Posted by freddiehero > 2020-02-01 20:34 | Report Abuse

rush in and rush out ka..

Posted by freddiehero > 2020-02-01 20:36 | Report Abuse

if account pasul can b pn17 ka?

Posted by paktua73 > 2020-02-01 20:38 | Report Abuse

bukan rush in rush out lagi..
dah flush out habis kaw kaw..
toge laa..
ah kaq hang macamana??
aku terlungkup kena con kaw kaw dgn TF..
mampos...

tut tut
waaaaaaaaa...waaaaaa..
Godzilla crash below 1.20

Posted by paktua73 > 2020-02-01 20:41 | Report Abuse

AA paktua rasa akan runtuh jauh ni..
maw below 1.00
mcm kes mywg,dsonic tu hari..
so..
sapa xmampu tahan..
pikir pikir laa..

tut tut
biaq jaa jadi pekasam..
lambat laun naik balik juga cam dsonic

Posted by Joon Chan > 2020-02-01 20:43 | Report Abuse

I think MACC is tremendously irresponsible here. It’s news that’s political. airbus gets tickled, Boeing kills people. But you wanna confirm whack this country into a meltdown. I think she gonna get a sounding from tun Mahathir, and the SC also. Where is their input?


It’s already a spooky market, airlines are an inherently spooky business. between oil prices , crashes, strikes , and debt levels you also scared.


If our airlines fail, since we only have one left. What then? No tourism. Virus already suppress. No more trips on weekend to Bali and Bangkok lo, see how much MAS fly you there for, or go transit in Singapore to go Bangkok back to the days of 3 hour check in very good.

Inter ASEAN travel has opened up so much to everyone in every country . Everyone benefits, a whole bunch of new industries and jobs were made.

What book cooking nonsense. Did you get cash in dividends? The cash come from where. Planes don’t fly on fake fuel ok..

Haiyooo. Maybe we deserve our own fate after all.

Posted by Unkerpanjang > 2020-02-01 20:59 | Report Abuse

Wah Lau! I also kena exposure,... Is ABMB financial partner for AA? Pls confirm?

Posted by Springtime > 2020-02-01 21:08 | Report Abuse

https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2020/02/01/macc-probing-airasia-airbus-bribery-allegations
Monday habis wayang

Posted by lizi > 2020-02-01 21:12 | Report Abuse

will AA suspend trading on monday for damage control action first?

Posted by Panorama1 > 2020-02-01 21:14 | Report Abuse

MACC has to be applauded for being prompt and transparent. Nothing political about the matter but sheer guts to act without Fear nor Favour and to commence investigation. Such shocking independent news from UK set out in Court papers ought to be investigated immediately rather than to be swept under the carpet. Rule of Law applies and the “Executives” are innocent until proven Guilty.

Posted by Sslee > 2020-02-01 21:15 | Report Abuse

Hahahaha,
i3lurker what to do? Malaysians like to use sidedoor or backdoor entry. You help me, I help you already become acceptable. I complaint to SC and Bursa also no use must try MACC next.

Posted by EmperorFund > 2020-02-01 21:16 | Report Abuse

If Lex Terrae applies, as long as TF does not go to India...he is safe...

But now is MACC.....where to hide?

Posted by Joon Chan > 2020-02-01 21:19 | Report Abuse

The Guardian, or any UK newspaper is not independent. After their "reporting" of Hong Kong, you are left with some really bad doubts. And maybe our The Star is not bad after all.

You know what's independent? The UK! Brexit. What good timing.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/31/airbus-to-pay-record-3bn-in-fines-for-endemic-corruption

I've read the MACC statement. They have every right to investigate, if they were doing their jobs right, then this is an issue that's open since 4 years ago. Should they have also not considered the economic impact? So many stakeholders involved. Why, to shout out ! I've courage! This is like one of the least corrupt things going on right now, more so 4 years ago.

You know there is a judgement call sometimes. Two big aerospace companies, selling planes in nascent markets.Corporate governance evolves. So yes settlement, and airbus says okay we learned our lesson, we won't do it so blatantly anymore.

But the fact is, at that moment in the past - that got the deal done. We are here today, and tomorrow. So it's important to take care of tomorrow.

Posted by Unkerpanjang > 2020-02-01 21:27 | Report Abuse

Graft involved from.. ... Bicycles, helicopters, submarines to jet engines n now planes.

