I suppose I'll wait till early next year and observe how the improved balance sheet affects it P&L

even completed with not much sales proceed, BJCorp can still recognize the value of the project... Agree with you, not seeing much value from Malaysia property sector

I have been having difficulty determining the impact of Ritz-Carlton Residences KL, it's supposed to be at least a 1 billion project. Visited KL end of February, the project is yet to be completed even though its said to be completed in the 1Q2017. Additionally, the % sold is not announced, so, its another wild card for 4Q2017 profit figure.

U Mobile has nothing to do with BJCorp, its personally owned by VT. Even if it were to be injected into Redtone, it will only cost outflow of funds to BJCorp.

VT had mentioned earlier Kyto Four Season has sold half of its residences, leaving half for higher price, but hasn't indicated the sales value.

Mazda Philippine shouldn't have much impact on BJCorp, given BJCorp has sold off most of BJAuto already.

Vietlott seems like an odd ball, given that nothing is disclosed on how BJCorp can benefit from it, except that BJCorp has a 55% stake in the Toto business (non disclosure agreement with the Vietnam government.)

China property project sold supposedly to contribute positively towards cash flow, but not yet disclosed on when the rest of the fund will be returned.

interest expenses

2017
Q2 93.679 million (saving 9 million in a quarter compared to Q2 2016)
half year 198.695 million (saving 7 million half year compared to 1st half 2016)

2016
Q2 102.524 million
half year 204.763 million

think bjcorp balance sheet is actually getting better... this should itself drive its price back to the 0.50-0.60 range after savings from financing is boosting bottom line

looks like a downtrend?

Limit up is 30% ... today's only 3.95%

Hopefully Bjcorp will show good profit in coming quarterly earning given completion of Kyoto four seasons and another stellar performance coming quarter given sales of companies and completion of KL Ritz Carlton Residences...

pineapple, for starter, like SC said, voice out, have more minorities calling SC to let SC know their concern. Then, voice out with NO vote when TRIPLC deal is presented... And if MSWG offer a forum for minority shareholders, participate.

ks55, its one thing when someone sitting on the BOD doing hanky panky in the balance sheet, its another thing someone saying buy or sell on i3investor. It's one thing when someone representing sell-side analyst writing non-fact analysis, and its another thing someone with no representation writing non-fact analysis. Its one thing when you are saying good buy when you are selling and its another thing when you are saying sell when you are selling. Frankly, don't see much wrong with hng33. If his skills are as good as written here, i have to say he's an excellent trader. And he made it very clear from the start. When you can start to see this difference, its when you are considered civilized!

firehawk, now you are talking senses. I agree with you, its not common for SC to intervene on cap repayment/div. Though, given Puncak's financial reporting of the past few quarters coupling with how the deals have been announced, I believe there could be a case if all minority shareholders voice out to SC seeking capital repayment. Surely, it won't be in writing, but by discussion with Puncak BODs.

valour, I'm not stressed out, just pissed off how ks55 has been commenting...

Jay, like I said over and over again, if the Puncak BOD so confident, they can keep the prized diamond and laugh to the end after offering those not trusting an exit at fair price. Sure hope Puncak Board can prove the rest wrong. There's no lose to Rozali offering that, unless he knows well its a bad deal that he has to get it through. Then, it's a total different story to tell...

firehawk, I found it worthless reasoning with you... Say anyhow you want, I should cease any future response on your comments. And please, get civilized yourself.

ks55 Those buying at 0.93 seeing a cash of 2.50 in the balance sheet, and fighting for 2.50 is considered risk taking effort. It's a extortion if somebody pushes Puncak share price down to 0.93 so they can buy, its not if the purchases are done on willing buyer willing seller like you said. If Rozali not happy with people buying at 0.93 seeking 2.50, he could have bought on the open market or offer 2.50 to minority shareholders whom he felt sorry for! Like I said, your mind is screwed up, always accusing and blaming the wrong people, like the jihadists.

bought some at .385 right after open just now, hope this quarterly earning is stellar...

ks55, fighting is an option, selling at a loss is also an option. At least KYY has guts to fight! And YOU? Besides laughing at loss-making minorities, bragging your winning history in Puncak, I am wondering what good has you channeled here?!? I am OK with you suggesting selling, but a definite NO when you are suggesting minorities should kept being bullied, even its so clear and present!

traderman, buy or sell, that I can't comment. But I sure can comment the net asset per share is there, the cash is there, the lack of independence and integrity of independent directors is there, and the clear problematic issues in how the majority shareholder has been handling Puncak is there. Hold your shares, and push for a change, we minority shareholders might win. Sell at loss, and we minorities are sure losers!

ks55, like your statements implied, lets blame the girls being raped, not the rapist.... No wonder we are called third world country, cause we are full of people like you. Instead of jailing the rapists, lets make jokes on the girls being raped, you scumbag!

firehawk, cities are not built in one day.

