TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................2

2.0 BACKGROUND OF THE COMPANY....................................................................................2

2.1 MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS..................................................................................................3

2.2 KEY PEOPLE.......................................................................................................................5

2.3 PRINCIPAL ACTIVITIES....................................................................................................6

3.0 INDUSTRY EVALUATION....................................................................................................7

3.1 CONSTRUCTION SECTOR................................................................................................7

3.2 PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT SECTOR.............................................................................8

3.3 BUILDING MATERIAL SECTOR.......................................................................................9

4.0 SEGMENTAL ANALYSIS.....................................................................................................10

5.0 MAJOR CAPITAL INVESTMENT........................................................................................11

6.0 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS.......................................................................................................15

6.1 ANALYSIS OF CASH FLOWS..........................................................................................15

6.2 FREE CASH FLOW............................................................................................................17

6.3 LIQUIDITY RATIOS..........................................................................................................18

6.4 EFFICIENCY RATIOS.......................................................................................................19

6.5 ABILITY TO PAY DEBT...................................................................................................20

6.6 PROFITABILITY RATIOS................................................................................................21

6.7 RETURNS TO SHAREHOLDERS RATIOS......................................................................23

7.0 CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................................24

8.0 RECOMMENDATION...........................................................................................................25

9.0 APPENDICES.........................................................................................................................26

10.0 REFERENCES........................................................................................................................33

1
1.0 INTRODUCTION

This is a detailed report about financial analysis of Ho Hup Construction Company Berhad.
The objective of this report is to evaluate the company for possible investment.

2.0 BACKGROUND OF THE COMPANY

In 1960, Ho Hup Construction Company was co-founded by Mr. Low Chee. Its subsidiaries
are basically involved themselves in major engineering structures, civil engineering, dredging, road
building and infrastructure projects. Subsidiaries of Ho Hup Construction Company has successfully
connected to different countries like Indonesia, South Africa, Mauritius, India, Madagascar, China
and Thailand.

Ho Hup became a Public Limited Company listed on the main board of Bursa Malaysia on
25th February 1991. After that, they have renamed the company as Ho Hup Construction Company.

The company has completed a numbers of private and government sectors project and also
national projects like Petronas Twin Towers, Light Rail Transit System (LRT), Kuala Lumpur
International Airport (KLIA) and National Sports Complex.

In 2009 and onwards, the company has facing a major transformation, its scope of activities
currently included three main divisions which is property development, construction and civil
engineering works and ready mix.

2
2.1 MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS

No. Name No. of Shares %

RHB Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.

1. 54,079,528 14.43
Pledged Securities Account for Low Chee Group Sdn. Bhd.

2. Gryphon Asset Management Sdn. Bhd. 39,195,250 10.46

AMSEC Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.

3. Pledged Securities Account – Ambank (M) Berhad for 23,495,100 6.27
Omesti Holdings Berhad (Smart)
M & A Nominee (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.
4. Insas Credit & Leasing Sdn. Bhd. For Omesti Holdings 23,115,000 6.17
Berhad

5. Low Chee Group Sdn. Bhd. 11,033,774 2.94

6. Dato’ Low Tuck Choy 6,817,500 1.82

M & A Nominee (Asing) Sdn. Bhd.

7. 6,450,000 1.72
Montego Assets Limited
Citigroup Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.
8. 6,119,700 1.63
Employees Provident Fund Board (Pheim)
RHB Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.
9. 5,679,000 1.51
Pledged Securities Account for Dato’ Low Tuck Choy
DB (Malaysia) Nominee (Tempatan) Sendirian Berhad
10. Exempt AN for Affin Hwang Asset Management Berhad 5,000,000 1.33
(TASTAC / CLNT-T)
M & A Nominee (Asing) Sdn. Bhd.
11. 5,000,000 1.33
For Winfields Development Pte. Ltd.
Citigroup Nominees (Asing) Sdn. Bhd.
12. 4,291,000 1.14
CEP for PHEIM SICAV-SIF
Citigroup Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.
13. Kumpulan Wang Persaraan (Diperbadankan) 3,688,100 0.98
(CIMB PRNCP ISLM)
CIMSEC Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.
14. CIMB Bank for Mohamed Nizam Bin Abdul Razak 3,525,554 0.94
(MY0888)
M & A Nominee (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.
Insas Credit & Leasing Sdn. Bhd. for Omesti Holdings
15. 3,115,000 0.83
Berhad (HH)

Kenanga Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.

