in Yes 4G-5G startup

@shpok4574, Wessex Waters recorded a pretax loss of RM47m in Q3FY2023, but there was a non-cash provision of RM75m related to interests on index-linked bonds. Stripping out the non-cash provision, Wessex should have registered a PBT of RM28m in Q3FY2023.

Its revenue for Q3FY2023 was RM987m so a c.9% rise in average water tariffs will increase revenue by RM89 million. Assuming no other non-cash provision and similar cost structure as in Q3, Wessex should register a pretax profit of about RM117 million.

However, as its Regulated Asset Base (RAB) has increased to a larger base as of April 2023, so theoretically the regulated revenue should be higher. And I am hoping for Wessex to be able to control costs to a lower level, and to achieve higher unregulated revenue through new projects. All in, I expect Wessex to register PBT of RM130-170m a quarter, if not in this June then in following quarters.

@moncmondo87, as you highlighted, the conitinued supply tightness leading to 2H 2026 will put more pressure on retails contract renewal in coming months, consumers are spooked with the spiking wholesale prices pushing them towards more steadily-priced long term retails contracts.

PowerSeraya does have spare capacity of some 1,000MW (registered capacity of c.3,500MW vs efficient capacity of 2,000MW) which are of lower efficiency types. These open-fired gas turbines and oil-fired turbines may serve as peaking plants to feed into the spiking wholesale prices during peak hours but may not generate a high % of generation output in terms of volume-weighted average.

With TPC to be in place from 2H 2023, we may expect similar number of occurrences of wholesale price spikes but each time the spike is capped at a price cap which is equivalent to 1.5x to 3x LRMC, estimated at about S$700-800/MWh max. This price cap is high enough to provide good margins to peaking plants.

Tuas' plants are not much newer than Senoko's and PowerSeraya's and they are of the same F-type CCGT (similar efficiency range), so Tuas does not stand much advantage in bidding into the pool. Again, the main battle ground is in the retails market (which Seraya has hedged over 80% of generation output against) and the current tight supply situation will continue to ensure each Genco to enjoy healthy margin in the next 3 years in the retails market.

Having 2 separate sites in Jurong Island (where original PowerSeraya plants are located) and in Hyflux does not offer much competitive advantage to PowerSeraya but the large scale does give substantial savings in terms of corporate overhead and operational staffs. For instance, the same preventive maintenance team can cover both sites and a slightly enlarged market operation team can cover all generating units in both sites, so the group shall enjoy lower overhead cost per MWh of generation.

@super911, the normal load dispatch factor for generating units in Singapore used to be 60% to 70% during normal supply-demand situation, but now due to tight supply, each generating unit especially the efficient CCGT needs to run at higher capacity during peak and non-peak hours and run with minimum maintenance downtime, hence a 75% dispatch load factor is more appropriate. They can run up to 80% to 85% max if necessary.

@super911, this 3,300 GWh is my estimated power generation for PowerSeraya in a quarter based on a total of 2,000MW of effective CCGT capacity and 75% dispatch factor:

2,000MW x 24h x 92 days x 75% = 3,312 GWh

CIMB in its latest research update report on YTLPower reiterates Buy with tp of RM1.70.

It states minimal impact from TPC on PowerSeraya assuming 10% exposure to the wholesale market and 8%-16% reduction in USEP under TPC.

I think CIMB has over-stated the wholesale market exposure. WHile it says PowerSeraya contracts 80% of generation outputs to retails contracts and 20% contracted under vesting contracts and wholesale market exposure, it has assumed 50:50 split between vesting contract and wholesale market exposure, hence the 10% assumption. I understand the current vesting contract proportion is about 16%-17% of total generation, so the exposure to the wholesale market is likely to be in the region of just 3%-4% for the June 2023 quarter.

