Directors of controversy mired Maika Holdings today bared the company's financial position to the press in an attempt to prove that Maika's situation is not as bad as painted by media reports.

At a press conference in Kuala Lumpur hosted by all six directors this afternoon, reporters were briefed on Maika's financial situation and the status of the company's investments in various ventures.

This is the first time the directors are directly addressing these issues since they were first raised some two months ago.

One of the directors, Khalib Mohamad Noh said Maika's performance had been improving over the past four years and the value of its shares still intact despite rumours to the contrary.

He said the company had been making steady profits from its inception in 1984 until the Asian financial crisis in 1997.

"The financial crisis happened and it affected not just Maika but all other companies in the country. But the company has been improving since 1999. We are almost at breakeven point," he explained during the 90-minute briefing.

Samy 'misquoted'

Khalib, a chartered accountant by training, clarified that at present, Maika held assets worth RM197 million while its liabilities amounted to RM92 million, leaving a net surplus of RM105 million.

Based on the original share issue of 100 million units, he said, each share is now worth RM1.05, marginally better from its original price of RM1 per unit.

However, when questioned about an earlier pronouncement by MIC president S Samy Vellu that Maika assets were worth RM320 million, Khalib declined to comment on the figure beyond saying that the discrepancy may be due to errors in reporting.

"I am not privy to the reasons (behind Samy's remark). Probably the minister was misquoted by the press, we don't know. We are here to tell you the actual status of the company and it is not fair to quote the minister since he is not here to defend himself," he said.

Meanwhile, Khalib denied allegations that investors had gained nothing from their 20-year investments but said instead that dividends had been paid out on seven occasions when the company made profits.

According to him, Maika shareholders have been given a total of 62 percent total returns since the company's incorporation in 1984.

From this amount, 37 percent of returns was in the form of cash dividends while 25 percent was in the form of bonus share issue distributed in 1997.

"The bonus issue was given even though the company suffered a write-down of investment value in 1997," he said.

Khalid said that some shareholders may not have received their dividend cheques because they have not updated their contact information with the company's registrar.

"When the company declares a dividend, they have to set up a special account in a bank before the cheques are dispatched. What is not claimed will then go to a special account," he said, while estimating that a total of RM4 million in dividends have remained unclaimed thus far.

When asked if the company would entertain requests by disgruntled shareholders for a refund of their investments, Khalid said the demands could not be fulfilled because the company was not a public-listed entity.

"If they want to sell, they have to make their own private arrangements. Maika cannot be made to buy back its own shares. What we are asking now is for the shareholders to continue supporting us and to give the new board of directors a chance," he added.

He declined to say when board intended to list the company on the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange, saying only that the new board would need more time to decide on the matter.

Company sale

On the company's investment portfolio, Khalib said Maika will retain investments in three key areas - insurance, plantations, and technology.

At present, the director said Maika was receiving the highest return from its 77 percent stake in Oriental Capital Assurance Berhad (OAB) which made RM15.3 million in post-tax profits.

Other hopeful ventures include investments in Maika Intellectual Resources Sdn Bhd, a Multimedia Super Corridor-status company, Golden Land Construction and the 1,000-acre Tumbuk oil palm estate in Sepang, Selangor.

As for the company's other ventures, Khalib said the new board of directors will be working to dispose of at least 15 companies which have been inactive for the past seven years.

In addition, he said the board may also dispose of five other companies - Golden Land Properties Sdn Bhd, Maika Technologies Sdn Bhd, Sri Utara Sdn Bhd, Ibex Sdn Bhd and Eurocrest Sdn Bhd - after settling outstanding matters including bank loans and lawsuits.

He rejected suggestions that Maika had made poor investment decisions, saying that the criticisms were only made with the benefit of hindsight.

"We have invested in many companies. Each time, we don't know whether they will go down or not. For instance, we invested in MegaTV when everyone thought it would be successful but unfortunately, it failed and we lost RM30 million in the venture," he said.

Unfounded rumours

Earlier, the newly appointed chairperson of the board, Abdul Rashid Abdul Manaf, urged shareholders to attend Maika's annual general meeting (AGM) on Dec 30 so as to clear their doubts about the company's financial viability.

"There have been rumours of incidents during Maika AGMs but no such things had happened except for one small incident (in 1992). We encourage all shareholders to be present," he said.

Both Abdul Rashid and Khalib were among four new shareholders appointed in October to join incumbent directors Vell Paari - son of MIC president Samy - and Dr M Thambirajah.

The other two new directors are V Jeyaratnam and C Vijayakumar.

Maika was established in 1982 purportedly to enable Indian Malaysians to share in the country's economic growth.

The company raised RM106 million in 1984 from more than 66,000 investors but Maika has since been implicated in several controversies, including the 1992 scandal involving a 'missing' RM9 million in Telekom shares allocated by the government for the benefit of the shareholders.

The briefing today by the Maika board is believed to be due to increasing pressure by shareholders for the company to account for their investments as reflected in various media reports.

A number of shareholders have also sought assistance from interest groups and opposition parties in gaining back their invested capital.