This is not a garage sales thread, so everyone is entitled to post their opinion and view even it is bias or wrong or seem not right. This is a open discussion thread, it is not belonged to a person thread to promote something even one is a TS, so others' opinion and view doesn't jeopradise this thread purposes. Because in the finance section, all are being openly discussed.
As this thread is meant to discuss Steven Corner, so any opinion and view on it (right or wrong) are entitled for their view. After all, this is also the open discussion forum. We can't shut away forumers that posted wrong view or some opinion that is not favourable, then admin or moderators will be seemed biad already.

Kind of tough job for admin, staff even as moderators sometimes, to distinguish precisely. So generally, mostly they will let it role as long as within the scope of discussion.

I don't think you have to worry much if Steven Corner is a legitimate business or investment scheme. A truth will remain a truth, no matter how to slice it, twist it or turn it upside down.

If the fact or issue (investment product) is right and correct or legitimate, it will always be. No matter how others said it is not, it is still remain correct as it was.

Unless it involved serious personal attack or serious accusation, then admin will look and take care of it, like warning the forumers, banning etc.

Cheers.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jun 17 2008, 11:03 AM

Based on the SC reply as Jean72 posted, it appears SC's is not a investment scheme, because it doesn't involved in public investment issue or collecting money from public for investment, based on the reply from SC. You need SC approval to do it.
So with reply of no securities involved as mentioned so it is more appropirate under prepaid scheme aka prepaid and eat. Prepaid issue is not under SC control so don't need SC approval, it is under BNM.

PS: I am not commenting on this issue, just based the interpretation from the SC reply as Jean72 posted.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jun 27 2008, 05:03 PM

Since SC's is not a investment scheme (based on SC reply), so there is no issue join or not join, as those money from individual public is not investing in SC as one doesn't become shareholders or whatsoever based on the letter reply on SC, so if the SC's scheme is legitimate, the RM3000 is just a prepaid which they give extra bonus in their prepaid scheme.

Above statement is based on interpretation from information gathered by forumers. Not based on opinion.

I have not comment on the SC issue until it is clear.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jun 29 2008, 10:41 AM

Errr.... I am confused now, it is Steven's Corner or Steven's Tea Garden that we are discussing on?

Please bare with me, as I don't follow this thread closely, just look at thread title (Steven's Corner) only.

Err.... which one is we discussing now? Steven's Corner or Steven's Tea Garden? they are separate identity or the same?

I think main issue here is not SC has good business or not (another story), the first criteria is what is the money collected is meant for either it is a prepaid or investment or something else, which is the main part of the discussion and mostly concerned by the public.


This post has been edited by cherroy: Jun 30 2008, 03:00 PM

Based on the Securities Commission reply, it has already signalled it is not a public investment scheme, as taking public money for investment (applied to all across) needs Securities Commission approval. So with Steven's Corner is not under Securities Commission approval list, public investment issue is out of question.

FYI, a public investment scheme without Securities Commission approval will mean it is illegal by law.

I don't know the money taken from public is meant for what, may be it is like prepaid scheme or some other thing, I don't know, not want to comment on it unless it is fully clear, may be others can give better answer especially Siliconwiper.com whom is familiar with it.


Yup, as a rule of thumb, don't do any investment on your hard-earned money, unless you are fully clear of it. Opportunity loss is better loss of money. So whenever invest in anything, be sure about them. Investment world is so big, there is not just one or two choice only. Above statement applies to all, not meant for the Steven's issue.

Just found out Jean72 post, based on Jean72 post, if it is true as the statement of Jean72, apparently, legally, Steven's Corner is not a public investment scheme (need Securities Commission approval), nor Steven teas corner is a deposit taking scheme (need BNM approval)

Whether those deposit taking voucher is genuine or not, it is another issue. It is much more important to find out whether those deposit taking scheme is legal or not first.

The main priroty in this thread is to find out the actual fact of Steven's Corner or Steven Tea Garden. (anyway I always confuse about both one, as I also don't know we are discussing on which one everytime, never mind on my side).

