BANGKOK RUBBER PUBLIC COMPANY LIMITED
AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES
REPORT AND INTERIM FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
FOR THE THREE-MONTH AND six-MONTH PERIODS ENDED 30 June 2004

Review Report of Independent Auditor
To the Shareholders of
Bangkok Rubber Public Company Limited
I have reviewed the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Bangkok Rubber Public Company Limited and its subsidiaries as at 30 June 2004, the related consolidated statements of earnings for the three-month and six-month periods ended 30 June 2004 and 2003, and the consolidated statements of changes in shareholders’ equity and cash flows for the six-month periods ended 30 June 2004 and 2003, and the separate financial statements of Bangkok Rubber Public Company Limited for the same periods.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management as to their correctness and the completeness of the presentation. My responsibility is to issue a report on these financial statements based on my reviews.
Except as discussed in paragraphs 1) and 2), I conducted my reviews in accordance with the auditing standard applicable to review engagements.  This standard requires that I plan and perform the review to obtain moderate assurance as to whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  A review is limited primarily to inquiries of company personnel and analytical procedures applied to financial data and thus provides less assurance than an audit.  I have not performed an audit and, accordingly, I do not express an audit opinion.
1)	As discussed in Note 7, the Company’s consolidated financial statements for the three-month and  six-month periods ended 30 June 2004 include investments in 3 associated companies which, under the equity method, amount to Baht 78.4 million as at 30 June 2004, and shares of profits of these associated companies for the three-month and six-month periods ended amounting to Baht 2.5 million and Baht 10.4 million, respectively.  The value of the investments in, and equity in the earnings of, these associated companies are recorded based on financial statements prepared by the management of those associated companies.

2)	As discussed in Note 29.3, the Customs Department filed a petition with the Central Bankruptcy Court claiming payment of duty liabilities totaling Baht 459.1 million.  The Court has ordered that the Customs Department receives payment equal to the amount claimed less duty on goods, which the Company is entitled to refund. The Company has set aside provision for contingent losses amounting to Baht 31.5 million and its management is of the opinion that such reserve is adequate. In examining this litigation, I sent a letter to the solicitor which the Company has engaged to act on its behalf in this case, to request the solicitor’s analysis as to the result of the litigation but the solicitor replied that he was unable to stipulate a definite amount of contingent losses at this time. I have been unable to adopt other audit procedures to satisfy myself as to this litigation.
3)	As discussed in Note 1, on 21 November 2002, the Company’s rehabilitation plan was approved by the Central Bankruptcy Court.  The Company is in the process of implementing this plan. As at 30 June 2004, the Company and its subsidiaries have a capital deficit of Baht 1,716.1 million because the Company has recorded provision for guarantee obligations and allowance for doubtful debts totaling Baht 2,520.9 million. There is still uncertainty as to the ability of the Company and its subsidiaries to continue their businesses as going concerns, and this depends upon its ability to comply with the business rehabilitation plan of the Company, and to find additional sources of funding, and on the outcome of their operations which is raised substantial doubt about their ability to continue as going concerns. Nevertheless, the accompanying financial statements have been prepared on the going concern basis, assuming that the realisation of assets and settlement of liabilities and obligations will occur in the ordinary course of the businesses of the Company and its subsidiaries without expectation of significant disruption to their ongoing activities.
Because of the uncertainties regarding the continuity of the business and the implementation of the rehabilitation plan of the Company as discussed in paragraph 3) and because of the scope limitations imposed on my review as discussed in paragraphs 1) and 2) could have a material effect on the financial position and operating results of Bangkok Rubber Public Company Limited and its subsidiaries, I am unable to reach a conclusion as a result of my review.
I have previously reviewed the consolidated financial statements of Bangkok Rubber Public Company Limited and its subsidiaries and the separate financial statements of Bangkok Rubber Public Company Limited for the three-month and six-month periods ended 30 June 2003, in accordance with auditing standards applicable to review engagements and under my review report dated 4 August 2003, reported that I was unable to reach any conclusion as a result of my review because of the scope limitation, the results of uncertainties regarding to the values of assets and liabilities and the continuity of the business.

I have previously audited the consolidated financial statements of Bangkok Rubber Public Company Limited and its subsidiaries, and the separate financial statements of Bangkok Rubber Public Company Limited for the year ended 31 December 2003, in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and issued a disclaimer of opinion on those statements under my report dated 24 February 2004. The balance sheet as at 31 December 2003, as presented herein for comparative purposes, formed an integral part of the financial statements which I audited and reported on.  I have not performed any other audit procedures subsequent to the date of that report.

		Sophon Permsirivallop
		Certified Public Accountant (Thailand) No. 3182
Ernst & Young Office Limited
Bangkok: 11 August 2004