Gunting dalam lipatan

Sudah terbukti. Walaupun berkali kali penafian dibuat dan malah menegaskan bawah beliau “Akur dengan keputusan dan akan berusaha untuk melaksanakanya, termasuk mempercepatkan proses”, musuh dalam selimut sebenar telah dikenal pasti.

Pada mesyuarat Lembaga Pengarah Koperasi Permodalan FELDA 28 Oktober 2011 di Kuala Lumpur yang telah dibuka oleh Pengerusi KPF Dato’ Dzulkifli Wahab, empat ahli telah di’gugur’kan iaitu Pengerusi FELDA Tan Sri Isa Samad, Mantan Pengerusi FELDA Tan Sri Dr Yusoff Nor, Presiden FELDA Global Ventures dan Pengarah Urusan FELDA Holdings Bhd. Dato’ Seri Sabri Ahmad dan Mantan Pengarah Urusan FELDA Holdings Bhd. Dato’ Seri Mohd. Bakke Salleh.

Ini bermakna, Lembaga Pengarah KPF bawah Pengerusinya Dzulkifli telah mengagalkan rancangan asal Perdana Menteri Dato’ Seri Mohd. Najib Tun Razak untuk memberikan hasil dari keuntungan semua perniagaan Kumpulan FELDA terus kepada peneroka melalui pelaburan KPF yang akan diaggregatkan di bawah FELDA Global Ventures Holdings (FGVH) yang akan diapungkan di Bursa Malaysia seawal April 2012. Sebahagian dari rancangan itu ialah melantik Pengerusi FELDA Isa sebagai Pengerusi KPF dan seterusnya menjadi Pengerusi FELDA Global Ventures Holdings apabila KPF akan memegang 35% dari pegagangan FGVH.

Kemesraan antara Pengarah Besar FELDA dengan Pengerusi FELDA memberikan illustrasi kesefahaman dan kerjasama erat antara pembuat dasar dan pelaksana

KPF telah memaklumkan Suruhanjaya Koperasi Malaysia (SKM) dengan surat bertarikh 31 Oktober bahawa Isa dan tiga lain itu di’gugur’kan dari keahlian KPF mereka pada mesyuarat Lembaga Pengarah KPF pada 28 Oktober. Ini bermakna Isa secara automatiknya tidak akan boleh dilantik sebagai Pengerusi KPF walaupun dengan kuasa kuasa khas Menteri Perdagangan Dalam Negeri dan Pengguna bawah pengecualian Seksyen 87 Akta Koperasi 1993.Dipercayai Dzulkifli yang juga Pengarah Besar Lembaga FELDA mahu kekal sebagai Pengerusi KPF atas kepentingan peribadi. Beliau dalam kapasiti Pengerusi FELDA menduduki Lembaga Pengarah 34 buah syarikat Kumpulan FELDA termasuk anak syarikat KPF dan dibayar RM 600,000 sebagai yuran pengarah dan gaji dan elaun mesyuarat hampir RM 100,000 setahun, disamping gaji sebagai Pegawai Kerajaaan Staff 1. Ini bermakna, beliau meraih hampir RM 1 juta dari kedudukan ini dan ini tidak termasuk kepentingan lain seperti motorkar, perjalanan luar negara yang berbayar dan sebagainya.

Duzlkifli jelas telah berdusta kepada wakil wakil peneroka dalam siri ‘Road Show’ bersama Pengerusi FELDA Tan Sri Isa Samad dan Pengarah Urusan FELDA Holdings Bhd. Dato’ Seri Sabri Ahmad di Kuantan (26 Oktober), Kuala Terengganu (27 Oktober), Melaka (29 Oktober), Trolak (31 Oktober) dan akhir sekali di Kuala Pilah pada 12 November bahwa beliau amat menyokong penuh plan penyenaraian FGVH. Ini termasuk akur kepada keputusan Lembaga FELDA agar arahan Perdana Menteri bahawa jawatan Pengerusi KPF dilepaskan dan Isa dilantik, sebagai menepati program ‘peralihan kuasa’ dan menentukan urus tadbir korporat sebagai gerak-kerja pra-penyenaraian.

Pengarah Besar Lembaga FELDA Dato' Seri Dzulkifli Wahab, Pengerusi Lembaga FELDA Tan Sri Isa Samad dan CEO FGVH Dato' Seri Sabri Ahmad semasa sidang media

Lembaga FELDA dalam mesyuarat pada 25 Ogos memutuskan agar Pengerusi FELDA Tan Sri Isa Samad dilantik sebagai Pengerusi KPF. Ini adalah arahan Perdana Menteri, yang juga Menteri yang bertanggung jawab keatas FELDA.