16. 2,500,000 0.67
Pledged Securities Account for Leong Kam Chee (002)
HSBC Nominees (Asing) Sdn. Bhd.
17. 2,409,200 0.64
Exempt AN for Credit Suisse (SG BR-TST-ASING)

3
18. Tan Siew Booy 2,020,000 0.54

CIMSEC Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.

19. 1,807,200 0.48
CIMB Bank for Teoh Ewe Jin (MY0829)

20. Yayasan Guru Tun Hussein Ong 1,535,500 0.41

21. Low Boon Wah @ Lawrence Low 1,455,000 0.39

Maybank Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.

22. 1,400,000 0.37
Pledged Securities Account For Fong York Siang
Maybank Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.
23.
Pledged Securities Account For Fong York Siang 1,400,000 0.37
RHB Capital Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.
24. 1,372,400
Pledged Securities Account for Low Choon Chong 0.37

25. Low Lai Yoong 1,362,500 0.36

Public Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.

26. Pledged Securities Account for Kee Ah Mat @ Kee Yong 1,354,000 0.36
Wee (KL C/ KEN)
HLB Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.
27. Pledged Securities Account for Dato’ Mah Siew Kwok 1,300,000 0.35
(KLM 2998 8-3)

28. Boey Tak Kong 1,200,000 0.32

29. Yap Siew Bee 1,200,000 0.32

Alliancegroup Nominees (Tempatan) Sdn. Bhd.

30. 1,200,000 0.32
Pledged Securities Account for Loh Chai Keong (8125084)

4
2.2 KEY PEOPLE

Board of Directors

Name / Title Current Board Membership

Tan Sri Datuk Panglima Sulong Matjeraie, 71

Chairman / Senior Independent Non-Executive
Director
Dato’ Mah Siew Kwok, 70
Deputy Chairman / Non-Independent Non-
Executive Director
Dato’ Wong Kit-Leong, 46
Chief Executive Officer / Executive Director
Petra Energy Berhad , Brahim’s Holdings
Berhad, Southern Acids (M) Berhad
Omesti Berhad, Diversified Gateway Solutions
Berhad, Kian Joo Can Factory Berhad, Voir
Holdings Berhad
Ho Hup Construction Company Berhad

Dato’ Wong Gian Kui, 58 Insas Berhad, Inari Amertron Berhad, Yi-Lai
Executive Director Berhad, SYF Resources Berhad

Dato’ Sri Thong Kok Khee, 63 Omesti Berhad, Insas Berhad, Inari Amertron
Non-Independent Non-Executive Director Berhad, SYF Resources Berhad

Datin Chan Bee Leng, 57

Ho Hup Construction Company Berhad
Non-Independent Non-Executive Director

Dato’ Dimitrios Pantazaras, 61

Ho Hup Construction Company Berhad
Independent Non-Executive Director
Dutch Lady Milk Industries Berhad, Censof
Mr. Boey Tak Kong, 63
Holdings Berhad, Gadang Holdings Berhad,
Independent Non-Executive Director
Green Packet Berhad
Mr. Chow Seck Kai, 62
Ho Hup Construction Company Berhad
Independent Non-Executive Director

Mr. Low Kheng Lun, 31

Ho Hup Construction Company Berhad
Non-Independent Non-Executive Director

Senior Management Profile

Name / Title

Mr. Lee Heng Aun, 54

Chief Financial Officer
Mr. Lee Chen Fee, 51
Group General Manager (Operations)
Ms. Yee Lai Kuan, 61
General Manager (Human Resource and Administration)
Ms. Victoria Loui Hoong Mei, 48
General Manager (Finance)
Mr. Yap Yoon Lean, 58
General Manager - Quarry Operations (Building Materials Division)

5
2.3 PRINCIPAL ACTIVITIES

Ho Hup Construction Company operates through different segments: Construction, Property

Development, Manufacturing and Trading.

 The Construction segment refers to building construction works, civil engineering works,
earthworks, highway and road works, drainage works, manufacturing and oil and gas works.

 Bukit Jalil Development Sdn. Bhd. (“BJD”) as a subsidiary company of “HoHup” in Property
Development segment. Their business model is to concern on projects joint venture
arrangements, financing on project basis and develops residential and commercial properties.

 The Manufacturing and Trading segment manufacture and supply of ready-mixed concrete.

6
3.0 INDUSTRY EVALUATION

3.1 CONSTRUCTION SECTOR

In real terms, the Malaysian construction industry had grown positive by the government's
10th Malaysia Plan 2011-2015 with large scale investment. To develop country's overall infrastructure
by implementing various project, the government had invest about 175 billion.

