SAVVY the first malaysian car made by proton that uses ENGLISH WORD.

if that the way what a Malaysians patriotic there have!.

if that the way, 10 years for now also get no used, only talk n act like there know ,but do nothing to our country, at the back only know how to get a spoon feeding ,protect this protect that for there own kind .

by the way we all r Malaysians , so who protect who. is that good for our country o good spoon feeding to there own minority.

hope what there talk there will do good to our country.

This is what I have to say:

Bravo, P1, do whatever that you deem proper BUT do let the playing field be levelled to all the aspiring auto players in the Bolehland.

Cliche : Mazda 6 selling about RM80,000, Vios and City about RM50,000, take a look at Brilliance Auto’s Junjie….

NeedGoodCar at reasonable price.

Stop making people at Bolehland to suffer from having to live with substandard products at rediculous dear price.

Enough said.

Happy Labour Day to everybody here who is earning salary. I share your pain too.

I mean like, forget about more Rnd on supercars, forget about spreading your market globally, forget about making new models every year first.. who the hell is going to buy a proton if the main issue is still not solved? good example is gen2, a new model isnt it? technological with own engine with decent power and good suspension system isnt it? have been marketed to others country eg the UK isnt it? but what’s making it being so scruitinized by even our own people? what else, the built quality la guys. For me i rahter take an old model car with good qulity rather than take a uptodate design car regardless of any brand with fancy stuff but to bare the brain pain of stupid quality problems every single day.

just my 2 cents.

where on earth you have a CONTENDED player,
who are making easy money in a near-monopoly market saying such statement!

Common!

kancil is dead, NEW kancil model is out,
Kembara is aged, new model already out,
shouldn’t perodua starting rolling out these 2 NEW models? come out with 1.5 sedan etc..? why wait?

(they just want to make easy money, from rakyats, on Myvi.
..that we are overpaying by RM10K!)

Under 20 odds year of PROTON since 1980s,
proton only contribute RM 2 BIL tax!

BUT, rakyats force to OVERPAID by

RM200BIL !
for protons cars and others types.

what a HUGE SIN!

In the past, we thought all the rakyat know was to bark at anything. Had no mercy in expressing their thoughts over Proton.

Today, everybody gave P1 a thumb up, a chance to once again prove themselves. P1 should count their blessing for such great forgiveness from the people who has been paying obscene money every month for a hopeless piece of metal that cost more to maintain than to own.

Is it that hard to make good cars and ensure quality?

Come on Proton, do it right this time. Be the real pride of our nation, your people will stand by you.

The M&M duo can continue to justify that Proton did great, we as rakyat know better because we actually DRIVE one. Proton quality sucks, there is nothing M&M can say to convince us we’ve done great. bullshit.

K

But Joe, u r best if working with ACA…

ps:If you cant fight them, join them!!! hehehe… I WANT SAVVY SEDANS..with AMT, of coz…

*This is my imagination only…

Not Another Perodua Clone,daihatsu clone, etc.

Quality campaigne – design to boost sales and clear 2005 stocks!
Press announcement on “strategic alliances” – design to prop up Proton share.
Press announcement on “new models” – design to please G that something is being done and “keep them in newspaper radar screen”.

Both also desperate acts but with limited success (perhap failure) in an attempt to mitigate P1 falling fortune!

I bet they only put SZ in P2 as their so call “MIDDLE LEVEL MANAGEMENT GUY” and all their Japanese “SO CALL CONSULTANT” make all the decision.

These so call CONSULTANT have more power than the local MD or Senior Manager or Department Manager. I have seen it.

By taking SZ over to P1, do you think he will be able to make any good and precise decision? The Japanese through their vast business empire and experience and know how have the ability and resources to make good decision. With only a handful of years at P2, do you all seriously think SZ can make any difference at P1?

P1 is basically a G company. Have you all see how G people works. Masuk pukul 8, minum teh sampai pukul 10, lunch pukul 12, relaks sampai pukul 1, minum teh pukul 3 sampai pukul 4. 4.30 cuci tangan, pukol 5 chow.

