MAS decided to reduce usage of its European cargo hub in Hahn, Germany, which is an abandoned military base and therefore cheaper to operate from, purportedly because it was very cumbersome and inconvenient to operate from Hahn. This 'penny wise pound foolish' syndrome has cost MAS lots of money and competitiveness.

A more serious matter though, is that the hub is 60 percent owned by Tajudin Ramli who, I presume, had so much confidence in Hahn as a base for MAS cargo operations. As a matter of principle, should MAS have allowed its chairman to own the majority stake of that company? Would not there have been a conflict of interest? What were the government representatives for the 'golden share' doing when the matter was tabled to the board for a decision? Are there other 'subsidiaries' that have this shareholding structure?

Worse of all, we the public, had to pay more than double the market price for this kind of management.