wait at 0.005.

Rewrite your article, make corrections. If wrong, admit and correct it, not hiding with slandering!

Gov has no money lah. Still waiting for lenders to borrow huge.

You have started it. Thus you must end it.

agree.

No solid proof no charge. Long ago story.

No solid proof no charge. Long ago.

No solid proof no charge. Long ago this story.

Talk like no talk.

I don't like those hypocrites too.

paktua73 where is all promoter who promise will buy on 1.50??
now reach ready why still scared..??
paktua never fear any..
was fight here long enough..
know how to fight..
now if they dare to appear after AA back on 1.80
paktua will hantam depa kaw kaw..
cakap xserupa bikin..
dah reach..lari macam pondan tua..

tut tut
hate hypocrite..
28/01/2020 11:28 AM

Don't time the market.

https://www.klsescreener.com/v2/news/view/627704

Slam Ambiga for her stupidity.

Must criticise dictator. Don't give any face. Promises must fulfill for all leaders

dollar.

Digital bank licence is valuable. Not everyone can get. A licence wortht a multi billion

Every one can borrow money to fly.

https://www.klsescreener.com/v2/news/view/627696

Sure get licence. No worry.

https://www.klsescreener.com/v2/news/view/627696

https://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/AmInvestResearch/2020-01-22-story-h1482896891-CIMB_Lower_provisions_lead_to_stronger_CIMB_Thai_earnings.jsp

https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/air-franceklm-says-not-involved-malaysia-airlines-sale-talks

Bought at 0.245.

Me at 0.5 cents. Longer. Wait lah.

10 lots sold at 18 cents. Come on. Sell 10 mil lots lah.

Departing started today.

AIRASIA Group Bhd’s (AAGB) proposed takeover of Malaysia Airlines Bhd (MAB) will include key exclusions which may take the initial cost to Khazanah Nasional Bhd (which owns all of MAB) to over RM8 bil, documents sighted by FocusM show.

These include an RM5.4 bil financing gap for MAB’s six A380s, the exclusion of an RM2.5 bil sukuk, costs of staff layoffs, and the cost of cancellation of 25 Boeing 737 MAX 8 orders as well as other fleet rationalisation. All these total up to well over RM8 bil that Khazanah will have to bear even if MAB is acquired by AAGB.

The documents showed that last month AAGB chief executive officer Tan Sri Tony Fernandes pitched to Khazanah managing director Datuk Shahril Ridza Ridzuan a merger between AAGB, its long-haul unit AirAsia X Bhd and MAB (MergedCo).

This MergedCo would be listed on Bursa Malaysia and be a “Malaysian/Asean champion.” These were some of the pull factors that entitled AAGB to be MAB’s strategic partner.

It is also understood that Shahril and the Khazanah management were in favour of the deal but it was shot down by the board. It is believed that the proposal is still making rounds and being considered as the fund needs to decide on a strategic partner for MAB soon.

According to Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, there are five proposals. Economic Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Azmin Ali also said Khazanah is still on the lookout for a strategic partner. The fund will need to settle on a name soon.

AAGB’s bid is one among four bids currently on the table and is probably the leading bid, followed by Japan Airlines, the other two being Air France-KLM and Malindo Airways.

But AAGB had the leg up as Khazanah believes the synergy derived from the MergedCo would amount to roughly RM1.4 bil a year, which is sufficient to cover MAB’s operations of RM1 bil a year.

Here are the salient points of Fernandes’ initial proposal to Shahril:

1) AirAsia Group is in the process of consolidation

AAGB, through AirAsia Bhd (AAB or AK), is in “the process of acquiring” AirAsia X Bhd (AAX or D7). This will see both airlines merge into one airline operation, retiring AK and D7 and only using one IATA code AK.

This enlarged group will serve the low-cost market, covering domestic and international segments, from short to long haul. This is also the crucial step in merging with MAB to form the enlarged MergedCo.

2) MH will be retired and placed under AirAsia group

MAB will be placed under Asia Aviation Investment Ltd (AAIL) which is 100% owned by AAGB. The IATA code MH will be changed to MY but will target the “premium segment” for both domestic and international markets.

AK, which is the merged company between AirAsia and AirAsia X, will aim for the low-cost segment for both domestic and international markets.

Further, AirAsia plans to retain the blue colour of the current MH but “with a refreshed, modern image and branding” while its low-cost offerings under AirAsia Group remains with its red and current branding.

3) No golden share

Post-transaction, the Malaysian government or Khazanah should not have any golden shares, or preference shares in MAB. AAGB also is demanding for complete control of management, including the appointment of key senior personnel, including the chief executive officer.

Fernandes wants “minimal government intervention” as MAB will be under the AAGB umbrella. But Khazanah may be allowed to have a seat on the board of the MergedCo.

4) Khazanah to bear staff layoffs and settle RM2.5 bil sukuk

AAGB wants to have full discretion on who to hire and fire from MAB but Khazanah has to execute the rationalisation exercise.

This includes bearing compensation and costs related to the exercise which may involve voluntary separation schemes (VSS) and/or mandatory separation schemes (MSS).

AAGB might retain pilots and cabin crew for future growth but other divisions are subject to “further deliberation.” AAGB will also not take up the RM2.5 bil corporate perpetual sukuk issued in 2012.

5) AAGB is seeking government and Khazanah’s help for clearance from the Malaysian Competition Commission (MyCC)

Having a MergedCo consisting AAGB, AAX and MAB is expected to trigger anti-competition problems. AAGB is seeking for the proposed transaction to be approved by MyCC. This is done to protect AAGB and its stakeholders’ interests.

