so u are saying Mr A strike 1st prize big sweep, everyone who buys ticket will one day strike 1st prize?
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
MM Lee say Mahathir built port to 'undercut & 'sabotage' Singapore
- Thread starter †††††
- Start date
so u are saying Mr A strike 1st prize big sweep, everyone who buys ticket will one day strike 1st prize?
so u are saying Mr A strike 1st prize big sweep, everyone who buys ticket will one day strike 1st prize?
???????????????????
The fact is PAP is specialist in such things,not that I mind,it is econmomic benefits for us-Before was Singapoore citizens,but sadly not any more.
How did we compete with HK to become the regional banking centre.Of course is to undercut,in fact they congratulated each other,The Ang Mohs in HK then and LKY as PM,saying a job well done and FAIR competition.
The word "sabotage" came from Mahathir's rebuttal and not from LKY. This is an excerpt from the news: "Describing Singapore in the book as an “80-storey building on marshy land,” Lee said it must contend with hostility from larger Muslim neighbors.
“We’ve got friendly neighbors? Grow up… There is this drive to put us down because we are interlopers,” he said, citing alleged Malaysian and Indonesian efforts to undermine Singapore’s crucial port business."
“We’ve got friendly neighbors? Grow up… There is this drive to put us down because we are interlopers,” he said, citing alleged Malaysian and Indonesian efforts to undermine Singapore’s crucial port business."
Don't go back to kindergarten childishness. Oh you saboed us, you're in the wrong! Wow, so happy that you made the louder noise? What did you get out of it? Nothing!
If you think they saboed you, do something about it, directly confrontational or complain to teacher and see that the teacher do something about it.
If you think they saboed you, do something about it, directly confrontational or complain to teacher and see that the teacher do something about it.
So you think you are one smart ass that clicking on google to a website is sufficient for you to believe wholesale what was published? So you entirely believe everything you gleamed from googling websites are completely true? If so, then you are truly one idiot yourself.
What other insights do you have apart from googling? Have you got connections in high places to verify what you read is true? Why not comment on the other points I had stated? Maybe you tried to debunk the other points too but cannot find them after googling?
Maybe you can also find after googling the following:
1. How much land was set aside for PTP?
2. How much was the capital cost for setting up PTP?
3. Who bore the cost for the entire project?
Then come back and tell us in past 10 years have they fully recovered the sum? If you don't have any answers then shut the fuck up.
What other insights do you have apart from googling? Have you got connections in high places to verify what you read is true? Why not comment on the other points I had stated? Maybe you tried to debunk the other points too but cannot find them after googling?
Maybe you can also find after googling the following:
1. How much land was set aside for PTP?
2. How much was the capital cost for setting up PTP?
3. Who bore the cost for the entire project?
Then come back and tell us in past 10 years have they fully recovered the sum? If you don't have any answers then shut the fuck up.
Teacher can;t help, look for discipline master. Still not effective, VP then principal. Proper channels.
The powerfully super loaded businessman can come in and sell super cheap to play time until the 3 dollar chick rice business close shop... then he can take control of the new price.
Say I have 10 million dollars to play competitors backside.. while I have few hundred millions coming to me made from other businesses coming to me, so I happy happy see which business to play.. I purposely play my compitiors backside.. until they cannot tahan close down... or force to sell cheaper than me.
If I not intend to make money but just want to play people's backside I can come in and do what I like to make people sweat even if I lose money . just because I am rich enough to burn the money.. but it is fun to see people close shops ... just because I am rich.
You all got the idea?
Cheaper to burn down rivals' biz thru act of sabotage. No need to play their backside. Backside for pang sai not play.
Wow... based on your logic i should disbelief the published accounts of a listed company audited by Price-Waterhouse Cooper... and rely on hearsay from some disillusioned individuals who believes he has connections at high places.
