Below is an extract from "Fighting corruption: The need for a Big Bang impact" by Anna Taing under the "Random Thoughts" category, April 2, 2012. I can't agree more with the article, and I would like to extend it to Corporate Governance. Despite all the raving articles, the new regulations etc. of the authorities (Securities Commission and Bursa Malaysia), they still haven't managed to get a single conviction (jail sentence, fine or even as little as a reprimand) against a "big shot": either a Blue Chip company, a Government Linked Company or an established tycoon. And that is what is very much needed, to give credibility to the enforcement, to show they really mean business.
"Last Friday, the financial markets of Hong Kong were rocked by news of the arrest of two of Asia's richest tycoons by the Independent Commission against Corruption (ICAC), its anti-graft agency. According to news reports, Thomas and Raymond Kwok, joint chairman and managing directors of Sun Hung Kai Properties, were arrested as part of an alleged corruption and bribery probe.
Such high-level investigations and arrests are not something that we see in Malaysia. And we say that this is exactly the kind of "big bang" impact that Malaysia needs in its fight to eradicate corruption.
Despite the proclamation of success by the government, there is widespread perception that nothing has changed and that corruption is still very persuasive in this country, particularly between the government and the business community.
It didn't help when Malaysia fell four places from 56 to 60 in Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index for 2011.
To be fair, the government has made some headway in fighting corruption with the enactment of the Whistleblower's Act and the publication of offender's faces in the Name and Shame database available on the NKRA website.
Primarily because the measures put in place are seen as "baby steps", there is still a perception that many big offenders have escaped the net, mainly because some are said to be high-powered and well-linked politically. According to the 2010 report of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, 381 people were charged for corruption during the year, of whom 193 were members of the public, 131 were civil servants, 56 private sector employees and amazingly, only one politician.
So, unless there is a clear demonstration that all offenders, big and small, rich and poor, politician or tycoon, are brought to book, the country will never really be able to declare a complete victory in the battle against corruption.
Yes, fighting corruption takes time, but it also can take too long. This is more so when Malaysia wants to become a high-income nation by 2020, and corruption has been singled out as one of the key impediments to the country's economic growth.
In Hong Kong, in the 1970's, corruption was so rampant it was almost a way of live and a norm of government departments. The ICAC was setup in 1974, which resulted in the arrest of a horde of government officials, including high ranking ones. Today, Hong Kong is one of the least corrupt cities in the world.
Thus, it is only by showing the culprits that no one can escape the net that the battle against corruption can be really successful. Going after the small offenders and convicting them is not enough. Catching the big fish will send a stronger and more effective message that Malaysia has no room for corruption. Let's learn from Hong Kong."
A Blog about [1] Corporate Governance issues in Malaysia and [2] Global Investment Ideas
Sunday, 1 April 2012
Governance key for China's London IPO hopefuls
From Reuters, analysis of Chinese firms looking for a listing in London due to a long waiting list in China.
Small and medium-sized Chinese firms looking to list in London will need to prove their corporate governance is up to scratch if they are to win over investors scarred by scandal.
Chinese companies accounted for a third of all global initial public offering volumes in 2011, raising a total of $54.2 billion, according to Thomson Reuters data.
The vast proportion of this was raised on Chinese exchanges, but faced with a long wait to list at home, and attracted by specialist knowledge and a desire to boost their international reputation, Chinese firms' interest in London is growing.
However, investor perception of Chinese IPO candidates has been marred by a string of scandals.
"Investors still want exposure to China but they were burnt a few years ago," said one investment banker.
"There are plenty of companies that could get a London listing done, but they have to be really, really focusing on the governance as if you talk to any UK investor there will be a deep concerns about governance levels ... there is a lasting suspicion you don't necessarily get the full picture."
Lottery operator Betex delisted from London's Alternative Investment Market (AIM) in 2007, just 19 months after its 12.5 million pound ($19.7 million) IPO. Its shares had been suspended after Chinese authorities detained two senior members of staff for illegal gambling.
