Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 MAS - Suspension, Why do you think it get suspended?

views
     
cherroy
post Jun 12 2009, 11:34 PM

20k VIP Club
Group Icon
Staff
25,802 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


Technically MAS is a PN17 company now, and have risk of delisting.

But wait, KLSE has waiver on MAS under some conditions

Quoted from KLSE's MAS announcement.

QUOTE
Condition 1: The Conditional Waiver is only in respect of unrealised MTM losses for fuel hedging contracts arising from the adoption of FRS 139. If MAS triggers the PN 17 criteria due to reasons other than the above (e.g. realised losses from hedging contracts), the above Conditional Waiver will not apply;

Condition 2: MAS must ensure full compliance with FRS 139 in recognising and measuring all the financial assets, financial liabilities and certain contracts to buy or sell non-financial items as stipulated in FRS 139 in all its financial statements issued in the financial year 2009;

Condition 3: MAS is to take all necessary measures to cease or avoid triggering the PN 17 criteria by 31 December 2009. In the event that the Company triggers or continues to trigger the PN 17 criteria after the expiry of the Conditional Waiver (i.e. 31 December 2009), MAS will be required to fully comply with PN 17 requirements;

Condition 4: MAS must take the following disclosures in its quarterly report(s):

i) a Proforma balance sheet position in its quarterly report (“QR”) ended 31 March 2009, showing shareholders’ equity based on MTM valuation of the fuel hedging contracts as at 29 May 2009 under the FRS 139 reporting principles;
ii) a Proforma balance sheet position without FRS 139 in all its QRs for financial year 2009;
iii) total realised and unrealised losses due to fuel hedging contracts under FRS 139 for financial year to-date in all its QRs for financial year 2009; and
iv) the status of the measures as referred to in Condition 3 above in all its QRs for financial year 2009.

The Conditional Waiver granted by Bursa was after taking into consideration of, amongst others, the following factors:

i) high volatility of the underlying assets (i.e. fuel) hedged by MAS which is subject to MTM valuation giving rise to fluctuations in the Group Equity Holders’ Fund. In this regard, it is noted that the Group Equity Holders’ Fund was negative for the quarter ended 31 March 2009 based on the pricing of fuel price at the material period but positive based on the comparative fuel forward curve as at 29 May 2009; and
ii) the MTM losses of the Group’s fuel hedging contracts are unrealised losses.









cherroy
post Jun 13 2009, 09:07 AM

20k VIP Club
Group Icon
Staff
25,802 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


QUOTE(VyvernS @ Jun 13 2009, 12:48 AM)
Haha...I leave after work and find MAS is nearly kena PN-17 since the company become Net Tangible Liability (NTL). They managed to get a waiver and not put on PN-17 - somehow someone managed to get this waiver.

Actually, lots of airlines hedge against fuel price increase, but I think last year most, if not all, bet the wrong way and recorded losses due to fuel price drop.

The waiver takes into account that the reason it became NTL is due to hedging wrong way, NOT because MAS management failed to properly execute the MAS operations.

In fact, I bought MAS at 2.6 because I have faith that Idris Jala will turnaround the company, and not because it is a GLC. Based on the recovery from 2007, Idris Jala has shown he is capable to turnaround a loss company to profit, taking hard steps where needed. I believe that at the end of 2009, this company will already turn around and later the MTM losses will be history.

Hehe...Just my 2 cents.
*
No doubt about Idris Jala reputation and credibility which show good and excellent track record.

Operation wise, MAS still suffer 100+ million losses, hedging losses 500+ millions. Operational wise still in red, but to be fair, every airliner also suffering in this period of time.

Turn around, it depended on economy condition and oil price then, if condition is not favourable like due to prolonged economy recession, flu become severe etc or fuel cost sky-rocketing, he is powerless to do anything as well.

MAS has poor history on hedging the fuel cost.
Last time, when oil price starting to surge, MAS has little hedge, so suffer the high fuel cost.
After oil price surge to USD100, start to hedge a lot, now suffering.

cherroy
post Jun 13 2009, 09:08 AM

20k VIP Club
Group Icon
Staff
25,802 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


QUOTE(AutumnFoliage @ Jun 13 2009, 08:09 AM)
if really become pn17?? jia lat la...  sad.gif
*
The answer is not yet due to waiver.

Actually this move makes the first step and show how other can apply for waiver. whistling.gif
cherroy
post Jun 13 2009, 10:42 AM

20k VIP Club
Group Icon
Staff
25,802 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


Negative equity means investors are paying 3.xx into a company that has nothing in their book but only liability aka in layman term, company has loss all of its asset and capital already previously. If company cannot turn into profit, basically there is nothing left in the company.

So for those paying 3.xx share price on it basically is paying the price on the expectation of the company to make xxx millions in the coming few years.

But the hedging loss is not yet fully realised if not mistaken.
But it has been realised, it will trigger the PN17 violation.
cherroy
post Jun 14 2009, 06:24 PM

20k VIP Club
Group Icon
Staff
25,802 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


Whether MAS needs bailout or not is depended on the solvency aka cashflow position.

