Shares with stamp duty exemption for 2018

Bursa has provided stamp duty exemption for small and mid cap stocks for the next 3 years starting from 1 March 2018. For each year they have predefined a list of stocks which will qualify for the exemption. Under the definition, small and mid cap stocks are those that are within RM200 million to RM2 billion market cap and for 2018's stocks, the list are for those that are within the market cap as at 31 December 2017.

Here are the list.

I do not know how to make out of the latest move by Bursa but I guess it will slightly enhance the trading activities for the smaller cap stocks.

On investment, it is still advisable to be careful and diligent as trading activities does not make any changes to the fundamentals of the company. Of course some will say it may enhance the business performance of companies like TA, Affin Hwang, Insas etc. but the impact will be minimal considering that the the stockbroking business is rather competitive and the fees that they earn today is a fraction of what they used to earn prior to 2000.

The curious case of Carlo Rino, Bonia and LEAP

When the LEAP market was created and approved last year in Malaysia, it was supposed to be an alternative platform for Malaysian companies - many of them early stage companies to raise funds. Hence, one of the criteria created was that only those individuals who has RM3 million in assets or earns RM300,000 a year and able to prove them can invest into LEAP market stocks. Companies that has at least RM10 million assets only are allowed to trade LEAP market stocks.

I have written about my apprehension on LEAP here.

However, Bonia's management has done something which I will not even be able to think about. My always thought tells me that most bankers will approach the smaller companies and those that are much riskier as these stocks are not going to be liquid anyway. These are what I hear in the market as well.

What Bonia does is that they have pulled out an old brand - Carlo Rino (CR) - from their portfolio and proposed to list them on LEAP. Firstly, CR is not an early stage company. Secondly, this proposal sounds more like a privatisation effort.

Why?

For LEAP market, usually these companies that want to go for IPO - they are under a smaller group of investors and those investors normally will be the friendly parties as only those who can have better access and information on these companies will dare to invest into LEAP shares as it will not be as easy to sell these companies as compared to the normal Main Board and ACE market as anybody can trade. For LEAP only very selected few can trade.

This CR exercise sounds like one. (I am not saying it is)

As it is Bonia has been traded for a while in a much fluid market. If it wants to expand CR, it could have raise more funds in other manners and it has lots of avenue to do so. When CR is ready for IPO in a bigger board, the usual practise is also about offering to its existing shareholders. Split the two businesses - not unusual.

By going to LEAP it is like preventing the current shareholders to buy CR - as LEAP feels like it is only for a special club of investors. A good management is about offering to its current shareholders - now this exercise is NOT.

Isn't it weird? Think of it, if I am already on Main Board, why would I go to a much lower board and let my stocks be illiquid?

With this case, you know what some companies can do? The management pulls out the most promising companies from their listed company (in the name of allowing the shareholders to share the wealth from the exercise). Pull those that has yet to make much profit but highly promising. List them under LEAP - where they can put them with family and friends as shareholders. When they get bigger, list them in the Main Board. Who is the sucker here.

Much food for thought for SC and Bursa to think further when they created LEAP...Are we now allowing the creation of monsters here?

(The above are entirely my opinion and not necessarily represent the true picture)

High GDP but we do not feel it - why

A person who understands elementary economics will know that it is beyond GDP growth to tell us about how well to do we are. Yes, in most cases GDP tells us about the wealth of a country but it does not inform us how well to do most people are. Is our power of consumption higher or have it gone lower?

Today, Mydin's owner has appeared on BFM and gave his account of how he thinks that despite the strong GDP of last year he does not think that people are feeling it.

One has to understand the calculation for GDP. As below is what we learned from Economics 101 if one can remember:

GDP = C + I + G + (X – M) or GDP = private consumption + gross investment + government investment + government spending + (exports – imports). 

The problem is that as in most news and report, they just report the absolute percentage increase without dwelling into important details just like the headlines - GDP for 2017 was projected at 5.6% for example.

What was not really explained is where did the contributing factor for GDP is from. Is it C (Consumption) or more from I (Investment) or Government expenditure (G) or Exports - Imports (Net Exports)?

To most people on the streets, the C is the most important in the short term but for government, it is potentially the growth of I and Net Exports which can be important in the long run as I and Net Exports is key to the fundamental development of the country.

If one can still feel it, our RM has dramatically dropped from around 1USD : 3.1RM in early 2015 to as bad as 1 USD: 4.4RM last year. That is drastic as our RM experienced a drop of around 40% over 2 years in US Dollar terms.

Our economy as many people would have known is largely a trading economy and that means that the things we sell and consume is very much dependent on our trade and strength of our currency. While a weak RM can be good for Net Exports but it could be very bad for C which is Consumption.

In the data that is presented, while it may show that Consumption is on the rise in percentage, but in terms of total real consumption value, it may not have improved. Today, many things we consume are impacted by dollar terms - i.e. milk, sugar, fruits, and other commodities such as metal, fuel etc. If RM has dropped by 40% over 2+ years, the actual situation could be that real inflation could be higher than the inflation for standard goods as presented in our inflation index.

Then, the actual case of goods substitution effect has also caused our locally produced food to increase as well. For example, if price of mackerel from Thailand has increased because of drop in our RM by 30%, ikan kembung caught by fishermen in Kuala Muda would have increased in price as well. Higher prices of oranges that are imported from Egypt (because of weak RM) would cause almost similar price increase in banana sourced locally.

Question: I still could not figure out the good GDP numbers?

Remember the good performance in many of our exports sector. Well, the weak RM has brought joy to many business people especially the semiconductor, rubber gloves, furniture, textiles as has been shown by their financial numbers over the last 24 months. This will be shown in the Net Export numbers i.e. a component of the GDP calculation.

However, while these good numbers are translated for the industrialists but it may not be trickled down to the general people. While the minimum wage is introduced, the middle class especially for those families which earns less than RM5000 would be hit the hardest.

Will this be a long term phenomenon? I think so. One of the main reason which is a more longer term fundamental is because of this - More upcoming middle class from our neighboring competing countries

Then of course, as more middle class families are coming on stream in our competing economies - like China, India, Vietnam, Indonesia, the fight for basic necessities is getting even greater while at the same time, the amount of "arable land" continues to reduce due to urbanisation. This would be a long term effect which will continue to affect Malaysia unless we really improve our real wages.

Even the I which is for Investment is getting precarious. The "Industry 4.0" term which we continue to hear of recently will not be really appreciated as automation means more investments and when our currency is weak, business people are much reluctant to invest for the long term but rather be more willing to be dependent on low cost labor. Low costs labor on the other hand means more foreign workers and they may not be that keen with a poor RM.

When our RM has improved to US Dollar (and a basket of currencies) i.e. to 1USD to 3.9RM as in recently, it will take some months for us to feel that positive impact in terms of "C" value - rather than nominal number.

And even then, it is still a drop of 25% from 1USD to 3.1RM...which we used to experience.

How do our economists feel about this? Of course, they know the real truth!, I think. But if we continue to kid ourselves by looking at just the GDP number, it is a matter of time before the people on the street will not trust that anymore.