Others who ran into trouble include mobile phone handset maker ZTC Telecoms, whose chief executive and majority shareholder disappeared in 2008 after using shares in the company as collateral for a loan. Under new leadership and a new name, the company was readmitted to AIM six months later with the intention of completing a reverse takeover, but its listing was cancelled in late 2010 after it failed to do so.
A spate of scandals involving Chinese companies in North America last year is also fresh in the market's mind. Shares in Nasdaq-listed China MediaExpress Holdings, which provides bus advertising, plummeted after fraud accusations. Trading in the company has been halted since March last year.
GETTING GOVERNANCE RIGHT
Getting investors to take a punt will require convincing them that the next wave of companies are ready to cope with the rigours of a London listing, including regular communication with investors, and that they have the right structures in place in terms of board composition and financial reporting.
Chinese sportswear brand Naibu and mining services group Rare Earths Global (REG) are both currently marketing listings on AIM.
For REG, whose chief executive Simon Ong said they had chosen London over alternatives such as Hong Kong because of the city's abundance of mining specialists, the focus on corporate governance has been central.
The company, which is hoping to raise $50 million to expand its operations in China, has appointed three non-executive directors and plans to appoint a further UK-based director with AIM experience following its listing.
It will also set up audit and remuneration committees, and adopt some aspects of the UK's Takeover Code, despite not having to be subject to it as an overseas company.
Naibu has taken a similar approach, appointing three British non-executives, including Giles Elliot who previously worked with asset manager Schroders in Asia and David Thomas, who has experience of Chinese companies on AIM, its spokesman said.
Luke Webster, director at Charles Stanley Securities, which is working on REG's listing, said a run of more successful listings could help boost the number of Chinese IPOs in London.
THREE-YEAR BACKLOG
There are 43 Chinese companies listed on AIM, more than a third of which joined in 2006 during a flurry of activity from Chinese firms. But the experience of high-profile failures like Betex and ZTC has dampened investor appetite.
"What it needs is a couple of really good solid Chinese businesses to demonstrate good corporate governance, transparency and build a track record for delivering results with investors," said Webster, a former manager of the AIM regulation team at the London Stock Exchange (LSE).
Interest has been increasing, said Webster, particularly from retailers and manufacturers as Hong Kong and other Asian markets are already saturated with firms in these sectors.
The suitability of AIM, half of whose 1,122 companies each have a market capitalisation of less than 25 million pounds, for high growth companies and the opportunity to boost their international profile are also important drivers.
For Naibu, which plans to raise up to 50 million pounds to build new factories, being able to list quickly enough to exploit current growth opportunities in China was vital.
There is a long queue of companies waiting to IPO in Shanghai, with the Chinese government keeping tight control over the number of companies that can list. At the moment, capital markets lawyers say the backlog stands at around three years.
That puts the LSE, which has a Beijing office, in a good position to attract those frustrated with the domestic market.
The growing presence of Chinese investment banks in London - China International Capital Corporation (CICC) became the LSE's first Chinese member firm in May last year - is also likely to help boost the flow to London.
"As these banks expand their London capabilities and staff numbers, it is likely that they will want to bring more Chinese companies to market in London," said Tracey Pierce, director of Equity Primary Markets at the LSE.
Small and medium-sized Chinese firms looking to list in London will need to prove their corporate governance is up to scratch if they are to win over investors scarred by scandal.
Chinese companies accounted for a third of all global initial public offering volumes in 2011, raising a total of $54.2 billion, according to Thomson Reuters data.
The vast proportion of this was raised on Chinese exchanges, but faced with a long wait to list at home, and attracted by specialist knowledge and a desire to boost their international reputation, Chinese firms' interest in London is growing.
However, investor perception of Chinese IPO candidates has been marred by a string of scandals.
"Investors still want exposure to China but they were burnt a few years ago," said one investment banker.