Assuming 4% exposure to wholesale market and 8% reduction in USEP as per EMA simulation, the likely impact to PowerSeraya for the June 2023 quarter will be:
3,300 GWh x 4% x S$300/MWh x 8% = S$3.2 million

Maintaining a gross margin of S$80/MWh, PowerSeraya would have made a gross margin of:
3,300 GWh x S$80/MWh = S$264 million for the June 2023 quarter

So the impact will be 3.2/264 = 1.2%

In fact, there is still room for Padini to expand its presence locally. Now Padini stores are mainly in big cities and big shopping malls, hence only 133 stores currently in Malaysia. It has the potential to expand into 2nd and 3rd tier cities and towns, given its products are at affordable prices.

Considering that Watson can have 700 pharmacy retail outlets in Malaysia, why not Padini?

@cgtan2020, thanks for the EMA determination papers. I have taken a look and found nothing new that this forum has not discussed on.

It is interesting to read the comments and feedback provided by Gencos in response to this proposed TPC. In particular, PowerSeraya said that "We are of the view that in the long run, free market forces generally provide a more efficient and stable environment for the operation of wholesale electricity markets than with government intervention."TPC should not be a permanent feature of the Singapore Wholesale Electricity Market. It should be a temporary measure for a period 12 months"

Pacific Light commented: "We would like to highlight to the EMA that scarcity pricing is one of the key market mechanisms embedded in the energy-only market. It should be noted that (i) Gencos rely on it to recover losses or missing money incurred during downcycles which could last for years, and (ii) investors rely on it to gauge the need to build new generation planting moving forward."

The EMA should really take into considerations such feedback before trying to intervene the wholesale market too much.

AmResearch stated a 25% exposure to the spot market for PowerSeraya in its latest report, that is incorrect. Such 25% exposure may apply to Sembcorp, not PowerSeraya.

But I do not discount the possibility that PowerSeraya also sold more into the spot wholesale market in the April-June 2023 quarter, taking advantage of the spiking wholesale prices. But it will not be anything like 25%.

@super911, I forecast net profit of RM3.0-3.6b a year for YTLP, or EPS of 38 sen to 45 sen. Applying a PER of 12x (half of its 2-year average PER of 24x), I am targeting a price range of RM4.50 to RM5.30 in 2 years.

It looks crazy to many now, but lets see the June qtr result before you write it off.

@hng33, haha I do not want to be overly bullish. As long as PowerSeraya can maintain PBT of RM800m a quarter, added with normalised PBT of RM130-180m from Wessex and new income stream from Jordan power, then YTLP is on track to achieve total PBT of RM1.0 billion a quarter, annualised to RM4.0 billion PBT and RM3.0 billion net profit which will be within my earlier projected range of RM3.0b to RM3.6b / year.

Based on CIMB latest research report on Sembcorp today, Sembcorp has about 25% exposure to the spot wholesale market, and the projected impact on its net profit will be S$36m or 4.8% to its FY2023 earnings. PowerSeraya exposure to the spot wholesale market has always been lower than 3%, typically less than 1%, so the impact of TPC if any on PowerSeraya will be at worst 1%-2%.

There would be a 8.1% reduction in USEP due to the Temporary Price Cap (TPC) as predicted by the EMA. The latest average USEP has been high at S$400-500/MWh, so a projected 8.1% reduction in USEP will result in USEP dropping to an average of above S$400/MWh, still much higher than the prevailing retails contract prices of below S$300/MWh. So I see no impact on retails contract pricing and Gencos' margin.

@Zhuge_liang, I stand by my earlier projection. The latest temporary price cap will not have much impact, max 1% to 2% adverse impact, on PowerSeraya, though it may have slightly higher impact on Sembcorp.

UBS coming in at an opportune time when YTLP shares come under profit taking

@hng33, you have explained it very well. In short, volatile wholesale prices have little impact on PowerSeraya who has a vertical integrated structure that includes power generation and retailer arm. High wholesale prices affect the independent retailers who do not have generation arm to hedge against the cost, so they can easily go bankrupt when wholesale prices spike up like now.

