ah_boon, you say falling knife, some will say buying opportunity....i guess this is how market works, else got seller no buyer, where got fun...lol

Anyhow, after reading the above article, cant help but notice that there is no analysis at all. If you say too pricy, what is the basis?

Just because Focus say F&B overpriced, suddenly it becomes gloomy? Anyhow, Can1 did not say it is selling F&B. I find it funny that people want to buy at an overpriced value and Can1 dont seems to be accepting the offer. Hehehe

Aiya, we small fish can only blow water here. Go to Johore and back, dividend not enough to cover lah....lol.

Hehehe...I am just reflecting the sentiment I picked up when attending Kian Joo's AGM recently. Compared to results delivered, Johotin directors got a bigger paycheck relative to profit compared to the other 2 can makers......by a few miles!

Their directors get RM5.2 million in remuneration and we shareholders only gets RM3.7 million in dividends for 2015!!! Not fair!!!

For 2014, directors get RM4.8 million but shareholders only get RM3.3 million!!!

Aiyo.....its still not the end of contest period yet, why so fast jump to conclusion?

LOL, You dont see the value does not mean that other people dont see the value too. Once Can-One is fully valued, this counter has its potential too. Afterall, its business mirror those of Can-One. May be the management need to be a little bit more gungho to achieve greater results.

You can try can1@canone.com.my. But useless one because they never respond.

Hi cfelykj, what you have said does not make sense. If a director hold an executive position in any subsidiary, he will be considered executive director.

Otherwise, we will have executive director at subsidiary level claiming themselves to be independent at parent level. Somehow not right.

Cut and paste comments by unknown on kai's blog.....

#1
一个人走进超市，跟超市经理说要购买超市内所有的东西。
另外一个人走进同样的超市，跟经理说他要购买超市51%的拥有权.
第一个人，就像Aspire对建裕的献购案。要收购的项目是在董事局的管控范围内。
第二个人，就像Toyota对建裕的收购建议。要收购的项目，完全不在董事局的权限范围内！

建裕的管理层并没像你所说那样拒绝Toyota的建议，而是叫他们去寻求证券银行的协助，并遵从相关的证券法令来提出建议。如果Toyota有心献购，大马的证券市场的相关条文是相当明确的！

作为负责任的部落客，请在发表前确认资讯的准确性，以免加盐加醋误导群众。谢谢！

#2
关于借贷高，这是一个见仁见智的事。没有人阻止他们发附加股来减少贷款。但是他们还是选择向银行贷款，而且银行还真的贷款给他们。这足以表现出银行对管理层的信任跟能力。

你要知道，向银行贷款是要还的！向股东发附加股是不用还的！

股东们没有动用半分钱就同时拥有两只金鸡母，还有冠旺原本表现还不错的业务啊！

#3
“建裕珍厂这只母鸡就比较危险了，因为他们时时刻刻都在等有心人买走他们。”有点可笑。难不成你认为冠旺的董事局，如果真的卖掉建裕，就会黄飞鸿收档？

姑且不论RM480million 会为冠旺带来的利息，依照冠旺的董事局过去的记录，冠旺不会从此停摆。
2006年冠旺以RM8million买下F&B80%股权。短短九年就翻了不知多少倍。现在的价值非同日而语。

2012年1月以每股RM1.65以小吃大，买下建裕32.9%股权。不到几年有翻倍。

间中没有向股东拿一分一毫，这样的笋盘那里找？你说对吗？如果有钱在他们的手里，这家公司的前途如何，自己做推测吧。

I read the annual report and noted something strange, on page 16, non executive directors are being paid salary!!! Is this a correct practice?

On page 17, a non-executive director is even getting more than the executive director. Someone should ask the directors in the AGM. Sadly I cant attend