At one of my customer, which is a Japanese Company, Masuk pukol 7.30, minum teh pukul 10. 10.15 masuk kerja. 3 minuted before 10.15, they announce thru PA system, waktu rehat sudah habis. Sila kemaskan meja, dan kerusi dan balik ke tempat kerja semula. Lunch only 45 minutes. Any staff left after the hours, their name will be jot down and pass to HR for warning letter. 3 times warning letter, you balik kampung tanam jagung.

Can SZ or any other GLC implement this? All QC station will have one Japanese Consultant. Not even a tiny weeny scratch can escape them. QC issues are dealt with seriously, even their HQ in Japan will get involve. This makes the local people more serious and perform better.

Do you see all this a G department or GLC? I do not think so. To me SZ is only the middle level Management in P2. He doesn’t know why this and that decision are made. He only knows how to execute them with proper screwing from his Japanese Boss. Regarding QC issue at P1, who doesn;t know it? Everybody knows about it. Even TM acknowledge this issue. Why can’t he tackle it earlier? For me the main reason P1 problem is that it is run like a Government Department. In the G, it is not easy to sacks a worker, worse, there will be political implications.

To SZ, if you want to change P1, make sure you have BIG BALLS and ready to SCREW and FUCK your own BOSS, otherwise, just sit there, take your salary and wait for the day, they kick you out.

Fundamentally, any national project undertaking shall strategize to create wealth to nation, but for Proton case, it is indeed become liability to the taxpayers’ money. From Proton inception 2 decades ago, huge sum of taxpayers’ money already poured in as capital expenditure for setting up this national car project. Two decade later, the taxpayers, especially car consumers still have to “subsidize Proton” in the form of paying prohibitive taxes to imported car (i.e. with intention to make it out of affordable to most of consumers) in order to enable its inferior product saleable and make it profitable. To be more precise, this could say “Proton’s profiteering” through “force selling and force buying” in-equation, not based on a “willing to sell and willing to buy” basis.

Is Proton become liability to the nation due to vindictive automotive tax-phobia structure? In order to justify this statement, the basic methodology employed is limited to conduct price comparative analysis between our close market and open market. In this case, USA is the most appropriate candidate to be chosen, as this country has the most liberalize laissez-faire economy, including automotive sector.

Purchasing Power Parity (PPP)

a. PPP for Malaysia: US 9,700.00 (2004 estimate): 1
PPP for US: US 40,100.00 (2004 estimate)

Ratio of PPP: 1 (M’sia): 4.13 (US)

The summary of comparative prices analysis for small and midsize passenger cars between Malaysia closed market and US open policy can be shown below: –

A) The comparative prices analysis indicated that on average (for those small car segment below 2.0L – Waja, Gen-2, Civic, Corolla Altis, Sentra, etc.): -
- Hefty tax resulted in imported makes higher by 60%.
- Proton products are over-price by 24%.
- The over-price local car diluted PPP ratio from 4.13 to 5.13

B) The comparative prices analysis also indicated that on average (those mid-size car segment normally above 2.0L – Perdana, Camry, Accord, Cefiro, Optima, etc): -
- Hefty tax resulted in imported makes higher by 111%.
- Proton products are over-price by 68%.
- The over-price local car diluted PPP ratio from 4.13 to 9.53

The price comparative analysis is clearly shown that on average, the Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) for Malaysian compare to US in small passenger car sub-sector is diluted from 1:4.13 to 1:7.12. In other word, there is “regression” of PPP for Malaysian to acquire auto given current pricing policy. This also indicated the Proton makes when compare on “open market and fair price” basis between Malaysia and US for small passenger cars is on average over-priced by USD 3,121.

