博主评：这对于种植业来说是个好消息，但如果肥料跌得太严重也会拖累商品市场的。
如果钾肥的价格从usd750降至usd500，如果我们以每公吨cpo成本计算，这就等于省下的成本为RM66.667。
（假设目前的每公吨cpo钾肥成本为RM200）
中国化肥网 2009-7-25 9:00:56
国际钾肥市场僵局在7月10日被打破。在印度IPL公司6月30日举行的氯化钾招标会上，绝大多数投标价格在 CFR625美元左右，上下浮动不超过10美元，而IPC公司（俄罗斯希利维尼特钾肥公司的销售公司）竞以CFR460美元的价格向印度供货。在过去的半年多时间里，标准氯化钾现货价格都维持在CFR735美元左右，同时生产商们纷纷削减产量，以让各国消化库存。就在IPL举行招标前，北美钾肥销售联盟还跟日本、韩国和台湾签订了下半年供货合同，价格略高于CFR700美元，因此说CFR625美元的价格已比较低了。一些观察家认为印度合同价格将在600 美元左右，也许会低至575美元，最乐观的估计也在550美元，没人预料到会以460美元的价格成交，因为印度政府给钾肥提供补贴，且该国氯化钾库存量已降至很低。
为什么IPC会接受CFR460美元的价格带来了争议。IPC声明“向印度供货的时间将会被推迟甚至有可能被取消，因为印度政府给钾肥的补贴远高于对其他化肥品种”。印度农民购买1吨氯化钾的价格在95美元左右。
世界各地的很多买家和经销商都认为氯化钾价格在400多美元左右才能有效地刺激需求，甚至一些生产商也在私下如此表示。有人认为希利维尼特钾肥公司是迫于特殊压力答应这样的价格。去年，该公司为了取得一钾矿的开采权支付了高达15亿美元的费用。有推测该公司的压力来自贷款银行，传言有高达7亿美金的贷款短期内到期。
现在最大的疑问是其他供应商的反应，他们会接受这一新价格，还是仍然坚持CFR625美元呢？看起来接受的可能性很大，已经有一条船从以色列开往印度，而且第二条船也已被预定。一家公司在德国也预订了船只。（向槐）
(作者:向槐 责任编辑:白云)
India breaks Potash cartel to save Rs 5K cr on fertiliser subsidies
22 Jul 2009, 2104 hrs IST, Prabha Jagannathan, ET Bureau
NEW DELHI: India has managed to clinch almost three million of its annual average of
five million tonne potash imports at a record low price
of $ 460 per tonne after busting
a global potash cartel’s stranglehold on pricing. This could mean a neat saving of Rs 5000 crore from the fertiliser subsidy bill of Rs 55,000 crore (BE 09-10) since the benchmark delivered price, clinched by Indian Potash Ltd (IPL), is now applicable to all Indian potash buys.
Thus far, a small group of companies that control roughly 75 percent of global supply had cartelised to cut production drastically in order to keep the prices high. With this, India has established itself firmly in the A list of global fertiliser buyers with clout to dictate the price of the commodity, a crucial plant nutrient as well as an industrial input.
Analysts surmised that the same price level woudl be offered to China. However, the best part of the deal is that India will get the cheapest potash in the world and should China, who is the world’s biggest buyer, manage to swing a lower price, the same would apply to all the Indian potash buys as well. IPL, is the country’s biggest buyer of potash and imports around 3.5 million tonnes annually. “Nobody else is going to swing a lower price for potash by wielding the gun from our shoulders,” Iffco MD U S Awasthi told ET. Iffco, the country’s largest fertiliser cooperative, owns 34% stake in IPL.
But on July 13, when it sewed up the first deal on potash supplies to the tune of 8.5 lakh tonnes at a literally jaw-dropper price of $460/tonne with IPC, UK (Silvinit’s marketing arm), it was dismissed by sectoral analysts worldwide as a fluke deal with a “desperate” company. The offer price by a powerful cartel of global potash majors including Canpotex, which is owned by Potash Corp, Mosaic Co. and Agrium Inc. was $625-635/tonne. Potash prices had soared in June to $700/tonne despite low demand thanks to the grip of the same cartel on prices. Canpotex sells Canadian potash to Brazil, China, India, and other Asian markets,
The real breakthrough that reinforced the benchmark price , though, only happened this Monday, when the world’s sixth largest potash maker and the second largest listed company on the Tel Aviv stock exchange, Israel Chemicals (ICL), took a beating on its shares overnight and caved in. “That proved the Doubting Thomases completely wrong on our price deal with Silvinit being a fluke,” points of P S Gahlaut, head of IPL. Shares of ICL ended down 8.7 percent at 35.60 shekels, by far the biggest decline on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange.
Immediately after, it signed the 9 month supply deal on July 20 for 5.75 lakh tonnes of
potash to IPL at $460/tonne. It also started
talking to other potash customers in India,
against indications that its earnings could be impacted. ICL’s supply volume was lower than last year since Silvinit ( SILV.RTS) had already secured a more than normal supply deal with India. Ironically, only the week before, ICL had been iffy on any potash supply deal with IPL.
The potash drama began when, after the Silvinit deal, shares of several potash majors worldwide started nosediving, pushing other potash exporters, Germany’s K&S, BPC (Belorus) , Canpotex and APC (Arab Potash) to the wall on their offer price. Shares of Potash Corp, the world's largest potash producer, fell 3 percent to $82.47 on the New York Stock Exchange last fortnight while its peers Mosaic and Agrium were also trading lower. Concerns sharpened after the Silvinit deal was sealed. On July 21, German potash makers K&S singed on for supply of one lakh tonnes at $460/tonne to IPL. On July 22, the Belarussian Potash Corp.
which had started rethinking its potash pricing strategy after the Silvinit deal, signed on for supply of five lakh tonnes at the benchmark price. It didn’t take long for the giants to follow suit. “Today, we are in talks with Arab Potash and Canpotex and could soon sew up a supply deal at the benchmark price with both,” Gahlaut told ET. A supply deal for over one million tonnes of potash is expected to be wrapped up with these giants.
Belarusian Potash Co. a 50-50 joint venture between Russia's Uralkali and Belaruskali, initially offered the second-lowest price, followed by Israel Chemicals Ltd., K+S AG, Jordan’s Arab Potash Corp., and Canpotex Ltd., marketer for g North American producers Potash Corp., Mosaic Co. and Agrium Inc. BPC,. the three in the Canpotex partnership, Silvinit and Germany's K+S account for about 75 percent of global potash supply.
Potash is the common name given to potassium carbonate and various mined and manufactured salts that contain the element potassium in water-soluble form.Potash has been used since antiquity in the manufacture of glass, soap, and soil fertilizer. Potash is important for agriculture because it improves water retention, yield, nutrient value, taste, colour, texture and disease resistance of food crops. It has wide application to fruit and vegetables, rice, wheat and other grains, sugar, corn, soybeans, palm oil and cotton, all of which benefit from the nutrient’s quality enhancing properties.
30 July 2009
26 July 2009
南方油脂 大股東紛爭一觸即發（2009五月旧闻）
【7月26号】
有名股东设了一个部落格，他花了RM15 ssm search了有关 Symfusion的资料， 但我还是看不懂，到底sab 的 case 有多少宗？
http://symfusionscam.blogspot.com/
case 1（SECTION 144. Section 144. Convening of extraordinary general meeting on requisition.）
早前一宗是由Banting Hock Hin Estate起诉的（下闻），罢免的董事是Yap Soon Nam 和 Haji Mohd Hisham Bin Harun。
case 2 （Section 181. Remedy in cases of an oppression）
最近的一宗是由symfusion 引起的，symfusion收了2.5millions的服务费，被视为不正当交易。【delete】
sab不在我的研究名单中，无法跟进和消化资料。
【旧闻】
南方油脂 大股東紛爭一觸即發
2009-05-01 07:54:53 轉寄給朋友
列印
（吉隆坡1日訊）旗下擁有約15億令吉資產的萬津福興園私人有限公司，掀起股東紛爭。
上述資產包括了2家上市公司，即南方油脂（馬）有限公司（SAB，5134，主板工業產品組）和百樂園機構有限公司（PARAMON，1724，主板產業組）。
消息指出，這些股東之間的分歧逐漸升級，並可能在未來數周內爆發。
這項不和的起因是其中一方尋求把福興園清盤，而另一方則希望維持原狀。
根據最新年報，福興園與一些子公司控制南方油脂至少50%股份，以及百樂園機構約18.3%股權。
南方油脂目前市值約為1億8200萬令吉，而百樂園機構則為2億3770萬令吉左右。這使得福興園與相關團體擁有兩家公司的股權價值約1億3450萬令吉。
南方集團屬下也擁有許多私人資產。據其網站顯示，該集團在我國和印尼擁有逾5萬公頃油棕園（約8200公頃是由南方油脂持有），以及6座棕油廠，聯合總加工產能每小時約250公噸。
大馬公司委員會的調查顯示，在2004年，福興園擁有非經常資產約2億1640萬令吉、經常資產2600萬令吉以及儲備金6760萬令吉。而截至2004年杪，該公司的負只有400萬令吉。
消息稱，在上述紛爭中，兩派分別是以劉文來和劉文聰為主，後者是南方油脂創辦人已故拿督劉文華的兄弟。（人名譯音）
目前，在百樂園機構並未出現任何董事部斗爭的跡象，可能因為福興園僅屬小股東，但在南方油脂卻已經箭在弦上。
在上月杪向大馬交易所作出的宣布中，南方油脂要求召開一項特別大會，以罷黜董事葉順南和莫哈末希山，以及在3月27日至特大召開前委任的任何董事。
莫哈末希山是朝聖基金局的托管人，後者持有南方油脂約13%股份。
不過，消息指出，朝聖基金局仍然考慮上述事項，及尚未表明立場支持任何一方。
除了福興園和朝聖基金局，南方油脂並沒有其他大股東。
Banting Hock Hin feud boiling over
Monday, 27 April 2009 00:00
A tussle between shareholders is emerging in little-known Banting Hock Hin Estate Co Sdn Bhd, which has some RM1.5 billion in assets under its belt, including sizeable stakes in two listed companies — Southern Acids (M) Bhd and Paramount Corp Bhd.