In between 2016 and 2017, the construction sector recorded an average growth of 7.1% per
year, it was mainly contributed by large civil engineering projects based on mid-term review of 11th
Malaysia Plan (2016-2020). Growth was spurred from residential subsector stemming from higher
construction for affordable housing. Despite challenging 2017, the construction industry has
experienced a steady growth.

According to the Statistics Department, the construction industry of Malaysia has listed
construction works valued 35.6 billion in the 2018 second quarter and a moderate of 5.3% year-on-
year growth and the sector's performance was driven civil engineering and special trade activities sub-
sectors which was 23.6% and 12.6% respectively. 41.7% works will then proceed by the civil
engineering sub-sector. Besides that, the department states that the private sector will continue with
the construction works, accounting 56.4% (RM20.1 billion) compared to 43.6% (RM15.5 billion)
public sectors.

In the period (2018-2022), a relative slow pace is expected to be expended. To achieve the
status of development economy by year 2020, a large scale investment is supported by the
government to be promoted.

Fluctuating oil prices in this industry is expected as vulnerable part because it heavily relies
on the oil sector revenues for infrastructures projects. Taking measures to diversify the economy is
doing by the government to minimize their dependence on oil sector. A 8.73% compound annual
growth rate (CAGR) recorded in the industry's output value during the review period and 6.48%
CAGR is expected to forecast-period.

In conclusion, the government shall do the correct evaluation and more efforts so that it will
have a steadily growth in rate to improve the construction sector.

7
3.2 PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT SECTOR

In Malaysia, the property market in the year 2017 was seen to shrug off a several weakened
currency despite positive economic growth and declining due to 1MDB scandal. Bursting the start of
2018 at a high while ringgit has rally, the local property sector. There were about 130,690 unsold
residential properties during the first quarter of 2017 by the National Property Information Centre
which was the highest in 10 years.

The unsold units include overhang units, small offices and as well as service apartments. 83%
of unsold units contribute the above RM250, 000 category and 61% comprise of high-rise properties
and comes to an estimate value of unsold units for RM35.5 billion.

During the first half of 2018, the Malaysian property market saw a gentle recovery, following
the strong economic growth momentum after 14th General Election. In a statement today, it said as
the government continued e-commerce initiatives, demand for larger Class A warehouse facilities was
expected to increase. On the residential segment, Knight Frank said market improved during 1H18
and Kuala Lumpur will remain as the destination for the investors and buyers and will be more
aggressive and transaction expected in 2018.

The Malaysian Institute of Estate Agents (MIEA) stated that the Malaysian property market is
set gradually to improve towards the year 2020. So, the property market is expected to start picking up
in the year 2019 with the help of those investors and the property buyers.

8
3.3 BUILDING MATERIAL SECTOR

The recent surge in the number of affordable housing projects in Malaysia is putting building
materials companies on the radar of investors. While the construction and property development are
beneficiaries, building materials companies supply the raw materials for those projects.

As the demand for the construction projects increased, the supply of building materials will be
increasing. The building materials such as cement, sand and steel needed for the infrastructure
project's demand will continue to further boost.

In order to have a better quality of building materials, the government may faced some
challenges. Non-toxic building materials are required to be chosen by the government to prevent acute
and chronic health effects to stakeholders who exposed to many short and long term hazards. The
prices of the building materials are to be controlled and there were any insufficient supply that led to
the slow progress of works.

In order to achieve development of 2020, building materials are the one that contributes to the quality
of the buildings of the whole construction projects.

9
4.0 SEGMENTAL ANALYSIS

Revenue Contributions from Segments

2016 2017
Division RM RM Change
% %
(in Million) (in Million)
Construction 61,223 25.37 65,292 36.34 +10.97%
Property Development 118,605 49.14 86,561 48.18 -0.96%
Building material 60,544 25.08 26,867 14.95 -10.13%
Others 994 0.41 957 0.53 +0.12%
Total 241,366 100 179,677 100 -

10
5.0 MAJOR CAPITAL INVESTMENT

The major capital of investment of the company changes in the latest three years. In 2015, the
major investment is Investment in Subsidiary Companies while the company start to invest much
capital in property, plant and equipment in 2016. For the 2017, the major investment drops on
Purchase of property, plant and equipment and investment in properties.