MAS is doing wrong decision at both time

When oil price was low, no hedge at all. So suffer the high fuel cost when oil price surged. So make loss

So after that start to hedge at 100, then oil price plummeting, so suffering the hedge loss. So again make loss.

If the company is always running at hedge one, the company benefit from the hedge previously when oil price surged.
Or
if the company is always running at no hedge or little hedge, then at least now getting the benefit of low oil price.

Aka you have at least one + and one - from your consistent or proper strategy.
Not double -ve as they are facing now.

The situation just suggested the company has no proper set of hedging strategy. Just like ordinary people when seeing share up time, go to chase, while when seeing share down time, don't want to buy. So always ended loss.

Don't get me wrong.
I am not blaming the company management currently as Idris Jala is newly appointed and couldn't do much about previous loss suffering. But what they need to do is have a full set of proper hedging position be it right or wrong for the outcome of the oil price.



cherroy
post Jun 15 2009, 10:57 AM

20k VIP Club
Group Icon
Staff
25,802 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


QUOTE(lklatmy @ Jun 14 2009, 11:56 PM)
No doubt,MAS will tumble tomorrow,but any big drop(limit down will be ideal) will be an opportunity.

My two sens.
*
The problem is, for long term investing, I can't see why we should be paying 3.xx for a company that in negative equity and no forseable profit future yet which there is surely no dividend in the next 3-5 years future.

I don't mind betting at 1.xx - 2.00 tongue.gif

My view only.
cherroy
post Jun 15 2009, 11:02 AM

20k VIP Club
Group Icon
Staff
25,802 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


Just to add,
MAS is an airliner company, they should hedge according to the operation needs, not act as like oil traders to guess which way oil price will go.
This is not the company objective.

Just like what plantation companies are doing, as long as the CPO price is profitable, they hedge the CPO price by selling at futures first disregard how future is look like be it up or down. You don't bet the market as long as business is profitable which is the company objective.



cherroy
post Jun 15 2009, 02:00 PM

20k VIP Club
Group Icon
Staff
25,802 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


QUOTE(lklatmy @ Jun 15 2009, 11:31 AM)
I do not have any privilege information but judging from the wording of the March09 Q announcement and the explaination that follows,it appear to me that MAS is doing hedging of their fuel needs,not trading.But the hedge gone awry due to the fall of crude oil prices in March/april this year.

*
The reason why I said they acted like oil traders is because :

1. They don't hedge in their history aka never or little hedge before oil price spike.
2. They only hedge when oil over 100.
3. Now the question, they got any hedge or not when oil price fall below 50 to as low as 35 during March and April? If the answer is no, their act is not different than a oil trader/speculator.

Although those fuel is indeed needed for their plane, you can't make decision (hedging) according the oil market price movement totally.

Doing business, it is not right trying to be clever or speculate your raw material is going to rise or not, then make decision (especially with billion of hedging) based on your prediction/speculation about the trend.

Do't mean company cannot hedge, but hedging must have some proper strategy and appropriate, not like suddenly no hedge, now hedging for 2 years, then no hedging again.

What should a company focus on is to maximise the capacity, cost controlling, which maximise the efficiency of runnig a company.
Whatever price increase/decrease in raw material, generally company can pass the cost to your customers one.

If the particular industry cannot pass the cost of raw material to customers which is to achieve some profit margin on long term basic, then this industry doesn't deserved to survive in the first place.

Any price increase in raw material could impact the company profit margin, but it is temporary as soon and later, this cost increase can pass to the customers/consumers one.






cherroy
post Jun 15 2009, 04:00 PM

20k VIP Club
Group Icon
Staff
25,802 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


QUOTE(lklatmy @ Jun 15 2009, 03:21 PM)
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «

Just my view,lets have a vitual beer

cheers.gif  cheers.gif
*
I fully understand your view.
icon_rolleyes.gif
I am in manufacturing line/business. I fully understand somehow, cost cannot passed straight away to customers in poor environment, but it is matter of time, it will happen finally (cost being passed around), if not the company or particular industry need to close shop.

If I am Hapseng shareholder, I won't be cursing the management to sell CPO at 2000+ as long as it already generate good enough profit and give good dividend. You still can produce more to sell at 4000+ forward!

As business out there is quite simple, if a particular industry/product is having high profit margin (like CPO at 4000+), it will lure a lot of new investment and company venture into it, soon or later, supply will creep out to offset the high profit margin.
That's why people in this industry never view at 4000+ is a sustainable level because profit margin is simply too much.

I understand it is a difficult decision for the management board or CFO to decide to hedge or not to hedge at 100. Just as I said before, they need to have consistent and proper strategy for it. If got hedge, then all the time hedge it. If not, then stay as no hedge. At least you either have outcome of +1 or -1, not the like -2 currently they are suffering.
I have no problem for the unrealised hedging loss, but the most issue is about how the company plan for it.

Let have a virtual beer cheers.gif cheers.gif
Cheers.


cherroy
post Mar 11 2011, 02:02 PM

20k VIP Club
Group Icon
Staff
25,802 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang


QUOTE(Bonescythe @ Mar 11 2011, 02:00 PM)
There are 2 MAS topic if I am not wrong???
*
Merged.

 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0161sec    1.08    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 23rd December 2025 - 09:28 PM