Sources say the disagreement between the shareholders is growing and could boil over in the next few weeks.
The feud is due to one faction looking to wind up Banting Hock Hin and another wanting to keep it intact.
Some of the other large companies controlled by the group include Southern Realty (Malaya) Sdn Bhd, Victory Investment Company Sdn Bhd, Southern Keratong Plantations Sdn Bhd, Serata Kaya Sdn Bhd and Southern Edible Oil Industries (M) Sdn Bhd. Most of these companies are lumped under the Southern group banner.
According to latest annual reports, Banting Hock Hin and the other units control at least 50% of Southern Acids and about 18.3% of Paramount Corp.
Southern Acids’ market capitalisation, at its close last Thursday, stood at RM182 million while that of Paramount Corp was RM237.7 million. This would value the stakes that Banting Hock Hin and related parties own in the two companies at about RM134.5 million.
There are also a lot of private assets parked under the Southern group. According to its website, the group has more than 50,000ha of oil palm estates both here and in Indonesia (about 8,200ha of which are held under Southern Acids) and six palm oil mills with a combined processing capacity of about 250 tonnes per hour. Southern Edible Oil, meanwhile, has palm oil refineries and shares in Southern Acids.
Another unit, PKE (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, provides dry bulk terminal services, with warehouse space, while the Sri Kota Specialist Medical Centre located in Klang is also under the group’s control.
A search at the Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) shows that in 2004, Banting Hock Hin had non-current assets of about RM216.4 million, current assets of RM26 million and reserves of RM67.6 million. The company’s liabilities as at end-2004 stood at RM4 million.
For the year ended December 2004, Banting Hock Hin posted a profit after tax of RM17.2 million on revenue of RM7.2 million.
In the tussle, one faction is led by Low Boon Lai while the other is headed by his cousin Low Mun Chong. There are also splinter groups in the feud looking to get a foothold in the company — to sway things their way, sources say.
Mun Chong is the brother of the late Datuk Low Mong Hua, the founder of Southern Acids, and is said to be in disagreement with Boon Lai and directors affiliated to him.
Checks with the CCM show that there are seven directors in Banting Hock Hin. Apart from Boon Lai (who is designated manager and director) and Mun Chong, the others are Datuk Low Boon Eng, Ng Si Weon, Lim Kim Long, Lou Ai Choo and Lim Kum Loke.
There are also two liquidators present on the board — Michael Joseph Monteiro and Heng Ji Keng from Monteiro & Heng. They were appointed earlier this year after a shareholder tussle in 2003. The presence of the liquidators means the board has likely lost its powers.
In the 2003 tussle, Boon Lai made some headway after a court judgment was seen to be in his favour.
According to the CCM search, there are 47 shareholders in Banting Hock Hin, with the largest being Southernel (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, which has about 24% of the company’s four million share base. The rest of the shareholdings vary from 1,000 to 228,229 shares, making Banting Hock Hin a very fragmented company.
It is not clear when the feud started. According to sources, it could have commenced sometime in the late 1990s or early 2000, when Boon Lai or members of his faction became unhappy with the way the late Mong Hua was running the show and attempted to oust him.
A legal suit was filed after Mong Hua disagreed with a resolution of the Banting Hock Hin board of directors to demerge or wind up the company and have its assets valued and distributed to the shareholders.
In 2003, the court ruled in favour of a liquidation of Banting Hock Hin.
Mong Hua passed away in April last year.
While there is no sign of any boardroom tussle in Paramount Corp, probably because Banting Hock Hin is a minority shareholder, there appears to be some disagreement in Southern Acids, based on the company’s announcements to Bursa Malaysia.
In an announcement to the exchange late last month, Southern Acids requested an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to remove directors Yap Soon Nam and Mohd Hisham Harun, and the removal of any director appointed between March 27 and the conclusion of the EGM.
The announcement also proposed as directors, Wong Yien Kim and Jonathan Law Ngee Song.
It is not clear which faction requested the removal of the two directors.
Mohd Hisham is the nominee of Lembaga Tabung Haji, which has about 13% equity interest in Southern Acids. However, sources say Tabung Haji is still considering the matter and has yet to make a stand supporting either party.
Possibly due to the feud, the company’s accounts for the financial quarter ended January 2009 were not issued on time. An announcement to Bursa said this was “due to insufficient information and explanation to the board in respect of foreign exchange losses and contracts”.
For the nine months ended January 2009, Southern Acids suffered a net loss of RM4.6 million on RM346.8 million in revenue. A year ago, it had made about RM24.7 million in profit on the back of RM345.4 million in revenue.
Other than Banting Hock Hin and Tabung Haji, there are no other substantial shareholders in Southern Acids.
有名股东设了一个部落格，他花了RM15 ssm search了有关 Symfusion的资料， 但我还是看不懂，到底sab 的 case 有多少宗？
http://symfusionscam.blogspot.com/
case 1（SECTION 144. Section 144. Convening of extraordinary general meeting on requisition.）
早前一宗是由Banting Hock Hin Estate起诉的（下闻），罢免的董事是Yap Soon Nam 和 Haji Mohd Hisham Bin Harun。
case 2 （Section 181. Remedy in cases of an oppression）
最近的一宗是由symfusion 引起的，symfusion收了2.5millions的服务费，被视为不正当交易。【delete】
sab不在我的研究名单中，无法跟进和消化资料。
【旧闻】
南方油脂 大股東紛爭一觸即發
2009-05-01 07:54:53 轉寄給朋友
列印
（吉隆坡1日訊）旗下擁有約15億令吉資產的萬津福興園私人有限公司，掀起股東紛爭。
上述資產包括了2家上市公司，即南方油脂（馬）有限公司（SAB，5134，主板工業產品組）和百樂園機構有限公司（PARAMON，1724，主板產業組）。
消息指出，這些股東之間的分歧逐漸升級，並可能在未來數周內爆發。
這項不和的起因是其中一方尋求把福興園清盤，而另一方則希望維持原狀。
根據最新年報，福興園與一些子公司控制南方油脂至少50%股份，以及百樂園機構約18.3%股權。
南方油脂目前市值約為1億8200萬令吉，而百樂園機構則為2億3770萬令吉左右。這使得福興園與相關團體擁有兩家公司的股權價值約1億3450萬令吉。
南方集團屬下也擁有許多私人資產。據其網站顯示，該集團在我國和印尼擁有逾5萬公頃油棕園（約8200公頃是由南方油脂持有），以及6座棕油廠，聯合總加工產能每小時約250公噸。
大馬公司委員會的調查顯示，在2004年，福興園擁有非經常資產約2億1640萬令吉、經常資產2600萬令吉以及儲備金6760萬令吉。而截至2004年杪，該公司的負只有400萬令吉。
消息稱，在上述紛爭中，兩派分別是以劉文來和劉文聰為主，後者是南方油脂創辦人已故拿督劉文華的兄弟。（人名譯音）
目前，在百樂園機構並未出現任何董事部斗爭的跡象，可能因為福興園僅屬小股東，但在南方油脂卻已經箭在弦上。
在上月杪向大馬交易所作出的宣布中，南方油脂要求召開一項特別大會，以罷黜董事葉順南和莫哈末希山，以及在3月27日至特大召開前委任的任何董事。
莫哈末希山是朝聖基金局的托管人，後者持有南方油脂約13%股份。
不過，消息指出，朝聖基金局仍然考慮上述事項，及尚未表明立場支持任何一方。
除了福興園和朝聖基金局，南方油脂並沒有其他大股東。
Banting Hock Hin feud boiling over
Monday, 27 April 2009 00:00
A tussle between shareholders is emerging in little-known Banting Hock Hin Estate Co Sdn Bhd, which has some RM1.5 billion in assets under its belt, including sizeable stakes in two listed companies — Southern Acids (M) Bhd and Paramount Corp Bhd.