Pineapple, it's best informed when investing than not. Sharing knowledge is good for minority shareholders, at least they will know what they're getting into before investing. While encouraging others minorities to participate seeking better option, it could be used to warn the incomers what they're getting

ks55 when someone sitting on the Board not acting on the best interests of ALL shareholders, that's called scumbags and cheating! When someone buying on the cheap, its called risk taking. Are you Rozali or one of those scumbags sitting on the board mismanaging shareholders' fund? You really are screwed up!

i'm not aiming high, just between 0.60 and 1.00...

almost bought some more at .38 this morning, guess not decisive enough and miss...

Jay, like I said, any deal is OK, so long an alternative cash-out option is offered, whether you are calling it a privatization or not. If Puncak BOD is so confident with the TRIPLC, and most shareholders are supporting them, good, it will stay as a listed company. If Rozali can't get the support, he can privatize both TRIPLC and Puncak and siok sendiri and laughing all the way to the end with the best asset ever purchased, just hope he is not impairing it again and again... Just so you know, TRIPLC got land, so is Puncak, a 250 acres in Ijok, Kuala Selangor, supposedly a good area suitable for property development already. So, its not just TRIPLC holding on to 'valuable' land.

been adding at .38 for the past few days, hope its not a bad decision...

ks55, i commented after you mentioned someone buying over trust in balance sheet and should deservingly being fooled by the market... Unless those in the market for years and know whos' who, its not easy to distinguish the bad from the good. I am used to invest, in fact, with over 15 years of experience. Yet, I am caught in this counter. I have read a few annual reports beside quarter reports before deciding to buy and own. I have anticipated some level of hanky-panky in the corporate world, but not to the extent of what's presented in Puncak's balance sheet in the past 5 quarters.

I suggested a joint effort of minority shareholders, from first engaging SC, getting in touch with LTH the largest minority shareholder in hope for joint effort, to engaging SC in group after FAIRnREASONABLE's attempt to hire lawyer (something I doubt has much effect.) I can now only hope SC will act swiftly to address this issue. From what I learnt through SC last Friday, one thing is clear. If MORE minority shareholders file complaints, there's more urgency for SC to act. That's why I am asking for participation here and hopefully through MSWG after chatting with the rest attending the SC meeting last Friday, thanks to chee.

To this date, I still believe in spending time reading quarter reports and annual reports., while not doubting I need more digging to learn how to evaluate majority shareholders' character. If we can't rely on annual reports and quarter reports to learn the viability of an investment, what difference is this equity market from casino market or mafia operation? If SC and BURSA who are supposed to be the guardian of the market can't do a thing, its probably time that the equity market not far from casino market already.

ks55 you buying or not any Puncak shares has nothing to do with me, nor do I care... But your comments sure felt like someone blaming a girl for being raped before learning if police has done anything to safeguard the place or police not/can't doing anything.

ks55, you are funny! What you are saying is like, if a girl wearing too nicely and being raped, the rapist has done nothing wrong, the girl should be cursed instead. BIG JOKE!

bought some at 0.92 to averaging down, almost puking when buying, sigh!

rMoi, instead of your non-stop 'very fishy' comment, why don't you approach SC for your second wave?

angiess, no, given Puncak's cash to total asset fall below 70% in Q4 report, despite the 67 L3 investment taken out, it won't be classified as PN 16 company. The only way is for an external forensic auditing of the firm can find out the core reason of the losses. It's surprising Puncak has been able to keep incurring impairment without any party taking action against it...

To all concerned minority shareholders of Puncak Niaga:

You can reach Mr. Shashi using below contact, make your concern and worry heard!

Investor Affairs & Complaints Department
Securities Commission Malaysia
No 3 Persiaran Bukit Kiara
Bukit Kiara
50490 Kuala Lumpur
Tel: 603 6204 8999
Fax: 603 6204 8991

E-mail: aduan@seccom.com.my

Most of the losses are impairment and from discontinued operation, most likely the China operation.

Steveooikp, from bursa website

I believe, the only way now is through SC. pretty close to my guess, the 67 million L3 investment is gone is the fourth quarter report. Big joke, acting like we minority shareholders are used disposal diapers

another record loss, have to respect the BOD... 93.7 million losses, of which 69 millions is impairment while 14.5 million from discontinued operation... If we minority shareholders don't bind together seeking SC intervention and an external auditing of the firm, we would be the free piggy banks to majority shareholders then

ks55, I am not denying the power of majority shareholder, but in Puncak case, it's currently in cash position and minority shareholders still have a chance to fight through SC. Hopefully, MSWG can assist.

cheoky, thanks for the encouragement.

