hey guys, must warn you guys this.

On the proxy form, read the Notes (1):-

A Grower of CHGS entitled to attend and vote at the meeting is entitled to appoint to a proxy to attend and vote in his stead. A proxy appointed must be a Grower of CHGS.

I just talk to my mom who works in a lawyer office...and yes, she is also an investor of CHGS.
After looking at the big picture and taking much consideration, I have change my mind to vote "FOR".
In simple terms, 10% for the 1st 30 days. another 90% will be distributed within to years.
If PGCB does not have enough cash to pay back to the investor, Bee Garden will act as an guarantor to step in and settle the amount.
Based on coming 2 years of calculation, Bee Garden is capable of paying back the full amount.

On the other hand, voting AGAINST will result in trustee stepping in to resolved this.
What I am worried is that PGCB will no longer take charge, trustee will look for a new management or something.
And this kind of thing will go for years while the funds being depleted year after year due to professional fees, this fees, that fees.
In the end if it doesn't work out, PGCB will go for last resort of winding up the company, so it makes no difference to their proposal now except longer years.
At that time, wherever asset that they have will be distributed back to the investors.
It might be lower than the 90% that was proposed in the circular.

See if I have the time I will post it up in an image format for better understanding.
A picture is more than a thousand words.
So end of the day, I'm voting FOR and this is just my opinion.

Lol was reading the CHGS termination circular... the below is comment from a planter's perspective. And no I do not own shares in CHGS...

The report states that the expected FFB yield is at best only 10 tons per hectare, this is the absolute lowest FFB yield I have ever seen, even in inhospitable terrain like central kalimantan, Irian Jaya and Sumatera. In those area, not only elephant but 'ninja' will come and harvest your trees at night, floods are common, roads are non-existent,  they are still making good profits? In Sarawak the soil is even worse (peat soil), yet plantations trives there.... also why mention gua musang but not lahad datu... what happen to the land there?

The planter responsible for this debacle must be the worst planter on earth... or is the report made to scare investors?  Or the plantation is badly managed to lower valuation? Anyone is even certain they bought fertilizer? 

By the way Lahad Datu is one of the most fertile lands available to a plantation company, and they are getting record FFB yield there. Workers are sooooo plentiful they are waiting at street corners (daily wage) to be picked up to plantation to harvest. A fried of mine owned 100 hectares (hilly land) there and the profits is very good.  Have a nice holiday to Tawau/Lahad Datu and you will see why. Foreigners outnumber locals... or you can stay at the Felda Sahabat Resort , nice seaside/plantation resort at Lahad datu.. to see even better picture and have a nice holiday with pristine waters, surrounded by palm trees.

Cost per ton CPO is about RM 1,500-1,800 now. CPO price is RM 2,400 and going up.. There is still a decent profit margin of RM 600 or 30% gross profit...

looking at the proforma 2012 financial results, they are getting >50% gross profit and >30% on the plantation which is already very good by industrial standard. Why such good results but painted such a bad picture on the future viability of the plantation? I see that the profit is starting to shoot up due to the tree coming to the 7-15 years peak production period... and they know it.

If they want to terminate, then by all means pay everything up, why wait 2 years... or they are using future profits (from plantation) to pay zero interest loans...? You are basically selling the land to them and take interest free payment spread over 2 years Oh yeah, biological assets are not mentioned.. are they getting for free?

Such a important decision, decided by show of hands at AGM? This is the most silly method, to be fair to minorities they should have a postal vote to share holdings. Why show of hands, they can just get 100-200 proxy to dominate the meeting. Each shareholder can split to unlimited proxy.... each proxy represent a portion of shares, and a 'hand'. You got 1 share also count 1 hand, and 1000 shares also count 1 hand... Also show of hand do not need to be counted, as long as the 'chairman' is 'satisfied' there is enough majority in the show of hands, the resolution will be passed.

A letter of recommendation from the con-sultant? No audit report, no valuation report, no expert (in palm oil plantation) viability report, no geo-tech report. How come so easy ah? 

Also the books does not balance... total cash received 197 million, 90% of 215 million. Land is 107 million which is proposed to be sold to Bee garden as part of liquidation. Where is the biological asset?!?!?! This should form part of the fixed asset if they do a proper valuation. 

Also those bad points given by CHGS and the 'biased' con-sultant does not match the financial results...the excellent FY13 proforma results. Why ah? 

no. of plot,
you may email them to confirm the plot you held
customerservice@chgs.com.my

The announcement said by September 2013. Does it mean on 1st or entire duration of september?

yes, the minority watchdog grp really help to pressure.

just 1-2 more weeks... better late than never

Already waited so long, just wait few more weeks for the money. No harm 

1&2 - There are also many people who would argue loudly that SPACs are bad investments, etc. You can see http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/08/13/a-t...f-failure/?_r=2 or http://www.kinibiz.com/story/issues/46323/...investment.html. In some countries, SPACs have a very bad reputation too because some high profile ones failed. This is the case now with the interest scheme business model in Malaysia after the failure of a high profile scheme. The interest scheme model is not something new. This sort of fructuary / share farming schemes exist in other countries too. Like SPACs, there are successes and failures in other countries as well.

Your 'robbing peter to pay paul' argument is just your disagreement with the interest scheme business model. Again, many people can raise similar disagreements with the SPAC model as well. Maybe you would be one to defend it then. At the end of the day, we can just agree to disagree that the interest scheme model is viable. we are looking for like minded investors. clearly, you are not one of them. perhaps you should just invest in SPACs.

Moving forward, the introduction of the Interest Scheme bill will help to strengthen and improve the industry. Currently, SSM is already seeking public feedback for the drafting of the bill. They have posted ads already. When the bill becomes a law, of course companies in the industry will have to comply. We are only more than happy to comply. RE: your worries about the lack of safeguards - we do have an independent auditor and independent plantation consultant who publishes their report alongside our prospectus. Also, the trustee have wide ranging powers. Investors can also vote to remove the management company shold they feel the need to. All these are spelt out clearly in our prospectus. Lastly, the best safeguard? Come and see the plantation yourself.

BNM did not say anything about interest schemes. You wonder wrongly. They only warned against get rich quick schemes like Genneva (officiated by top politicians, nonetheless). You can see all their announcements here: http://www.bnm.gov.my/microsites/fraudalert/ ; http://www.bnm.gov.my/consumeralert/

re: mills, we will run the mills ourselves of course. it is a progression of diversifying downstream. we do not just 'sell plots', we are a plantation company.

OER - we do aim to hit the industry average of 20%, which is not unachievable.

re: 24 tons/ha - we do aim to hit that figure some time during our harvesting stage. of course, we will not hit that right off the bat. these figures depends on things like tree profile, etc. in our case, we are confident of hitting it eventually because of our fertile land. our land is  surrounded by other productive plantations, all who are highly profitable too.

lastly, once again, interest schemes are different from shares. share prices are also volatile. IOI 5 years ago was about RM 3.50. Now its RM 5.40. At one point it hit RM 2.30+. At its peak it was RM 8.20+. If you bought in when it was high at that price, now you would be cursing and swearing too.

RE: replanting - it is also in our prospectus that investors can vote for the option to replant after the end of our scheme too if they feel that they do not want to sell the plantation.

Keen on EWOPS
Seek comments from all of u
Thanks

Should b TTDI
But TTDI offers Soho now

why not consider ict venture zone?
also 8% pa