For midsize passenger car, on average it is over-priced by USD 11,431 and PPP is increase from 1:4.13 to 1:9.53. Therefore, the existing NAP and “tax-phobia” structure is a “total lost-lost situations”; either to the consumers who suffering the most by compelling to pay more, or the national car projects (Proton, Perodua, Naza and Inokom) are economically not viable, whose products are not cost effective and do not achieved economy of scale.

Consumers have to fork out on average RM 2.42 Billions per annum (or RM 202 Millions per month) from 2000 to 2004 in order for Proton to achieve in aggregate 920,590 passenger cars sales to make profits of RM 3.11 Billions for the same corresponding period! If in open market, Proton would face with massive debts in aggregate of RM 9 Billions for the same corresponding period, sure get annihilated! This is for 5 years period only, but for Proton, its over-price practice already causes huge economic cost to consumers totaling RM 12.11 Billions. With this kind of probable financial standing under open market, then it is understood why “Local-Class Joker” like Proton fight ferociously until to the “last drop of blood” to maintain the current NAP’s preference and automotive tax-phobia structure. However, maintaining current status quo means consumers are get suck until “blood of last drop”!

How about prohibitive sum consumers have to pay for imported makes and other local players like Perodua, Inokom and Naza range of products? If all cars were calculated, the economic cost on “over-price” due to “Machiavellian’s tax-phobia” is around RM 8.66 Billions for 2004 alone? How about for Proton’s existence period of 20 years ++? The sum involved should be added “Billions exponentially”? Perhaps in excess of well over RM 100 Billions! There are many questions marks and definitely a whopping sum by our national standard! Where to put our national pride and dignity with so call national car projects? If the government did not embarked on Proton project, with this huge sum of money collected over 20 years, there are no problems for the nation to secure not only enough, but perhaps surplus funds to build many highways like North-South, Central Link, East Coast, LDP, SPRINT, SILK, Penang Bridge, etc for motorists to use at all time TOLL FREE!

Finally by revealing this “conundrum”, that is to say and it is not difficult to see why the former Prince CEO, and even current Proton’s management fight dearly for government preference consciously knowing very well that it is sure a die game if this leverage is not extended. Against, there is nonsensical economic benefits “to squeeze the consumers to the last drop of juice” in order to enable Proton to continue its controversial existence!

However, looking back to former Prince CEO’s press interview (27 June 05) with Oriental Daily News, could harangue on almost anything with rambling statements: -

1. “He criticizes the government for killing Proton and the national car industry due to its opaque policy on the national automobile industry.”

2. “He says the government is fighting a blind battle in which it has failed to differentiate between foes and friends”.

3. “Furthermore, “he challenges the country that, if the government and the people do not treasure Proton, the company can fold up and be taken over by foreigners at any moment.”

The rich in defiance and bitter recrimination statements with too much lips service but little effort not worthy for renew his employment contract! At best, it is a cocky egocentric viewed by former Prince CEO as ignorant on its own problems (e.g. inferior quality and outdated products) and did not response to market reality (i.e. open policy). There are no questions on government opaque policy, nothing to do with fighting a blind battle or do not treasure Proton! It is Proton’s “self-inflicted wound” by not be able to become competitive, couple with lack of R & D, innovations and bad quality image is the real causes of its calamity.

AFTA and recent FTA with Japan lead to our government commitment to reduce automotive sector taxes on or before 2015. If this is an indication, Proton has less than 10 years to prepare to face a level playing field in its own home turf. However, Proton sure demises from market if it does not change from its current structure to become competitive and cooperate with foreign partner to achieve sustainable long-term growth. NAP core objectives should be maintain but require embracing more open policy without preference to any one automotive company. Also current petulant and treacherous automotive tax structure won’t stimulate long-term growth in car industry as well as deny the consumers enjoy better products at fairer price. In addition, it is a “disservice” to the consumers as it diluted their purchasing power.

