KLSE (MYR): MNHLDG (0245)
You're accessing 15 mins delay data. Turn on live stream now to enjoy real-time data!
Last Price
0.335
Today's Change
+0.005 (1.52%)
Day's Change
0.335 - 0.34
Trading Volume
2,021,600
2023-09-22
2023-09-21
2023-09-21
2023-09-21
2023-09-20
trader808
216 posts
Posted by trader808 > 2 months ago | Report Abuse
1.Court case invites negative and unwanted publicity.
2. In general,any company would expect timely payment for work done and goods and services delivered. Cash sale is excellent and most preferred. 30 days term is good, 60 days is bad and barely acceptable, 90 days and beyond is horribly bad and damaging.
3. In MN's case it has to institute court proceedings to receive payment for service rendered and work done. It is horrendous, unthinkable and a failure in credit control and project management.
4. The process incurs legal cost and energy ,quality time and valuable resources that could be employed more productively in real business matters.
5. Considering that MN being a very small company with profit ranging between 1.5m to 3.5m a quarter, hence Rm1,051,012 is considerably a significant amount and seriously detrimental to cash flow and bank balances.
6. Besides, the proceeding reflects bad vendor and business partners relationship and give rise to negative publicity and counter sentiment, impedes upwards momentum and obstructs raising share price.
7 Therefore, material litigation regardless being a plaintiff or defendant is view negatively by the investing public.
8 This is my perception.
12/7/23