Obviously you cannot understand published accounts, otherwise you wouldn't be asking these questions. I entertain you anyway:
1) Land is purchased from the govt and paid for by MMC Corp Bhd which is a public-listed company that owns both the Pasir Gudang and PTP ports. The total land area is 1075.56 hectar of 99 years leasehold land, or 115.77m sft. The price paid was MYR1,954,190,000 which works out to MYR17 psf... this is fair market value. (refer pg 189 of the annual report)
2) Total capital costs of the 2 ports are 10.5 billion (refer pg 167)
3) The costs are borne by the company that own the ports MMC Corp
All these costs are depreciated over 20 - 50 years depending on the component, this is in accordance with international accounting standards FRS and all port operations adopt the same standard worldwide. (page 106)
Any futher questions ?????
Great that you can dig out those facts. As they say, wysiwyg, but in this case, it is the exact opposite. Corporate information is just like window dressing. It is only after several years before the truth comes out but by then it will be too late to hold the culprit/s accountable. Guess who is left to hold the baby when things get rotten?
Perhaps you should get a dictionary to understand the word "disillusioned" if you intend to dress me down. Perhaps Sam Leong can help you there.
You have not attempt to deride what I wrote apart form the mentioned of them not making millions as reported. I suggest you search google more for details of MMC Corp. Bhd., sift through the maze of information. Perhaps you might discover who is actually pulling the strings. Hint....is it Syed Mokthar and his links to Kedah or is it UMNO?
Perhaps you should get a dictionary to understand the word "disillusioned" if you intend to dress me down. Perhaps Sam Leong can help you there.
You have not attempt to deride what I wrote apart form the mentioned of them not making millions as reported. I suggest you search google more for details of MMC Corp. Bhd., sift through the maze of information. Perhaps you might discover who is actually pulling the strings. Hint....is it Syed Mokthar and his links to Kedah or is it UMNO?
There is no end to this. It should not come as any surprise conglomerates in any country are linked to highly connected people, or window dress their books. We have seen enough of Enrons, Lehman Brothers', AIG, Citicorp and the likes.
It would be fair to say, whatever misgivings you have about PTP or Malaysian listed companies - the same applies to Singapore or any other countries.
At least there is audited and published information on the whole venture. Don't forget an ex president was told 26 man-years was needed to make a national asset listing.
Astralmage
New Member
The thing is that Mahathir has bore and still bears ill-will towards Singapore. No? We can dig out all his past speeches and actions, political and military or otherwise, and I think it will be quite clear.
It is perfectly thru that Mahathir has the right to set up a port and price things competitively and it is fair competition, but it is perceived that underlying this competitive activity, other than possible profits, is also a malicious intent towards Singapore’s government. This is why when Shanghai overtakes Singapore, it’s taken in a different light than when Malaysia does so, and competition from Hong Kong is also taken in a ‘friendly’ way by Singapore.
Say if you own a rice stall. And where you live you have a neighbor who bad-mouthed you and irritates you from time to time. You know he hates you. Then he sets up a rice stall next to you and undercuts the price. Yes, it is fair competition. But would you take it in the same light as a stranger who sets up a stall next to you and undercuts as well?
So this PTP thing cannot be analysed apart from the history of Singapore-Malaysia relation, or rather, between the LKY and Mahathir administrations. Hence, it is perceived that an element of sabotage is inherent in the commercial act itself.
It is perfectly thru that Mahathir has the right to set up a port and price things competitively and it is fair competition, but it is perceived that underlying this competitive activity, other than possible profits, is also a malicious intent towards Singapore’s government. This is why when Shanghai overtakes Singapore, it’s taken in a different light than when Malaysia does so, and competition from Hong Kong is also taken in a ‘friendly’ way by Singapore.
Say if you own a rice stall. And where you live you have a neighbor who bad-mouthed you and irritates you from time to time. You know he hates you. Then he sets up a rice stall next to you and undercuts the price. Yes, it is fair competition. But would you take it in the same light as a stranger who sets up a stall next to you and undercuts as well?
