KI Project (Final)

1

INTRODUCTION

Proton Holdings Berhad (PROTON) is a Malaysian automobile manufacturer. It is

headquartered in Shah Alam, Selangorand operates an additional manufacturing plant in Tanjung

Malim, Perak. The company was established in 1983 as the sole national car company until the

advent of Perodua in 1993. Proton is a Malay acronym for Perusahaan Otomobil Masional.

Proton was largely a manufacturer of badge engineered vehicles from Mitsubishi

Motors between 1985 and the early 2000s. The company has since produced several

indigenously designed models and operates in at least 26 countries today, the majority of which

are in Asia. Proton was formerly owned by Khazanah Nasional, the investment holding arm of

the government of Malaysia. In January 2012, it was taken over by DRB-HICOM, a Malaysian

conglomerate in a transaction amounting RM1.2 billion.Proton, predominantly reliant on its

domestic market is currently undergoing structural and internal changes, as evident in the

appointment of a new owner, partner, Chairman and the launch of various new and upcoming

models in an effort to gain an international presence and increase profitability.

But since of late, sales of Proton vehicles have been on the decline. Proton has been

battling to improve the quality and appeal of their vehicles even since the old days. In our

project, we analyze the sales statistics of Proton and other competing car makers. We also

compare Proton’s products with those of the same category from different car manufacturers to

see where Proton cars are lacking from. Lastly we provide few solutions using Industrial

Engineering methods to overcome some problems faced by Proton today.

2

Sales for Proton,Peugeot and Nissan Vehicles in Malaysia a year, 2009-2013.

Table 1: Statistics of sales of Proton passenger vehicles in Malaysia, 2009 – 2013.

Table 1 shows the sales of proton passenger vehicles in Malaysia per annum from year 2009 to

2013. In 2009, the vehicles sales was 148,000 units and increased to 157,274 units in 2010. It

increased a total of 5.7% from 2009. The vehicle sales also continued to increase in 2011 to a

total of 158,000 units, an increase of only 0.46% from the previous year. Proton vehicle sales

started to decrease in 2012 and also followed by a decrease in 2013, which is 141,120 and

138,753 units in those years respectively.

125000

130000

135000

140000

145000

150000

155000

160000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Sale

s (U

nit

s)

Year

Sales of proton passenger vehicles in Malaysia, 2009 - 2013.

Year Sales (units)

2009 148,000

2010 157,274

2011 158,000

2012 141,120

2013 138,753

3

The bar chart shows the sales of proton passenger vehicles in Malaysia from 2009 to 2013. From

the chart, we can see very clearly that proton vehicle sales decreased in last two years, right to

138,753 units in year 2013. Although that seems a large figure, but this trend concludes that

proton vehicles are becoming less appealing with the sales drop. As we can see, proton vehicle

sales only increased starting from year 2009 to 2011. Within those years, the increase in

saleswas probably due to less competitors from other vehicle manufacturers in Malaysia.

However, proton vehicle sales started to decrease in year 2012 until last year in 2013. This

situation may have been caused by the with increasing number of competitors from other vehicle

manufacturers in Malaysia such as Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Mazda, Hyundai, Peugeot, Kia

and so on. It may also be that by the Proton vehicle are still lacking behind on the technological

aspect compared to other vehicle brands and not to forget the pricing aspect. Consumers now

seem less interested in Proton vehicles and are getting smarter by the day because they are

getting good at comparing the wuality and prices offered by other car manufacturers. This was

maybe the cause of Proton’s decrease in sales.

Table 2: Statistics of sales of Peugeot vehicles in Malaysia, 2010 – 2013.

Table 2 shows the statistics of sales of Peugeot vehicles in Malaysia per annum from 2010 until

2013. Peugeot are among of the potential vehicle manufacturers constantly posing a challenge to

the sales of vehicles in Malaysia especially to Proton. From the table, we can see that the sales of

Peugeot vehicles in Malaysia increases every year. In 2010, the number of sales was 2562 units

and increased a total of 8.2% in 2011 which is 2787 units. Meanwhile, in 2012 and 2013 the

sales of vehicles was 6114 and 6505 units respectively. Peugeot vehicles sales seems to increase

every year.

