YOURSAY | 'And if that is the case, shouldn't the finance minister be sacked?'
Fair Play: Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Abdul Wahid Omar, by all accounts you are a trained professional accountant.
1MDB is a public-interest entity and is subject to the purview of the Securities Commission in matters of disclosures and accountability, like any public-listed company.
The fact that 1MDB changed several auditors (the Big Four) says a lot about it. And what about the auditor-general who is responsible for conducting the internal audit?
Herein lies the root cause of the problems facing 1MDB - no accountability and public disclosure until opposition MPs Tony Pua and Rafizi Ramli exposed the irregularities.
Now 1MDB has gained international notoriety with global investigators jumping into the fray attempting to connect the money trail.
Abasir: Abdul Wahid said, "The 1MDB model was unsustainable from the very beginning."
You mean the model which was conceived and approved by the minister of finance, who also chaired its advisory board? The same minister of finance whom you report to?
Gaji Buta: And if that is the case, shouldn't the finance minister be sacked?
Eternal Optimist: Since the overly paid bloodsuckers knew the business was unsustainable from the beginning, why would such people and the government go and set it up?
It is even more obvious now 1MDB was set up for some other purposes. Unfortunately for the beggars, their hands were caught on the udder but they 'mati mati' keep on shouting otherwise.
Shamu99: So it was a terrible strategy, and now it's "rationalisation" once Sarawak Report and the opposition start firing. So the men who are behind this failure can get away without any consequences.
Don't use your favourite word “rationalisation” to cover the past mistakes. Bring the culprits to book.
Tempurung Kelapa: Please, any hawker in the street knows that any business model that has more debt than its cash flow can sustain, is doomed.
Odin Tajué: Abdul Wahid, my late father had never studied even basic economics and never mind gone to a world-renowned business school such as Wharton to study how to be a business whiz kid.
Yet, even he knew that it is the height of stupidity to go into business with little money and borrow a lot. He did not do such a thing when he started his business. He told my siblings and me what not to do when starting a business.
How, then, could it be that an economics graduate from Nottingham University and a business graduate from Wharton did not know this?
The answer is that it is not that they did not know. They bloody well did know. To my mind, they have never meant for 1MDB to be a bona fide business entity but mainly a means to make mega bucks faster than fast.
They have never had to worry about 1MDB suffering huge losses, because if it did, Malaysians, not they, would bear the burden. To them, if 1MDB made some money, well and good. If it did not, no matter.
Roguekiller: Though the starting capital was inadequate, but with government facilities and land more or less given to it on a silver platter, 1MDB should have easily made profits, as land in high-demand localities had been acquired at dirt-cheap prices, which they then resold at exorbitant prices.
It should be in an advantageous position, so why is 1MDB heavily indebted?
With all brains of high calibre personalities as its asset, was 1MDB unable to put all these to good use because they were being controlled by someone who had a different motive?
Ex-Wfw: Over the past 50 years, we have gone from okay to 'also ran', and the indicator keeps pointing south; even comparing us with some African countries could be an insult to them.
We seem bent on doing impossible acts against basic economic practices.
Triple A: I am quite confident 1MDB will be able to show that this company is a corporation that is able to go through the process of rationalisation with a massive reduction in debts.
Anonymous 749: 1MDB has done a good job. Hopefully, 1MDB can grow in the future though always criticised hard by the opposition.
Patriot1: The cybertroopers really don't understand English. A former top banker has said the business model is non-sustainable, meaning it cannot survive on its own even without any mismanagement.
What they have succeeded in doing is selling off prime Malaysian assets to foreigners for a song, under the catchword "debt rationalisation".
Donplaypuks: We don't want this bull about rationalisation plans. Where are 1MDB's audited accounts for the year ended March 31, 2015? Why the one-year delay? Are the books being cooked?
SimonTi: How is it possible that, when state assets are sold undervalued, or rather freely "donated" to the so-called 1MDB for a pittance, but later sold at massive 1,000 percent profits, yet it managed to incur sinful and horrendous debts amounting to RM42 billion?
And worse, until now no one is responsible and accountable for this most ‘haram’ of crimes against the country.
Any idiot knows it cannot be anything but a criminal breach of trust, daylight robbery and wholesale corruption on a horrendous scale.
Speaking Sense: It would be instructive for someone to compare this with all the statements defending the viability of 1MDB that have come from PM Najib Razak and the board, and successive failed CEOs of this unarguably unviable fantasy from an incompetent finance minister.
Then I am sure we will see for ourselves all the lies that have been told in this sorry saga, many sordid details of which are still to come, we can bet.
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .
These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.