Posted by skcm2017 > 2021-03-03 12:10 | Report Abuse

1mil unit invested at 0.06. deal, the action better than talk. see u next month.

Posted by AiOne Corner > 2021-03-03 12:20 | Report Abuse

congrats.. Good Luck .. :D

Posted by Ppmaster > 2021-03-03 13:10 | Report Abuse

This counter i wont invest much, max RM 500k

Posted by Ikanbilis999 > 2021-03-03 13:11 | Report Abuse

I won't invest much also max 500mil

Posted by Winson8087 > 2021-03-03 13:13 | Report Abuse

That mean this counter bye bye already

Posted by Ppmaster > 2021-03-03 13:13 | Report Abuse

Skcm2017, all the 0.06 q by the trader, you impossible to get the price today so far. Maybe you buy at 0.065 not 0.06 .

Posted by Ppmaster > 2021-03-03 13:16 | Report Abuse

First 50m buy q is from trader start from the trading.

Posted by Ppmaster > 2021-03-03 13:52 | Report Abuse

Ikanbilis99, this penny counter how to absorb 500m capital? Haha

Posted by Ppmaster > 2021-03-03 13:55 | Report Abuse

For me this counter invest RM 500k is max, i not plan to be this counter substantial share holder. Haha , i jus retail investor only

Posted by Ppmaster > 2021-03-03 13:56 | Report Abuse

Ikanbilis , if RM 500m, i will invest 80 - 100 diff counter that i done it before.

Posted by Ppmaster > 2021-03-03 13:58 | Report Abuse

Last few months ago, i invest this counter also at the price 0.115-0.12, very high price compare to the price now, 50% discount. Haha

Posted by Anonymous12567 > 2021-03-03 15:34 | Report Abuse

Get ready Cummings......

Posted by Newbiexxxxxxxxx > 2021-03-03 15:50 | Report Abuse

Please come

Posted by AiOne Corner > 2021-03-03 16:46 | Report Abuse

at this rate.. buy q looks so high as compared to sell q right now .. :D

Posted by Anonymous12567 > 2021-03-03 16:48 | Report Abuse

Shit... q up dun dumb tomorrow start again.

Posted by LycanD > 2021-03-03 16:51 | Report Abuse

You can refer YAHOO Finance volume, about the same when 0.13-0.08, high volume, but value drop in next few days too. Volume get higher or maintain but price drop day by day, all average down (volume maintain) hope rebound, end up losing more.

Posted by Start_0f_the_bull > 2021-03-03 16:54 | Report Abuse

No surprise. Just more people wants to buy than people wants to sell today.

Posted by Start_0f_the_bull > 2021-03-03 19:09 | Report Abuse

34 mil shares disposed in one day on 2 Mar 21. Obviously this is the major shareholder and the culprit that caused the share to dip down 2c yesterday. Really suck!

Posted by fl888 > 2021-03-03 19:46 | Report Abuse

It is good for the company that Mr.Ho is no more a substantial shareholder....see the damage he did to PDZ,DGB & PNE PCB....hopefully new substantial will come out soon..

Posted by Start_0f_the_bull > 2021-03-03 20:35 | Report Abuse

Yes. No wonder today only got ikanbillis selling.

Posted by Anonymous12567 > 2021-03-03 20:41 | Report Abuse

The devil Ho.... Don't worry one day you will cry for your love one.... the day will come soon.. Well done.

Posted by skytaxi > 2021-03-03 21:25 | Report Abuse

Strategy Ho, buy more, then try monopoly counter price with sell drastically to make counter low price.. He still have a little bit shareholders.. Almost 70 million share unit more after sell yesterday...

Posted by IkanCaru > 2021-03-03 22:06 | Report Abuse

tahu takpa..kaki scamm je lebih..pening2

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 22:55 | Report Abuse

Barisan Nasional politicians New Economic Policy (NEP)- type policy license holder , AP holder , contract government all only give bumiputra company ,royal family and politician member.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 22:58 | Report Abuse

Umno that at the end of the year 2000 corporate equity attributable to bumiputera individuals and trust agencies had stood at a mere at 19.1 percent, far short of the 30 percent goal set by the NEP, and that it had moved only insignificantly in the period between 1985 and the turn of the century.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:00 | Report Abuse

Even if bumiputera equity ownership is increased to 30 percent, would this mean that wealth has been more equitably distributed among members of this community or between them and other Malaysians? And, most importantly, should we continue to perpetuate a discourse on equitable wealth distribution among Malaysians along racial lines?