@InvestMsia, to be honest I don't know, but based on past practice, PowerSeraya tends to hedge 99% - 100% of their generation output with its retailer, and not to game over short term price volatility in the wholesale spot market.

sentiment rules the day, but over longer term, fundamentals prevail...

@chessgame99, you didn't get my point on the vesting contract price. What I wanted to point out was that last time when the EMA conducted an industry consultation to try to review the methodology that derived the vesting contract price, they eventually did not make any change after getting feedback from the industry players. So they made sensible decisions.

The vesting contract price is determined every quarter based on prevailing gas prices and forex rates, and it was used to determine the electricity selling price that the incumbent retailer MSSL used to sell to small households in Singapore.

It has nothing to do with this round of changes on wholesale price cap, but rather it shows the EMA does get feedback from industry players before making sensible decisions.

@xiaochen, this is exactly my point. Based on EMA's simulation, the price cap will see an average reduction of 3.6% to 8.1% in USEP which is the headline electricity prices that spiked up last month. It will not impact the retail electricity prices which tend to be more long term of 6 months to 2 years duration. What the EMA is trying to address is the spiking wholesale prices or USEP that made headlines, not to curb retail electricity prices which have not seen any spike but in fact have been trending down following the weakening LNG prices.

There are many power experts in the industry that EMA can consult with. More importantly the CEO and chiefs of Gencos in Singapore are all veterans in this power industry. PowerSeraya is headed by a CEO who has over 30 years of experience in this field. I am confident they know how to play this game and provide proper industry feedback to the EMA in order to achieve some outcome that is win win for all.

@chessgame99, Singapore government can install the most efficient CCGT in Singapore but the question is how they are going to run the business and sell electricity to consumers. The key question is whether the government itself should get into this power business and disrupt free market rules. If they do that, it will send a wrong message to foreign investors. I would imagine that it would be a tall order for Singapore to get any RE import by 2035 if they enter the market and disrupt market rules just like that. Who wants to commit any investment in Singapore to build any new capacity or bring in RE if foreign investors are spooked that Singapore government can anytime come in and disrupt market rules and make them lose out their investment capital. I think this is a serious question Singapore government needs to consider.

A few years back when oil prices were very high, a lot of consumers complained about the high vesting contract price (which was used as a benchmark price for MSSL to supply electricity to small household consumers). EMA then conducted a few rounds of industry consultation and finally they withstood the methodology used in deriving the vesting contract price. I think this round the outcome will be the same.

For Singapore government to step in and build new power generation capacity, it will not be as efficient as by private experienced players like YTL and Keppel. It will go against the original intention of liberalising the power market in 2006-2008 and introducing the competitive wholesale electricity market. It will not give confidence to foreign investors in the power sector as well as in other sectors like IT, infrastrature, port, energy etc. The long term economic damage will be far greater than trying to save electricity prices for 1-2 years.

They will achieve the goal by introducing a cap on wholesale electricity prices, which will be easier and more effective in controlling spikes in electricity prices that spook businesses and households, not the steady retail electricity prices.

It is a healthy correction now for YTLP share price that has gone up in past few months. It will aim to wash out weak holders and short term traders but it presents a good opportunity for long term investors to gain entry into this deep-value stock at cheaper prices.

As I said earlier, Gencos' profit will not be impacted much even if the wholesale electricity prices are capped at a lower upper limit from currently S$4,500/MWh (thanks @chessgame99 for the correction).

As I studied before, PowerSeraya tend to hedge almost 100% of its generation output with its retailer, completely bypassing the volatility of the wholesale market prices.

The lower wholesale electricity prices will mean lower fixed priced retails contracts' price as well, but it does not necessarily mean the non-fuel margin will be lower. As I explained earlier, due to the lower LNG prices now, the reduction in the fuel portion of the electricity prices is more than enough to offset against the decent non-fuel margin.

All in, I expect Gencos' profit margin to maintain going forward until a new generating capacity to come in, expected to be in 2H2026.