Posted by Panorama1 > 2020-02-01 21:28 | Report Abuse

This news is not based on merely newspaper reporting. It is clearly set out in Court Papers as admitted by Airbus Executives. “The investigations have resulted in a record €3.6 billion (RM16.36 billion) settlement with anti-fraud agencies in the UK, France and the US to stop further investigations into the company and escape a criminal conviction, which would have prevented it from doing business in several countries”.

Posted by TonsilBasher > 2020-02-01 21:36 | Report Abuse

Target Price rm 0.4

Posted by Jeffreyteck > 2020-02-01 21:40 | Report Abuse

...MACC investigating Airbus bribe claims against two AirAsia executives.... Percentage of successful cases? Withdrawing death sentence is more urgent than improving enforcement agencies efficiency and effectiveness, in particular, on those with power and money.

Posted by EmperorFund > 2020-02-01 21:42 | Report Abuse

The improper payment consisted of US$50 million (and Airbus employees also offered but did not pay an additional US$55 million) paid to directors and/or employees of AirAsia and AirAsia X airlines as sponsorship for a sports team. (THE EDGE)

WHAT SPORTS TEAM??????

Is it a Soccer Team?

Posted by TonsilBasher > 2020-02-01 21:49 | Report Abuse

Air Asia Has bad Corporate governance. This stock is for play not for long term

Posted by Joon Chan > 2020-02-01 21:58 | Report Abuse

https://www.sfo.gov.uk/download/airbus-se-deferred-prosecution-agreement-statement-of-facts/

Let you read the whole case la... Alot of things. Chinese lobbying, consultants, generals, military hardware, the Malaysian case, haha. Doesnt deserve to be included in this case...

54. On 27 September 2010 the CDSC considered a proposal to sponsor the Sports team for US$6 million, in respect of which Airbus would pay for AAB advertising. AirAsia Executive 1 complained to Airbus employee 2 [senior] about the delay. This led to internal correspondence between Airbus employees where Airbus employee 1 [senior] wrote to Airbus employee 2 [senior] on 8 November 2010 as follows:
“I am sure that you will understand that paying USD 16 m on [Sports team] need some minimum engineering!!!”

55. In an email to AirAsia Executive 1, Airbus employee 2 [senior] stated:
“I have not seen all the papers relating to the sponsorship but in general, we need to have some internal link to AirAsia as we can't get board approval simply to sponsor.
Externally there is probably no need to link the two.”

56. There was no legal relationship between AAB, AAX and the Sports team, albeit the association between them was utilised by both parties to generate publicity. The common denominators were AirAsia Executive 1 and AirAsia Executive 2.

57. On 27 December 2010, pursuant to the concluded sponsorship agreement (the “First Sponsorship Agreement”) Airbus made a payment of US$3 million to the Sports team. On 9 February 2011 Airbus employee 2 [senior] emailed AirAsia Executive 1 asking for an invoice: “…for the next 3 million.”. On the same day Airbus employee 2 [senior] emailed Airbus employee 1 [senior] forwarding the email chain and wrote:
“[Airbus employee 1 [senior]] as discussed yesterday, please can you pay immediately. It will help me close my deal.”

58. On 24 February 2011 a payment of US$3 million was made to the Sports team. At that stage, US$10 million of the 2009 MoU commitment remained outstanding and was split into two separate payments of equal amounts.

59. On 12 July 2011, an amendment to the First Sponsorship Agreement was signed by Airbus employee 3 [very senior] pursuant to which Airbus agreed to pay the Sports team US$5 million. This payment was made on 26 July 2011 from the SMO International budget. 60. The remaining US$5 million was not coming out of the SMO International bu