Cheers.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jun 30 2008, 09:32 PM

Errr...
If STG has nothing to do with Steven Corner, then can we please totally ignore the Steven Corner issue. (if both are separate entity, as based on the information posted).
So STG is a new company or what? and has one outlet at Sunway Pyramid? right? Kinda confuse if keep on dragging like that.

If STG has nothing to do with Steven Corner, then whatever STG did or future plan has nothing to do with Steven Corner nor Steven Corner will hold any reponsibility on STG nor getting/sharing the profit.

Can we please discuss in a more accurate way or specific targer? seems like just going round and round without much progress (in term find out accurate STG informatin and legality issues of taking public money <--- main issue)

I had visited the STG website (on my curiousity due to the discussion in this thread), I can't find any statement in the website stating the company got programme/scheme/member or prepaid to eat etc.

Please and please, we sort out the legality issue first, can we? I don't want this discussion always in the round circle ended up at the same point.
Whether STG can make profit, open which branch, who owns it etc is the secondary issue. After we sort out and clear about the legitimate of it, then only we proceed, still not too late.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 2 2008, 10:56 AM

Aiyoyooo, please don't 'pusing' again, can we, don't need to blar blar further? Already enough pening, please.

We just asked (already mentioned in the previous post, now ask me back again), come back the the circle.
NVM.

First question:
Is it legitimate and legal by law for STG to sell Rm3000 prepaid voucher? <-- that's the first and ultimate most important fact to clear up.

Under prepaid scheme on public money, it still needs approval from BNM as mentioned by Jean72 post. So without BNM approval, this already KO in the first place, don't need to discuss further. Right?

One thing we have clear now is STG Rm3000, is not an investment. --> one thing solved.

I understand your point, in real world, there is always grey area and loophole people exploit on, typically eg would be MLM business model. On paper, MLM is another way of doing business, but a lot of pyramid scheme/scam exploit the MLM structure to do the ponzi scheme. So sometimes people find no way to distinguish whether the MLM is a scam or not until when found out, might be too late already.
Anyway OT already.

How company and people play with loophole will be another story which is the Securities Commission/gov job to tackle it. Need a lawyer to discuss the term of 'investment' and classification of it.
To be fair to them (Securities Commission), it is difficult to tackle at the root because those loopholes won't be revealed until it become ugly and reveal their truth face. Just like xx MLM business say business is profitable and enable to give you a monthly return of 5%, but in actual scene, it might be a money game on those 5% return is come from late comer/joiner money only, while company not doing business at all or business is not actually profitable, merely use business as camouflage. So it is not easy to find out in the first hand for outsiders. But as rule of thumb, there would be no business in the world can guarantee any return rate to you except FD/bond interest only. Anything too good to be true, then would be smell fishy already in the first place. (Don't mean must be scam, just fishy smell that prompt one suspect)

Don't get me wrong, I don't comment any on STG issue until it is clear, that's what we want to find out.

I merely or we need to state everything on paper first then proceed with it, so that we can discuss it step by step to find out the legal issue of the scheme aka in this thread STG prepaid and eat issue. Whether it uses the loopholes or not, then we can discuss further afterwards also not too late, right?

So first issue on STG:
1. It is not an investment
2. It is a public prepaid scheme then got approval from BNM or relevant authority?

So second question need to be answered.

Stamp by lawyer is meant by it is deemed a contract between both parties only. Just like people use lawyer to do tenancy agreement and S&P.

It doesn't mean, what we speak of legal issue at the previous posts aka when STG issue public prepaid voucher then is it or not the prepaid scheme is against under Malaysia law/SC rules, or BNM ruling.
I have posted this question many times already, still no answer given, instead answer given always 'pusing' again. I still stand at a more neutral point to find out it.

But please don't use 'come and read it yourself'. It won't serve much good in the discussion in this forum. As everyone just post the line like that then no discussion can be proceed from here. Instead if sincerely want people to find out more and have better understanding picture of it, then should at least tell people this contract means xxx issue and this contract is meant for what purposes and who are the company and risk of people taking up on it. I don't think it is hard to type a few lines of the contract clauses. It is much better than an answer like come and read yourself. No offence.
Then when people clear about it, then surely the people will reduce the suspectibility on it. We just want to find out more and clear about the issue for the best of interest of general public.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 2 2008, 09:55 PM

Securities Commission said it is not an investment, so if it is a public investment then it already violate the the rules/law already. So it is not a legal investment if it is an investment.

