(06-03-2012, 12:39 AM)Musicwhiz Wrote: [ -> ] (03-03-2012, 01:53 AM)Qiaofeng Wrote: [ -> ]This could potentially be a persistent black crow---- squawking in Boustead's backyard.
I know many of U love this stock and what I am writing sounds like heresy.
But, I wish FF Wong can somehow make a graceful exit b4 the environmental timebomb that the smelting process unleashes builds up and eventually explodes.
Thanks for your views, Qiaofeng. I am a person who accepts alternative views backed by evidence and objective reasoning, and I will not label you a "heretic" just because you mention something which puts Boustead in a bad light. In fact, it is people like you whom I admire because you are able to go against the flow to speak up against something which most people would be nodding their heads to, and that takes courage and conviction. So, please continue the sharing.
Based on the articles you posted and the facts about environmental pollution and poisoning, I can conclude that manganese smelting is definitely neither the safest nor more environmentally friendly activity out there. However, to put things in perspective, there are also many other industries out there (chemical, etc) which spew out equal amounts, if not more toxic chemicals and dump waste into rivers and jungles etc. I am not condoning OM Holdings or the Sarawak smelting plant for pollution, but just making a point to say that at least this is a legal process and the Government is backing the project up using a hydro-electric dam, rather than in China where illegal manganese activities have poisoned many human beings.
If we balance the fact that manganese is needed for steel production and construction of buildings, highways etc, which will benefit the human population; against the activities of errant and corrupted people who carry out such activities illegally, I think we cannot simply label ALL manganese mining as being harmful.
FF Wong is simply looking at the commercial aspect of the deal. I doubt he is fully aware of the environmental implications as you stated; but I also do not think it will become a full-blown crisis which Boustead may be saddled with. They are a partner to OM Holdings and will provide EPC and Engineering support, but should have no legal liability when it comes to the actual smelting and pollution (if any).
Just my views. Thanks.
(05-03-2012, 06:06 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: [ -> ]Good news - go high go higher is easier than relentless averaging down in a never ending downtrend. Anyway, you have so much time to accumulate since Sept 2011 - its a case of buying not enough when the price is up.
I think we have to agree to disagree then. For me, lower prices are always welcome as a way to profitably increase my holdings with a requisite margin of safety, and the OM Holdings announcement came after Sep 2011; and one always has limited funds to pump in at any one time without being over-stretched. Some of these funds were channelled into investments such as SIA Engineering which I purchased in Jan 2012.
Boustead has not fallen to a level attractive enough to accumulate more of. My last purchase of Boustead was made back in early October 2011 at a price of 78.5 cents/share.
Personally, I don't subscribe to the concept of uptrend or downtrend. To me, there is only under-valued, fairly valued or over-valued.
I fully agree with you on under, fairly and over valuation concept else its really difficult to be vested for coming to a decade and witnessed the transformation of the company.
$0.40 net cash a share and a sustainable dividend yield of 5.7%. Company operates on a cashflow not accounting profit model. To me, its undervalued. Of course, its a boring company that even analysts dropped coverages as a result of lack of market linked type of news driven excitement.
Price is temporary and value is permanent. However, it will take a fair bit of effort to unlock the real value of Boustead.
(06-03-2012, 02:15 AM)Qiaofeng Wrote: [ -> ] (06-03-2012, 12:39 AM)Musicwhiz Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks for your views, Qiaofeng. I am a person who accepts alternative views backed by evidence and objective reasoning, and I will not label you a "heretic" just because you mention something which puts Boustead in a bad light. In fact, it is people like you whom I admire because you are able to go against the flow to speak up against something which most people would be nodding their heads to, and that takes courage and conviction. So, please continue the sharing.
Based on the articles you posted and the facts about environmental pollution and poisoning, I can conclude that manganese smelting is definitely neither the safest nor more environmentally friendly activity out there. However, to put things in perspective, there are also many other industries out there (chemical, etc) which spew out equal amounts, if not more toxic chemicals and dump waste into rivers and jungles etc. I am not condoning OM Holdings or the Sarawak smelting plant for pollution, but just making a point to say that at least this is a legal process and the Government is backing the project up using a hydro-electric dam, rather than in China where illegal manganese activities have poisoned many human beings.