External analysis was obtained regarding the value of the sponsorship, which was considered by Airbus employee 7 [very senior] (Airbus Compliance), who advised: “This is helpful. However, I strongly advise that our contribution to [the Sports team] becomes transparent to the management of Air Asia. For instance, the MD or another legal rep of the airline
18
can acknowledge the contribution. The purpose is to mitigate the risk of being accused of conspiracy on transfer value from the airline to the majority shareholder private interests.” 75. On 15 October 2013, Airbus employee 2 [senior] wrote an email to Airbus employee 1 [senior] and another SMO International employee:
“We need to get this done. If not we don’t have a 25 A330 deal. We won’t get any letter from Air Asia x.” 76. By November 2013, AAB had signed the purchase agreement for the A330 aircraft but would not proceed until the US$30 million of sponsorship was finalised. Airbus employee 2 [senior] wrote to Airbus employee 1 [senior] :
“I know we still have some compliance issues on the 30m for [the Sports team]. When can we expect a solution. My PA for A330 is now signed but not dated. They will only release when we sign with [the Sports team].” 77. The following month Airbus employee 2 [senior] emailed Airbus employee 4 [very senior], Airbus employee 6 [very senior] and Airbus employee 1 [senior] regarding announcing the 25 A330 aircraft deal to say that:
“[AirAsia Executive 1] has agreed we can announce this month if it is important for Airbus. However, he wants his contract for the 30m in sponsorship before he agrees.” 78. On 12 December 2013, Airbus entered into an amendment to the Second Sponsorship Agreement with the Sports team, increasing sponsorship by US$30 million. 79. On 16 December 2013, Airbus made a US$15 million payment to the Sports team’s bank account. On 18 December 2013, AAX announced its purchase of 25 A330 aircraft and an agreement was signed. The purchase order has been since amended to 7 A330 aircraft. 80. The Sports team sold the remaining US$15 million debt to a third party bank in order to receive advance payment. Airbus paid the third party bank US$15 million on 9 January 2015.

Posted by TonsilBasher > 2020-02-01 22:00 | Report Abuse

Its very bad corporate governance. Do you trust this type of company??

Posted by TonsilBasher > 2020-02-01 22:02 | Report Abuse

TP 40 cent. Dont trust those say otherwise. Becos those say AA still good is silently Q in the morning to dump their position. They are the first to get out of sinking boat. Titanic is sinking

Posted by Joon Chan > 2020-02-01 22:06 | Report Abuse

https://imgur.com/a/MCGteu3

the airasia branding on the jersey, offset abit by Airbus. Airbus should just have a customer development budget for new airlines la. But you know, speed is key, things take ages, so other channels are made

Posted by EmperorFund > 2020-02-01 22:09 | Report Abuse

DISCLAIMER: just sharing old news...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/08/15/qpr-owner-tony-fernandes-step-chairman-club/amp/

Posted by EmperorFund > 2020-02-01 22:10 | Report Abuse

What SPORTS TEAM this case is referring to ???

Posted by TonsilBasher > 2020-02-01 22:11 | Report Abuse

Why is EPF Disposing 7 Million shares on 28 Jan 2020?

Posted by Joon Chan > 2020-02-01 22:12 | Report Abuse

I come to realise, tonsil,i3lurker. my god you are fools. you want to buy the share cheap cheap yourself is it..?

Posted by Joon Chan > 2020-02-01 22:14 | Report Abuse

EPF dispose the shares to pay you that 6% you have in your baki 1 and baki 2.
it's fund management business la what else.

Posted by TonsilBasher > 2020-02-01 22:14 | Report Abuse

I can Guarantee this Idiot Joon Chan is a hypocrit and the first one to sell on MOnday Morning. Are you cheating others not to sell so fast? Come on everybody know its a sinking boat with Wuhan Virus and now this scandal

Posted by EmperorFund > 2020-02-01 22:16 | Report Abuse

Section 44(1) of the Anti Money Laundering Act states that “an enforcement agency may issue an order to freeze any property of any person if an investigation of an unlawful activity has commenced against that person and if the enforcement agency has reasonable grounds to suspect that the property was from the proceeds of an unlawful activity or the instrumentalities of an offence”.

Is bribery a money laundering offence?

Posted by dxbman > 2020-02-01 22:18 | Report Abuse

@Emperor, QPR owned by TF

Posted by EmperorFund > 2020-02-01 22:18 | Report Abuse

Meaning....if bribery is money laundering....macc can freeze till iced?

Posted by freddiehero > 2020-02-01 22:21 | Report Abuse

play mario jumping game.la.. monday baru start

Posted by Chris Wong > 2020-02-01 22:22 | Report Abuse

so many bad news coming to airasia.

Posted by EngineeringProfit > 2020-02-01 22:23 | Report Abuse

Escape with BAT mobile lah

Posted by EngineeringProfit > 2020-02-01 22:24 | Report Abuse

(Msia is like Gotham City)

Posted by Joon Chan > 2020-02-01 22:24 | Report Abuse

Now i'm the stupid one for even thinking whatever nonsense you spout will have an effect on the share price.

But i don't appreciate the nonsense you spew to other readers.

And you must know that it is a fragile time now. You think Airasia is not important? Have you seen what tourism is as a % of Malaysias GDP? It's 7% you know!

You want this to explode? So every other connected industry could be at risk?

Posted by EngineeringProfit > 2020-02-01 22:26 | Report Abuse

And then who to bail out MAS, if not AA?