"There are plenty of companies that could get a London listing done, but they have to be really, really focusing on the governance as if you talk to any UK investor there will be a deep concerns about governance levels ... there is a lasting suspicion you don't necessarily get the full picture."
Lottery operator Betex delisted from London's Alternative Investment Market (AIM) in 2007, just 19 months after its 12.5 million pound ($19.7 million) IPO. Its shares had been suspended after Chinese authorities detained two senior members of staff for illegal gambling.
Others who ran into trouble include mobile phone handset maker ZTC Telecoms, whose chief executive and majority shareholder disappeared in 2008 after using shares in the company as collateral for a loan. Under new leadership and a new name, the company was readmitted to AIM six months later with the intention of completing a reverse takeover, but its listing was cancelled in late 2010 after it failed to do so.
A spate of scandals involving Chinese companies in North America last year is also fresh in the market's mind. Shares in Nasdaq-listed China MediaExpress Holdings, which provides bus advertising, plummeted after fraud accusations. Trading in the company has been halted since March last year.
GETTING GOVERNANCE RIGHT
Getting investors to take a punt will require convincing them that the next wave of companies are ready to cope with the rigours of a London listing, including regular communication with investors, and that they have the right structures in place in terms of board composition and financial reporting.
Chinese sportswear brand Naibu and mining services group Rare Earths Global (REG) are both currently marketing listings on AIM.
For REG, whose chief executive Simon Ong said they had chosen London over alternatives such as Hong Kong because of the city's abundance of mining specialists, the focus on corporate governance has been central.
The company, which is hoping to raise $50 million to expand its operations in China, has appointed three non-executive directors and plans to appoint a further UK-based director with AIM experience following its listing.
It will also set up audit and remuneration committees, and adopt some aspects of the UK's Takeover Code, despite not having to be subject to it as an overseas company.
Naibu has taken a similar approach, appointing three British non-executives, including Giles Elliot who previously worked with asset manager Schroders in Asia and David Thomas, who has experience of Chinese companies on AIM, its spokesman said.
Luke Webster, director at Charles Stanley Securities, which is working on REG's listing, said a run of more successful listings could help boost the number of Chinese IPOs in London.
THREE-YEAR BACKLOG
There are 43 Chinese companies listed on AIM, more than a third of which joined in 2006 during a flurry of activity from Chinese firms. But the experience of high-profile failures like Betex and ZTC has dampened investor appetite.
"What it needs is a couple of really good solid Chinese businesses to demonstrate good corporate governance, transparency and build a track record for delivering results with investors," said Webster, a former manager of the AIM regulation team at the London Stock Exchange (LSE).
Interest has been increasing, said Webster, particularly from retailers and manufacturers as Hong Kong and other Asian markets are already saturated with firms in these sectors.
The suitability of AIM, half of whose 1,122 companies each have a market capitalisation of less than 25 million pounds, for high growth companies and the opportunity to boost their international profile are also important drivers.
For Naibu, which plans to raise up to 50 million pounds to build new factories, being able to list quickly enough to exploit current growth opportunities in China was vital.
There is a long queue of companies waiting to IPO in Shanghai, with the Chinese government keeping tight control over the number of companies that can list. At the moment, capital markets lawyers say the backlog stands at around three years.
That puts the LSE, which has a Beijing office, in a good position to attract those frustrated with the domestic market.
The growing presence of Chinese investment banks in London - China International Capital Corporation (CICC) became the LSE's first Chinese member firm in May last year - is also likely to help boost the flow to London.
"As these banks expand their London capabilities and staff numbers, it is likely that they will want to bring more Chinese companies to market in London," said Tracey Pierce, director of Equity Primary Markets at the LSE.
Saturday, 31 March 2012
Metronic Global: syndicates and receivables
Article in Business Times: "Transparency will benefit all market players" by Francis Fernandez.
"Do we have market makers here in Malaysia? The answer to that officially is a resounding "NO", but the market makers, nevertheless, exist unofficially at least.
