PDA

View Full Version : Richest Malaysians



sirgalahad2010
17-02-2006, 03:50 PM
Richest Malaysians, according to the latest Malaysian Business magzine:

(1) Robert Kuok (RM21.56 billion)
(2) T Ananda Krishnan (RM 10.97 billion)
(3) Quek Leng Chan (RM 9.90 billion) - Hong Leong Group
(4) Lim Goh Tong (RM6.14 billion) - Genting Group
(5) Teh Hong Piow (RM6.09 billion) - Public Bank
(6) Lee Shin Cheng (RM 3.89 billion) - IOI Corp
(7) Syed Mokhtar Albukhary (RM 2.93 billion) - Albukhary Foundation
(8) Lim Kok Thay (RM1.61 billion) - Genting Group
(9) Tiong Hiew King (RM1.52 billion) - Rimbunan Hijau Group
(10) Kua Sian Kooi (RM963.52 million) - Kurnia Asia Bhd
(11) Yeoh Tiong Lay (RM915.25 million) - YTL Corp
(12) Tony Fernandes (RM705.08 million) - AirAsia
(13) Azman Hashim (RM675.50 million) - Arab-Malaysian Group

Yay! Go, Tony!

It's nice to know that you can still make money in Msia.

Now, if someone could only draw up lists of the 13 richest Malaysian ministers, politicians, civil servants, lawyers, doctors and retirees...... ;)

alexhay
17-02-2006, 08:05 PM
Got this from

http://www.forbes.com/static/bill2005/LIRARHN.html?passListId=10&passYear=2005&passListType=Person&uniqueId=ARHN&datatype=Person

Robert Kuok is rank #94 in the world..(if I am not mistaken, his nick name is Suger King)

Country of citizenship: Malaysia
Residence: Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Industry: Agriculture
Marital Status: married , 8 children
Raffles College, Bachelor of Arts / Science


Southeast Asia's richest man. Has holdings throughout Asia, including the Shangri-La hotel chain, Hong Kong's South China Morning Post newspaper and Kerry Beverages, one of the biggest Coca-Cola bottlers in China. Also has vast holdings in shipping, sugar trading and other commodities as well as substantial investments in China beyond the bottling operations. Got his start in the sugar business back in the late 1950s.

alexhay
17-02-2006, 08:10 PM
Malaysian that is in the Forbes List...(Extracted from www.forbes.com, 2005 list)

138 Ananda Krishnan 66 4.0 Malaysia Malaysia , Kuala Lumpur (Astro,Maxis,Da Ma Cai and etc)
258 Lim Goh Tong 87 2.4 Malaysia Malaysia , Kuala Lumpur (Genting Group)
258 Teh Hong Piow 74 2.4 Malaysia Malaysia , Kuala Lumpur (Public Bank)
272 Quek Leng Chan & family 64 2.3 Malaysia Malaysia , Kuala Lumpur (Hong Leong Group)
620 Tiong Hiew King 69 1.0 Malaysia Malaysia , Sibu

USJ27Resident
17-02-2006, 09:45 PM
Now, if someone could only draw up lists of the 13 richest Malaysian ministers, politicians, civil servants, lawyers, doctors and retirees...... ;)

In your dreams.... the first two categories falls under the preview of the O.S.A. ! :p and that can court BIG trouble.... :p

...and by the way, one cannot count/account for wealth hidden under mattresses and in the attics... :p

tempuadua
22-02-2006, 01:20 AM
Got this from

http://www.forbes.com/static/bill2005/LIRARHN.html?passListId=10&passYear=2005&passListType=Person&uniqueId=ARHN&datatype=Person

Robert Kuok is rank #94 in the world..(if I am not mistaken, his nick name is Suger King)

Country of citizenship: Malaysia
Residence: Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Industry: Agriculture
Marital Status: married , 8 children
Raffles College, Bachelor of Arts / Science


Southeast Asia's richest man. Has holdings throughout Asia, including the Shangri-La hotel chain, Hong Kong's South China Morning Post newspaper and Kerry Beverages, one of the biggest Coca-Cola bottlers in China. Also has vast holdings in shipping, sugar trading and other commodities as well as substantial investments in China beyond the bottling operations. Got his start in the sugar business back in the late 1950s.
I was made to understand that Robert Kuok got his first break in the 50s when the first PM give him the sole monopoly of sugar trading in Malaysia. Around that time, the same PM give Lim Goh Tong the sole monopoly of casino licence in Malaysia. 40 years later, both become some of the richest men in the world. In early 90s, the 4th PM give a sole and exclusive licence to Ananda Khrisnan to operate the sole "satelite pay TV" in Malaysia. Now he is also in the list. The same PM give Tony Fernandez the sole and exclusive licence to operate LCC in Malaysia. Today, he is also in the list. Whoever said that monopoly is not good!

Jose Mourinho
22-02-2006, 08:26 AM
A monopoly business has to be backed up with sound business plans and very hard work. No?