There are thousand and ten of thousand of company out there, even investigate one by one (one per day), 10 years also can't finish. Normally they will investigate into something when it become high profile and lot of complaints from public.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 3 2008, 03:01 PM

Precisely, who will be top up their prepaid TNG up to Rm3,000.

If STG offers prepaid Rm3,000 for public to buy that's mean pubic fork out Rm3,000 first before eat, so why need to prepaid, can't just pay a few bucks or even hundred everytime take the meal? unless something extra benefit or so called return or special discount <--- which can fall into grey area.

People use TNG for convenience purpose to access tolls, buses. Still people top up until reasonable usage amount only, not Rm3,000 in one go. STG prepaid of Rm3,000 only can take the meal at STG. Sound not logical to buy a Rm3,000 just to take the meal in one place.

Still TNG needs BNM approval for taking public money as prepaid, if not mistaken as said by Jean72.

Ok, let's me reframe all things together:

Some of the issues are explained by other forumers:
So STG or as Siliconwiper explained :
1) it is not an investment.
2) it is not a prepaid
3) but it is a prepaid membership. As claimed prepaid membership is not as same with prepaid scheme for public.


That's true, prepaid membership is not same as public prepaid, nice loophole. If offer to member, then can get rid of public issue. Something grey area that let lawyer to tackle on this. Don't get me wrong here, as long thing/issue is not violating the law, then on paper everything is fine.

So your prepaid membership of RM3,000 can become Rm6,000 (in cash? or voucher?) So if it is a cash, the STG need to generate 100% profit in 5 years time, that's mean 20% p.a. which Warren Buffet also can't guarantee their shareholders this kind of return rate. Err... STG guarantee it in the contract clause? I don't know and clear about, that's why I ask.

So if RM3,000 can become Rm6,000 cash (if it is in cash), (if it is only in food voucher different story), then this is not classified as investment? Then what should we called it?

Cheers

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 4 2008, 02:00 PM

You know what, most forumers here are most concern on this part because too good to be true. That's why people interest to find out.

Without viable in financial term to support the payout, it is not sustainable over the long run. <--- that's where people afraid of. Not because of the prepaid alone. Company needs to make enough profit to payout the 'prepaid membership reward'. But if company can make enough profit, why not take up bank loan to finance it, instead need to look for public to get the money? As calculated by other forumers, over 5 years, one can earn Rm6k from RM3k 'prepaid' translated into 20% p.a. while taking OD from banks is around BLR + 1% (less then 8%).

You know mentioned yourself, it is not logical to have Rm3K prepaid, then why not prepaid is like Rm50 or RM100, then better sense and logical?
If it is a prepaid of like Rm100, while with prepaid voucher, everytime spend it can get 10 or 20%, or pay Rm100 can get a preaid voucher like Rm120 to eat later, still make sense and people still more confidence with it and more willing to take up without much susceptibility.

Instead now the prepaid become something that can earn money one, people become more concern as there is no free lunch in the world, or there is no such a 'big frog hobble around the street'.
Something too good to be true will lead to more susceptibility for those well informed people out there, instead attracting them.

So if the prepaid is true then should be sincerely explain clearly to others, not the like a single line of 'if a company are willing to pay you for eating at their restaurant? OK?' then it is hard for others to understand. After all this thread is meant to have discussino in it and have clearer picture of it and truth behind it, right?


This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 4 2008, 10:10 PM

Ok, let summarise a bit.

If there is no legal issue (I still think not fully clarify because of the 'prepaid membership' return issue). Whether they are running behind a MLM money game or not, we don't know.
Siliconwiper.com said no, while Chatwarrior said might be.

Possibility :
1) So if is is a MLM money game with legitimate business, then it can close shop after taking in RM3k 'prepaid membership' after there is no newcomers or late comers to support the money game. Businesses wise won't care much, as it can be a platform to make the company legitmate while secretive running money on behind. There are some might be running this way (one claimed to be a big company, S**), as recently being investigated by Securities Commission as reported. Having legitimate business might not mean they are not running MLM money game behind, as above mentioned.

