Public Bank Q4 profit up 19%; RM5bil earnings for 2015

Public Bank Head Office in Kuala Lumpur - Founder and chairman Tan Sri Teh Hong Piow said expectations were for intense competition for market share

Public Bank Q4 profit up 19% but warns of challenges ahead

Public Bank Bhd, the country’s third largest bank, reported an increase of 19% in its fourth quarter net profit which stood at RM1.49bil compared to the net profit of RM1.25bil for the same period a year earlier but warns of challenges ahead.

Founder and chairman Tan Sri Teh Hong Piow said expectations were for intense competition for market share.

“And the more stringent capital and liquidity requirement will continue to put pressure on net interest margin and return on equity,” Teh said in a statement.

The bank’s increase in its fourth quarter ended Dec 31, 2015 net profit was boosted largely by a net writeback of loan impairment allowances and higher net interest income, it said in the statement yesterday.

It also announced a second interim divided of 32 sen per share for shareholders, bringing total dividends for the year to 56 sen per share or a total payout of 42.7% of the bank’s net profit last year.

For the entire FY15, Public Bank’s net profit stood at RM5.06bil which translates to a net return on equity of 17.8%, against a net profit of RM4.52bil in FY14 while revenue stood at a higher RM19.18bil compared with RM16.86bil earlier.

Public Bank continued to be the most efficient banking group in the country with its low cost-to-income ratio of 30.5% compared to the banking industry’s average cost-to-income ratio of 45.5%. It also continued to maintain a healthy level of capital with its common equity Tier 1 capital ratio, Tier 1 capital ratio and total capital ratio standing at 10.9%, 12.0% and 15.5% respectively as at the end of 2015, after deducting the second interim dividend, it said.

In FY15, the bank grew its loans by 11.6%, aided by its retail banking segment and extension of credits to small and medium enterprises while total customer deposits saw a growth of 8.9%.

Its domestic customer deposit grew by 7.5%, higher than industry’s growth of 1.8%.

As at the end of 2015, the group’s impaired loan ratio was at 0.5%, significantly lower than the industry ratio of 1.6% while its loan loss coverage ratio of 120.8% as at the end of last year was also higher compared to the local banking industry’s ratio of 96.2%.

Teh said growing fee-based revenue remained a key strategic focus of the Public Bank group.

“Arising from the group’s initiative to drive growth of its non-interest income in order to sustain better return for its shareholders, the group’s non-interest income increased by 22.4% in 2015 as compared to 2014, mainly contributed by higher income from its unit trust business, foreign exchange related transactions and fee income from banking operations,” he said.

Shares of Public Bank finished yesterday higher at RM18.38, up 4 sen.

Public Bank's 2015 earnings cross RM5bil mark 

 

 

Public Bank's Founder and chairman Tan Sri Teh Hong Piow

KUALA LUMPUR: Public Bank Bhd recorded a stellar set of results, with net profit surpassing RM5bil for the financial year ended Dec 31, 2015. It rewarded shareholders by declaring a second interim dividend of 32 sen per share, bringing the full-year dividend to 56 sen.

The total dividend paid and payable for 2015 amounted to RM2.16bil and represents a total payout of 42.7% of the group’s net profit for 2015.

Public Bank posted a net profit of RM5.06bil, up 12% from RM4.52bil it recorded a year ago, translating to a net return on equity of 17.8% for 2015. Revenue was 13.8% higher at RM19.18bil compared with RM16.86bil in 2014.

In its filing with Bursa Malaysia on Wednesday, the bank said it owed its improved earnings to higher net interest income, higher non-interest income and lower loan impairment allowances.

However, these were partially offset by higher operating expenses due to higher personnel costs.

Gross loans grew 11.6% to RM273.4bil driven by growth in property financing, financing of passenger vehicles and lending to SMEs.

Deposits from customers were 8.9% higher to RM301.2bil, which partly contributed to the higher net interest income during the year.

"The results reflected the consistent execution of the group’s organic growth strategy which continues to deliver favourable results to our customers and our shareholders,” said founder and chairman Tan Sri Teh Hong Piow in a statement.