:)

saml
22-02-2006, 08:32 AM
The same pm also gave opportunities to certain individuals in the hope that they would also make it but they all fell by the roadside, the companies, I mean. They are still fabulously rich but no where near these people. One cannot begrudge them for their success. They deserve to be in that list. Given an opportunity they took it and made a mountain out of it instead of continuously extending their hand out for hand outs. That is the easy way out.

wAISEKMAo
22-02-2006, 09:49 AM
The same pm also gave opportunities to certain individuals in the hope that they would also make it but they all fell by the roadside, the companies, I mean. They are still fabulously rich but no where near these people. One cannot begrudge them for their success. They deserve to be in that list. Given an opportunity they took it and made a mountain out of it instead of continuously extending their hand out for hand outs. That is the easy way out.

Being in the business on my own.

I felt you have to invest and expand vertically, in your businesses areas of expertise. Like Genting in casino and hotel, ananda in telco and astro, sugar king in sugar, hotel, property and related. This is where you are strong at.

Furthermore, you have to expand and invest conservatively.

The guys who are favoured by BIG G but fell are those who expand horizontally..meaning expand beyond what they are good at doing. In doing this, they waste energy and money which are better in expanding their core expertise.

But then again, considering how easy it is for the BIG G to give the favoured any choice assets. It is easy to become "tamak". Note how those favoured , after getting one asset gets another asset and expand aggresively into any other areas where they think they can make money?

USJ27Resident
22-02-2006, 10:57 AM
The same PM give Tony Fernandez the sole and exclusive licence to operate LCC in Malaysia. Today, he is also in the list. Whoever said that monopoly is not good!

Are you sure ?? DRB was bleeding dry when they was in control of AirAsia and their fat birds could hadly fly...

TF bought over AirAsia and had to assumed all outstanding financial liabilities in order to get the license... therefore he was not given AirAsia on a silver platter...

And by the way, what monopoly... they got a lot of friends in the skies nowadays from our neighboring countries to compete with...

gtl
22-02-2006, 02:35 PM
those fellas are in the TOP 10 is not by not doing anything. they r good business man which grew the business to what it is today. they did not bled the company they set up and screw the public. they made good. take for example robert kuok, he is into so many successful business which is doing so well, he got a bunch of loyal managers working for him and grew the business.

unlike the current "rich" which are govt pampered. they are only interested to "makan" the company till dry and retire.

Jose Mourinho
22-02-2006, 02:42 PM
I agree with you. Many of the old guards (and some new ones) were given head-starts with some concessions from the government and other quarters but they do work very hard to reach where they are now. They have also managed to keep many people employed and tens of thousands of mouths to feed.

alexhay
22-02-2006, 02:55 PM
Dont forget...some felda settlers might make it to the richest malaysian list :)

pcyeoh
22-02-2006, 04:58 PM
But for how long? Before they even received the first ringgit, they have already spend all ...... I mean some of them. They say "A fool and his money will soon be parted." The Agriculture Minister should have done something for them to prepare them for this sudden wealth but he was too busy with Puteri Gunung Ledang. And it is shocking that he was reappointed to the Cabinet once again recently.

bugbear
22-02-2006, 05:09 PM
I wonder how come the malays do not feature more prominently in the top ten list given the NEP/NDP and the gomen full backing of 30% equity in almost all companies? Can anyone give an analysis?

orchipalar
22-02-2006, 10:54 PM
Err...should Orchi be not mistaken...we might see a soon to be 'malaysian' topping the list...ahem...being THE wealthiest malaysian...

Err...by that time...he could become 'THE richest man in the world' also...ahem...guess who?

Ahem...anyone who might guess the right answer...would likely be promised by him...to receive a reward for 10 millions ringgits from him... :rolleyes:

tempuadua
26-02-2006, 02:48 PM
Are you sure ?? DRB was bleeding dry when they was in control of AirAsia and their fat birds could hadly fly...

TF bought over AirAsia and had to assumed all outstanding financial liabilities in order to get the license... therefore he was not given AirAsia on a silver platter...

And by the way, what monopoly... they got a lot of friends in the skies nowadays from our neighboring countries to compete with...
It cannot be denied that the government give TF, Kamarudin Meraun and Pahamin Rejab a lot of help when they first took over AA. DRB was operating AA as conventional airlines. When they took over, the government give them the exclusivity to operate LCC from Malaysia. You are right that there are other LCC in the skies but all of them are based from outside Malaysia and only fly certain routes into Malaysia on reciprocal basis.
Government helped AA by protecting the most profitable domestic routes from other LCC, e.g. domestic routes to KK and Kuching. Btw, the KL-KK-KCH-KL routes are very profitable and for so many years has been keeping MAS operation afloat.
GOvernment, through MAB, also helped AA during the early years by charging AA airport and landing charges far lower that MAB charged MAS and other airlines. IN fact, when MAS was foreced to move to KLIA, government allowed AA to continue operating from Subang for another year (because the cost of operating in Subang is cheaper.
I was made to understand that, during the early years, PETRONAS also helped AA by selling them jet fuel on credit.
Recently, government just completed the construction of LCC terminals in KLIA solely to cater for LCC (read AA).
In the early stage, AA did received helps from the government. It is not wrong for government to help enterprenuers because for every ringgit that they earn, 25 sen belong to the goverment. I have no qualm about people getting help from the government, but these people must be able to deliver, and later contribute to the nations (e.g. AA bringing foreigns tourists to Malaysia).