Sources say the disagreement between the shareholders is growing and could boil over in the next few weeks.
The feud is due to one faction looking to wind up Banting Hock Hin and another wanting to keep it intact.
Some of the other large companies controlled by the group include Southern Realty (Malaya) Sdn Bhd, Victory Investment Company Sdn Bhd, Southern Keratong Plantations Sdn Bhd, Serata Kaya Sdn Bhd and Southern Edible Oil Industries (M) Sdn Bhd. Most of these companies are lumped under the Southern group banner.
According to latest annual reports, Banting Hock Hin and the other units control at least 50% of Southern Acids and about 18.3% of Paramount Corp.
Southern Acids’ market capitalisation, at its close last Thursday, stood at RM182 million while that of Paramount Corp was RM237.7 million. This would value the stakes that Banting Hock Hin and related parties own in the two companies at about RM134.5 million.
There are also a lot of private assets parked under the Southern group. According to its website, the group has more than 50,000ha of oil palm estates both here and in Indonesia (about 8,200ha of which are held under Southern Acids) and six palm oil mills with a combined processing capacity of about 250 tonnes per hour. Southern Edible Oil, meanwhile, has palm oil refineries and shares in Southern Acids.
Another unit, PKE (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, provides dry bulk terminal services, with warehouse space, while the Sri Kota Specialist Medical Centre located in Klang is also under the group’s control.
A search at the Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) shows that in 2004, Banting Hock Hin had non-current assets of about RM216.4 million, current assets of RM26 million and reserves of RM67.6 million. The company’s liabilities as at end-2004 stood at RM4 million.
For the year ended December 2004, Banting Hock Hin posted a profit after tax of RM17.2 million on revenue of RM7.2 million.
In the tussle, one faction is led by Low Boon Lai while the other is headed by his cousin Low Mun Chong. There are also splinter groups in the feud looking to get a foothold in the company — to sway things their way, sources say.
Mun Chong is the brother of the late Datuk Low Mong Hua, the founder of Southern Acids, and is said to be in disagreement with Boon Lai and directors affiliated to him.
Checks with the CCM show that there are seven directors in Banting Hock Hin. Apart from Boon Lai (who is designated manager and director) and Mun Chong, the others are Datuk Low Boon Eng, Ng Si Weon, Lim Kim Long, Lou Ai Choo and Lim Kum Loke.
There are also two liquidators present on the board — Michael Joseph Monteiro and Heng Ji Keng from Monteiro & Heng. They were appointed earlier this year after a shareholder tussle in 2003. The presence of the liquidators means the board has likely lost its powers.
In the 2003 tussle, Boon Lai made some headway after a court judgment was seen to be in his favour.
According to the CCM search, there are 47 shareholders in Banting Hock Hin, with the largest being Southernel (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, which has about 24% of the company’s four million share base. The rest of the shareholdings vary from 1,000 to 228,229 shares, making Banting Hock Hin a very fragmented company.
It is not clear when the feud started. According to sources, it could have commenced sometime in the late 1990s or early 2000, when Boon Lai or members of his faction became unhappy with the way the late Mong Hua was running the show and attempted to oust him.
A legal suit was filed after Mong Hua disagreed with a resolution of the Banting Hock Hin board of directors to demerge or wind up the company and have its assets valued and distributed to the shareholders.
In 2003, the court ruled in favour of a liquidation of Banting Hock Hin.
Mong Hua passed away in April last year.
While there is no sign of any boardroom tussle in Paramount Corp, probably because Banting Hock Hin is a minority shareholder, there appears to be some disagreement in Southern Acids, based on the company’s announcements to Bursa Malaysia.
In an announcement to the exchange late last month, Southern Acids requested an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) to remove directors Yap Soon Nam and Mohd Hisham Harun, and the removal of any director appointed between March 27 and the conclusion of the EGM.
The announcement also proposed as directors, Wong Yien Kim and Jonathan Law Ngee Song.
It is not clear which faction requested the removal of the two directors.
Mohd Hisham is the nominee of Lembaga Tabung Haji, which has about 13% equity interest in Southern Acids. However, sources say Tabung Haji is still considering the matter and has yet to make a stand supporting either party.
Possibly due to the feud, the company’s accounts for the financial quarter ended January 2009 were not issued on time. An announcement to Bursa said this was “due to insufficient information and explanation to the board in respect of foreign exchange losses and contracts”.
For the nine months ended January 2009, Southern Acids suffered a net loss of RM4.6 million on RM346.8 million in revenue. A year ago, it had made about RM24.7 million in profit on the back of RM345.4 million in revenue.
Other than Banting Hock Hin and Tabung Haji, there are no other substantial shareholders in Southern Acids.
21 July 2009
Blend palm kernel oil and palm oil to better replace cocoa butter?
By Stephen Daniells, 01-Dec-2006
Related topics: Science & Nutrition, Chocolate and confectionery ingredients, Fats & oils
Blending palm kernel oil, extracted by supercritical carbon dioxide, and palm oil leads to new cocoa butter replacers (CBR), offering cheaper alternatives with good physical and chemical properties.
As cocoa butter continues to run at a relatively high price, and crops and price will always be vulnerable to climatic and political change, the use of cheaper vegetable fat replacers should be a convincing argument for international chocolate firms such as Nestle, Cadburys and Hershey.
But it would appear that change, at least in the eyes of the marketer, may not please the consumer. As the slow cocoa butter replacer uptake in Europe suggests, chocolate makers suspect that the consumer will not opt for the vegetable fat/cocoa butter mix, preferring instead the 100 per cent cocoa butter recipe. But there is also the argument that consumers will be tempted by low prices, made possible through cheaper ingredients.
"The cocoa bean only contains small amounts of CB, and thus the price of CB is one of the highest among all commercial fats and oils. As only a few countries cultivate cocoa, supply can be unstable," explained researchers from Tohoku University in Japan and Universiti Sains Malaysia.
"Therefore, industries are looking for CB replacers (CBRs) or alternatives to CB. Palm kernel oil (PKO) could provide such a replacement as it is regarded as food-grade oil that is of high quality," they said.
In palm kernel oil (PKO), lauric acid (C12) makes up about 48 per cent of the oil, but in cocoa butter (CB) it represents only about 12 per cent. Moreover, the longer chain acids (palmitic acid (C16), stearic acid (C18.0), and oleic acid (C18.1)) are found in large amounts in CB but in small amounts in PKO.
The researchers behind the new study, to be published in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Food Engineering and already available on-line, used supercritical carbon dioxide fractionation of palm kernel oil to decrease the C12 and C14 (myristic acid) concentrations, and then blended this with palm oil to produce new CBRs.
The use of the supercritical carbon dioxide technique reduced the C12 concentration from 48 to 28 per cent. This was further reduced by blending with palm oil (Wilmer edible oil) and commercial C18.0 (palmac 98-18) and C18.1 (palmac 760), both obtained from Palmco Holdings.
Ten blends were produced, with PKO content ranging from five to 50 per cent, and PO from 60 to 20 per cent. The remaining was made up of the C18.0 and C18.1 (usually 15 per cent each).
The researchers report that, despite the continued presence of C12 and C14 constituents, all of the blends"could be recommended as CBRs in respect to the physico-chemical properties like fatty acids constituent, [and] slip melting point (SMP)."
"The other properties like iodine value (Iv), saponification value (Spv) and acid value (Av) for the blends 110 were found to be closer to that of commercial CB," they said.
"All blends were found to be able to use as CBRs."
The authors were not available for comment prior to publication, and it is not known if such blends will be developed further and made available commercially.
The research was sponsored by a grant from the Malaysian government.
The first European Union chocolate directive was agreed in 1973 and allowed the then new entrants to the European Community, the UK, Ireland and Denmark, to use a small amount of vegetable fats in their chocolate. Since this time, other European countries, notably Germany, have been fighting with chocolate puritans' notably France, Belgium and Italy - for the right to use vegetable fats and still call their products chocolate.
The fight ended in 2000, and in August 2003 Europe enforced new legislation that allows manufacturers to replace up to 5 per cent of chocolate's cocoa butter content with vegetable fats.