Padini growth prospects will be at overseas markets after it strengthens its market share in Malaysia with a total of 133 stores here. In comparison, it only has 5 stores in Thailand and 4 in Cambodia. The growth potential in Thailand and Cambodia is tremendous given the huge population there. But retails clothing business in Thailand is highly competitive, so Padini is still trying to figure out how to penetrate this market before it embarks on larger scale of expansion there.

Comparatively, Cambodia is less competitive and offers more room for Padini to expand. Vietnam will be another country for possible expansion for Padini.

Take an example to illustrate:

Say when the supply is tight and wholesale electricity prices hit the max upper price of S$5,000/MWh during 5% of the time in a month like June. The average wholesale prices at normal hours are below S$300/MWh. The effect of having 5% of the time hitting max upper limit price is substantial:

(S$5,000 - 300) x 5% x 720h / 720h = S$235/MWh rise in weighted average wholesale price or over 80% rise in monthly average wholesale price.

If they cap the upper limit price to S$1,000/MWh, then the overall impact of having 5% time hitting the upper limit will be considerably lower:

(S$1,000 - 300) x 5% = S$35/MWh rise or just 12% rise in weighted average wholesale price

In any event, Gencos' profit will not be impacted much as they tend to hedge the electricity selling price with their respective retailer to bypass the volatility of the wholesale prices.

What they should do and what the industry players should agree to is to cap the wholesale electricity prices to a lower upper limit currently at S$5,000/MWh. They could agree to cap it at say S$2,500/MWh or even S$1,000/MWh, it does not matter and it will not affect Gencos' profit much.

What it will do is effectively capping any spikes in wholesale electricity prices to the lower cap price say S$2,000/MWh. So the headlines news that said wholesale prices hit above S$3,500/MWh during peak hours will only recur at a lower price of S$2,000/MWh. Immediately the headline increase in weighted average wholesale prices is capped at a more reasonable figure, rather than this 3,000% rise in the news above.

The EMA could try to regulate the wholesale electricity prices which shot up to over S$3,500/MWh during peak hours, but that would not affect Gencos' profits much as Gencos tend to hedge the electricity selling prices with their retailers, bypassing the volatility of the wholesale pool prices.

The Singapore government could try to build new power generation capacity on its own but it would go against the free market principle of liberalising the power market in the first place. If it built too much capacity, then it would crash the electricity prices and make Gencos losing profits or making losses then foreign investors in these Gencos would just leave the market as the rule of the game has changed, which might dent the image of Singapore government who would be the only generator in town. Singapore government knows the bad consequences for which it will pay a much higher economic price for disrupting free market principles.

It is good to regulate the wholesale electricity market to a lower upper cap price, currently it is at S$5,000/MWh. Even if they cap the max price at S$1,000/MWh, it will not have impact to Gencos' profit, but it will have a small effect on the weighted average wholesale price which tends to be the headline price the media or households are complaining about.

On the other hand, when LNG prices have dropped so much, it helps to lower the overall electricity prices paid by businesses and households while Gencos can still enjoy decent margin.

Take an example, when crude oil prices were at US$120/bbl, the fuel portion of Singapore electricity pricing was around S$200/MWh. Added with a non-fuel margin of say S$40/MWh, the total electricity pricing paid by households was about S$200+40 = S$240/MWh.

Now when LNG prices have dropped by half to equivalent of US$60/bbl of crude oil, the fuel portion of the electricity price is about S$100/MWh. Even if Gencos load it up with a higher non-fuel margin of say S$80/MWh, the total electricity price paid by households is just S$180/MWh which is 33% lower than before. But Gencos enjoy a 100% higher profit.

@ChloeTai, nothing to worry about. Pls see my comments above reproduced below:

The EMA could try to regulate the wholesale electricity prices which shot up to over S$3,500/MWh during peak hours, but that would not affect Gencos' profits much as Gencos tend to hedge the electricity selling prices with their retailers, bypassing the volatility of the wholesale pool prices.