orchipalar
27-02-2006, 01:05 AM
Err...not sure about who could be amongst the truly richest Malaysians....ahem...perhaps some answers may lie...in HERE...??? (http://www.aseanfocus.com/asiananalysis/article.cfm?articleID=721)

Since 1983, over 400 SOEs have been privatised, ranging from ports to telecommunications, power utilities, highways, water, sewerage services, shipping, car distribution, petrol retailing, and television stations. Some government departments were corporatised and subsequently listed on the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange (KLSE). This was coupled with the sale of minority shares to private investors. However, two of the largest listed companies on the KLSE, Tenaga Nasional and Telekom Malaysia, are still majority owned by government even after more than 15 years of supposed privatisation.

Schemes that allowed investors to build and operate infrastructure or utilities were later used for infrastructure expansion. The most notable example was the awarding of a contract in 1986 to United Engineers Malaysia (UEM) to construct the North-South Superhighway with no public bidding or prior announcement of selection criteria and despite UEM’s lack of experience in highway construction. New players were licensed in former state-monopolised industries. For example, in the telecommunications industry, eight new companies, all owned by politically well-connected businessmen, were awarded licenses without any observable due process. Although it was soon quite clear that too many players had been allowed entry, none of the companies agreed to merge until the onset of the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. The government awarded privatisation contracts under concessionary terms, and offered special privileges such as soft credit, state-backed guarantees for loans, and in some cases secure monopoly status. This led to the establishment of conglomerates that amassed totally unrelated businesses. Finally, there were cases of management buy-outs of state enterprises, such as those of Peremba, Pernas International Holdings, and the Fima group of companies.

Although non-Malay favoured businessmen benefited from privatisation, the biggest beneficiaries were companies owned by Malay businessmen who were linked to Prime Minister Mahathir, former Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Anwar Ibrahim, and Daim, who was then Government Adviser and Treasurer of the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO). Each of the top three politicians seemed to have had a different aim in selecting businessmen. Mahathir appears to have been selective and to have genuinely believed that he had the ability to ‘pick winners’ who would later develop international competitiveness. Daim appears to have used business associates as proxies for his own commercial interests. Anwar, in contrast, used his political influence to create a group of business associates and develop a political base in UMNO.

Despite the criticism, the government declared the policy an astonishing success. After 1983, the government claims to have saved RM$132 billion by not having to build infrastructure, to have gained RM23 billion from the sale of former SOEs, and to have trimmed the bureaucracy by 97,000 employees, or 11.4 per cent of the public sector, whilst improving service to the public. Some 40 privatised SOEs were said to make up RM131 billion or 30 per cent of the KLSE’s total capitalisation.

The Asian Financial Crisis, however, exposed the excesses of Malaysian privatisation. Privatised companies controlled by the politically well connected suffered heavily due to their highly leveraged financial positions. Government assistance was extended to troubled industries that fell within vaguely defined national and strategic interests such that from 1998 onwards the state bailed out and renationalised privatised entities. The most notable case involved the buy-back of Malaysian Airlines (MAS) from Tajudin Ramli, a Daim associate, for RM8 per share when the market rate was RM3. In June 2001, however, the scenario changed drastically. Daim resigned from the government without any explanation. A few months later the ‘Malay Billionaires’ began to fall one by one. For example, in June 2001, Halim Saad suddenly resigned from the vice chairmanship of UEM, the most profitable listed company of Renong, Malaysia’s biggest conglomerate and owner of PLUS, the North-South Highway concession holder. In November 2001, the Securities Commission rejected Tajudin’s attempt to rescue Technology Resources Industries (TRI) from debt using the cash that he made from selling MAS back to government. In April 2002, Tajudin lost control of his interests in TRI (which owns Celcom, one of the leading mobile phone companies) and Naluri (which formerly controlled MAS) to Danaharta, the government’s debt restructuring body.

Ironically, the past decade has shown that privatisation came at the expense of the Malay community in general, and of its poorer members in particular. Clearly, Mahathir’s brand of privatisation did not break the nexus between the state and business, but strengthened it. It appears that the late 1990s impetus toward restructuring was provided by factionalism among the political elite, in particular the fall-out between Mahathir and Daim. Although dealing with the debt of Malaysia’s huge conglomerates is a positive move, it is worrying that these reforms have been implemented in a manner that lacks transparency.

Read MORE... (http://www.aseanfocus.com/asiananalysis/article.cfm?articleID=721)