Source: Journal of Food Engineering
February 2007, Volume 78, Issue 4, Pages 1397-1409
"Blending of supercritical carbon dioxide (SC-CO2) extracted palm kernel oil fractions and palm oil to obtain cocoa butter replacers"
Authors: I.S.M. Zaidul, N.A. Nik Norulaini, A.K. Mohd Omar and R.L. Smith
Related topics: Science & Nutrition, Chocolate and confectionery ingredients, Fats & oils
Blending palm kernel oil, extracted by supercritical carbon dioxide, and palm oil leads to new cocoa butter replacers (CBR), offering cheaper alternatives with good physical and chemical properties.
As cocoa butter continues to run at a relatively high price, and crops and price will always be vulnerable to climatic and political change, the use of cheaper vegetable fat replacers should be a convincing argument for international chocolate firms such as Nestle, Cadburys and Hershey.
But it would appear that change, at least in the eyes of the marketer, may not please the consumer. As the slow cocoa butter replacer uptake in Europe suggests, chocolate makers suspect that the consumer will not opt for the vegetable fat/cocoa butter mix, preferring instead the 100 per cent cocoa butter recipe. But there is also the argument that consumers will be tempted by low prices, made possible through cheaper ingredients.
"The cocoa bean only contains small amounts of CB, and thus the price of CB is one of the highest among all commercial fats and oils. As only a few countries cultivate cocoa, supply can be unstable," explained researchers from Tohoku University in Japan and Universiti Sains Malaysia.
"Therefore, industries are looking for CB replacers (CBRs) or alternatives to CB. Palm kernel oil (PKO) could provide such a replacement as it is regarded as food-grade oil that is of high quality," they said.
In palm kernel oil (PKO), lauric acid (C12) makes up about 48 per cent of the oil, but in cocoa butter (CB) it represents only about 12 per cent. Moreover, the longer chain acids (palmitic acid (C16), stearic acid (C18.0), and oleic acid (C18.1)) are found in large amounts in CB but in small amounts in PKO.
The researchers behind the new study, to be published in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Food Engineering and already available on-line, used supercritical carbon dioxide fractionation of palm kernel oil to decrease the C12 and C14 (myristic acid) concentrations, and then blended this with palm oil to produce new CBRs.
The use of the supercritical carbon dioxide technique reduced the C12 concentration from 48 to 28 per cent. This was further reduced by blending with palm oil (Wilmer edible oil) and commercial C18.0 (palmac 98-18) and C18.1 (palmac 760), both obtained from Palmco Holdings.
Ten blends were produced, with PKO content ranging from five to 50 per cent, and PO from 60 to 20 per cent. The remaining was made up of the C18.0 and C18.1 (usually 15 per cent each).
The researchers report that, despite the continued presence of C12 and C14 constituents, all of the blends"could be recommended as CBRs in respect to the physico-chemical properties like fatty acids constituent, [and] slip melting point (SMP)."
"The other properties like iodine value (Iv), saponification value (Spv) and acid value (Av) for the blends 110 were found to be closer to that of commercial CB," they said.
"All blends were found to be able to use as CBRs."
The authors were not available for comment prior to publication, and it is not known if such blends will be developed further and made available commercially.
The research was sponsored by a grant from the Malaysian government.
The first European Union chocolate directive was agreed in 1973 and allowed the then new entrants to the European Community, the UK, Ireland and Denmark, to use a small amount of vegetable fats in their chocolate. Since this time, other European countries, notably Germany, have been fighting with chocolate puritans' notably France, Belgium and Italy - for the right to use vegetable fats and still call their products chocolate.
The fight ended in 2000, and in August 2003 Europe enforced new legislation that allows manufacturers to replace up to 5 per cent of chocolate's cocoa butter content with vegetable fats.
Source: Journal of Food Engineering
February 2007, Volume 78, Issue 4, Pages 1397-1409
"Blending of supercritical carbon dioxide (SC-CO2) extracted palm kernel oil fractions and palm oil to obtain cocoa butter replacers"
Authors: I.S.M. Zaidul, N.A. Nik Norulaini, A.K. Mohd Omar and R.L. Smith
18 July 2009
Fima aims for 25% revenue growth in FY09
plantation division namely NJL, an 80% owned subsidiary, contributed RM4.0 million pretax profit to the overall results of the Group. During the financial year under review, plantation mature area was 4,221.8 hectares and 41,811 mt of fresh fruit bunches (“FFB”) was produced whilst a total of 4,990 mt FFB was sourced from third parties. During the same period, production of crude palm oil (“CPO”) and palm kernel (“PK”) was 12,155 mt and 1,984 mt respectively."
---from 2008 march annual report.
Roslan Hamir
Indonesian oil palm ops expected to contribute more
KUALA LUMPUR: Fima Corp Bhd hopes to achieve 25% growth in revenue to RM220mil for the financial year ending March 31 (FY09), backed by higher contribution from its oil palm plantation in Indonesia.
Managing director Roslan Hamir said the company would continue to bank on the production and trading of security and confidential documents as well as its palm oil production to be the main revenue drivers in FY09.
“However, we expect higher quantum of revenue growth from the oil palm division in view of higher fresh fruit bunch production,” he told reporters after the company AGM yesterday.
“We aim to produce at least 25,000 tonnes of crude palm oil (CPO) in FY09 compared with 9,000 tonnes previously,” Roslan said, adding that 80% of its CPO from Indonesia was sent back to Malaysia.
According to him, the company would enjoy a higher yield as most of the oil palm trees were expected to mature by year-end.
Fima, which has an 80% stake in palm oil-based Indonesian company PT Nunukan Jaya Lestari, also expected revenue contribution from its oil palm division to increase to RM60mil in FY09 from RM22mil in FY08, said Roslan.
On landbank expansion, he said Fima was in no hurry to expand now as it still had 7,500ha to be developed. It would, however, be eyeing Indonesia for future expansion.
Meanwhile, he said, escalating raw material prices would continue to affect the company’s gross profit margin by 2% to 3%.
On the fluctuating CPO price, Roslan said: “We are still at a comfortable level if the price remains above RM2,500 per tonne. I believe that CPO would average at RM3,000 for the remaining second half of the year.”
On the company’s budget wish list, Roslan said he hoped the Government would focus on the small and medium enterprises and allocate more incentives for manufacturers in view of inflation and rising operating costs.
For its first quarter ended June 30, Fima posted 129.3% jump in net profit to RM14.01mil and 59.05% increase in revenue to RM63.89mil compared with the previous corresponding period.
Currently, its production and trading of security documents division contributes 60% to the company’s revenue.
For FY08, Fima registered 12.4% increase in net profit to RM176.79mil and 11.04% rise in revenue to RM176.79mil. For FY08, it will pay total net dividend per share of 11.93 sen.
---from 2008 march annual report.
Roslan HamirIndonesian oil palm ops expected to contribute more
KUALA LUMPUR: Fima Corp Bhd hopes to achieve 25% growth in revenue to RM220mil for the financial year ending March 31 (FY09), backed by higher contribution from its oil palm plantation in Indonesia.
Managing director Roslan Hamir said the company would continue to bank on the production and trading of security and confidential documents as well as its palm oil production to be the main revenue drivers in FY09.
“However, we expect higher quantum of revenue growth from the oil palm division in view of higher fresh fruit bunch production,” he told reporters after the company AGM yesterday.
“We aim to produce at least 25,000 tonnes of crude palm oil (CPO) in FY09 compared with 9,000 tonnes previously,” Roslan said, adding that 80% of its CPO from Indonesia was sent back to Malaysia.
According to him, the company would enjoy a higher yield as most of the oil palm trees were expected to mature by year-end.
Fima, which has an 80% stake in palm oil-based Indonesian company PT Nunukan Jaya Lestari, also expected revenue contribution from its oil palm division to increase to RM60mil in FY09 from RM22mil in FY08, said Roslan.
On landbank expansion, he said Fima was in no hurry to expand now as it still had 7,500ha to be developed. It would, however, be eyeing Indonesia for future expansion.
Meanwhile, he said, escalating raw material prices would continue to affect the company’s gross profit margin by 2% to 3%.
On the fluctuating CPO price, Roslan said: “We are still at a comfortable level if the price remains above RM2,500 per tonne. I believe that CPO would average at RM3,000 for the remaining second half of the year.”
On the company’s budget wish list, Roslan said he hoped the Government would focus on the small and medium enterprises and allocate more incentives for manufacturers in view of inflation and rising operating costs.
For its first quarter ended June 30, Fima posted 129.3% jump in net profit to RM14.01mil and 59.05% increase in revenue to RM63.89mil compared with the previous corresponding period.