The Singapore government could try to build new power generation capacity on its own but it would go against the free market principle of liberalising the power market in the first place. If it built too much capacity, then it would crash the electricity prices and make Gencos losing profits or making losses then foreign investors in these Gencos would just leave the market as the rule of the game has changed, which might dent the image of Singapore government who would be the only generator in town.

Even if the EMA or Singapore government tries to build new capacity on their own, it would take at least 3.5 years for any new capacity to come online. This simply means the electricity supply in Singapore will remain very tight for next 3 years until 2H 2026 at the earliest.

The EMA could try to regulate the wholesale electricity prices which shot up to over S$3,500/MWh during peak hours, but that would not affect Gencos' profits much as Gencos tend to hedge the electricity selling prices with their retailers, bypassing the volatility of the wholesale pool prices.

The Singapore government could try to build new power generation capacity on its own but it would go against the free market principle of liberalising the power market in the first place. If it built too much capacity, then it would crash the electricity prices and make Gencos losing profits or making losses then foreign investors in these Gencos would just leave the market as the rule of the game has changed, which might dent the image of Singapore government who would be the only generator in town.

https://klse.i3investor.com/web/blog/detail/dragon328/2022-04-26-story-h1622262012-BPlant_has_Tremendous_Upsides_as_a_Prime_Take_over_Target

The attraction of BPlant lies in its huge non-core landbank of over 9,100ha that fetches a market value of RM1.29 per share of Bplant. My conservative case valued this non-core landbank at RM4.00 psf or almost RM1.80 per share of BPlant

@xiaochen, ya I also checked. Credit Suisse (Hong Kong) first appeared as a shareholder of YTL Power with a 3.10% stake in AR2019, which means it acquired the stake between Sept 2018 and Sept 2019. The share price of YTLP was trading between RM0.90 to RM1.30 during this period, so the average purchase price of Credit Suisse (HK) should be in this range.

Correction. Credit Suisse (Hong Kong) first appeared as a shareholder in YTL Corp with 4.6% stakes in Annual Report 2019, which means it acquired the stakes between Sept 2018 and Sept 2019. During this period, YTL share price was trading at RM1.10-1.40, so the average purchase price of Credit Suisse (HK) should be in this range. So it will not sell its stakes at anything below RM1.10.

UBS acquired the 0.8% stake in YTL after Sept 2022 when AR 2022 did not show its name as a shareholder. I assume UBS acquired this stake in past 1 month when trading volume was high, so its average cost of purchase should be between RM0.825 to RM0.94.

I suspect there could be another corporate move involving MCement coming soon

Nice closing at year high 0.975 with heavy volume. MCement also closing at year high.

10m shares makan up at last minute to 0.975 is no small fish.

If a foreign shareholder is just a passive investor like Morgan Stanley in Media Prima earlier, it did not bring any tangible benefit to the company.

But if the foreign shareholder is a prominent investor or a bigger growing company, then it may add value. The former case is a vote of confidence in YTL and the company prospects, the latter case is better with the new shareholder bringing in strategic corporate deals or construction order book for YTL.

We still do not know who is behind this 4.6% stake held thru Credit Suisse (Hong Kong) account, it should be for a rich client of Credit Suisse.

I think you meant YTLPower, as it was just announced this morning Credit Suisse had a 4.6% stake in YTL, plus another 0.8% held by UBS

@xiaochen, did you mean YTLPower or YTL for Credit Suisse (Hong Kong) as the 8th largest shareholder?

There were total 841 million shares traded in 3 weeks from 17 May 2023 when the share price jumped from RM0.665 to a high of RM0.985, assuming 50% of these were acquired by Credit Suisse/UBS, it means 420m shares were acquired at an average price of RM0.825.
Then the share price consolidated between RM0.90 to RM0.98 until yesterday with 300 million shares traded. Assuming again 50% of these were acquired by USB, then average price for these 150m shares was about RM0.94. So the total 570m shares acquired by UBS should average about (420 x 0.825 + 150 x 0.940)/(420+150) = RM0.855.