Posted by Joon Chan > 2020-02-01 22:28 | Report Abuse

Really don't get it, 55m passengers fly with AirAsia Malaysia alone.

I don't know what AirAsia loan covenants are, but you know it might be an event of default if their shares go to some low level?

Posted by Safri Rahman > 2020-02-01 22:29 | Report Abuse

AA statements

https://newsroom.airasia.com/news/2020/2/1/airbus-deferred-prosecution-agreement

Posted by flexibt > 2020-02-01 22:31 | Report Abuse

ANOTHER FAKE NEWS BY RENOWNED MEDIA?


JUST LIKE what happened to Broadcom - Apple case ?


Someone paid for the made-up stories!




Media release by AA

https://newsroom.airasia.com/news/2020/2/1/airbus-deferred-prosecution-agreement



Airbus' Deferred Prosecution Agreement


SEPANG, 1 February 2020 -- AirAsia refers to the article entitled “AirAsia directors/staff got RM240 mil bribe from Airbus, court docs say” on the focusmalaysia.my website, as well as other articles in the press regarding the Deferred Prosecution Agreement entered into by Airbus SE and the U.K. Serious Fraud Office (SFO) on 31 January 2020. At the outset, AirAsia wishes to clearly state that it was neither involved in any way whatsoever with the SFO’s investigation of Airbus nor given any opportunity to provide any information or clarification to the SFO.

The articles referenced above allege that certain agreements by AirAsia to order Airbus aircraft were improperly linked to sponsorship by Airbus of a sports team jointly owned by AirAsia executives. AirAsia vigorously rejects and denies any and all allegations of wrongdoing.

The entering into of each aircraft purchase agreement was never made by any single individual decision, but instead arrived at through careful evaluation, deliberation and the collective decision of the board members after taking into account technical specifications, aircraft flight performance and operating economics. The superiority and reliability of the aircraft and increasingly attractive pricing being offered to maintain our competitive edge in the airline business were key considerations. As a customer of Airbus since 2005, AirAsia never made purchase decisions that were premised on an Airbus sponsorship.

We also wish to emphasise that all negotiations and dealings leading to the signing of any aircraft purchase agreement have been undertaken directly with Airbus on an arm’s length basis, and without the involvement of any third parties or intermediaries. AirAsia executives negotiated rigorously in the interests of the company and had at all times acted in good faith. In any event, AirAsia is aware that correspondence between the company and Airbus dating back more than a decade has been reported in the press without proper context or review, and we are concerned that views and opinions on the matter may have been formed unfairly and prematurely.

Furthermore, the involvement of Airbus in the sponsorship of the sports team was a well-known and widely-publicised matter bringing branding and other benefits to Airbus. AirAsia’s own sponsorship of the sports team went through due internal assessment and approvals before being considered and approved by the board.

As AirAsia and its executives have no visibility on Airbus’ internal processes, we cannot comment on or be associated with any alleged failures or lapses on the part of Airbus to comply with its own policies or applicable legal requirements.

AirAsia is deeply concerned that these allegations will have an adverse and negative impact on the AirAsia brand, reputation and goodwill. AirAsia is monitoring developments in this matter and will review any allegations or negative inferences concerning or affecting AirAsia and/or any of its executives and will fully cooperate with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the relevant authorities where required.

Posted by EmperorFund > 2020-02-01 22:35 | Report Abuse

Section 44(1) of the Anti Money Laundering Act states that “an enforcement agency may issue an order to freeze any property of any person if an investigation of an unlawful activity has commenced against that person and if the enforcement agency has reasonable grounds to suspect that the property was from the proceeds of an unlawful activity or the instrumentalities of an offence”. 

Means Freeze Dulu....Siasat Kemudian???

Posted by Tan KW > 2020-02-01 22:40 | Report Abuse

AirAsia Media Statement - Airbus' Deferred Prosecution Agreement

https://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/kianweiaritcles/2020-02-01-story-h1483014971-AirAsia_Media_Statement_Airbus_Deferred_Prosecution_Agreement.jsp

Posted by EmperorFund > 2020-02-01 22:46 | Report Abuse

Section 44(1) of the Anti Money Laundering Act states that “an enforcement agency may issue an order to freeze any property of any person if an investigation of an unlawful activity has commenced against that person and if the enforcement agency has reasonable grounds to suspect that the property was from the proceeds of an unlawful activity or the instrumentalities of an offence”.  

Investigate how long? Freeze that long....