To all shareholders, if you are willing to contribute in this effort, please call and write to SC as soon as you can. Would appreciate if you can leave a message here once you have done that. It will encourage others to follow suit. Meanwhile, once MSWG has confirmed the date and time of the forum, it would be great if you show up to offer MSWG support for further action.

Thanks

From what I learnt from SC, the plantation deal is still pending completion. I suppose if we minority shareholders push hard enough, the plantation deal can be stopped until an alternative for minority shareholders is offered. My guess, if more of us write and call SC, we could possibly make an impact. I can't guarantee it, but there's no harm trying if you also felt mistreated.

1. In Puncak Niaga’s second quarter report, the balance sheet is shown to have

Other investments 63,713
Cash & bank balances 280,358
Short-term investments 906,065
Total assets: 1,754,250

The 63.713 million investment is a L3 financial asset purchased during the second quarter that classified it as long-term asset. Had this L3 financial asset considered liquid, the cash & equivalent of Puncak Niaga would have crossed 70% threshold and be classified as PN 16 company ((63,713+280,358+906,065)/1754250)=71.26%. The issue is, what’s this other investments of 63.713 million so crucial to Puncak’s business development? Without doubt, if the significance of this investment can’t be explained, its nothing but an attempt to hide asset to avoid PN 16 classification.

Thus, we urge SC to investigate into this matter and classify Puncak as a PN 16 company regardless how Q3 and future financial reports are presented.

2. Misinformed Expensive Plantation Deal

Seller: Shin Yang Holding Sdn. Bhd. (shareholders include Tan Sri Datuk Ling Chiong Ho)
Acquisition price: RM 446,505,690.45 (Puncak Niaga’s stake of 60% is RM 267,903,414)
Date of announcement: Oct 17, 2016
Palm Oil price during the month: Should be about RM 2,600
Land (location): Murum District and Silat District, Sarawak (Lot 13-15, 18, 20-23, Murum District, Lot 1, Silat District).
Land (size): 43,139.5 hectares (planted: 9,766.9 hectares, unplanted: 33,372.6 hectares)
Palm age: Less than 18 months 7,258.10 hectares
More than 18 months 2,508.80 hectares

A recent transaction deal announced on Bursa: Sarawak Oil Palm Berhad

Seller: Shin Yang Oil Palm (Sarawak) Sdn. Bhd. (Shareholders include Tan Sri Datuk Ling Chiong Ho)
Acquisition price: RM 873,005,875.00
Date of announcement: July 04, 2016
Palm Oil price during the month: Should be about RM 2,300
Land (location): Between Batang Belaga and Sungai Murum, Belaga District, Kapit Division, Sarawak. (Lot 30-42 Murum Land District, Lot 40-64 Punan Land District)
Land (size): 47,000 hectares (planted: 23,798 hectares, unplanted: 6,772 hectares)
Palm age: Less than 4 years: 6,716 hectares
4 years – 10 years: 12, 388 hectares
11 – 16 years: 4,694 hectares

Puncak Niaga’s purchase is extremely expensive compared to what’s presented by Sarawak Oil Palm. Sarawak Oil Palm purchase prices its planted acreage at RM 34,224 per hectare while Puncak Niaga is paying RM 45,714 per hectare, a premium of 33.57%!

In addition, 52% of Sarawak Oil Palm purchase has trees between 4 – 10 years old while 74% of Puncak purchase has trees less than 18 months that the Board of Puncak considered as ‘matured’ trees that has clearly misled minority shareholders!

Finally, given trees planted are mostly less than 18 months, it is possible that the deal has been leaked to seller that has incentivized the seller to plant at a speed of at least 400 hectares per month (the planting speed of Sarawak Oil palm’s is 140 hectares per month for trees less than 4 years)!

3. Puncak Niaga is offering to purchase TRIPLC at RM 210 million while at the announcement date on Dec 16, 2016, TRIPLC has a market capitalization of RM 139 million at RM 2.03 per share. That’s a premium of 51%. What’s more, when the Head of Agreement was announced on April 18, 2016, TRIPLC was ONLY trading and closed at RM 1.41 per share with a market capitalization of RM 96,549,869. That’s a premium of 117% .

Since the conclusion of the Selangor water asset disposal and distribution of special dividend of RM 1.00 per share, the share price of Puncak Niaga has dropped to new low. As of Feb 24, Puncak Niaga’s closing price is 0.985 with a market capitalization of RM 442 million, less than 40% of its cash in hand. The phenomenon is not temporary, in fact, it’s on a declining trend from RM 1.70 per share right after the special dividend is distributed. We are urging SC to intervene to defend minority shareholders by requiring Puncak Niaga to offer minority shareholders an exit option at a minimum price of 2.68 per share (the cash position of Puncak Niaga at the 2016 Q3 financial report (63.713 million other investment, 913.735 million short term investments, and 229.990 million cash and bank balances divided by shares outstanding of 449,283,784) on the following grounds:

1. Dubious purchase of level 3 financial asset to avoid PN 16 classification.
2. Expensive plantation and TRIPLC deals that clearly disregard minority shareholders interest (a clear case of Puncak Niaga suffering from principal agent problem.)
3. Given recent cases of majority shareholders offering a heavy discount to net asset citing unfavorable market condition, it is better to let minority shareholders an option to leave when the cash is in the company and the asset easier to evaluate. Please do not let us suffer financial losses after being humiliated by independent adviser trying to educate us the terminology ‘reasonable’ but ‘unfair’ or ‘unreasonable’ but ‘fair.’