6) AAGB will look to cancel, exclude and retire a number of MH planes

Six Airbus A380-800 are to be sold or disposed by Khazanah prior to the merger transaction. The reason is, according to AAGB, the group does not need to use the A380s as part of its operations.

Also, these six Airbuses have yet to be fully paid for by MAB. There is an RM5.4 bil loan financing gap for the six planes. AAGB does not want to bear that either.

AAGB also wants Khazanah to cancel the 25 Boeing 737 MAX 8 orders. This is to streamline planes to ensure that they originate from a single manufacturer, Airbus. Also, AAGB is worried about “current iss

https://www.bursamalaysia.com/market_information/announcements/company_announcement/announcement_details?ann_id=3017438

Don't waste time and energy here.

All of you must sell first, then we decide. No shares get out of this forum

It is also understood that AAGB requested a list of exemptions that would have to be borne by Khazanah should both AirAsias buy MAB, including giving up the golden share.

GOOD OR NOT?

https://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/kianweiaritcles/2020-01-20-story-h1482865952-AirAsia_appears_in_the_lead_to_take_over_Malaysia_Airlines.jsp
Khazanah’s management said that a merger between MAB, AAGB and its long-haul sister AirAsia X (AAX) should be the way forward. The reasons were that the fund deemed the consolidation as the best foot forward in resolving domestic industry capacity, thus placing MAB on a more financially sustainable path.

why now complaint, not last year?

No logic to postpone. Verify if the new is true first.

https://www.thesundaily.my/business/bcorp-we-didn-t-lose-us-200m-in-jeju-project-DJ685014

The history:
https://www.transnational-dispute-management.com/legal-and-regulatory-detail.asp?key=22385

The court has postponed it to 6 Feb, 2020 for delivery of judgement.

The final hearing was subsequently re-set to
25 November 2019. The court has fixed 9 January 2020 for the delivery of the judgment.

In July 2018, BJR made an application to the court in the JDC Lawsuit to conduct a second supplementary
land price appraisal report, as BJR was dissatisfied with the first supplementary land appraisal report which
was based on disputable land reference. The court in the JDC Lawsuit granted BJR's application to conduct
a second supplementary appraisal, to be undertaken by a different appraiser. The second supplementary land
price appraisal report has been completed and a preparatory hearing was held on 20 June 2019. The presiding
judge closed the preparatory proceedings for pleading and stated that the formal hearing will commence on
25 July 2019.
At the formal hearing held on 25 July 2019, the presiding judge requested BJR to submit evidentiary evidence
with respect to the total claims by BJR and fixed 19 September 2019 as the next hearing date. On 19 September
2019, the presiding judge fixed 31 October 2019 as the final hearing before the court decides on the JDC Lawsuit.
The final hearing was subsequently re-set to 25 November 2019.

In view of the nullification of all the development approvals issued in connection with the Jeju Project, BJR
made an application to the court in the JDC Lawsuit for a supplementary land price appraisal report, to be
prepared with respect to the Jeju Project site subject to a revised assumption that no development approval
had been issued on the Jeju Project site. In February 2018, the presiding judge in the JDC Lawsuit was
re-assigned to another court, and another judge was appointed as the new presiding judge in the JDC Lawsuit.

On 13 September 2017, Jeju District Court rendered a judgement against JDC and Seogwipo City in the
Administrative Lawsuit. The judgement rendered all of the development approvals issued in connection with
the Jeju Project null and void. JDC and Seogwipo City have filed an appeal against the Administrative Lawsuit
judgement. On 1 February 2019, the Korean Supreme Court dismissed JDC and Seogwipo City's appeal.

Let's wait and see. Pray for the best.

Translated as:
The Malaysian Berjaya Group, who lost in a lawsuit for damages to the former recreational residential complex against Jeju Island, appealed.

Berjaya Jeju Resort (BJR) has recently filed an appeal with the Seoul Central District Court for the loss of the 200 million won damages filed against Jeju Island.

On March 20, 2015, Berjaya decided that the Supreme Court would invalidate the disposal of land-based recreational residential complexes and land acceptance.

Subsequently, Jeju and Seogwipo City, which are license disposal agencies, were also responsible, and filed an additional lawsuit on March 19, 2018, one day before the expiration of the claim (March 20, 2018).

In a first trial against Jeju Island, the court ruled that the plaintiffs did not believe that the defendant violated the Burjaya side in violation of the objective duty of attention.

It was judged that Jeju Island did not grant the permit even though it found that the recreational residential complex does not correspond to an amusement park, which is an infrastructure under the National Land Planning Act.

A trial of 350 billion won against JDC has been under trial for four years. The Tribunal visited Jeju in November 2016 and conducted on-site verification, but it has not been able to resume pleadings until now due to land appraisal.

Originally, Berjaya had invested 2.5 trillion won in Yerae-dong, Seogwipo-si by 2017 to create a high-end residential complex. Since July 2015, due to financial difficulties, the construction was completely suspended.

As the Supreme Court found that land acceptance was invalid, about 200 original landowners also filed a lawsuit to return land to JDC. The litigation is equivalent to 480,000㎡, which is 65% of the 74,1192㎡ of business sites.

Copyright © Jeju Sound of All Rights Reserved.

2019 April new?

China Communist Party also plays politics and is deemed dirty.

Netx staff can purchase from the market at 2 cents.

Like PharmaNiaga, Gov may has to renew the contracts as no suitable replacement yet.

When were the private placements done?

Get digital bank licence will make it flying high. Those no hope can sell lah.