Year Type of Capital Investment Amount RM(,000)

Purchase of property, plant and equipment 31,274

2017
Purchase of investment properties 15,840

Purchase of property, plant and equipment 44,895

2016
Investment in Subsidiary Companies 19,992

2015 Investment in Subsidiary Companies 33,153

Purchase of Investment Properties

In 2017, the Ho Hup construction company decided to choose investment properties as one of
its major investment. The addition of the investment properties about RM15, 840, 000 and disposal of
the properties about RM 1, 850, 000 in last year.

11
Purchase of Property, Plant and Equipment

Year 2015 2016 2017

Amount (cash payment) RM 2,218,000 RM 44,895,000 RM 31,274,000

Comment:

Started from 2016, there is an increase dramatically the investment in property, plant and
equipment but slightly drop during 2017.

12
Investment in Subsidiary Companies (Acquisition of Subsidiary Companies)

Year 2015 2016 2017

Amount (cash payment) RM 33,153,000 RM 19,992,000 -

Comment:

a) In 2015, Ho Hup Ventures (KK) Sdn. Bhd. had a a Share Sale Agreement between Agro Padi
Sdn. Bhd. to acquire of 70% equity interest of Golden Wave Sdn Bhd (GWSB) for cash
consideration of RM30 million.
b) For the acquisition of 70,000 ordinary share of RM1.00 each, representing 70% of the issued, Ho
Hup Ventures (Johor) Sdn. Bhd had carried out a Share Sale Agreement with I4G Intelliganz Sdn.
Bhd. and paid RM20, 000,000. for share capital of Intact Corporate Approach Sdn. Bhd. (ICA).

13
The Major Sources of Funding

Year Amount obtained from Borrowings (RM)

2015 51,941,000
2016 122,621,000
2017 177,034,000

Comment:

Drawdowns of borrowings are the major mean to finance the investment of Ho Hup
Construction Company. The Borrowings’ amounts keep increasing from 2015 to 2017 to maintain the
financing activities.

14
6.0 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

6.1 ANALYSIS OF CASH FLOWS

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013

Operating Activities (22,279,000) 29,564,000 (58,886,000) (56,420,000) 13,400,000
Investing Activities (52,202,000) (60,432,000) (34,406,000) (39,849,000) 4,158,000
Financing Activities 64,721,000 63,035,000 79,249,000 (18,665,000) 91,000,000

Above table and chart was showing the cash flow of Ho Hup Construction Company Berhad
from 2013 to 2017. Through the table we can observe that the major cash inflow of the company was
based on financing activities. From 2014 to 2017, this company was invest in development project or
purchase land, properties, equipment and plant; therefore the cash outflow would be more on
investing activities. Furthermore, the cash outflow was high in 2014 and 2015 compare to the other
years. It is caused by the progressive billing of the property development project and also the
development costs. In my opinion, the company would able to rent the plant and equipment rather
than purchase the plant and equipment for the development project for using once.

15
 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013
Amount of the
net increase or (4,613,000) 4,875,000 (33,354,000) (8,427,000) 105,160,000
decrease

This chart and table would let us know that after all the activities, how many cash would the
company left. By including the cash left from last year, the company have to deduct all the necessary
bill or expenses and add all the revenue and cash received by others to calculate out how much cash
would able for the company to spend. As we saw, in 2017, the company was not enough cash to let
them cover their expenses of the year. So, the company have to adjust their operating method to
increase their cash inflow and decrease the cash outflow.

16
6.2 FREE CASH FLOW

Cash provided by Capital

Year Cash Dividends Free Cash Flow
Operating Activities Expenditures
2017 (22,279,000) 789,000 0 (23,068,000)
2016 29,564.000 2,259,000 0 27,305,000
2015 (58,886,000) 2,093,000 0 (60,979,000)
2014 (56,420,000) 3,348,000 0 (59,768,000)
2013 13,400,000 0 0 13,400,000

Total Free Cash Flow for 5 years = - RM 103,110,000.00

Free Cash Flow (FCF) is to calculate how much cash is available for a company to expand its
asset base after minus the capital expenditure and dividends from the cash provided by operating
activities. For Ho Hup Construction Company Berhad, it was quite limited to expand their asset due to
the FCF of the company was in outflow during the years. From 2013 with RM 13,400,000.00
increases the cash outflow until RM 59,768,000.00 at 2014. It was a huge amount for a company that
the cash outflow so much in one year. Until 2017, the FCF still has the cash outflow and no extra
money to expand their company.

