Proton Agusta - A New Spin?

Article below for your info. I refer to the following sentence taken from the article.

“These include who took the lead in company’s decision for the investment, how the board was convinced to make the the collective decision and how the company’s 57.75% stake in MV Agusta costing 70 million euro (RM315 million) had suddenly turned sour.”

Notice the word ‘INVESTMENT’ is used (instead of ‘DIVESTMENT’).

Only a difference of two alphabets i.e from DI-vestment to IN-vestment but adds a totally new dimension to the issue! Might be a new spin? I don’t know. But it seems that the two people who queried Proton about the deal earlier on have to now provide the answers instead! Very subtle eh?! Haha…..This can only happen in Malaysia!

P.S: I acknowledge the fact that MSWG is entitled to ask Proton whatever questions they deem fit. They’re professional in their work.

QUESTIONS POSED BY THE 2-Ms ON PROTON (Notice focus solely on DIVESTMENT issue)

1. Who offered to sell or who offered to buy at one Euro?
2. Were there other bidders?
3. Was there an attempt to get the buyer to pay a higher price?
4. Was there an announcement that M.V. Agusta was up for sale?
5. If not did Proton approach only one bidder?
6. If other bidders were offered, did they reject?
7. Who in fact made the decision to sell?
8. Can Proton explain how selling an entity bought at Euro 70 million for one Euro would not cause Proton to lose money as is claimed?

16-01-2006: Proton should explain MV Agusta deal to shareholders: MSWG
By Ashwin Raman

Proton Holdings Bhd's board of directors should answer queries raised on its decision to dispose of its stake in MV Agusta to avoid more adverse comments or trenchant criticism, said the Minority Shareholder Watchdog Group (MSWG).

In a statement on Jan 16, MSWG chief executive officer Abdul Wahab Jaafar Sidek said the board’s silence has made it more vulnerable to criticism.

The board has to be prepared to demonstrate its role as gatekeepers of the company’s conscience and corporate morality, he said.

“Whatever the reasons, the shareholders need to know and the board has to respond quickly. Without credibility, the board cannot operate accountably,” he added.

Abdul Wahab said Proton’s shareholders would never know the true picture behind the company’s decision on the MV Agusta deal unless the board came forward to publicly disclose certain details.

These include who took the lead in company’s decision for the investment, how the board was convinced to make the the collective decision and how the company’s 57.75% stake in MV Agusta costing 70 million euro (RM315 million) had suddenly turned sour.

Abdul Wahab said Proton needed to explain to shareholders if an informed analysis or due diligence was done before it made the investment and whether an independent review, second opinion and expert advice were sought before making the decision to dispose of the stake for one euro (RM4.50).

He said shareholders also wanted to know if the investment was a case of theoretical assumptions that led to an error of judgment or a corporate aberration that confused the strategy for core businesses.

Abdul Wahab added that there was also concern that the case was not in line with the government’s call for government-linked corporations to transform, practise corporate governance and deliver shareholder value.