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

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 Protons 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.

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

Year

Sales (units)

2009

148,000

2010

157,274

2011

158,000

2012

141,120

2013

138,753

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.
Sales of proton passenger vehicles in Malaysia, 2009 - 2013.
160000

155000

Sales (Units)

150000
145000
140000
135000
130000
125000
2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Year

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 Protons decrease in sales.

Year

Sales (units)

2010

2,562

2011

2,787

2012

6,114

2013

6,505

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.

Sales of peugeout vehicles in Malaysia, 2010 - 2013

7000
6000

Sales (units)

5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
2010

2011

2012

2013

Year

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.

Year

Sales (units)

2009

23,176

2010

26,322

2011

25,504

2012

28,318

2013

45,780

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
4

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.

Sales of Nissan vehicles in Malaysia, 2009-2010

50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
Nissan
2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

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.

FACTORS LEADING TO PROTONS SALES DROP

COMPARISON BETWEEN PROTONS 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
Protons product and Peugeots 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

79,797
Price (RM)
Overall length/width/height 3905x1710x1400
(mm):

Peugeot 207 SV

76,888
4235x1669x1447

Wheelbase (mm):
Front/rear tracks (mm):
Ground clearance (mm):
Kerb weight (kgs):
Seating capacity:
Turning radius (m):
Type:
Layout:
Displacement (cc):
Bore x stroke (mm):
Compression ratio:
Max output (kW/bhp@rpm):
Max torque (Nm@rpm):
Fuel/Min RON:
Fuel delivery system:
Fuel tank capacity (litres):
Transmission:
Front brakes:
Rear brakes:
Front suspension:
Rear suspension:
Steering system:
Power-assistance:
Wheel size:
Tyre size:
Spare wheel size:
Airbags:
ABS:
EBD + Brake Assist:
Traction Control:
Vehicle Stability Control:

2440
2443
1467/1483
1435/1430
155
170
1200
1177
5
5
5.1
5.2
4 cylinders, in-line, DOHC, 16V 4 cylinders, in-line, 16V, DOHC
with CPS
Front, tranverse-mounted
Front, transverse-mounted
1597
1587
76x88
78.5x82
10:1
11:1
111/145@7000
81/110@5800
168@5000
147@4000
Petrol/95
Petrol/95
EFI
Electronic Multi Point Fuel
Injection System
50
50
5-speed manual
4-speed automatic
Discs
Ventilated Discs
Discs
Drums
MacPherson Strut
MacPherson Strut and anti roll
bar
Multi-link
Independent trailing arms with
torsion beam and anti roll bar
Rack and Pinion
Rack and Pinion
Yes, hydraulic
Yes, Hydraulic variable power
steering
7J x 16
6JJx15
205/45 205/45
185/60R15 185/60R15
Compact space-saver
185/60R15
Front
Front (2)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
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
7

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.
Proton

Peugeot 207

Fuel Consumption = 6.5 km/liter

Fuel Consumption = 16 km/liter

Tank Capacity = 50 liter

Tank Capacity = 50 liters

Distance travelled = Fuel Consumption Tank

Distance travelled = Fuel Consumption Tank

Capacity

Capacity
= (6.5 km/liter) (50 litres)
= 325 Kilometers

= (16 km/liter) (50 litres)

= 800 Kilometers

With this result, it shows one of Protons 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
8

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 products safety. Different from others, Proton Satria Neo R3 did not have their product
tested (safety) so this will make buyers doubtful in buying Protons 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.

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 Neos 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.
Cost

Quality
Safety not tested with ANCAP
Having a problem with
power window

Not friendly in fuel consumption

Price too expensive for a car that
have bad fuel consumption

Problems with Satria Neo R3

Not spacious
Offer 2 years warranty only while most of the
Size too small
other cars manufacturer offers 5 years
Difficult for passenger to enter at
the back since it only have 2 doors

Marketing

Comfort

10

COMPARISON BETWEEN PROTONS PRODUCT WITH NISSAN

As for comparison with Nissans 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

Price (RM)
Engine :
Engine type
Engine Position

59458

Displacement (cc)
Max. Power
(kW/rpm)
Max. Torque
(Nm/rpm)
Bore/Stroke (mm)
Compression Ratio
Transmission
Fuel
Fuel Tank (litre)
Fuel Delivery
System

Dimensions :
WheelBase (mm)
Overall Length
(mm)
Overall Width (mm)
Overall Height
(mm)

Nissan Almera 1.5VL A/T

79827

Inline-4, DOHC, 16V, IAFM

Inline-4, DOHC, 16V, CVTC

Front

Front

1597
82/6000
148/4000
76.0 x 88.0
10.0
4 A/T
Petrol
55
MPI

1498
75/6000
139/4000
78.0 x 78.4
10.1
4 A/T
Petrol
41
ECCS

2600
4477

2600
4426

1725
1438

1695
1514
11

Front Track (mm)

Rear Track (mm)
Min. Turning
Radius (m)
Kerb Weight (kg)
Ground Clearance
(mm)

Mechanical :
Steering
Front Suspension
Rear Suspension
Front Brakes
Rear Brakes
Std. Tyre Size
Std. Wheel Size
Driving Wheels

Air Conditioning
Central Locking
Power Windows
Cassette Player
CD Player
CD Changer
Radio AM/FM
Alarm System
Reverse Sensor
Electronic Mirror
Cruise Control
Leather Seats
ABS
Air Bag(s)
Traction Control
Elec. Brake Force
Distribution
Stability Control

1475
1470
5.4

0
0
5.2

1195
0

1045
0

Rack & Pinion, Hydraulic Power

Assist
MacPherson Strut
Multi-Link
Vent Disc
Drum
195/60 R15
15-in alloy
FWD

Rack & Pinion, Electric Power

Assist
MacPherson Strut
Torsion Beam
Vent Disc
Drum
185/65 R15
15-in alloy
FWD

Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes(front dual)
No
Yes

Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes(front dual)
Yes
Yes

No

Yes

12

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 ones 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 Almeras 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 its 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 Personas
design has been basically the same since 2007 whereas the Almeras 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 Personas 1597. Even with the smaller
displacement, both cars produced almost the same amount of power. Fuel economy plays a big

13

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 Products 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

Maturity phase

Competitive costs become

critical
Defend market position
Standardization
Fewer rapid product changes,
more minor changes

Growth phase

Practical to change price or quality

image
Strengthen niche
Forecasting critical
Increase capacity

Decline phase

Cost control critical

Little product differentiation
Cost minimization
Overcapacity in Industry

14

From what we see, we can say that Protons 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 (19282001) 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 products 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
Protons 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

15

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 Malaysias
automotive market.

16

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.

5.30pm-5.44pm

Protons issues today.

Car seat ergonomics and design.

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)
17

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)

18

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)

19

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)

20

21