My answer to syedoutsidethebox blogspot - Part 2

1. This is the continuation of previous article with regards to Syedoutofthebox article on Proton/AP. The previous article is here :- click here

2. My comment to that article was not approved by the blog owner.  Perhaps the blog owner (Syed) has no answer to my argument. In my comment I’ve revealed his false accusation and mis-leading article. I’ve written that comment in my previous article here.

3. On top of that, I’ve made another short comment to show that the price of the same volswagen Passat in Singapore is RM 488,000. With his logic, Singapore should be 4^th world country and the people of Singapore should be the dumbest ever. This comment was approved by him and he has answered to this comment. Please refer to the screenshots.

4. As Syed Akbar Ali has answered to my argument; I have to reply to support my point. Hence I’ve made another reply to answer his comment. This is what I’ve written :-

“Tuan Syed,

The different only in the `reason’. Both country has their own reason to impose certain rules and regulations. Singpore impose COE to restrict the number of car on the road while Malaysia impose Import duty to protect Proton. In my previous comment, I’ve mentioned the reason for the protection and the vision behind Proton project.

Your saying about if Singapore were to make their own national car, they will also tax it to RM 488,000 is just an ASSUMPTION. It is your ASSUMPTION and you do not know for sure. In fact, protection in new automotive industry is common practice to ALL CAR MANUFACTURER in the world and it is a standard in automotive industry. I’m very sure, if Singapore were to produce a national car, they will exempt their national car from import duty or COE.

Btw, Even if we deduct the COE price (~ SGD 60,000) from the total price, the PASSAT will cost RM 340,000 which is much higher the US price of RM 65,000. So, to quote your analogy, Singapore is 4^th world country and ‘nak kata bodoh pun boleh lah’ “

Unfortunately, Tuan Syed did not approve that comment. I believe he has not answer to my argument hence not publishing it. Surprise to see he is chicken out.

5. Then, another commenter, anonymous at 1:13 reply to me (addressed to Chewal) talking about purchasing power. Refer to screenshot below.

6. That comment was addressed to me and I have the right to answer to that comment. I’ve written the reply as following:-

“@anon 1:13,

I’ve answered you argument in my reply to Tuan Syed, but he did not publish it. I don’t know why.

You are talking about purchasing power and Syed is not talking about purchasing power. He is comparing the price between discounted US passat and Malaysia’s Passat. He is blaming the AP system which he is totally wrong. He is confused between AP and Import duty.

If you talk about purchasing power, it has nothing to do with import duty. A product without any duty will have the same affect. For example, PS3 in Malaysia cost RM1,200 and in UK cost about 199 pound. A cleaner in UK (earned 700 pound) can buy the PS3 and still has a lot of money left but a cleaner in Malaysia (earned RM 900.00) cannot buy the PS3 at all. PS3 is duty free item. So, you can’t bring the purchasing power in the discussion. We can discuss about purchasing power on other separate topic.

If you can accept Singapore reasoning behind the inflated car price, why can’t you accept Malaysia reasoning?  

Tuan Syed, If you don’t want to publish this comment, please ask anon 1:13 to raise the argument in my blog and I can answer him there.”

7. Again, Syed Akbar Ali didn’t approve my comment. My comment was addressed to anon 1:13 and Syed did not publish it. 

8. Maybe Syed has realized how wrong he is with his article and he has no answer to my argument. I feel this is not a good behavior especially when you let your false argument to the reader you don’t have the responsibility to correct your mistake. The least syed can do is to let my comment go through and let the reader to his blog argue with me. I’m open to any argument and willing to learn my mistake but apparently, Syed Akbar Ali is not.