Currently, its production and trading of security documents division contributes 60% to the company’s revenue.
For FY08, Fima registered 12.4% increase in net profit to RM176.79mil and 11.04% rise in revenue to RM176.79mil. For FY08, it will pay total net dividend per share of 11.93 sen.
人工变贵了，肥料下跌了。
根据am research的资料，本地的人工费用增加了10%。
但肥料却因为拖后作用(lag)，下跌了。
如果以RM4400(+/-)当作是在一年里的每公顷园丘营运成本，那么，人工就是RM1210（1100 + 10%），肥料是RM1320。剩下的，就由油价和其他平分。
开发成本
ioicorp预计他们在印尼的每公顷开发成本（planting cost），可以创下令人无法置信的RM9800。
也就是说，买了地以后，ioicorp在前面4年（一直到成熟阶段），平均每年只能投入RM2500。
当然，“4年”要扣掉树苗入土时的岁数。
IOI’s planting cost is about US$2,800/ha or RM9,800/ha, which we consider low compared to the average of US$4,000/ha to US$5,000/ha (RM14,000/ha to RM17,500/ ha).
是什么造成如此低的成本，有没有把地价计算进去？
根据我的记忆，orient，ijmplnt，metrok的每公顷种植成本，若不包括地价和提炼设施，都在RM17000-RM20000。
如此低的成本，相信已经不能有灌溉系统了。
【add 1 day later】
翻种成本（replanting cost,不同于开发成本）较便宜，RM8000，假设，夷平是自己操作的。
小园主翻种成本较高，RM12000。
但肥料却因为拖后作用(lag)，下跌了。
如果以RM4400(+/-)当作是在一年里的每公顷园丘营运成本，那么，人工就是RM1210（1100 + 10%），肥料是RM1320。剩下的，就由油价和其他平分。
开发成本
ioicorp预计他们在印尼的每公顷开发成本（planting cost），可以创下令人无法置信的RM9800。
也就是说，买了地以后，ioicorp在前面4年（一直到成熟阶段），平均每年只能投入RM2500。
当然，“4年”要扣掉树苗入土时的岁数。
IOI’s planting cost is about US$2,800/ha or RM9,800/ha, which we consider low compared to the average of US$4,000/ha to US$5,000/ha (RM14,000/ha to RM17,500/ ha).
是什么造成如此低的成本，有没有把地价计算进去？
根据我的记忆，orient，ijmplnt，metrok的每公顷种植成本，若不包括地价和提炼设施，都在RM17000-RM20000。
如此低的成本，相信已经不能有灌溉系统了。
【add 1 day later】
翻种成本（replanting cost,不同于开发成本）较便宜，RM8000，假设，夷平是自己操作的。
小园主翻种成本较高，RM12000。
15 July 2009
联合马六甲“提议”购sabah 种植地
昨天umcca，“提议”以RM2.4亿购入一间sabah公司一片位于sabah州的种植地和园丘(continuous plot)。
Labau, District of Kinabatangan, Sabah, Malaysia,
total land 10,102 hectares
planted land 5,685.52 hectares
Maturity Profile of Oil Palm Trees <5 years old
-没有提炼厂。
-不是买入公司，纯粹买地。
Fresh Fruit Bunches Production (tonnes)
根据这个趋势推测，12345岁，分别占了种植面积的20%，也就是个别占了1137hectares。
【7月26号更新：
根据ta securities 推测，成熟面积是2,024 ha】
以2.4亿，购入4416公顷空地和5685.52公顷种植地，是否值得？
收购价是合理的，因为sabah的种植地，就是这个价钱。但我担心的是，它的产量不高，若以production curve来算。人家说，人，可以“3岁定80”，油棕树也是可以“4岁定20”的。除非我的初步推测是错的。
其实这些收购事项，理想值都在+/- 10%之间，算的这么仔细，多此一举，烂地例外。
如果不考虑2003年到现在的通膨率，这个地段的成本加上种植开销成本，总计是65.4m，以240m购入（虽然估价师给予的市值是248m），是否值得？
由此可见，种植地要“自己种”才划算，买入已经种好的，回酬只会是“投资回酬率”而已。
早前UMCCA放弃了进军印尼，是对是错？
附：已栽种的种植地，初期每年以 +RM2500/hectare 的增值幅度递加。当然，如果有良好的bio，每年可增加RM3500，eg：4岁种植地是RM35000，那么空地就是21000。这是我自己的方法，因为只会linear calculation。
Labau, District of Kinabatangan, Sabah, Malaysia,
total land 10,102 hectares
planted land 5,685.52 hectares
Maturity Profile of Oil Palm Trees <5 years old
-没有提炼厂。
-不是买入公司，纯粹买地。
Fresh Fruit Bunches Production (tonnes)
| 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7456 | 1818 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
根据这个趋势推测，12345岁，分别占了种植面积的20%，也就是个别占了1137hectares。
【7月26号更新：
根据ta securities 推测，成熟面积是2,024 ha】
以2.4亿，购入4416公顷空地和5685.52公顷种植地，是否值得？
收购价是合理的，因为sabah的种植地，就是这个价钱。但我担心的是，它的产量不高，若以production curve来算。人家说，人，可以“3岁定80”，油棕树也是可以“4岁定20”的。除非我的初步推测是错的。
其实这些收购事项，理想值都在+/- 10%之间，算的这么仔细，多此一举，烂地例外。
如果不考虑2003年到现在的通膨率，这个地段的成本加上种植开销成本，总计是65.4m，以240m购入（虽然估价师给予的市值是248m），是否值得？
由此可见，种植地要“自己种”才划算，买入已经种好的，回酬只会是“投资回酬率”而已。
早前UMCCA放弃了进军印尼，是对是错？
附：已栽种的种植地，初期每年以 +RM2500/hectare 的增值幅度递加。当然，如果有良好的bio，每年可增加RM3500，eg：4岁种植地是RM35000，那么空地就是21000。这是我自己的方法，因为只会linear calculation。
10 July 2009
貿易風設法收回賽莫達1.9億欠款
tws是一间综合白糖和种植的公司，它和ppb，瓜分了近乎全部的国内白糖市场，连同出口的白糖，两间公司的白糖产量不相伯仲。
但是，tws和ppb的关系却是友好的，或许是表面友好的。也可以说，tws的业务非常依赖ppb，因为tws的肥料和化学品，都是向ppb购买的。
在sarawak，twsplnt出厂的cpo，也有相当部分是卖给bintulu edible oil的，它也是ppb的公司。
即使是tws的核心业务-白糖，也是ppb提供支援的。
Tan Gee Sooi 和 Boo Yew Leng都是tws和ppb的董事。
这样的一间处处需要扶持的公司，成长已成问题，只有人口增加它才会增加盈利。
虽然它是由赛莫达大亨持有，但赛莫达并没有给它良好的待遇。
对于明年，我国可能撤销白糖津贴的揣测，对ppb和tws来说，是“中和”的。
留意以下新闻，这个发言的主席，同时也是bernas, ijm的高层人士，他的话可以当没说过。
BUKHARY是一间经营白糖销售和出口的公司，和tws有很紧密的关系。1億9390萬令吉相等于BUKHARY一年的销售量。
2009-06-18 19:18
星洲日報／財經‧2009.06.18
（吉隆坡）貿易風（TWS,4421,主板消費品組）主席拿督威拉賽阿都查化表示，公司將設法向BUKHARY公司收回所拖欠的1億9390萬令吉的欠款。
上述款項為多年來所累積的欠款，占這間公司貿易應收款項總額的60%。BUKHARY公司為丹斯里賽莫達旗下的公司。
賽阿都查化表示，由於目前經濟情況欠佳，這間公司會給布卡利公司一些寬容期。他是在這間公司股東常年大會後發表上述談話。
他說：“這間公司將會關注此問題，它是公司的正常業務營運。布卡利公司自2004年開始即是公司的代理，與公司擁有長期的關係，它協助這間公司開拓市場，不僅是北馬，同時也打進東馬沙砂市場。我們也要考慮它的問題，因為目前經濟艱辛。”
截至2009年3月31日為止首季，公司淨利跌至839萬令吉，前期為3781萬令吉。而營業額也從前期的4億3503萬令吉，跌至3億5456萬令吉。它的貿易應收款項達3億9839萬令吉。
星洲日報／財經‧2009.06.18
Tradewinds seeks recovery of RM193.9m from Syed Mokhtar's company
Written by Fong Min Hun
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 18:17
KUALA LUMPUR: Tradewinds (M) Bhd said it was taking steps to recover the RM193.9 million owed by Bukhary Sdn Bhd (BSB), which had increased over the years and now accounted for about 60% of total trade receivables.
