Why MMC want to take over UEM Group?

When the RM15.6 billions take-over news broke out, MMC share price has been rallying to multi-months high. It was reported that MMC is pairing with EPF and PNB with MMC holding a 40% stake of the consortium. On the other hand, Khazanah Nasional Bhd is the ultimate holding company of UEM Group Bhd.
The Pull factors…
  1. PLUS Expressways, is one of the key assets that spark MMC interests? The national’s largest cash-generating toll-operator undeniably is Khazanah’s golden asset with 55.2% direct and indirect interest.
  2. UEM Land, which has a huge land bank in southern corridor – Iskandar Development Region. This is favorable to Johor based MMC’s investments.
  3. To boost its construction arm with stronger muscle? UEM Group is having several projects in Malaysia, such as the Penang Second Bridge. MMC can leverage on the latter expertise and also to gain market share, given the lack of domestic awards.

What makes me interesting is the alternative MRT proposed by IJM-UEM recently. By acquiring UEM, MMC could break-up the joint venture and effectively eliminate the said rival proposal which reportedly costing much lower than the Gamuda-MMC RM35bil proposal. There are two possibilities:
  1. Take-over succeeds.
  2. Failed. But, MMC guaranteed succeeds in MRT project, because government is running out of time to consider an alternative proposed by IJM-UEM joint venture, which is remain uncertain.
Either way, MMC will gain more than harm. Or, is this the strategy employed by MMC?


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"You Can Keep Your Existing Health Insurance"

I wondered about this statement at the time Obama made it.  Clearly, by changing all the rules of health care insurance and mandating conformity, it was unlikely that the vast majority of Americans would not find themselves forced by 'The Affordable Care Act' to have to deal with a completely different health insurance plan and completely different set of health care providers. I now understand what Obama meant.   He was speaking to his immediate family and (politician) friends.  They are exempt from the "Affordable Care Act."  Clearly what he meant to say was: "if you are exempt from Obamacare, like me and my family, you can keep your existing health insurance."  He never meant to mislead.
Read more

Work Ethic of 70s, 80s, 90s

Image
Different generations have their own view on working. You like it or not, working is part of our live. No work = No life. However, this equation has since changed to " Working = No life ". Do you agree? Generally, those born in 70s were perceived to be loving their job. They work hard mainly because of 3 meals/day. For them, a secured life means having a stable job with stable income. They believe that with every efforts you put in, that will reward you back later. As such, over time (OT) is nothing for them. As a responsible 70s, losing their job is a serious matter they tend to avoid. That's why they usually found another job first, before resigning. How about 80s? Other than chasing for stable income, those 80s working adults will also look into the job scope , opportunity for promotion , or working environment . They will take initiative to find for better job. Hence, job hopping is very common for them. Notably, 80s are reluctant to sacrifice their quality of life b
Read more

Things We Now Know

The poor are losing ground in the new Obama world.  The facts are showing up even in the halls of collectivist extremes like the New York Times.  The rich are getting richer and poor are being locked in place.  Big government is throttling the economy and the hopes and dreams of lower and middle class Americans. Today's Wall Street Journal's article by Simon Constable lays out some of the simple and obvious facts of the Obama era: "The richest 20% of households account for 38% of spending, according to government data for 2011, the latest available.  Compare that with 2003 when the top earners spent 26% of the total."  The article goes on to say..."it could get even worse."  It will. Who really benefits when the regulators strangle the banks?  Do banks really need to get much more conservative in their lending practices?  Why does the government know best?  How far can you stretch the FDIC guarantees before American banking is simply a subsidiary of the US g
Read more