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:01 | Report Abuse

Before addressing these issues, let us start with the fundamental question. How do we obtain a more informed picture of ownership patterns in Corporate Malaysia

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:02 | Report Abuse

One simple but effective, way to secure insight into equity ownership is to review the list of the top publicly-listed companies on the Bursa Malaysia in 2000 in terms of market capitalisation.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:03 | Report Abuse

An evaluation of the top 10 quoted firms for that year reveals a very significant point. The government had majority ownership of six of these top 10 firms, including utilities like TM (Telekom Malaysia) and power supplier Tenaga Nasional, the country's leading bank, Malayan Banking , the national oil corporation Petronas' gas producer, Petronas Gas , the national shipping line Malaysian International Shipping Corporation (MISC) and the well-diversified Sime Darby . The government also had a stake in Commerce Asset-Holding of Malaysia's second largest bank, Bumiputra Commerce Bank.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:05 | Report Abuse

The sole government-owned and foreign-owned companies figured in the bracket were the motor vehicle producer, Perusahaan Otomobil Nasional , and the cigarette producer Rothmans of Pall Mall respectively. Proton, part of the Hicom Holdings group that was privatised to the late Yahya Ahmad, was bought over by the government's cash-rich oil agency, Petronas.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:06 | Report Abuse

Two Malay Malaysians came up as owners of three firms listed in the - Rashid Hussain, who controlled RHB Capital and Halim Saad, who controlled United Engineers (UEM) and Renong . Renong and UEM had cross-holdings and were once directly owned by Umno before Halim, a protege of former finance minister Daim Zainuddin, secured control of the group. In July 2001, Halim relinquished control of the Renong group to the government.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:07 | Report Abuse

mid-2001RHB Capital, was owned by a bumiputera. In 2002, Rashid divested control of the firm to the family members of Taib Mahmud, the chief minister of Sarawak.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:08 | Report Abuse

A number of important observations about the top firms at the turn of the century can be made

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:09 | Report Abuse

First, is the considerable decline in foreign ownership of Corporate Malaysia between 1970 and 2000. Since only one of these firms was owned by a foreign enterprise in 2000, this was a remarkable achievement under the NEP given that foreign firms owned 63.4 percent of corporate equity in 1970.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:10 | Report Abuse

Second, the government still held majority ownership of half of these firms, in spite of the spate of privatisations since the mid-1980s. Of these 10 companies, two were a part of the Renong group, a major recipient of privatised concessions, while Proton was re-nationalised.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:11 | Report Abuse

How do we explain these rather interesting outcomes of the NEP implementation on the form and development of Corporate Malaysia? To understand these astonishing equity ownership figures, one must first understand the orientation of Malaysian political economy under the long premiership of Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:12 | Report Abuse

As prime minister, Mahathir committed himself to three primary goals: to industrialise Malaysia, to privatise government-owned firms, and to create Malay capitalists. To help him achieve his goals, Mahathir appointed his close ally, Daim, as finance minister in1984. Both men were with developing the stock market and using it as a key avenue to create domestic capitalists. By the early 1990s, Malaysia's stock market capitalisation relative to gross domestic product was the highest in Southeast Asia.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:13 | Report Abuse

By the mid-1990s a number of huge publicly-listed conglomerates controlled by well-connected Malay Malaysians had emerged. The high degree of autonomy that Mahathir had had as prime minister had allowed him to distribute government-created concessions and privatised projects to a select group of businessmen to help them swiftly develop their corporate interests. Mahathir justified this form of patronage on the grounds that the way to create Malay capitalists was by distributing concessions to those most capable of generating wealth.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:14 | Report Abuse

But the leading corporations in the mid-1990s were connected to one of the then three most powerful politicians in Malaysia - Mahathir, then deputy premier and finance minister Anwar Ibrahim and then economic advisor Daim.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:14 | Report Abuse