Tradewinds chairman Datuk Wira Syed Abdul Jabbar Syed Hassan said some leeway had to be made for BSB, which is linked to Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary, because of the current economic climate.
"We've looked at (the amount owed) but this is the ordinary course of business. As you know, 2008 was not an easy year," he told reporters after the company's annual general meeting on June 17.
"This company, Bukhary has been our agent since 2004. It is a long-term relationship and they have been able to develop markets for us not only in northern Semenanjung (Peninsular Malaysia) but also in Sabah and Sarawak. We have to take into account the problems on their side because of the difficult year," he added.
For the first quarter ended March 31, 2009, its net profit was RM8.39 million, down from RM37.81 million a year ago. It revenue was RM354.56 million compared with RM435.03 million. Its trade receivables totaled RM398.39 million.
Syed Abdul Jabbar said Tradewinds was working towards progressively reducing the amount owed by BSB, which amounted to RM193.9 million at end-December last year.
但是，tws和ppb的关系却是友好的，或许是表面友好的。也可以说，tws的业务非常依赖ppb，因为tws的肥料和化学品，都是向ppb购买的。
在sarawak，twsplnt出厂的cpo，也有相当部分是卖给bintulu edible oil的，它也是ppb的公司。
即使是tws的核心业务-白糖，也是ppb提供支援的。
Tan Gee Sooi 和 Boo Yew Leng都是tws和ppb的董事。
这样的一间处处需要扶持的公司，成长已成问题，只有人口增加它才会增加盈利。
虽然它是由赛莫达大亨持有，但赛莫达并没有给它良好的待遇。
对于明年，我国可能撤销白糖津贴的揣测，对ppb和tws来说，是“中和”的。
留意以下新闻，这个发言的主席，同时也是bernas, ijm的高层人士，他的话可以当没说过。
BUKHARY是一间经营白糖销售和出口的公司，和tws有很紧密的关系。1億9390萬令吉相等于BUKHARY一年的销售量。
2009-06-18 19:18
星洲日報／財經‧2009.06.18
（吉隆坡）貿易風（TWS,4421,主板消費品組）主席拿督威拉賽阿都查化表示，公司將設法向BUKHARY公司收回所拖欠的1億9390萬令吉的欠款。
上述款項為多年來所累積的欠款，占這間公司貿易應收款項總額的60%。BUKHARY公司為丹斯里賽莫達旗下的公司。
賽阿都查化表示，由於目前經濟情況欠佳，這間公司會給布卡利公司一些寬容期。他是在這間公司股東常年大會後發表上述談話。
他說：“這間公司將會關注此問題，它是公司的正常業務營運。布卡利公司自2004年開始即是公司的代理，與公司擁有長期的關係，它協助這間公司開拓市場，不僅是北馬，同時也打進東馬沙砂市場。我們也要考慮它的問題，因為目前經濟艱辛。”
截至2009年3月31日為止首季，公司淨利跌至839萬令吉，前期為3781萬令吉。而營業額也從前期的4億3503萬令吉，跌至3億5456萬令吉。它的貿易應收款項達3億9839萬令吉。
星洲日報／財經‧2009.06.18
Tradewinds seeks recovery of RM193.9m from Syed Mokhtar's company
Written by Fong Min Hun
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 18:17
KUALA LUMPUR: Tradewinds (M) Bhd said it was taking steps to recover the RM193.9 million owed by Bukhary Sdn Bhd (BSB), which had increased over the years and now accounted for about 60% of total trade receivables.
Tradewinds chairman Datuk Wira Syed Abdul Jabbar Syed Hassan said some leeway had to be made for BSB, which is linked to Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary, because of the current economic climate.
"We've looked at (the amount owed) but this is the ordinary course of business. As you know, 2008 was not an easy year," he told reporters after the company's annual general meeting on June 17.
"This company, Bukhary has been our agent since 2004. It is a long-term relationship and they have been able to develop markets for us not only in northern Semenanjung (Peninsular Malaysia) but also in Sabah and Sarawak. We have to take into account the problems on their side because of the difficult year," he added.
For the first quarter ended March 31, 2009, its net profit was RM8.39 million, down from RM37.81 million a year ago. It revenue was RM354.56 million compared with RM435.03 million. Its trade receivables totaled RM398.39 million.
Syed Abdul Jabbar said Tradewinds was working towards progressively reducing the amount owed by BSB, which amounted to RM193.9 million at end-December last year.
08 July 2009
sab的人事纠纷，后续。
【原文】
之前提到的sab人事纠纷，几乎忘了。
昨天sab董事委任了新的管理团队，接管了sab。
sab董事根据公司法，Section 181. Remedy in cases of an oppression，委任Lim Tian Huat 和 Duar Tuan Kiat 为临时接管人。至于之前的人事，犯了什么错，就不清楚。
The Company wishes to announce that it has today been served with an ex-parte order dated 30 June 2009 for the appointment of Mr Lim Tian Huat (NRIC No. 541128-04-5235) and Mr Duar Tuan Kiat (NRIC No. 610323-10-5375) both of Messrs Ernst & Young, 4th Floor, Kompleks Antarabangsa, Jalan Sultan Ismail, 50250 Kuala Lumpur as Interim Receivers and Managers of Southern Acids (M) Berhad, pursuant to a petition under Section 181 of the Companies Act, 1965 filed by two shareholders, one of whom is an executive director of the Company.
【update on 8 july 09，suspended pending the decision of the court】
【Saturday July 11, 2009】
What’s going on in Southern Acids?
By CECILIA KOK
The company, which has been served an ex-parte order, is reported to be embroiled in a shareholder dispute, stemming from factions in its major shareholder
IT may not be a closely watched counter, but over the week, Southern Acids (M) Bhd caught some limelight after it announced on Monday that it had been served an ex-parte order for the appointment of two Ernst & Young partners as interim receivers and managers.
On Wednesday, the company said the ex-parte order had been suspended pending a court decision on July 14 on the preliminary objections to an application to set aside the order.
Trading of the company’s shares will be suspended on the same day until further notice.
Southern Acids is principally an investment holding company that carries out the marketing of oleo-chemical products for commercial use. The ex-parte order is the result of a petition filed by two shareholders, one of whom is an executive director.
The company currently has two executive directors, namely Low Mong Chai and Lim Kim Long, who held 56.2% and 50.5% direct and indirect interests, respectively, in Southern Acids as at Sept 15 last year.
Reasons for the filing of the petition are still not clear. When contacted, the management of Southern Acids and representatives from Ernst & Young refused to comment on the current status of the company because the court case is outstanding.
If the ex-parte order stands, the control of Southern Acids will be placed under the stewardship of the interim receivers and managers from Ernst & Young.
The net book value of the company’s affected assets as at April 30, 2009 was RM368.3mil.
The interim receivers and managers will be reviewing the financial and operational aspects of the company.
This mandate includes protecting and safeguarding the assets of the company, managing its affairs and conducting investigations about its past doings. The scope of investment, however, is limited to what is allowed by the court.
In essence, the receivers and managers in the case above are the officers of the court and they report to the court.
Generally, through receivership, a company can avoid liquidation through the reorganisation of assets and liabilities with the help of a court-appointed trustee, or until a white knight comes and rescue the company.
A management consultant familiar with such cases explains that the placement of Southern Acids under receivership (if the ex-parte order is not set aside) does not necessarily mean that the company would wind up in liquidation.
“The company can get out of this entanglement once the ‘main cause’ that triggered the action is resolved,” he clarifies.
Southern Acids in April was reported to be embroiled in a shareholder dispute, stemming from factions in its major shareholder Banting Hock Hin Estate Co Sdn Bhd.
According to media reports, there was a group in Banting Hock Hin that wanted to wind up Southern Acids and distribute its assets to shareholders, while another wanted to keep the company as a going concern.
“When two parties cannot agree on important matters of the company, it will definitely affect the company’s operations,” the consultant says.
“So, in this case, it is best that the company be put under a custodian until the conflict is resolved. This is for the betterment of the company, so that it can operate normally,” he adds.
The concern now is the effect of the receivership on the interests of other shareholders in Southern Acids.
“Well, it is too premature to conclude that they will lose out in the current scenario,” an analyst familiar with the case explains.
“If you take the spirit of what the receivers and managers are doing as professional, and that is, they are managing the affairs of the company for its good until any dispute is resolved, then it should not prejudice the interests of other shareholders,” he says.
Further announcements on the company are expected to be made in the week ahead.
Southern Acids booked a loss of RM4.35mil on a turnover of RM442.2mil for the financial year ended April 30, 2009. In the preceding financial year, the company made a net profit of RM23.2mil from a turnover of RM465.5mil.