He added that the bank's robust funding position was mainly supported by its strong retail franchise and large domestic depositor base of over five million customers who continue to place their trust and confidence in the group in safeguarding their funds.

Public Bank’s impaired loan ratio improved to 0.5% as at end-December 2015.

For the fourth quarter, the bank posted a 19% year-on-year gain in net profit to RM1.49bil while revenue was 8.8% higher at RM4.93bil.

Moving forward, the group said it will leverage on its internal strength and capitalise on its customer service and service delivery to maintain its leading market share in the domestic retail segment, supported by steady demand for home mortgages, vehicle financing and SME lending.

By Wong Wei-Shen The Star/Asia News Network

Related posts:

   Rich Malaysians get richer!

Mar 4, 2011 ... As for banker Tan Sri Teh Hong Piow of Public Bank Bhd, a close to 20% rise in his personal value sees him displacing IOI Corporation Bhd's ...

   HSBC Bank to cut 50,000 jobs in major overhaul: slash ...

Jun 10, 2015 ... HSBC to cut 50,000 jobs, slash investment bank and shrink risk by $290 billion. HONG KONG/LONDON: HSBC will shed almost 50,000 jobs ...

HSBC to freeze salaries, hiring in 2016 in battle to cut costs

  Pay and hiring freeze possible at HSBC Video: https://youtu.be/Q4V8L-98LVY   Why Refusing a Pay Cut May Get You Fire? HSBC Holdin...

Bankers and lawyers should know better

FOOD FOR THOUGHT By DATUK ALAN TONG

BUYING a property that eventually becomes abandoned is a painful experience for many house buyers. It not only hurts purchasers who have lost their hard-earned money but also affects the property industry's reputation which has taken a beating due to unethical activities of a few culprits.

This is particularly so when the abandoned project is not caused by factors such as economic downturn or withdrawal of purchasers, but solely due to irresponsible people who claim to be “developers” but do not hold a licence to do so.

It was recently reported that our Housing and Local Government Ministry has identified 195 abandoned developments that were unlicensed in our country. I am puzzled as to how these “developers” are able to start their projects when they do not even have their licence to apply for financing if they require a bridging loan, and is their sales and purchase (S&P) agreement properly attested by a lawyer before they start selling?

In this context, what can be done and who should play a part in reducing these unlawful developers? Assessing our existing housing development process would provide us with some ideas.

When a developer plans for a housing project, he must first get the necessary approvals and licences from the relevant authorities such as the development order, building plan, advertising permit and developer's licence. The developer then may need to source for a bridging loan from a financial institution and this is followed by getting lawyers to prepare the legal documents which include the S&P agreement.

When the project is launched to the market, the developer will require the purchasers to sign the S&P agreements in order to finalise the purchase. Should the purchaser acquire a housing loan from a bank, the bank will come into the picture to process the loan application submitted by the purchaser. Those are the basic procedures involved in developing and marketing a housing project in Malaysia.

For unlicensed development, the regulatory bodies are not in the picture. In such cases, it becomes apparent that the lawyers and/or bankers, both representing the house purchaser, have a role to play as the first line of defence to protect the interest of the purchaser.

Hence, there are questions that begged to be answered. How is it possible for financial institutions to approve the end financing loan for a property development in the absence of all or part of the required approvals and licences? The same questions are posted to lawyers who prepare the legal documents for unlicensed development.

I believe everyone has a role in identifying irresponsible players in the industry, especially the bankers and lawyers with their better access to information and strong regulatory network as compared to the general public. As a purchaser and a customer, you would have expected your banker and lawyer to carry out their due diligence duties to ensure that your interest is not compromised.

In other industries, professional practitioners who do not convey the right message and do not protect customers' interests can be given stern punishment as their action may be deemed as negligence, fraud or even criminal breach of trust.

According to the record of National House Buyers Association, in the case of Keng Soon Finance Bhd (1996), a financial institution had granted a loan to an unlicensed developer, and it was decided that the loan and the security offered were invalid. The bank could not institute the foreclosure proceedings on the land and therefore could not recover its loan.