Apart from Halim and Rashid, other Malay Malaysians controlling major firms included Tajudin Ramli, Wan Azmi Wan Hamzah, Shamsuddin Kadir, Azman Hashim, Ahmad Sebi Abu Bakar, Ishak Ismail, Mirzan Mahathir, Mokhzani Mahathir, Amin Shah Omar Shah and Yahya Ahmad.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:19 | Report Abuse

Between 1997 and 2001, Mahathir marginalised two influential politicians, Anwar and Daim, who had significant indirect control over important quoted enterprises. The vast corporate assets owned by the business allies of these two politicians were re-allocated to government institutions or other private individuals. What is clear is that the nexus of politics and business based on patronage and political loyalty had only served to undermine the development of Malay entrepreneurship.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:21 | Report Abuse

There is little evidence of wealth concentration or intra-ethnic cooperation involving Chinese Malaysian firms, although it is widely believed that the Chinese work together to protect their economic interests. On the contrary, the shareholding pattern among Chinese-owned firms indicates that they function independently of one another.Similarly there is little evidence that Malay Malaysian businessmen who own large quoted firms have cooperated with one another in business.

Posted by Anonymous12567 > 2021-03-03 23:23 | Report Abuse

Pls dun brings in politic issues.... We are more interested in mtronic news la.... Only mtronic.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:25 | Report Abuse

What Mahathir did not state was that the Chinese Malaysians, for all their ostensible entrepreneurship, had not managed to develop brand names or move up the technological ladder. This was mainly because they had received inadequate support from his government, a situation that had only served to curb the rise of a domestic group of entrepreneurial business people that could have helped reduce Malaysia's dependence on foreign capital to generate growth and industrialise the economy.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:26 | Report Abuse

The policy recommendations by Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi are, interestingly enough, correct. His call that government-linked companies (GLCs) professionalise their management and deploy their control and ownership of corporate assets more efficiently is timely.His focus on the promotion of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), not of big business, as well as his plea for the need to dispense with a patronage mentality and the need to instill a spirit of competition in business to promote entrepreneurship is appropriate. His desire to eradicate corruption and to ensure an at-arms-length, transparent relationship between government and business in the award of contracts is sensible.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:28 | Report Abuse

If it is the aspiration of Umno members to sincerely promote inter-ethnic economic parity, their focus should be on providing decent education, especially to the poor. It is, thus, ironic that it was the Hishammuddin Hussein, who raised the issue of reviving the NEP to stab home his point about the inequities in wealth distribution among Malaysians.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:29 | Report Abuse

What Hishammuddin should have raised was the need to focus attention on the ways to stem the serious decline of education standards in Malaysia, clearly something that his office has the power to address.This debate about a new NEP appears to have been raised merely to mobilise support, more from within the party than from the larger Malay Malaysian community. However, Umno would do well to remember that the rapid decline it received in Malay Malaysian support in 1999 was widely, and correctly, attributed to this community's growing disenchantment with the abuse of affirmative action by party members for vested interests. More importantly, the promotion of another NEP-like policy, conceived and executed along racial lines, would serve to undermine Umno credibility as a party striving to achieve the goal of national unity.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:31 | Report Abuse

Has 30pct bumi equity target been achieved? At the outset, we wish to make it abundantly clear that we fully support the New Economic Policy (NEP) objective of eradicating poverty irrespective of race and we completely agree with the 30 percent bumiputera equity ownership target. In a multiracial country, social engineering using affirmative action to uplift the economic status of a lagging community is necessary. We do not doubt the noble intention of the founding fathers of NEP and we believe the objectives can be achieved if right policies are formulated and implemented.

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:35 | Report Abuse

Government in any part of the world is usually quick to claim credit for any success. However, in the case of Malaysia, with regard to the achievement of 30 percent bumiputera equity ownership target, the government seemed to be more inclined to declare "failure".

Posted by teck > 2021-03-03 23:35 | Report Abuse

Was it an honest admission of failure or just a convenient pretext to justify the continued implementation of programmes to benefit certain well-connected elites?