Based on the counter’s closing price of RM1.45 per share on Thursday, the market capitalisation of Southern Acids stood at RM198.55mil.
【Tuesday July 14, 2009】
Southern Acids announces additional information
PETALING JAYA: Southern Acids (M) Bhd has announced additional information pertaining to the appointment of its interim receivers and manager from Messrs Ernst & Young.
In a filing to Bursa Malaysia yesterday, it said the additional information was announced after the company was served with an ex-parte order dated June 30 on July 6 for the appointment of Lim Tian Huat and Duar Tuan Kiat as interim receivers and managers of Southern Acids pursuant to a petition filed by two shareholders – Southern Acids executive director Low Mong Chai and his brother-in-law Soh Ah Bah.
The petitioners said in the filing that Symfusion Sdn Bhd was engaged at a fee of RM2.5mil to investigate complaints raised by shareholders in respect of numerous alleged questionable transactions, such as removal of certain bank signatories and payment of certain allowances to two non-executive directors, were alleged to be irregular.
The directors were unable to ascertain, at this point in time, if the company would suffer any losses from the aforesaid appointment, it said.
【Tuesday July 15, 2009】
Clarification (thestar)
WITH reference to yesterday’s report Southern Acids announces additional information, Symfusion Sdn Bhd was appointed to investigate only complaints over numerous alleged questionable transactions and not as published.
之前提到的sab人事纠纷，几乎忘了。
昨天sab董事委任了新的管理团队，接管了sab。
sab董事根据公司法，Section 181. Remedy in cases of an oppression，委任Lim Tian Huat 和 Duar Tuan Kiat 为临时接管人。至于之前的人事，犯了什么错，就不清楚。
The Company wishes to announce that it has today been served with an ex-parte order dated 30 June 2009 for the appointment of Mr Lim Tian Huat (NRIC No. 541128-04-5235) and Mr Duar Tuan Kiat (NRIC No. 610323-10-5375) both of Messrs Ernst & Young, 4th Floor, Kompleks Antarabangsa, Jalan Sultan Ismail, 50250 Kuala Lumpur as Interim Receivers and Managers of Southern Acids (M) Berhad, pursuant to a petition under Section 181 of the Companies Act, 1965 filed by two shareholders, one of whom is an executive director of the Company.
【update on 8 july 09，suspended pending the decision of the court】
【Saturday July 11, 2009】
What’s going on in Southern Acids?
By CECILIA KOK
The company, which has been served an ex-parte order, is reported to be embroiled in a shareholder dispute, stemming from factions in its major shareholder
IT may not be a closely watched counter, but over the week, Southern Acids (M) Bhd caught some limelight after it announced on Monday that it had been served an ex-parte order for the appointment of two Ernst & Young partners as interim receivers and managers.
On Wednesday, the company said the ex-parte order had been suspended pending a court decision on July 14 on the preliminary objections to an application to set aside the order.
Trading of the company’s shares will be suspended on the same day until further notice.
Southern Acids is principally an investment holding company that carries out the marketing of oleo-chemical products for commercial use. The ex-parte order is the result of a petition filed by two shareholders, one of whom is an executive director.
The company currently has two executive directors, namely Low Mong Chai and Lim Kim Long, who held 56.2% and 50.5% direct and indirect interests, respectively, in Southern Acids as at Sept 15 last year.
Reasons for the filing of the petition are still not clear. When contacted, the management of Southern Acids and representatives from Ernst & Young refused to comment on the current status of the company because the court case is outstanding.
If the ex-parte order stands, the control of Southern Acids will be placed under the stewardship of the interim receivers and managers from Ernst & Young.
The net book value of the company’s affected assets as at April 30, 2009 was RM368.3mil.
The interim receivers and managers will be reviewing the financial and operational aspects of the company.
This mandate includes protecting and safeguarding the assets of the company, managing its affairs and conducting investigations about its past doings. The scope of investment, however, is limited to what is allowed by the court.
In essence, the receivers and managers in the case above are the officers of the court and they report to the court.
Generally, through receivership, a company can avoid liquidation through the reorganisation of assets and liabilities with the help of a court-appointed trustee, or until a white knight comes and rescue the company.
A management consultant familiar with such cases explains that the placement of Southern Acids under receivership (if the ex-parte order is not set aside) does not necessarily mean that the company would wind up in liquidation.
“The company can get out of this entanglement once the ‘main cause’ that triggered the action is resolved,” he clarifies.
Southern Acids in April was reported to be embroiled in a shareholder dispute, stemming from factions in its major shareholder Banting Hock Hin Estate Co Sdn Bhd.
According to media reports, there was a group in Banting Hock Hin that wanted to wind up Southern Acids and distribute its assets to shareholders, while another wanted to keep the company as a going concern.
“When two parties cannot agree on important matters of the company, it will definitely affect the company’s operations,” the consultant says.
“So, in this case, it is best that the company be put under a custodian until the conflict is resolved. This is for the betterment of the company, so that it can operate normally,” he adds.
The concern now is the effect of the receivership on the interests of other shareholders in Southern Acids.
“Well, it is too premature to conclude that they will lose out in the current scenario,” an analyst familiar with the case explains.
“If you take the spirit of what the receivers and managers are doing as professional, and that is, they are managing the affairs of the company for its good until any dispute is resolved, then it should not prejudice the interests of other shareholders,” he says.
Further announcements on the company are expected to be made in the week ahead.
Southern Acids booked a loss of RM4.35mil on a turnover of RM442.2mil for the financial year ended April 30, 2009. In the preceding financial year, the company made a net profit of RM23.2mil from a turnover of RM465.5mil.
Based on the counter’s closing price of RM1.45 per share on Thursday, the market capitalisation of Southern Acids stood at RM198.55mil.
【Tuesday July 14, 2009】
Southern Acids announces additional information
PETALING JAYA: Southern Acids (M) Bhd has announced additional information pertaining to the appointment of its interim receivers and manager from Messrs Ernst & Young.
In a filing to Bursa Malaysia yesterday, it said the additional information was announced after the company was served with an ex-parte order dated June 30 on July 6 for the appointment of Lim Tian Huat and Duar Tuan Kiat as interim receivers and managers of Southern Acids pursuant to a petition filed by two shareholders – Southern Acids executive director Low Mong Chai and his brother-in-law Soh Ah Bah.
The petitioners said in the filing that Symfusion Sdn Bhd was engaged at a fee of RM2.5mil to investigate complaints raised by shareholders in respect of numerous alleged questionable transactions, such as removal of certain bank signatories and payment of certain allowances to two non-executive directors, were alleged to be irregular.
The directors were unable to ascertain, at this point in time, if the company would suffer any losses from the aforesaid appointment, it said.
【Tuesday July 15, 2009】
Clarification (thestar)
WITH reference to yesterday’s report Southern Acids announces additional information, Symfusion Sdn Bhd was appointed to investigate only complaints over numerous alleged questionable transactions and not as published.