Hence recent reports that Bursa Malaysia gave verbal instructions to brokerages to stop their proprietary day traders (PDTs) from trading in Metronic Global Bhd and Ariantec Global Bhd are disturbing.
What Bursa Malaysia did is good, but why the reports on the market regulator engaging with the brokers are disturbing is because, when Bursa Malaysia gives out instructions on some particular securities, it must provide the information to all investors at the same time.
I do believe that is why it has a website. If all investors have the same information, then they will be able to make an informed decision based on facts, and not on reports that can later be denied or confirmed.
Most investors do not read the same newspapers, hence some will gain from those reports, while other will lose out".
But according to its most recent statement, nothing has changed:
Volume is very high, reaching 845 million on March 21, 2012. Remarkable, since the total number of shares is only 635 million.
"DO we have syndicates operating in the local stock market? The answer is probably "Yes". Do we have syndicates operating in the major global equity markets? The answer to that is also probably "Yes".
However, can we prove our suspicions with facts, the answer to that is most likely "NO".
Does the financial markets need market makers and are all market makers syndicates? The answer to that question is probably tangled with a bit of white, black and a whole lot of grey".
However, can we prove our suspicions with facts, the answer to that is most likely "NO".
Does the financial markets need market makers and are all market makers syndicates? The answer to that question is probably tangled with a bit of white, black and a whole lot of grey".
"Do we have market makers here in Malaysia? The answer to that officially is a resounding "NO", but the market makers, nevertheless, exist unofficially at least.
Hence recent reports that Bursa Malaysia gave verbal instructions to brokerages to stop their proprietary day traders (PDTs) from trading in Metronic Global Bhd and Ariantec Global Bhd are disturbing.
What Bursa Malaysia did is good, but why the reports on the market regulator engaging with the brokers are disturbing is because, when Bursa Malaysia gives out instructions on some particular securities, it must provide the information to all investors at the same time.
I do believe that is why it has a website. If all investors have the same information, then they will be able to make an informed decision based on facts, and not on reports that can later be denied or confirmed.
Most investors do not read the same newspapers, hence some will gain from those reports, while other will lose out".
I wrote about Metronic Global in the past, it is a company with quite a few issues, some dating from a long time ago. This is their statement from June 30, 2011 about RM 44.5 million outstanding receivables:
"In relation to the related party receivables due from the Main Contractor Related Party, subject to the finalization of the claim certification by JKR and the subsequent disbursement of payment from the Ministry of Finance, the Company expects the outstanding receivables to be fully recovered through progressive disbursements to be made by the Government of Malaysia not later than 31 December 2011."
But according to its most recent statement, nothing has changed:
Its share price made a rollercoaster ride with the entry of a new investor, Datuk Raymond Chan Boon Siew, buying 33 million shares (5.2%):
Volume is very high, reaching 845 million on March 21, 2012. Remarkable, since the total number of shares is only 635 million.
We have to wait and see how this story will evolve.
Friday, 30 March 2012
Rafael Hui "to attend to other commitments"
This statement comes from the AIA group in Hong Kong:
"The board of directors (the “Board”) of AIA Group Limited (the “Company”) announces that, Mr. Rafael Si-Yan Hui has tendered his resignation as independent non-executive director of the Company with effect from 29 March 2012 in order to attend to other commitments".
"The board of directors (the “Board”) of AIA Group Limited (the “Company”) announces that, Mr. Rafael Si-Yan Hui has tendered his resignation as independent non-executive director of the Company with effect from 29 March 2012 in order to attend to other commitments".
And what are those "other commitments"?
They are revealed here:
"Hong Kong's richest property tycoons, Thomas and Raymond Kwok who jointly head Sun Hung Kai, and former Chief Secretary Rafael Hui have been arrested by the ICAC for suspected corruption."
Thanks to David Webb's website for the tip.
By the way, Rafael Hui has been released today, but the announcement of the AIA group could have been "a tiny bit" more clear about the reasons of his resignation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)