Dalam ucapan di Kuala Pilah juga beliau menegaskan “Tiada ‘rampasan kuasa’ berlaku” dan “Menjadi tanggung jawab saya untuk mempercepatkan proses (penyenaraian FGVH termasuk ‘peralihan kuasa’ Pengerusi KPF)”. Namun apa yang sebenarnya berlaku ialah beliau mengkhianati amanah dan janji kepada Perdana Menteri Dato’ Seri Mohd. Najib Tun Razak dalam gerak-kerja penyenaraian FELDA Global Ventures Holdings, yang mahukan semua perniagaan Kumpulan FELDA diaggregatkan sekali untuk diapungkan dan apa apa kebaikan termasuk keuntungan dari syarikat konglomerat berasaskan pertanian ini disalurkan kepada 112,635 melalui pegangan 35% kepentingan mereka dalam FGVH.

The Icon, Jalan Tun Razak

Difahamkan, Dzulkifli bukan sahaja mempertahankan kedudukan imbuhan yang beliau dapat secara langsung sebagai ahli Lembaga Pengarah 34 syarikat Kumpulan FELDA itu semata mata. Ada kemungkinan beliau mempertahankan apa apa keputusan yang dibuat oleh Lembaga KPF, yang sebenarnya tidak menguntungkan KPF pada jangkamasa panjang. Ini termasuk pelaburan KPF dalam menara The Icon di Jalan Tun Razak, yang difahamkan bernilai RM 400 juta untuk keluasan 500,000 kaki persegi dalam bangunan pejabat yang rata rata kosong itu.

Mereka yang membuat keputusan untuk pelaburan ini bukanlah mereka yang arif dalam perniagaan. Jauh lagi, jika ianya melibatkan pelaburan hartanah bernilai tinggi, terutama dalam kawasan mewah dan kommersial. Tidak dinafikan mungkin ada pihak yang berkepentingan meraih keuntungan peribadi dari pelaburan ini, terutama apabila sudah terbukti ianya amat sukar untuk dipasarkan sebagai ruang untuk disewa.

Siri penerangan pegawai pegawai Lembaga FELDA sebenarnya patut menerangkan dengan jelas kepada warga FELDA terutama peneroka:

1. Tanah milik peneroka tidak terjejas dalam penyenaraian FELDA Global Ventures Holdings. Hanya tanah FELDA Plantations yang akan dipajak (dengan persetujuan Kerajaan Kerajaan Negeri tertentu)

2. Nilai pegangan KPF dalam FGV bernilai 15% dari nilai aggregat keseluruhan penyatuan FELDA Holdings Bhd dan FELDA Global Ventures, pra-penyenaraian FELDA Global Ventures Holdings. Selepas penyenaraian, KPF akan mendapat pegangan nilai 35% dari keseluruhan asset FELDA Global Ventures Holdings yanga kan di’bebas-kunci’kan (unlocked value)

3. Yang akan diapungkan hanyalah saham saham FGVH. Manakala KPF hanyalah pelabur pemegang terbesar dalam FGVH. Ianya sama seperti ASNB merupakan pemegang saham terbesar dalam Maybank atau Sime Darby dimana syarikat gergasi ini diapung dalam Bursa Malaysia dan diuruskan oleh pengurus professional dan dikenakan urus tadbir korporat, sesuai dengan kehendak dan amalan pasaran. Saham syer KPF hanyalah boleh dibeli sebagaimana disyaratkan oleh piagam koperasi itu dan tertakluk bawah Akta Koperasi

4. Lembaga FELDA sebagai agensi Kerajaan Persekutuan dalam agenda membangun sosio ekonomi dan kommuniti masyarakat tanah rancangan FELDA dan fasilitator dan ko-ordinator segala projek dalam semua 317 tanah rancangan dibawah FELDA akan kekal diteruskan, sebagaimana 55 tahun sebelum ini.

Kegagalan memberikan penerangan ini secara jelas sehinggga masyarakat FELDA terkeliru dan merasa tertipu dan marah atas gerak-kerja penyenaraian FELDA Global Ventures Holdings sehingga Laporan Polis dibuat, wajar dilihat sebagai tindakan secara langsung segelintir pegawai Lembaga FELDA untuk mensabotaj rancangan strategik Perdana Menteri bagi menentukan masyarakat FELDA akan beroleh keuntungan berterusan jangka panjang, melalui pelaburan yang progressif KPF dalam FGVH.

Bagi masyarakat peneroka, mereka wajar merasakan diri mereka dikhianati.

Published in: on November 18, 2011 at 16:00  Comments (24)  

Monopoly of Non Bumiputra housing developers

Sime Darby's prized development Ara Damansara Seri Pilmoor: A property giant's turf

Minister of Housing and Local Government  (KPKT) Dato’ Seri Chor Chee Heung introduced an amendment to the Housing Developers Act yesterday. It was designed to do away with errant developers and reduce number of abandon housing projects.

Thursday November 17, 2011

Bill to penalise errant builders tabled

By MARTIN CARVALHO
mart3@thestar.com.my

KUALA LUMPUR: A Bill to make it a criminal offence for developers who fail to complete their projects has been tabled in Parliament for first reading.