17
6.3 LIQUIDITY RATIOS

Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Current Ratio 0.87 : 1 1.57 : 1 1.96 : 1 1.68 : 1 1.71 : 1
Quick Ratio 0.78 : 1 0.57 : 1 0.61 : 1 0.52 : 1 0.45 : 1

Basically, the current ratio for 2017 is slightly increase compared to 2016. The quick ratio for
the company is below 0.5 and it can consider risky as the current liability is double of current asset.
The current ratio of the company is higher than the YFG Berhad which is around 0.38. The proportion
of inventories is higher among the current asset of company as the current ratio has huge difference
with quick ratio.

18
6.4 EFFICIENCY RATIOS

Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Inventory Turnover (Times) 275.79 395.33 297.64 254.11 332.23
Average Collection Period (Days) 111.70 85.68 83.8 83.00 118.24
Total Asset Turnover 0.43 0.94 0.58 0.36 0.21

The inventory turnover ratio started to strike back after the low tide from 2016. This is a good
sign which showing the sale performance of the company improved.

The average collection period was reducing until around 80 days from 2014 to 2016 but the
period started to rise since 2016.

The performance of the company became worsen in the latest three years. The YFG Berhad is
having a total asset turnover ratio about 0.92 and able generating sales efficiency. Ho Hup
Construction Company had brought in large assets in these few years while the assets are not
promptly turn into sales. The company also spent longer time to get back the revenue.

19
6.5 ABILITY TO PAY DEBT

Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Debt Ratio 0.75 : 1 0.66 : 1 0.55 : 1 0.55 : 1 0.61 : 1
Gearing Ratio - 0.25 0.51 0.64 0.81
Time Interest Earned 8.75 141.99 34.93 10.98 5.36

The gearing ratio increases significantly while the company is facing a greater risk of failure
to pay back the loans.

For the Debt ratio, it dropped in year 2013 and slightly rises after year 2016. But the debt
ratio of the company is healthier than YFG Berhad which is 2.5.

After the Times interest earned of company reached a peak in 2014, the ratio dramatically
dropped and kept dropping until 2017. Compared to YFG which cannot cover expense (-10.43 in
ratio) with profit, the company is better than YFG but still facing problem in the paying back its debt
as increasing debts.

20
6.6 PROFITABILITY RATIOS

Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Gross Profit Margin (%) 13.31 29.29 36.69 45.52 47.95
Operating Profit Margin (%) 6.31 23.73 30.10 36.23 35.94
Net Profit Margin (%) 18.58 19.70 23.54 26.96 21.45
Return on Total Assets 0.08 0.18 0.13 0.10 0.04
Return on Common Equity (%) 33.34 54.79 30.78 22.00 11.50

21
 From the year 2013 to 2017, the gross profit margin of Ho Hup Construction Company is
increasing sharply from 13.31% to 47.95%. The operating profit margin and net profit margin both
are same in increasing apparently from year 2013 to 2016, thus, it drops after year 2016. For the
return on total assets, it rises in one year then drops significantly after year 2014. The return on
common equity is same with the return on total assets as well.

Compared to the YFG Berhad, their gross profit margin is –42.86% in year 2017 which incur
a loss and obviously lower than the Ho Hup Construction Company. Hence, a higher of gross profit
margin reveals the ability of a company to make profit on their sales which will appeal more investors
to fund more to a company.

22
6.7 RETURNS TO SHAREHOLDERS RATIOS

Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Earnings Per Share (EPS) (RM) 0.22 0.25 0.21 0.19 0.11
Price/Earnings (P/E) (RM) 5.53 5.06 5.13 4.36 4.96
Dividend Yield - - - - -

The earning per share (EPS) of Ho Hup Construction Company is increased from year 2013
to 2014. After 2014, it decreases steadily until year 2017 in RM0.11.

Therefore, the EPS of Ho Hup Construction Company is opposite with YFG Berhad which
decline significantly at first and then increasing gradually after year 2015. When the EPS is getting
higher, the higher the value of the shares of stock will be due to the investors are willing to fund more
money to get a higher profit.

In the Ho Hup Construction Company, they do not offer any dividend so the dividend yield
considered as none.

23
7.0 CONCLUSION

Throughout this assignment, we are taking Ho Hup Construction Company Berhad for the
analysis of the financial and accounting statement with using YFG Berhad to do the comparison on
their assets and liabilities. Therefore, through this analysis we would able to observe and inspect how
is a company with profit or loss. Moreover, a company which obtain a lot of liabilities and show the
company loss, it may use their assets to cover it. So only one element would not able to decide the
company is good or poor. Therefore, we would able to know a company condition through many
ways such as their assets, liabilities, debt, sales and cash flow. We would able to decide whether it is
worth to invest to the company.