Looking back to well-known economics historical background; Adam Smith (1723 – 1790) is the proponent of modern economic thinker. In his published work titled “The Wealth of Nations” (1776), the most significant contribution is the championing of free trade and modern market economy that are prevalent in our democratic world today. Present FTAs like WTO, NAFTA, EU, AFTA, etc. all gear toward this directions. For our current closed market policy for automotive sector and preference to national car is “contrary” to the very fundamental ideas as profound by Adam Smith! Will Proton set a precedence to become Adam Smith “sparring partner” and someone from intellectual circle will publish “The Liability of Nations (20??)”? Current “rebellious” closed market automotive policy may at least set the clock back to two century if what Adam Smith’s argument is applicable!

Karl Marx (1818 – 1883) is the social scientist and philosopher. He is the most influential socialist thinker. In his remarkable critique of political economy, he is in favored of central planning and the economy is in the hand of government. Private enterprises should not be allowed as it will create social injustice, in which the rich (owner of enterprises) will become richer and the poor (workers) will become poorer. Currently Proton position as GLC entity neither contributed to the nation’s wealth (i.e. liability) in real sense nor creates social justice (i.e. unfair pricing). This is because the more outmoded and inferior cars crank out by Proton, the more liability the consumers have to bear in the form of unfair prices due to taxes (Proton or imported as well) in order to sustain its existence. Hence, the consumers by itself will relatively become economically cheaper commodity (i.e. diluted PPP). Karl Marx recognized that capitalist system is more efficient but argued that central planning is more fair, albeit to achieve social justice. However, our today closed market automotive sector with preference to Proton create this scenario: “There is more efficient disproportionate distribution of miserable to consumers and more fair sharing of liability toward nation”.

John Maynard Keynes (1883 – 1946) is a Cambridge University young economist thinker. During great depression of 1930s, his far-reaching idea of Keynesian approach is “to save the economy by government intervention without abandoning capitalism”. Governments should intervene especially to save financial institutions. This idea is in contrast with economists before him who were pessimistic and intoned it will never work. For young John, the recessions and depressions in economy is not permanent problem of the nation but looking forward into future, it is cyclical in nature. This lead to his radical idea that governments should take drastic action, including borrow money for spending frenzy in downturn to rejuvenate the economy. Later it will become nation’s financial headache, as there is unpleasant reading on debts, normally repay via revenue generated during economic boom. In Proton case, unfortunately its calamity is not cyclical, but “born handicap” by economically not viable since its inception. Any further use of taxpayer’s money to sustain Proton or treating consumers as “cash cow” to buy its over-price products in order to make it profitable and maintain its contentious existence is “unpleasant encountered”.

Proton’s past inception, current and foreseeable “cancerous” future existence (if that is the case) resulted in used of RM Billions tax payers money to implement it in 1980s, customers start to “subsidize RM Billions” on its products since earlier of 1990s until present in the form of “over-pricing” (including high price for imported makes), and government have to adopt policies not in the sprit of FTAs including automotive tax-phobia structure in order to support its controversial existence. Any national project, like mighty Petronas, should contribute revenue to government, benefits the peoples, creating job, social opportunities, nation building and preferably achieve high stature on international level. There are still many blue-chip companies in our corporate world like Maxis, Astro, AirAsia, Public Bank, etc.

Joe Ooi said, MD SZ can set direction, can lead, can manage but definitely on macro view, Proton will fail SZ misery!

yup… total agree with Joe Ooi’s comment. The working habits already there for decades…. it is not just release some news to public then overall will become excellent. But from my guess, if still maintain TM as MD… then i think maybe P1 will need to shutdown the business pretty soon… then we will free from the NAP… TM i miss u to become P1’s MD. P1 have a lot of news explosure to media, it is a way to change & let people know P1 is aggressively make changes. How well is the changes… time will probe….haha

There are so many pressing issues currently SZ facing and present effort is limited to item 1 only. Can SZ pull Proton out from doldrum? MD SZ can set direction, can lead, can manage but definitely on macro view, Proton will fail SZ misery!

Mitsubish cuts prices by 20% ……..$27,990 for the 380 model as claimed by fellow bloggers to be the Perdana replacement model.