Under Clause 9 of the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) (Amendment) Bill, errant housing developers can be fined up to RM500,000, jailed up to three years or both.

The Bill was introduced by Housing and Local Government Minister Datuk Seri Chor Chee Heung here yesterday.

Among others, it is a crime if a developer “abandons or causes to be abandoned a housing development”.

They are deemed to have abandoned projects if they refuse to carry out, delay, suspend or cease work continuously for six months or beyond a period stipulated under the Sales and Purchase Agreement.

The Bill also introduces harsher penalties against errant developers such as increasing the fines from RM20,000 to RM50,000.

They will be entitled to terminate the Sales and Purchase Agreement if the housing project is abandoned, and the developer is required to refund any money paid within 30 days.

Developers who fail to comply with this will face a fine of up to RM250,000 and a penalty of RM5,000 for every day during which the offence continues.

The Bill will also insert Clause 3 into the Act the deposit to obtain a housing development licence will be increased from RM200,000 to 3% of the project’s estimated cost.

This is to ensure that only developers who have sufficient financial ability will be allowed to begin building houses.

*****************

The Bill is considerably good to protect the interest of the home buyers now that property developers who abandon their projects would be deemed as white collar criminals. However, the 3% deposit of the gross development cost (GDC) as license is a bit stiff.

This is because in general, property developers no longer have the luxury to make what they used to make then, which margin is in the neighborhood of 30% of the gorse development value (GDC). If the average margin for property developers now hovers around 20%, it means that the deposit for the housing developers license would be in the neighborhood of 2.5% of the GDV.  They are already subjected to 5% retention for which half of that will only be returned to the property developers 24 months from the date of deliver to the buyers.

That is a good 7.5% retention cost against the GDV, which translate to 37.5% of the average returns for the property developer.

Consider this scenario; A property developer buys a parcel of land with subdivided titles and development order, would at best take 30 months from the point of the acquisition to deliver a development of houses to the home buyers. At the point of delivery of vacant possession, the returns for capital investment is only at best calculated at 12.7% of the GDV. That is only pro-rated 5.08% of GDV per annum.

This is on top of the existing ruling of property developers are subjected to the housing developer’s account that is maintained and managed by the bank. Tight controlled cash flow coupled with heavy upfront deposits would throw the burden on the shoulders of the directors even more.

Considering that the property developer would take the heavy brunt of multi pronged risks on their side, this would translate that only companies with very strong capital and cash position would dwell into property development. Medium-sized property developers would find it uneconomical to take the risk. Property development game would now be for the ‘Big Boys’.

In the case of Bumiputra property developers, many would no longer take the risk to dwell into the business even though they have good parcels of land to develop. They would be more driven to either outright sell their parcels of land or do joint ventures. Joint ventures with companies with more solid capital and cash position means that these Bumiputra entrepreneurs would take a back seat and their Non Bumiputra joint venture partners take the lead.

Worse still, for property development projects in very upmarket areas, where GDC is very high.

A high rise upmarket development near KLCC

Imagine a Malay family owns a plot of land 1km radius from KLCC or Bukit Bandaraya/Damansara Heights/Jalan Duta/Jalan Ampang affluent neighborhoods. If the proposed development for the land is luxury apartments, then the GDC would be in the neighborhood of RM 45 million for 60 units or so. 3% of licensing fee would means that the family must fork out RM 1.35 million in cash to be deposited to KPKT  even before they could obtain the advertising and sales license. The consultants’ fee for the project would cost them at least RM 4.5 million through out the 42 months from start till delivery of vacant possession.

That’s over RM 100,000 a month, pro-rated.

If there are borrowings for the land and working capital for the project, let say RM 40 million, then the burden to repay the commitment is in the neighborhood of RM 430,000 per month, even before sales started. What about other usual overheads. If the process takes a year before the project is launched, then the property developer would have aggregated over RM 5.5 million to pay out, on top of the RM 1.2 million consultants’ fees.

The solution is for Government agencies such as MARA, Bank Negara, MITI or NGOs such as DPMM create a special fund for capital injection into medium sized bona fide Bumiputra housing developers. We don’t see many state governments able to come in with the special capital ventures at state level Bumiputra housing developers. For the Bumiputra entrepreneurs, these injections of capital would act as angel ventures and they should be given the first right of refusal to buy back the amount of capital with some degree of guaranteed profit scheme.

Contrast: A typical Malay reserve land development

Otherwise, only solid Bumiputra property developers would dwell into the game and it would be barrier for the entrance new entrepreneurs. Imagine, what would happen to the majority of Malay Reserve lands now left undeveloped all over the country and waiting for some Bumiputra entrepreneurs to amass enough money to take the risk. Otherwise, all of these Malay Reserve lands would remain as what they are at the moment, largely for agriculture purposes.

We doubt it that this is what Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Mohd. Najib Tun Razak has installed for the Bumiputra commercial and industrial community for strategic wealth creation, especially for asset backed businesses.

Published in: on November 18, 2011 at 03:35  Comments (15)