For a foreign fund to buy into a substantial stake like this, usually they will look for easily 50% to 100% upside from their average purchase price, so I am looking at RM1.28 as 1st target and RM1.70 as 2nd target for YTL.

The entry of UBS as the new substantial shareholder in YTL speaks loud on this promising growth stock

@super911, there is no quick answer to your question. But I try to give my thinking on this:

YTL has been in the telco business since it got the wimax licence some 10 years ago and no doubt it has been bleeding non-stop. All this while, YTL has been trying hard to gain market share in the competitive telco business but has not been successful as the industry has been dominated by Maxis, Celcom and DIGI which have lucrative voice business segment. What it has tried to do is to control losses by cutting operating costs to the minimum and by doing some government programs to help increasing the topline. If it exits the telco business now, how to exit? Who wants to take over? Take over for how much? It won't fetch much valuation which will certainly not enough to cover the capital investment so far.

It is waiting for a turning point, and I believe the turning point is coming now with the 5G roll-out. By getting access to DNB 5G network, every telco will have the same cost structure at least until the coverage reaches 80% nationwide. Hence YTL Yes will have the same competitive edge against every other telco in the 5G business. When it is rolled out to 80% nationwide, mobile 5G may be able to replace fixed line broadband service in every household as it will be cheaper (eg. RM30 per month for 30GB per 30 days or <RM80 for unlimited 5G data vs RM168 per month for unifi unlimited data) and faster (700 MBps - 1 TBps for 5G vs 300-500 MBps for fixed line broadband). For one, I will switch from unifi to mobile 5G then as I will save half the fee every month.

There are potential 10 million households in Malaysia and over 30 million mobile phone users. If YTL is able to get 10% market share for mobile 5G business, it will have about 3 million mobile 5G users. Assuming RM50 per month of mobile 5G fee on average per user, potential revenue for YTL Yes could reach RM150 million a month or RM450 million revenue per quarter.

Right now, Yes is doing revenue of RM109m a quarter and pretax loss of RM103m a quarter, meaning the operating costs are about RM212 million a quarter. So if Yes can do revenue of RM450 million a quarter, it will have a chance to turn in a pretax profit of RM238 million a quarter.

If it only gets 2 million mobile users, then potential revenue will be RM300 million a quarter and pretax profit will be about RM88 million a quarter.

For only 1 million mobile users, Yes could make revenue of RM150 million revenue a quarter and cut pretax loss to RM62 million from RM103m currently. Added back with non-cash depreciation, operating cashflows may turn positive then even with just 1 million mobile 5G users.

Then only it makes sense for YTL to consider disposing off this telco business and other telcos will consider taking over at a decent valuation.

ya many of the hotels and shopping mall assets are parked under YTL Hosp REIT and Starhill Global REIT, but YTL is the ultimate owner of all these assets and will benefit if these overseas assets earn more from operations or strong currencies.

Besides, there are still many assets parked under YTL Corp directly such as the huge landbank in Sentul and Japan Niseko, and some hotels and resorts which have not been injected into REIT yet.

@hng33, YTL also owns numerous hotels, resorts and shopping malls across Australia, Japan, UK, Europe and Singapore, which will benefit a lot from border re-opening and strengthening currencies in SGD, USD, AUD and Yen.

ChloeTai, I am not aware of any particular bad news for YTL. The current share price weakness is not a big surprise given the poor market sentiment when state elections are around the corner.

Whether or not YTL will bag the MRT3 package at RM10.8bn, nobody knows at the moment. I guess the government has not made a decision yet when focusing on the upcoming state elections. The fact that YTL put in the lowest bid for the above ground package at RM10.8b still gives an advantage to YTL to become the winner, at least the pricing has been made transparent to the public. If the government does not award the package to YTL, it will have to make a good explanation why it does not, either on technical ground or other reasons.