Year Sales (units)

2010 2,562

2011 2,787

2012 6,114

2013 6,505

4

The bar chart above shows the sales of Peugeot vehicles in Malaysia from 2010 to 2013. As we

can see, the sales of Peugeot vehicles in Malaysia continued to increase until last year which is

2013. This increase in sales may have been due to the innovation in their technology and design

of their vehicles. Most Peugeot vehicles sold adhere to consumer needs.

Table 3: Statistics of sales of Nissan vehicles in Malaysia, 2009 – 2013.

Table 3 shows the statistics of sales of Nissan vehicles in Malaysia per annum from 2009 until

2013. Nissan is also are among the list of vehicle manufacturers constantly posing a threat to the

sales of vehicles in Malaysia especially to Proton. From the table, we can see the sales of

Year Sales (units)

2009 23,176

2010 26,322

2011 25,504

2012 28,318

2013 45,780

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

2010 2011 2012 2013

Sale

s (u

nit

s)

Year

Sales of peugeout vehicles in Malaysia, 2010 - 2013

5

Nissanvehicles in Malaysia increases every year. In 2009, the number of sales was 23,176 units

and increased a total of 11.95% in 2010 which was26322 units. There was a slight reduction in

sales in 2011 but after that the number continued to rise and this is shown in 2012 and 2013

where the sales of vehicles were 6114 and 6505 units respectively.

The bar chart above shows the sales of Nissan vehicle in Malaysia from 2009 to 2013. As we can

see,the sales of passenger vehicles from Nissan increased up to the year 2010 and dropped

slightly in 2011 but continued to increase and it rose dramatically in 2013.

These two competitors obviously plays a role in affecting the sales of local branded vehicles in

Malaysia such as Proton because of the better quality and features their product has to offer.

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

Nissan

Sales of Nissan vehicles in Malaysia, 2009-2010

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

6

FACTORS LEADING TO PROTON’S SALES DROP

COMPARISON BETWEEN PROTON’S PRODUCT WITH PEUGEOT AND NISSAN

When it comes to purchasing a new car, there are some criteria that we should consider in order

to make sure that we make the right choice. These are some of the criteria:

Cost-It is important for consumers to make sure that a new car will fit into their budget.

Checking manufacturer websites and value books will help ensure that the car in question

is priced correctly.

Size-For potential car buyers with a family, size is especially important in a new car.

Check the seating capabilities and storage room in a car before purchasing it.

Fuel-Cars that get better gas mileage will save money on fuel costs and lessen emissions

to have less of a negative impact on the environment.

Power-Consumers who want their car to be able to accelerate quickly should check the

engine and transmission specifications on a car to ensure that it has enough power to

match their needs.

Safety-It is wise to inspect safety ratings for any car being purchased to help avoid injury

should an accident happen.

The question is, does Proton possess these criteria? Let us make a comparison between

Proton’s product and Peugeot’s product by looking at their car models. We take Satria Neo

for Proton and Peugeot 207 for Peugeot as these two have the same price range and are

mostly similar in specification. Below is the specification between Satria Neo and Peugeot

207.

Car Type Proton Satria Neo R3

Peugeot 207 SV

Price (RM) 79,797 76,888

Overall length/width/height (mm):

3905x1710x1400 4235x1669x1447

7

Wheelbase (mm): 2440 2443

Front/rear tracks (mm): 1467/1483 1435/1430

Ground clearance (mm): 155 170

Kerb weight (kgs): 1200 1177

Seating capacity: 5 5

Turning radius (m): 5.1 5.2

Type: 4 cylinders, in-line, DOHC, 16V with CPS

4 cylinders, in-line, 16V, DOHC

Layout: Front, tranverse-mounted Front, transverse-mounted

Displacement (cc): 1597 1587

Bore x stroke (mm): 76x88 78.5x82

Compression ratio: 10:1 11:1

Max output (kW/bhp@rpm): 111/145@7000 81/110@5800

Max torque (Nm@rpm): 168@5000 147@4000

Fuel/Min RON: Petrol/95 Petrol/95

Fuel delivery system: EFI Electronic Multi Point Fuel Injection System

Fuel tank capacity (litres): 50 50

Transmission: 5-speed manual 4-speed automatic

Front brakes: Discs Ventilated Discs

Rear brakes: Discs Drums

Front suspension: MacPherson Strut MacPherson Strut and anti roll bar

Rear suspension: Multi-link Independent trailing arms with torsion beam and anti roll bar