2) It is a legitmate business with legitimate 'prepaid membership'.
It become some sort like instead taking out own money to invest in opening branches, with the 'prepaid membership' scheme, STG is taking advantage of using public money (Rm3K 'prepaid membership') as their capital which is quite a clever move. As STG shift the risk from their own to public. While with 'prepaid', they at least secure some customers to come to eat. <-- secure some customers base.

So even STG business won't be good and no profitable and eventually close shop, what they loss won't be totally on their own money as some are from the public money already. As once STG closed shop, so does those 'prepaid' amount, nowhere to use those prepaid (3k) anymore, right? STG and Steven Corner's are separate entity, so Steven Corner's won't bare any liability of STG.
But if business is good and highly profitable, 'prepaid members' being rewarded. <-- this issue hasn't properly and fully clear in term of legal issue (if it is not investment, then how to classify something prepaid that can yield return)
It is a very clever move, STG has shift the business risk to the 'prepaid members'

Above is the possibility in this issue that I can observed based on information posted. Not mean to comment on STG whether it is or not.
Judge you own and 'prepaid' with your own risk.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 5 2008, 10:46 AM

Mobile Wallet close shop already?

After you mentioned Mobile Wallet, I remind back some of the MW issue discussed before. Err... STG issue is quite similar to it though. Also got prepaid then get return rate afterwards one.
Don't mean to comment much on STG. Better let Siliconwiper or other familiar with it to comment. I am just an outsiders that are curious and for the best of interest of public, try to find out the actual and exact thing that is happening.

I remembered once some forumers also strongly promoting those scheme (MW) also. But I can't find anything (regarding the prepaid/investment) from the legitimate official website, but the forumers said the scheme so complicated until they didn't put in the website, and ask people come and see yourself.

No, Steven's Corner accepts those prepaid voucher doesn't mean they are attached in term of company law/liability issue. Please don't confuse people out there. It has nothing to do with the company entity in term of law. Please separate out these 2 entity so that people have a clearer view, otherwise it can be very confusing for those not familiar with company law. Just like you said before, the contract stamped by lawyer is between 'prepaid member' and STG only. It has nothing to do with Steven Corner's.

1) yes, fair enough
2) no problem with that
3) nothing to comment, no business is guaranteed to be success, once business can sustain itself, then even legitimate and sincere business also need to close shop.
4) I am a business people as well.

Then STG hasn't opened a single store yet, so how bank can approve a 10 millions loan? Steven Corners is the guarantor? or STG already has substantial assets to be a collateral for getting the 10 millions loan? Banks won't loan a company without anything in hand as collateral, right? or a turstfulness of a guarantor. We are not talking of RM10K but 10 millions.

Another link to the loan issue, if indeed got 10 millions loan so with Rm3,000 'prepaid membership', once they can get around 3 thousand plus 'prepaid membership', then the whole company risk has been transferred to the 'prepaid member' already. That's where I said before, this move is very clever in term of or in the view of STG management.

Another issue, why 10 millions? only one shop will be opened in near future, need 10 millions already? For loan like OD, you don't apply too much that you are not going to use because those unused OD will be charged on commitment fee (around 1% interest on those unused OD applied).

Yes, but it become a grey area of investment return already, need a lawyer to debate whether it is prepaid ot investment already.
That's also the primary risk (if the prepaid membership is true, besides whether it is true or not), no business is guaranteed to make money one especially for those newly set-up one.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 6 2008, 07:27 AM

Showing face or no face, has nothing to do with this thread nor contribute to the thread. A scammer won't have a face the written word of scam on their face.
So please everyone calm down.

Please stay in topic.

A truth will remain a truth, even others accuse it is a scam, there is no reason to angry about it, (showing angry will be looked by others, already being exposed or telling lies), just simply telling the truth then others can easily see and judge the truthfulness of it.
While a scam will remain a scam, no matter how one describes it is not a scam, it is still fishy to others as a fox with tail soon or latter or reveal its tail even though being covered.

So please discuss in proper manner and all towards specific STG issue.

Cheers.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jul 9 2008, 03:01 PM