Posted by EngineeringProfit > 2020-02-01 22:47 | Report Abuse

Escape with BAT mobile lah

Posted by EmperorFund > 2020-02-01 22:47 | Report Abuse

Will fully cooperate with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the relevant authorities where required.

Gonna investigate how long?

Posted by RogerTan901111 > 2020-02-01 22:49 | Report Abuse

Guys, why so many overreaction? TF is TF, AA is AA. As long as financial statements is not a fraud (which was audited by Ernst & Young btw), then nothing bad will happen to AA fundamentally. TF if guilty will just be sacked (and maybe fined)? New CEO take over, business go on as usual.

Do you guys really think AA will be PN17 because of a $50 million sponsor? Please, this case is not difficult to get out of. AA can go on a defense stance to show the comparison of Boeing and Airbus (price point, safety etc), and even without the bribe, the decision would be Airbus.

The one in hot waters are the executives who takes bribe. Executives' liabilities and the Companies are separate entities. MACC can freeze TF's account, but they can't freeze AA to continue their business.

The reason why Airbus paid the fine s because those bribe offering was an instruction or corporate culture from top to bottom, this means they are doing that for the company to get the business, hence the fines are appropriate. However, for AA, is just between choosing a vendor. These kind of crime does not warrant AA to pay fine at all as the benefit is wholly on the executives who received the bribe.

Posted by EmperorFund > 2020-02-01 22:49 | Report Abuse

Food for thought...

How long can u suspend a counter in Bursa ?

Posted by i3lurker > 2020-02-01 22:49 | Report Abuse

might take 20 years to investigate

Posted by EmperorFund > Feb 1, 2020 10:47 PM | Report Abuse
Will fully cooperate with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the relevant authorities where required.

Gonna investigate how long?

Posted by icepumpkin > 2020-02-01 23:00 | Report Abuse

Walao. Should we sell? Trapped.

Posted by Zuliana > 2020-02-01 23:00 | Report Abuse

Airbus' Deferred Prosecution Agreement


SEPANG, 1 February 2020 -- AirAsia refers to the article entitled “AirAsia directors/staff got RM240 mil bribe from Airbus, court docs say” on the focusmalaysia.my website, as well as other articles in the press regarding the Deferred Prosecution Agreement entered into by Airbus SE and the U.K. Serious Fraud Office (SFO) on 31 January 2020. At the outset, AirAsia wishes to clearly state that it was neither involved in any way whatsoever with the SFO’s investigation of Airbus nor given any opportunity to provide any information or clarification to the SFO.

The articles referenced above allege that certain agreements by AirAsia to order Airbus aircraft were improperly linked to sponsorship by Airbus of a sports team jointly owned by AirAsia executives. AirAsia vigorously rejects and denies any and all allegations of wrongdoing.

The entering into of each aircraft purchase agreement was never made by any single individual decision, but instead arrived at through careful evaluation, deliberation and the collective decision of the board members after taking into account technical specifications, aircraft flight performance and operating economics. The superiority and reliability of the aircraft and increasingly attractive pricing being offered to maintain our competitive edge in the airline business were key considerations. As a customer of Airbus since 2005, AirAsia never made purchase decisions that were premised on an Airbus sponsorship.

We also wish to emphasise that all negotiations and dealings leading to the signing of any aircraft purchase agreement have been undertaken directly with Airbus on an arm’s length basis, and without the involvement of any third parties or intermediaries. AirAsia executives negotiated rigorously in the interests of the company and had at all times acted in good faith. In any event, AirAsia is aware that correspondence between the company and Airbus dating back more than a decade has been reported in the press without proper context or review, and we are concerned that views and opinions on the matter may have been formed unfairly and prematurely.

Furthermore, the involvement of Airbus in the sponsorship of the sports team was a well-known and widely-publicised matter bringing branding and other benefits to Airbus. AirAsia’s own sponsorship of the sports team went through due internal assessment and approvals before being considered and approved by the board.

As AirAsia and its executives have no visibility on Airbus’ internal processes, we cannot comment on or be associated with any alleged failures or lapses on the part of Airbus to comply with its own policies or applicable legal requirements.

AirAsia is deeply concerned that these allegations will have an adverse and negative impact on the AirAsia brand, reputation and goodwill. AirAsia is monitoring developments in this matter and will review any allegations or negative inferences concerning or affecting AirAsia and/or any of its executives and will fully cooperate with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the relevant authorities where required.
01/02/2020 10:31 PM
=========

No worry lah, AA denied any wrongdoings involved with Airbus. So no sell off Isnin ini.