Steering system: Rack and Pinion Rack and Pinion

Power-assistance: Yes, hydraulic Yes, Hydraulic variable power steering

Wheel size: 7J x 16 6JJx15

Tyre size: 205/45 205/45 185/60R15 185/60R15

Spare wheel size: Compact space-saver 185/60R15

Airbags: Front Front (2)

ABS: Yes Yes

EBD + Brake Assist: Yes Yes

Traction Control: No No

Vehicle Stability Control: No No

The table shows that there are no significant differences between Satria Neo and Peugeot 207. It

is undeniable if we compare in terms of performance which is already proven that it will side

more on Satria Neo R3. However, not everyone wants to buy a car with a purpose to race, only a

small number. The first comparison that can be made is about the fuel consumption. As you can

see from the table, both cars have the same volume of fuel tank which is 50 liters and use the

8

same fuel which is RON 95 but when it comes to fuel consumption, it has huge difference

between these two cars where the fuel consumption for Satria Neo r3 is 6.3 km/liter for Manual

Transmission and 6.5km/liter for Automatic Transmission. For the Peugeot 207, the fuel

consumption is 16km/liter. If we do some math calculation (shown below) , we can see that

Peugeot 207 gives better in fuel consumption where if you fill your tank full with 50 liters of

fuel, you can drive for about 800 kilometers compared to Proton which is capable of just over

325 kilometers.

With this result, it shows one of Proton’s weaknesseswhere they do not take a consideration on

fuel consumption or they might take it lightly and this will make it difficult for them to compete

with other car brands such as Peugeot because if we as a buyer, we would rather go for the

Peugeot 207 because it saves fuel better than Proton Satria Neo R3. Furthermore the world

market price for fuel right now is increasing and expensive plus the price of the car also is

cheaper compared to what is offered by Proton. The second point is comfort. We can see that the

Satria Neo does not have rear doors which gives difficulty to us if we have more than one

passenger because in order to seat at the back, the front passenger must give way by folding the

front seat so that the other passenger can get in back. And if they managed to get in the back,

they will still feel uncomfortable because the distance between the front seat and the back is so

close so people at the back cannot rest their feet compared to Peugeot 207, which has 4 doors

which make it easier to get in and is also much more spacious. This is also a reason why people

do not want to buy the Satria Neo because, why would people pay more for an expensive car but

have to go through difficulty to get in the car and it is just not spacious? It would be better we

chose the Peugeot as it is more spacious and cheaper. That is what will play in buyers mind. The

Proton

Fuel Consumption = 6.5 km/liter

Tank Capacity = 50 liter

Distance travelled = Fuel Consumption × Tank

Capacity

= (6.5 km/liter) × (50 litres)

= 325 Kilometers

Peugeot 207

Fuel Consumption = 16 km/liter

Tank Capacity = 50 liters

Distance travelled = Fuel Consumption × Tank

Capacity

= (16 km/liter) × (50 litres)

= 800 Kilometers

9

third point is about marketing strategy. Marketing strategy is very important as it helps to attract

people to buy your product and this is one of Peugeots advantages as they offer 5 years warranty

and free services to anyone who purchases the Peugeot 207 while Proton offers just 2 years so

the marketing strategy used by Peugeot will attract more people in buying their products

compared to Proton. The last point is about safety. Most of the buyers or consumers are

concerned about safety when buying a car. Thus most of the car manufacturer have their product

tested at ANCAP (Australian New Car Assessment Program) in order to convince people about

their product’s safety. Different from others, Proton Satria Neo R3 did not have their product

tested (safety) so this will make buyers doubtful in buying Proton’s product compare to Peugeot

which obtained 5 stars from ANCAP on safety.The Peugeot 207 scored 14.77 out of 16 in the

offset crash test. The passenger compartment held its shape well. There was a slight risk of

serious chest and leg injury for the driver. The vehicle scored 14.82 out of 16 in the side impact

crash test. There was a slight risk of serious chest injury for the driver. A further 2 points were

earned in the optional pole test.