So this PTP thing cannot be analysed apart from the history of Singapore-Malaysia relation, or rather, between the LKY and Mahathir administrations. Hence, it is perceived that an element of sabotage is inherent in the commercial act itself.
It is not to say LKY cry mother, father as some are saying, citing Mahathir's response. Despite the other unprofitable Ports like Penang Port and Klang, they decided to have one within a stone's throw next to PSA and now make claims how profitable the venture is. Despite the fact that the turn-around of a vessel cause delays to other ships, and that only a few operators like Evergreen and Maersk can profit from using the port as a hub. They can afford to as they have their own feeder vessels, unlike smaller operators. What this all mean is that there is a limit as to how many berths they can build, for beyond that, no matter how efficient they can be, the vessels still need to take the queue before they can turn around and steam out of the harbour.
Last edited:
you sure have a warped logic. on the same logic Mahatir can also claim likewise that singapore sabotage Malaysia by hosting F1 and building 2 casinoes later to undercut Malaysia in tourism and gambling revenues. as much as I am a local your argument doesn't make sense. by the same logic you can also accuse Shanghai port of undercutting too, but now it is China you are talking about and nobody has the gall to speak out loud (for you know the Chinaman is dammn petty and might just hit back in other ways like in suzhou project, that why nobody accuse China of unfair play unless you are big like USA). it's more sour grapes attitude. in love as well as in in business all is fair and square. you do your business and I do mine so long as it is done in my territory.
Astralmage
New Member
So there’s no bad blood between Singapore and Malaysia? At all? I don’t suppose you’re in the negative on this one.
And if there is, then are we to suppose that behind the business decision making, amongst all other business considerations, there is no trace, absolutely, of a desire to see Singapore ‘go down’, at least on this port issue, and derive a pleasurable triumph of getting a good hit at the opponent?
This is the thrust of my argument, which you seemed to miss out somewhat if not entirely. And from the lens of this miscomprehension, of course you perceived the logic as “warped” and “doesn’t make sense”.
There are emotional hang-ups between the two countries, or rather the two administrations, and we just cannot remove this hidden factor out of the entire equation, an equation that expresses rational business decision making and responses to competition. However, in no way have I speculated that the malicious intent, or ill-will towards Singapore, weighs heavily in their decision making on commercial enterprises. What I’m saying is that it exists.
I quote: “by the same logic you can also accuse Shanghai port of undercutting too “. There is no history of significant emotional hang-ups between Singapore and Shanghai. When I extend my line of logic, I don’t see how it can arrive at the conclusion of accusing Shanghai of undercutting, hence, you may be following a line of logic quite different from mine.
You mentioned that Singapore is afraid to speak out against shanghai because it is part of China. Alright, maybe this Shanghai port example I cited doesn’t bring my point across saliently. So does Singapore view all its other competitors this way, the way we view Malaysia’s competition? Enlighten me if I’m wrong but I don’t think so.
“….on the same logic Mahatir can also claim likewise that singapore sabotage Malaysia by hosting F1 and building 2 casinoes…” I’m not sure if I can synchronise my thoughts to your line of logic, the logic you derived from your own understanding of my points. I’ll try my best though…..now, because there’s animosity and antagonism prevalent in both sides, Mahathir will not likely view Singapore’s success without sensing a hint of “Look I’m successful here and you’re not” (My opinion here is based on our conventional understanding of human psychology) So, you’re quite right in that Mahathir could feel some discomfort, but not in the sense that Singapore tries to sabotage but to prove a point.
hahaha...My Paper (15/2/2011) posted that missing freights/cargoes still quite prevalent in Mudland....some of them were simply robbed along the way.
26 man-years is actually small potatoes.
Either 1 man takes 26 years,
26 men take 1 year,
312 men take one month.
Average cost per man month of $5k, it means it costs only $150k per month.
Very likely scenario to getting it done is that about 52 men taking 6 months. Instead of arguing about it, OTC should have just asked them to spend it. Can even offer his one month's salary to pay for it and thus hold the moral high ground.
Similar threads