24
8.0 RECOMMENDATION

Strength

Through the current ratio and debt ratio, the company has a high current asset compare to the
current liabilities. Therefore, the company would still able to cover their liabilities by turning their
large inventories into liquid assets in a reasonable time.

Weakness

The quick ratio of the company in latest 5 years is dropping because most of the current asset
of the company relies on inventories. The lower quick ratio makes the company may not able to deal
with the current liabilities in a short period due to the inventories cannot turn into cash immediately.

The company has high gearing ratio as the company had applied for large amount of long-
term loans and this will cause the company having pressure in paying back the loans. This showing
the company has poor management on financial issue and the company should pay attention on the
debt control.

Recently, the company took longer period in collecting payments from client and this will
affect the cash flow of the company although obtaining large amount of sale. As the efficiency of
turning the asset into sales became worse, soon and foremost the company may face losses in their
business.

Lastly, cash flow to a company was very important but it was not satisfy in this company.
Throughout the years, this company outflow is higher than inflow. So that, it would limit the company
in expand and develop.

Comment:

We recommend that should not invest in Ho Hup Construction Company Berhad as there was facing
serious financial and cash flow problem of the company.

9.0 APPENDICES

25
10.0 REFERENCES

1. The Star, 2018. Construction Sector to Record Slower Growth in 2019. [Online]
Available at : https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-
news/2018/10/25/construction-sector-to-recrod-slower-growth-in-2019/ [Accessed 17
December 2018]
2. BCI Asia, 2018. Construction Plus Asia. Malaysian Construction Industry In Review.
[Online] Available at : http://www.constructionplusasia.com/malaysian-construction-
industry-review/ [Accessed 17 December 2018]
3. The Edge Markets, 2018. Average Growth On Construction Sector to Decelerate to
4.3% from 7.1% in 2016-2017. [Online] Available at :
http://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/average-growth-construction-sector-decelerates-
43 [Accessed 17 December 2018]
4. The Start, 2018. Construction Sector Records RM35.6bil In Value In 2Q18. [Online]
Available at : https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-
news/2018/08/10/construction-sector-records-rm35pt6bil-in-value-in-2q18/ [Accessed
17 December 2018]
5. AB Newswire, 2018. Construction In Malaysia Market 2018 - Current And Future
Plans. [Online] Available at : http://www.abnewswire.com/pressreleases/construction-in-
malaysia-market-2018-current-and-future-plans_184772.html [Accessed 17 December
2018]
6. The Star, 2018. Malaysia Property Market To Gradually Improve In The Year Ahead,
Says MIEA. [Online] Available at : https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-
news/2018/08/09/malaysian-property-market-to-gradually-improve-in-the-year-ahead/
[Accessed 18 December 2018]
7. Rachel Chew/ EdgeProp.my, 2018. Property Market To Pick Up Soon, Says Knight
Frank. [Online] Available at : http://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/property-market-
pick-soon-says-knight-frank
8. Bernama, 2018. Outlook For Malaysian Property Market 'To Remain Stable'. [Online]
Available at : https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2018/11/01/outlook-
for-malaysian-property-market-to-remain-stable/
9. CSI Prop, 2018. Malaysian Property Market To Decline in 2018. [Online] Available at :
https://csiprop.com/malaysian-property-market-decline-2018/
10. The Star, 2018. Property Market Saw Gentle Recovery in 1H18. [Online] Available at :

33
 https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2018/07/26/property-market-saw-
gentle-recovery-in-1h18/
11. Neily Syafiqah Eusoff/ theedgemarkets.com, 2017. Construction, Building Materials
Sectors See in Vogue. [Online] Available at :
http://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/construction-building-materials-sectors-seen-
vogue
12. The Star, 2016. Time to Relook At Building Material Companies. [Online] Available at :
https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2016/12/03/time-to-relook-at-
building-material-companies/
13. Zarina Isnin, Sabrina Sh.Ahmad, Zaharah Yahya, 2012. Challenges of The Unknown
Building Material Substances for Greener Adaptation Projects. [Online] Available at :
https://ac.els-cdn.com/S1877042812056893/1-s2.0-S1877042812056893main.pdf?
_tid=de1ade21-2569-4d92-
891a64a941905798&acdnat=1545139458_63e6c4bc53e892468a6768036f2693e8

34