Frontaloffset crash test

Body region scores out of 4 points each: Head/neck 4pts, chest 3.94pts, upper legs 3pts, lower

legs 3.82pts. The passenger compartment held its shape well in the offset crash test. The clutch

pedal moved rearwards by 37mm and downwards 25mm. The steering wheel hub moved

forwards 28mm, upwards 10mm and sideways 4mm. The front ("A") pillar moved 13mm

rearwards. All doors remained closed during the crash. After the crash high manual effort was

required to open the driver's door. The airbag cushioned the head of the driver and contact was

stable. Steering column components were a potential source of injury for the driver's knees. The

passenger's head was cushioned by the airbag.

10

Side impact crash test

Body region scores out of 4 points each: Head 4pts, chest 2.82pts, abdomen 4pts, pelvis 4pts.

The vehicle was eligible for an optional pole impact test, since it had head-protecting side

airbags and scored four points for the head in the side impact test. The manufacturer decided to

go ahead with the pole test and the vehicle earned a further two points.

Pedestrian safety

Child head impacts: 4.37. Adult head impacts: 4. Upper leg impacts: 4.18. Lower leg impacts: 6.

Total (out of 36): 18.55.

Those above were the details on Peugeot 207 safety test result and we can see that it is quite safe

compared to Proton Satria Neo R3. What will you think if Peugeot use these details for their

marketing strategy? Do not you think that the buyers will be more confident in buying their

products? These are other weaknesses discovered in Proton. They did not have a details on the

Satria Neo’s safety test result since they did not have it tested. So these are four reasons why

Peugeot 207 is better than Satria Neo according to most of the buyers opinion and a small reason

why Proton sales are declining every year. Those reason are being simplified in the Pareto

diagram below.

Not friendly in fuel consumption

Price too expensive for a car that

have bad fuel consumption

Safety not tested with ANCAP

Having a problem with

power window

Offer 2 years warranty only while most of the

other cars manufacturer offers 5 years

Not spacious

Size too small

Difficult for passenger to enter at

the back since it only have 2 doors

Cost Quality

Marketing Comfort

Problems with Satria Neo R3

11

COMPARISON BETWEEN PROTON’S PRODUCT WITH NISSAN

As for comparison with Nissan’s product, we have chosen the Proton Persona 1.6 Executive A/T

and the Nissan Almera 1.5VL A/T. These two models are the top spec models from each

manufacturer and they sit in the same category and are competitors with each other. These two

models are usually considered by customers when they think of purchasing cars within this price

range and of this size.

The following are the specifications of both cars :

Car Model Proton Persona 1.6 Executive A/T

Nissan Almera 1.5VL A/T

Price (RM) 59458 79827

Engine :

Engine type Inline-4, DOHC, 16V, IAFM Inline-4, DOHC, 16V, CVTC

Engine Position

Front

Front

Displacement (cc) 1597 1498

Max. Power

(kW/rpm)

82/6000 75/6000

Max. Torque

(Nm/rpm)

148/4000 139/4000

Bore/Stroke (mm) 76.0 x 88.0 78.0 x 78.4

Compression Ratio 10.0 10.1

Transmission 4 A/T 4 A/T

Fuel Petrol Petrol

Fuel Tank (litre) 55 41

Fuel Delivery

System

MPI ECCS

Dimensions :

WheelBase (mm) 2600 2600

Overall Length

(mm)

4477 4426

Overall Width (mm) 1725 1695

Overall Height

(mm)

1438 1514

12

Front Track (mm) 1475 0

Rear Track (mm) 1470 0

Min. Turning

Radius (m)

5.4 5.2

Kerb Weight (kg) 1195 1045

Ground Clearance

(mm)

0 0

Mechanical :

Steering Rack & Pinion, Hydraulic Power

Assist

Rack & Pinion, Electric Power

Assist

Front Suspension MacPherson Strut MacPherson Strut

Rear Suspension Multi-Link Torsion Beam

Front Brakes Vent Disc Vent Disc

Rear Brakes Drum Drum

Std. Tyre Size 195/60 R15 185/65 R15

Std. Wheel Size 15-in alloy 15-in alloy

Driving Wheels FWD FWD

Air Conditioning Yes Yes

Central Locking Yes Yes

Power Windows Yes Yes

Cassette Player No No

CD Player Yes Yes

CD Changer No No

Radio AM/FM Yes Yes

Alarm System Yes Yes

Reverse Sensor Yes Yes

Electronic Mirror No Yes

Cruise Control No No

Leather Seats No No

ABS Yes Yes

Air Bag(s) Yes(front dual) Yes(front dual)