Dear all Puncak Niaga concern shareholders,

The discussion with SC went smoothly. The director, Mr. Kamarul (or is it Mr. Kamarudin?) and Mr. Shashi met with us. Together with the rest, we have presented our concern to SC. Besides a promise to investigate, Mr. Kamarul has asked concerned shareholders to both call and email SC believing that numbers count. So, please call and email SC (Mr. Shashi at 03-6204 8999) and let them know your name and shareholding in Puncak Niaga.

In addition, upon the suggestion of one member, I have approached MSWG in the evening and met with Mr. Wong Kin Wing, Mr. Quah Ban Aik and Mr. Norhisam Side. You can reach them through 03-20709090. At the end of the meeting, Mr. Wong has suggested letting him and his team 1-2 weeks time to evaluate what I have presented. Upon completing the evaluation, he will, through MSWG email list, send out invitation for a forum to all Puncak shareholders interested to participate. He would then advise us on their view and suggestion on the next step.

Anyhow, I will attach my letter to SC. If, after reading, you agree with what I have written, you are welcome to use all or part of my write-up. BUT, please, do you own fact-checking. I do not want to be accused of misleading any of you.

Thanks you.

Jay, not getting your 'oppressive on others'?!? I am merely asking the BOD to offer those disagreeing to TRIPLC or plantation deal an exit at cash per share of at least 2.50. If Rozali as majority shareholder and Chairman of Puncak also not finding the deals to be good, he also can choose to go. Those agreeing with the deals can then stay to absorb TRIPLC and plantation deal plus other free assets for free. Of course, if too many decide NO to the deals and choose to go, those staying will of course not able to buy TRIPLC or plantation accordingly, but they will be awarded 2.50 per share plus other assets for FREE.

Also, don't worry. From my understanding, there are at least 2 shareholders not opposing with TRIPLC or plantation deals, not complaining and can be extremely happy with the deals. They are Rozali and LTH who together control more than 50%, so ample cash to acquire TRIPLC and the plantation. If Rozali is not agreeing, the deals could not have been presented. If LTH is not agreeing, when I invited them to meet SC, they would have joined.

I have together with 3 others shareholders met with SC in the morning for approximately an hour. A discussion was made after meeting with SC (another hour or so?). After the discussion, I have also proceeded to contact with MSWG and met up with MSWG at 4:30 pm for approximately 1 1/2 hour.

Real apology, been really exhausted from the meetings. I will post the details of the meetings tomorrow.

Jay, I'm not against any Puncak board's deal IF there's a capital repayment option of at least 2.50 for minority shareholders opting to sell their shares. I can't really comment on TRIPLC because I'm not particularly keen with its businesses, no matter how profitable it's. Similarly, I am placing out the comment only because I am trapped in Puncak thanks in part to CIMB's rosy valuation without warning the characters of Rozali and only signaling concern over 'future' after share price plummeted (jokingly, after I emailed my concern to CIMB, they cease coverage on Puncak, as if to 毁尸灭迹.) Given Puncak and TRIPLC are sharing the same controlling shareholder, there's no telling Rozali won't do the same to TRIPLC. Looking at TRIPLC share price now, there's a potential, and that's why I am suggesting TRIPLC shareholders to voice out a cash for share option, whether the deal will go through or not.

Jay, Puncak has net asset of 3.41, cash of 2.50, trading around 1.00. TRIPLC will be receiving 3.10 per share if the deal gets through. How would you know if TRIPLC, with common shareholders of Puncak, won't be getting the same fate? I am pointing it out because I got trap in Puncak and hope others investing in TRIPLC is aware of the situation and won't fall into the possibility of ending up with the same trap.

soon9913, thanks for pointing out.

Err... bjcorp selling bjland after buying from VT? This is crazy

Err... I am merely making suggestion based on what I am facing in Puncak, a company holding over 1 billion cash traded less than 500 million with TRIPLC and Puncak seem to share similar major shareholder

Yes, think Kyoto Four Season profit should reflect in coming quarter report... hope VT no cooking this result

No, if I were not wrong, Ritz Carlton is under build then sell approach

If I were TRIPLC shareholder, whether the deal will go through or not, I will ask for a cash for share option instead of share for share option.