Under our Housing Development Act, a property developer that engages in, carries out or undertakes housing development without having been duly licensed can be fined between RM250,000 and RM500,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or both. This is an avenue to take action against unlicensed developers. While we have the law in place, it is equally important to ensure strong enforcement comes along.

For house buyers, you are strongly advised to purchase property from reputable developers and to do thorough “shopping” and analysis before signing on the dotted lines. Responsible developers are keen to work hand-in-hand with purchasers and appreciate the role of the National House Buyers Association which advocates the protection of house buyers in Malaysia. We should stand together as a team to fight against irresponsible developers.

And for anyone of you who think that you have bought into one of those unlicensed developments mentioned earlier in the article, it is time to write and call your banker or lawyer for clarification.

Datuk Alan Tong is the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties, he was the FIABCI World president in 2005-2006 and was named Property Man of The Year 2010 by FIABCI Malaysia.

Related posts:
Invest in Malaysia's Real Estates 
Houses prices hardly fall 
Malaysian High-end property expected slower
The fear factor in property

What is a banker really worth?

Barclays made a serious error over the pay of John Varley, the bank’s former chief executive, who stepped down in 2010 with a ‘goodbye package’ of nearly £4m – it wasn’t enough!

Sir Philip Hampton, RBS chairman, warns that the vilification of Fred Goodwin, RBS's former boss, has morphed into the persecution of his replacement, Stephen Hester. Photo: PA. By Jeff Randall - Telegraph

So says Sir Nigel Rudd, Barclays’ former deputy chairman, who led its remuneration committee.

As Britain’s state-controlled banks, RBS and Lloyds, prepare to unveil results and bonuses later this week, Sir Nigel’s comments in my television documentary (Sky News 7pm, Wednesday) will enrage critics who believe that bankers remain detached from public anger over jackpot salaries.

Sir Nigel, however, is adamant that Mr Varley made a “huge difference” to Barclays during the credit crunch, when rival banks fell apart. By raising funds privately, Barclays was able to survive without a bail-out from UK taxpayers.



“John Varley was underpaid. Because what he did [for Barclays] during the crisis was phenomenal,” Sir Nigel says. In his last year, Mr Varley received a salary of £1.1m, a bonus of £2..2m and a performance cash incentive of £550,000.

Sir Nigel, who is now chairman of BAA, the airports operator, offers advice to ministers wrestling with demands for a pay clampdown while trying to maximise value in the state’s bank shareholdings: “If I was the Prime Minister, I’d ban the use of fairness as a word, because I don’t think you can be fair.”

Sir Philip Hampton, RBS’s current chairman, warns that understandable anger about the banks’ past failings is becoming destructive. In particular, the vilification of Fred Goodwin, RBS’s former boss, has morphed into the persecution of his replacement, Stephen Hester.

“We do lynch mobs better than most, but I think the opprobrium is directed now at the wrong people – the people that are fixing the problems rather than the people that are causing the problems,” Sir Philip says.
He believes the main flaw with bank bonuses is that they were linked to profits which turned out to be “illusory”. The banks did not understand the risks they were embracing, but it took a while for profits to collapse, by which time the bankers had pocketed the cash.

Alistair Darling, who was chancellor when the financial turmoil erupted, says that many highly paid bankers were in denial and remain so. “One or two to this day still don’t realise they did anything wrong, which most people find just flabbergasting.”

In a reference to Mr Goodwin and his top team, Mr Darling says: “They didn’t know what they were doing and we, not them, to a large extent are paying the price for that.”

Mr Goodwin’s old adversary, Sir Peter Burt, who led Bank of Scotland when it was outbid by RBS in a takeover battle for National Westminster in 2000 , doesn’t hide his dislike of the disgraced banker but deplores the nationwide “witch-hunt” against him: “Perhaps Fred should count himself lucky there weren’t any lamp-posts low enough from which to hang him.”

Related posts:

RBS, biggest British stated-owned bank losses of £3.5bn !
Lloyds, Britain’s biggest mortgage lender plunges to £3.5bn loss for 2011