Traction Control No Yes

Elec. Brake Force

Distribution

Yes Yes

Stability Control No Yes

13

We will discuss about this two models in a few aspects as follows:

Safety

As we can see, both cars come with dual frontal SRS airbags. No one is lacking in this area. But

when it comes to stability control and traction control, the Persona does not come equip with

them. Nowadays, cars seem to come standard with these safety equipment. This is disappointing

because Proton should not be cutting cost to compromise safety. During rain or emergency

braking, traction control and stability control programs might be able to save one’s life. These

factor plays a major role when customers are deciding which car to purchase.

Pricing

As we can see from the table above, the Persona is price relatively cheap at RM59458 compared

to the Almera’s price tag of RM79827. Here the Persona has an advantage in terms of pricing.

But then again, A customer will wonder why the price gap is like so. Proton has been known for

using inferior plastics for it’s interior design and cheap materials in the manufacturing of their

cars, all in which to cut cost. This is not always a good thing as customers who think long term

may be willing to spend a little more just to have a piece of mind that they bought something of

quality. Therefore, the point is here is that cutting cost and decreasing quality is not always the

best idea.

Design

In this aspect, it boils down to personal preference and nothing much can be said. The Persona’s

design has been basically the same since 2007 whereas the Almera’s design is just about 3 years

old now because it was launched in 2011. Both cars look solid on the outside and appeal well to

customers.

Fuel Economy

The official fuel consumption for the Almera is 6.7L/100KM whereas for the Persona, it has

been reported to be as high as 19.9L/100KM ! This is a shocking figure. But it has been a norm

for the Persona to be paired with its image as a fuel guzzler. And surprisingly the Almera has a

smaller displacement of 1498 compared to the Persona’s 1597. Even with the smaller

displacement, both cars produced almost the same amount of power. Fuel economy plays a big

14

role when customers search for cars to buy. With the rising fuel cost and the world initiative to

go green, a car that guzzles fuel will certainly not appeal to customers. A more well designed and

fuel efficient engine will always be a selling point to customers.

HOW TO OVERCOME?

Talking about a company that produces products, they must know what is Operations

Management and try to apply its methods. Taking one of the basic method which is Strategy and

Issues During a Product’s Life since we are talking about products. Each product has its lifetime

and it is categorized in four different phases that is Introduction, Growth, Maturity and Decline

as shown in the figure below.

Introduction phase

Best period to increase market

share

R&D engineering is critical

Product design and development

critical

Frequent product and process

design changes

Growth phase

Practical to change price or quality

image

Strengthen niche

Forecasting critical

Increase capacity

Maturity phase

Competitive costs become

critical

Defend market position

Standardization

Fewer rapid product changes,

more minor changes

Decline phase

Cost control critical

Little product differentiation

Cost minimization

Overcapacity in Industry

15

From what we see, we can say that Proton’s product now are in the 3rd phase which is Maturity

phase since Proton now are established and well known. During this stage, more competitors are

going to compete with Proton by entering into the Malaysian market and these competitors sells

the same product as Proton which is cars. In order to survive in markets, Proton have to come out

with innovative ideas or else it will fall into the decline phase and end up like Plymouth (1928-

2001) and Pontiac (1926-2010) where back in the days, these two company were giant company

that produces muscles car and the American were proud of it. Now, most of the American use

Nissan, Toyota and others Japanese cars causes these two companies later closes their

businesses. Why can that happen? It is because those two companies did not improve their

product. They still stuck with their old product using big engines and big engines meant more

fuel. Nowadays the price of the car fuel is expensive thus making people search for cars with a

good fuel consumption. The reason why Nissan and others Japanese companies are able to sneak

into American markets is because they offer cars that have good power and good fuel

consumption. That is why those two American big companies shut their business down since

they could not compete with the Japanese cars in market. By doing it slowly, Proton must show

some improvement in their product’s quality. They must build a car with a good fuel

consumption since that is the first priority to the buyers when they want to buy a car. Secondly

they must have their product tested more on safety. If the car is proven safe, then people will

have no doubt when they buying Proton cars. Thirdly is that they have to improve in term of

quality since Proton have a long history with the power window issue. Whenever people talk

about proton, the power window issue always comes up. These are the three things that Proton

have to take into consideration because the reason why Proton are surviving until now is because

the government imposes high taxes on imported cars. So peoples have no choice but to buy

