Kaoz still got free vegetarian bento set??????? I should have gone then.........
No thanks to Olivia Lum, Hyflux is now officially a hot political potato.
Hwa Chong must be so "proud" of this alumni.
NATIONAL water agency PUB said on Friday that it has acceded to Hyflux subsidiary Tuaspring Pte Ltd's request for more time to cure its defaults.
The default notice period has been extended to April 30, subject to conditions, instead of April 5.
PUB said that Tuaspring Pte Ltd (TPL) had on Wednesday requested for the deadline to be pushed out to the end of April.
It said in a statement on Friday: "TPL noted that it is currently loss-making and will require financial support from Hyflux. However, Hyflux's ability to provide financial support to TPL will depend on whether it is able to complete its restructuring and to obtain the investment from SM Investments."
SM Investments (SMI) is the Indonesian investor group led by billionaire Anthoni Salim that had agreed in October last year to give Hyflux a S$530 million lifeline in exchange for a controlling stake in the company once all its debts are settled.
Hyflux creditors are scheduled to vote on this rescue plan on April 5, although SMI said on Thursday that the deal no longer has its endorsement.
One of the main points of dispute arose from PUB's default notice. On March 5, PUB served a default notice to TPL, seeking remedy for both operational and financial defaults.
SMI has taken the position that PUB's default notice constitutes a "prescribed occurrence" that allows it to call off the rescue deal.
On the other hand, Hyflux has argued that a prescribed occurrence would take place only if PUB terminates its water-purchase agreement (WPA) with the Tuaspring water desalination plant. Such an event has not yet taken place, and the earliest that PUB can exercise its right to terminate the water contract – if Tuaspring's defaults were not remedied – was on April 6, Hyflux said. (With the extension, that date is now May 1).
Now that PUB has agreed to give TPL more time to cure its defaults, the ball is in SMI's court.
More at https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/companies-markets/pub-accedes-to-tuaspring%E2%80%99s-request-to-extend-default-notice-period
Hmm Lim Tean didn't attend?
Among them was 67-year-old retiree Koh Ah Kiw, who lost about $40,000 after investing in Hyflux preference shares and perpetual securities to "get pocket money for retirement". She said she bought the shares at $100 apiece and had been receiving dividends until they stopped last year.
Madam Koh, who was with the Ministry of Health for more than 42 years, said: "My daughter said I'm unlucky. I also lost my $30,000 investment in Lehman Minibonds."
Madam L.L. Hong, 53, and her husband, Mr B.C. Ong, 55, said they bought Hyflux perpetual securities and preference shares because they thought Tuaspring was a "strategic national asset".
Instead, they have lost more than $200,000 of their retirement funds.
It appears the guy in blue wearing a mask and carrying a green bag is the faggot organizer behind this lame ass protest.....name is Alex or something.
@GOD MODE Full name?
Who the fuck did they vote? Let me guess.....the People's Adulterers Party?
Masaghost just told Hyfuck investors to go fuck themselves. Outstanding hah.
HYFLUX said on Thursday that a key rescue deal from the Salim-Medco group is officially off, with just weeks to go before the water and power plant company loses court protection from creditors.
Hyflux has cancelled scheme meetings scheduled for April 5 and 8. There is also no need for shareholders to attend an extraordinary general meeting scheduled for April 15, the company said.
Now both sides are arguing over who killed the deal. The answer may determine who gets to pocket the S$38.9 million deposit that Salim-Medco (SMI) put into escrow last year, upon agreeing to play white knight for Hyflux.
Reacting to Hyflux's announcement on Thursday, SMI, led by Indonesian billionaire Anthoni Salim, said it was "surprised" by Hyflux's "purported termination" of the rescue deal, and will be taking legal advice in relation to Hyflux's action.
In a late Thursday night filing, Hyflux said it wrote to the investor to request a clear and unequivocal written confirmation of its commitment, and stated clearly that the company would have no choice but to terminate the restructuring agreement if the investor declined to do so.
"Regrettably, the investor, in a letter from its lawyers dated 4 April 2019, declined to provide the written confirmation sought," Hyflux added.
Salim-Medco was supposed to invest S$530 million into Hyflux in exchange for a 60 per cent stake once Hyflux's debts had been cleared, an investment that formed a key pillar in Hyflux's restructuring plans.
But SMI had a change of heart in recent weeks, citing concerns about Hyflux's working capital requirements and the cash distribution plan under the proposed restructuring.
On Thursday, Hyflux said it had tried to meaningfully engage with the Indonesian investor group on multiple occasions: "However, in light of the investor's responses and conduct, the company has no confidence that the investor is prepared to continue to complete the proposed investment."
It added: "They have also not refuted the statements in the media that SMI was 'slated to walk away' from the deal. Without the confirmation from SMI to dispel the overhanging uncertainty over this deal, it would not be possible for the stakeholders to have a proper vote."
Effectively, Salim-Medco has repudiated the restructuring agreement and Hyflux has accepted its repudiation, the Singapore company said.
"The restructuring agreement is therefore terminated," Hyflux stated.
More at https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/companies-markets/hyflux-says-salim-medco-rescue-is-off-both-sides-play-the-blame-game-0
For a decade, audit firm KPMG had stamped Hyflux's annual reports with a clean bill of health, attesting to the water treatment company's ability to continue to operate.
But with the company now facing the possibility of liquidation after a scuppered restructuring deal on Thursday, its shareholders and investors are asking why auditors failed to flag the risk of Hyflux spiralling into heavy debt.
This might well be a key question on the minds of Singapore's accounting and auditing regulator, which told The Straits Times that it is monitoring the Hyflux quagmire closely.
The Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (Acra), which enforces Singapore's strict auditing and accounting laws and standards, said in a statement that it will also "assess if further action is warranted". The Acra spokesman did not elaborate further.
Acra's statement came a day before the restructuring agreement between Hyflux and SM Investments collapsed on Thursday, with both parties laying the blame on the other side for the demise of the $530 million deal.
As a result, the scheme meetings that were supposed to be held yesterday were also cancelled, and the day passed without any pronouncements from either side.
Acra now joins a trio of financial regulators - including the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Singapore Exchange - which have publicly said they are keeping a close watch on affairs.
Corporate governance experts believe the accounting and auditing issue is likely to centre on Hyflux's 2017 books, which the company released in March last year and carry the unqualified opinion of the auditors. It had slipped into the red for the first time in 2017 since its listing in 2001.
Yet two months later in May, Hyflux shocked investors when it filed for bankruptcy protection.
Its financial statements were prepared on the basis of going concern - an accounting method that assumes the company will remain solvent and operational indefinitely until proven otherwise.
According to Singapore's auditing standards, auditors are duty-bound to question this assumption, assessing any risks to the company's ability to stay afloat and avoid bankruptcy. They are also required to remain alert to any events or conditions that show otherwise.
Hyflux, in response to queries from the Securities Investors Association (Singapore) in February, told the watchdog there were no events to cast significant doubt on the assumption of going concern.
National University of Singapore associate professor of accounting Mak Yuen Teen said that if auditors had given an adverse opinion, ordinary shareholders and creditors could have chosen to get out earlier.
He noted that there were no separate audited statements for the group's loss-making subsidiary Tuaspring for 2017.
More at https://www.straitstimes.com/business/acra-to-assess-if-further-action-needed