回读者的信，要复杂，要简单，依你选择。
你好，我不是做这一行的，普通投资者。
你的要求，很难实现，因为有太多东西需要兼顾，看产量不对，看平均售价不对，看margin也不对，看成本也不对。好的公司（如果股价不好，也不对。）
你提到benchmark 要求，个人觉得很难。万一benchmark弄得不好，情况就如，把“已经分类好的东西”再凑和在一起了。
当你听（看）到人家告诉你，投资要benchmark，行业要benchmark时，事实上他们10个有9个，连我自己，都是没有自己benchmark过的。因为，知易行难（讲就容易，做很难），人的一天就只有几个小时，看一份报告已经很“千载难逢”，download 10份报告下来，输进excel，要多久呢？
可能又会有人提议说，这个方法很“传统”，因为http://osksec.klsetracker.com.my就提供了一组table。但，这组table能透露什么呢？
benchmark的局限，例子：州属。
你不能拿登家楼（丁加奴）的园丘和霹雳的园丘相比；不能拿sarawak的园丘和sabah的园丘相比，因为它们的比较关系就像是牛和羊，矛和盾。
多年来丁加奴州的产量都不高，其中最具代表性的公司是TDM，TDM占了整个丁加奴州属1/6园丘。
虽然TDM的表现在全马的种植上市公司中（除了sarawak，kelantan），算最差的，但它却是丁加奴州最好的，如果要benchmark，也不知和谁benchmark才好？
马来西亚有两个“油棕带”，一个在kota tinggi，一个在sandakan，如果某公司的园丘在那边，自然的它的估值会高一些。估值至少可以是RM60000/hectare。
因为我不是做这行的，手上也没有“卫星图”，不知道哪个园丘好，哪个不好，和相关行业的人比较，我简直是井底之蛙，试问我该怎么比较它们，和替它们估价？
一般上，评估一个园丘的价值方法是：(产量x售价-成本)(以10%的DCF算出)
算到来，应该是10倍pe。（if growth rate = discount rate = 10% ）
valuer会把通货膨胀，growth rate，和土地增值算进去。
很抱歉，连我都觉得我在推搪了。
benchmark的局限，例子：行业属性。
IOI：油脂。
Kurnia，Twsplnt：pure estate。
Kmloong，QL ：miller and kernel expeller， Carbon Credit
Tsh etc
种植不像银行，值得你去benchmark。
每间银行运作模式都一样，提供的服务都差不多，连non-performing-loan都差不多，贷款成长也差不多，分行数目，服务态度，这些都可以benchmark，但种植就很难。（对我来说很难。）
benchmark的局限，例子：树龄。
4岁-10岁：exponential growth curve（快速曲线上升），eg:4-6tons快速上升到25-30tons。
10岁-17岁：慢慢衰退，eg:25-20
17岁-25岁：衰退，eg:20-10
benchmark的局限，例子：天气和环境。
印尼的天气和马来西亚的天气不同，
雨多，fruit多，extraction rate少。（但平均起来，oil to area最多）
雨少，fruit少，extraction rate多。
雨太多，没有雨。等等。。。
我建议的方法是，plantation profit per hectare，因为这是最“化繁为简”的。
有关profit per ha的资料，你可以通过blogsearch搜索，http://timcheeso.blogspot.com/search?q=%22profit+per+ha%22
在“繁”的部分而言。
不可忽略的是“四大要件”了：产量，榨油率，平均售价和成本。
衍生出来的数据，有：
1。return on investment：
plantation profit / (prepaid lease payment + biological asset)
2。开发成本：
biological asset/hectare，
biological asset指的是油棕还没有收割时的“成本投入”。
3。每公顷营运成本：
（plantation revenue - plantation profit） / hectare
讲到concept，SWOP analysis，重点，或“注意事项”之类的，我还没到能够“整理系统”的程度，也许你慢慢看应该可以get到一些。
对于小型公司，我的心得比较接近这个：用新的modulus评估，看看准不准确。
............其实我不知道如何回答你，甚至“从何答起”都不能够。
我不是什么种植专家，我看起来像种植专家，事实上是因为我在一些投资知识“帮助”下，“弥补”（掩饰）过去而已。
当然如果说我可能“比你懂一点点”，这还说得过去。
我不是“刻意谦虚”或“刻意炫耀”，实话实说罢了。
你是想要知道oil palm还是company analysis？
如果你想知道oil palm，我帮不了你，除了valuation per hectare的部分，可以解释。
这是pure planter blog
>>>
hi
你好，我刚刚看到你的Blog, 觉得你对Oil Palm Industry 很熟悉。。真的不得不佩服。。连什么种子都知道， 你是在这一行做的吗？
其实我有东西想向你请教，请问你是怎样 Evaluate 一个 Oil Palm Plantation 是好还是不好？ 我有找和看你对本地oil palm counter 的 Analysis, 可是我却没有什么 Get 到整个Concept 或 Model...
不知道你方便写一个 Post 关于怎样 Analysis 和 BenchMark 一个好的 Oil Palm Plantation 吗？
我有找回你以前的 Post 可是找不到 （可能使我overlook)
如果你真的方便的话， 希望你可以谢谢这一方面的心得。 我真的是很有诚意想学习怎样 Analysis Oil Palm.
*我现在每天都在看着你以前的作品， 都写到很好，希望你会继续分享你的心得。。。
加油！ 加油！
Mario
你的要求，很难实现，因为有太多东西需要兼顾，看产量不对，看平均售价不对，看margin也不对，看成本也不对。好的公司（如果股价不好，也不对。）
你提到benchmark 要求，个人觉得很难。万一benchmark弄得不好，情况就如，把“已经分类好的东西”再凑和在一起了。
当你听（看）到人家告诉你，投资要benchmark，行业要benchmark时，事实上他们10个有9个，连我自己，都是没有自己benchmark过的。因为，知易行难（讲就容易，做很难），人的一天就只有几个小时，看一份报告已经很“千载难逢”，download 10份报告下来，输进excel，要多久呢？
可能又会有人提议说，这个方法很“传统”，因为http://osksec.klsetracker.com.my就提供了一组table。但，这组table能透露什么呢？
benchmark的局限，例子：州属。
你不能拿登家楼（丁加奴）的园丘和霹雳的园丘相比；不能拿sarawak的园丘和sabah的园丘相比，因为它们的比较关系就像是牛和羊，矛和盾。
多年来丁加奴州的产量都不高，其中最具代表性的公司是TDM，TDM占了整个丁加奴州属1/6园丘。
虽然TDM的表现在全马的种植上市公司中（除了sarawak，kelantan），算最差的，但它却是丁加奴州最好的，如果要benchmark，也不知和谁benchmark才好？
马来西亚有两个“油棕带”，一个在kota tinggi，一个在sandakan，如果某公司的园丘在那边，自然的它的估值会高一些。估值至少可以是RM60000/hectare。
因为我不是做这行的，手上也没有“卫星图”，不知道哪个园丘好，哪个不好，和相关行业的人比较，我简直是井底之蛙，试问我该怎么比较它们，和替它们估价？
一般上，评估一个园丘的价值方法是：(产量x售价-成本)(以10%的DCF算出)
算到来，应该是10倍pe。（if growth rate = discount rate = 10% ）
valuer会把通货膨胀，growth rate，和土地增值算进去。
很抱歉，连我都觉得我在推搪了。
benchmark的局限，例子：行业属性。
IOI：油脂。
Kurnia，Twsplnt：pure estate。
Kmloong，QL ：miller and kernel expeller， Carbon Credit
Tsh etc
种植不像银行，值得你去benchmark。
每间银行运作模式都一样，提供的服务都差不多，连non-performing-loan都差不多，贷款成长也差不多，分行数目，服务态度，这些都可以benchmark，但种植就很难。（对我来说很难。）
benchmark的局限，例子：树龄。
4岁-10岁：exponential growth curve（快速曲线上升），eg:4-6tons快速上升到25-30tons。
10岁-17岁：慢慢衰退，eg:25-20
17岁-25岁：衰退，eg:20-10
benchmark的局限，例子：天气和环境。
印尼的天气和马来西亚的天气不同，
雨多，fruit多，extraction rate少。（但平均起来，oil to area最多）
雨少，fruit少，extraction rate多。
雨太多，没有雨。等等。。。
我建议的方法是，plantation profit per hectare，因为这是最“化繁为简”的。
有关profit per ha的资料，你可以通过blogsearch搜索，http://timcheeso.blogspot.com/search?q=%22profit+per+ha%22
在“繁”的部分而言。
不可忽略的是“四大要件”了：产量，榨油率，平均售价和成本。
衍生出来的数据，有：
1。return on investment：
plantation profit / (prepaid lease payment + biological asset)
2。开发成本：
biological asset/hectare，
biological asset指的是油棕还没有收割时的“成本投入”。
3。每公顷营运成本：
（plantation revenue - plantation profit） / hectare
讲到concept，SWOP analysis，重点，或“注意事项”之类的，我还没到能够“整理系统”的程度，也许你慢慢看应该可以get到一些。
对于小型公司，我的心得比较接近这个：用新的modulus评估，看看准不准确。
............其实我不知道如何回答你，甚至“从何答起”都不能够。
我不是什么种植专家，我看起来像种植专家，事实上是因为我在一些投资知识“帮助”下，“弥补”（掩饰）过去而已。
当然如果说我可能“比你懂一点点”，这还说得过去。
我不是“刻意谦虚”或“刻意炫耀”，实话实说罢了。
你是想要知道oil palm还是company analysis？
如果你想知道oil palm，我帮不了你，除了valuation per hectare的部分，可以解释。
这是pure planter blog
>>>
hi
你好，我刚刚看到你的Blog, 觉得你对Oil Palm Industry 很熟悉。。真的不得不佩服。。连什么种子都知道， 你是在这一行做的吗？
其实我有东西想向你请教，请问你是怎样 Evaluate 一个 Oil Palm Plantation 是好还是不好？ 我有找和看你对本地oil palm counter 的 Analysis, 可是我却没有什么 Get 到整个Concept 或 Model...
不知道你方便写一个 Post 关于怎样 Analysis 和 BenchMark 一个好的 Oil Palm Plantation 吗？
我有找回你以前的 Post 可是找不到 （可能使我overlook)
如果你真的方便的话， 希望你可以谢谢这一方面的心得。 我真的是很有诚意想学习怎样 Analysis Oil Palm.
*我现在每天都在看着你以前的作品， 都写到很好，希望你会继续分享你的心得。。。
加油！ 加油！
Mario
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)