Proton’s cars since the imported cars are expensive. But starting next year, the government will

reduce the taxes on imported cars and this will give a blow to Proton because people will most

likely choose imported cars will be cheaper and imported cars are well known in terms of

quality. Learning from experience, Proton are now starting to place more emphasis on quality

and this can be seen in the latest model from Proton that is Proton Suprima S. This model has

been tested on safety and has been awarded five stars by the ANCAP. This is actually quite a

good achievement for Proton after 31 years of establishment. Hope that Proton will start to

16

produce quality cars with a reasonable prices in order to survive and compete with other foreign

car brands in the market.

Conclusion

As a final say, if Proton wants to be successful in the market, they must address their

issues regarding their products. Quality must be improved and product design must be more

appealing to the consumers. If they do not do so, sooner or later they will be swallowed up by

their market rivals. Techniques analysis in the field of Industrial Engineering might prove useful

to them in achieving their future goals. Without a doubt, if Proton employs the right strategies

and game plans, they should be able to come up as a major stake holder in Malaysia’s

automotive market.

17

Appendix

Minutes of Meetings:

Meeting #1 :

Date : 14/11/2014

Venue : UTM library (PSZ)

Time Activity

4pm-4.10pm Electing a group leader

4.10pm-5.10pm Brainstorming project ideas

5.11pm-5.29pm Few suggestions were proposed :

- Malaysian Airlines market position and

its services.

- Protons issues today.

- Car seat ergonomics and design.

5.30pm-5.44pm Coming to an agreement on a common project

title: The Problem with Proton cars today in

terms of quality, product design and reliability.

5.45pm Meeting is adjourned.

Attendance: Alvin Freddie Peter

Mohd Ihsan Kaimin

Daniel John Mah Heen You

Mohd Azim bin Mohd Adam

Prepared by :

________________

(Daniel John Mah Heen You)

18

Minutes of Meetings:

Meeting #2 :

Date : 17/11/2014

Venue : UTM library (PSZ)

Time Activity

8pm-8.40pm Discussion regarding the Industrial

Engineering tools that will be applied to the

project.

8.41pm-8.45pm Coming to an agreement on using the fish bone

diagram and product cycle phases to be applied

to the project.

8.46pm-10.30pm Compiling the first outline to be shown to the

lecturer.

10.31pm Meeting is adjourned.

Attendance: Alvin Freddie Peter

Mohd Ihsan Kaimin

Daniel John Mah Heen You

Mohd Azim bin Mohd Adam

Prepared by :

________________

(Daniel John Mah Heen You)

19

Minutes of Meetings:

Meeting #3 :

Date : 23/11/2014

Venue : Kolej 10 UTM

Time Activity

9pm-9.15pm Distribution of tasks :

Alvin : Sales on Proton and Nissan

Ihsan : Sales on Proton and Peugeot

Azim : Car specs of Proton and Peugeot

Daniel : Car specs of Proton and Nissan

9.16pm Meeting is adjourned.

Attendance: Alvin Freddie Peter

Mohd Ihsan Kaimin

Daniel John Mah Heen You

Mohd Azim bin Mohd Adam

Prepared by :

________________

(Daniel John Mah Heen You)

20

Minutes of Meetings:

Meeting #4 :

Date : 10/12/2014

Venue : UTM library (PSZ)

Time Activity

8pm-8.30pm All tasks completed were compiled and

assessed by all group members.

8.31pm-10pm All necessary corrections were made to each of

the task given by respective group members.

10.01pm-10.15pm Project documentation is edited and compiled.

10.16pm-10.19pm Final read through of project documentation.

10.20pm-11.10pm Preparing presentation slides.

11.11pm-11.15pm Slides are given to all group members to

prepare for the presentation.

11.16pm Project discussion is concluded and meeting is

adjourned.

Attendance: Alvin Freddie Peter

Mohd Ihsan Kaimin

Daniel John Mah Heen You

Mohd Azim bin Mohd Adam

Prepared by :

________________

(Daniel John Mah Heen You)

21