If we balance the fact that manganese is needed for steel production and construction of buildings, highways etc, which will benefit the human population; against the activities of errant and corrupted people who carry out such activities illegally, I think we cannot simply label ALL manganese mining as being harmful.
FF Wong is simply looking at the commercial aspect of the deal. I doubt he is fully aware of the environmental implications as you stated; but I also do not think it will become a full-blown crisis which Boustead may be saddled with. They are a partner to OM Holdings and will provide EPC and Engineering support, but should have no legal liability when it comes to the actual smelting and pollution (if any).
Just my views. Thanks.
If U read "the Guardian" article carefully, the word "unapproved" was in inverted commas----meaning the local authorities in Hunan were aware of the activities .
China has approx. 37% of the world's rare earth resources yet it produces 97% of the current world supply.
Ever wonder why there is such a high level of production in China and not in the US and Australia (see the Graph)?
Bingo!---Lax environmental regulations in China and strict ones in the other two!!
Thanks to articles like the Guardian's that embarrass the local Hunan authorities so that they are distancing themselves; Beijing is taking many strong measures lately to clean up and limit such production thereby reducing supply and implemented export quotas etc----- but the same western nations and even Japan have protested when their supply chain were affected by these cuts.
Many are happy that the Chinese local authorities are allowing such toxic activities so long as it does not happen in their own backyards. Such hypocrisy is prevalent in the name of capitalism---- so they will happily buy or transport their raw material to such countries to smelt / process.
They are not illegal---just that environmental-wise--- the awareness, laws and standards are weak and will only change and evolve as underdeveloped portions (Hunan/ Sarawak) gets exploited then exposed in developing countries like China/Malaysia.
This is why I say it is a timebomb---- becos as awareness rise what was approved and acceptable can and do become illegal at some point.
I have looked at the Chemistry of the process and I understand the huge energy requirements in the smelting process to convert to ferromanganese or siliconmanganese or even bare managenese. I can understand the reason why a cheap source like the power from the Bakun hydroelectric dam can help in reducing costs. Costs however may not be the overriding factor as events in China (rare earth saga) or the Malaysian Lynas saga illustrate.
Look at the toxicity profiles----- U can google the medical studies of toxicity on communities near manganese mines in other parts of the world such as S Africa---and U will realise that legal or ilegal is just a label in name and time--- eventually, the communities will suffer and the timebomb will explode. The health consequences to human communities living and working nearby--- from too much manganese are just too horrific to ignore!!
To put it very bluntly--- this is called arbitraging---- seeking where the costs are lower; due to the less developed status of the political, legal and environmental knowhow in the countries where the smelting takes place.
Qiaofeng, u really sounded like some green environmentalist. Seriously, internet is a extremely powerful tool and plenty of information can be uncovered if one is extremely diligent.
Unfortunately if one assume that you can ride on such abundance of online info to make big money, it will actually degrade the actual significance of real work.
Should you be a Boustead shareholder or a concern public, I strongly urged you to call up the company and voice your concerns. I am very confident that the IR person at Boustead will be able to clarify your doubts.
There is no point speculating on this forum. In fact, should one fail to observe posting rules, there could a risks of running foul of integrity and face undesirable consequences of legal consequences like in recent cases of online postings including on this forum.
In any case, based on Boustead's track record, they did walk away from some projects that they have announced and deemed environmentally and economically not feasible - a huge water project in Tianjing back in 2006/07. Would appreciate that you do some research before making implications based on the abundant of online info that you have dugged up.
Equally concerned vested holder
(06-03-2012, 12:32 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: [ -> ]Qiaofeng, u really sounded like some green environmentalist. Seriously, internet is a extremely powerful tool and plenty of information can be uncovered if one is extremely diligent.
Unfortunately if one assume that you can ride on such abundance of online info to make big money, it will actually degrade the actual significance of real work.
Should you be a Boustead shareholder or a concern public, I strongly urged you to call up the company and voice your concerns. I am very confident that the IR person at Boustead will be able to clarify your doubts.
There is no point speculating on this forum. In fact, should one fail to observe posting rules, there could a risks of running foul of integrity and face undesirable consequences of legal consequences like in recent cases of online postings including on this forum.
In any case, based on Boustead's track record, they did walk away from some projects that they have announced and deemed environmentally and economically not feasible - a huge water project in Tianjing back in 2006/07. Would appreciate that you do some research before making implications based on the abundant of online info that you have dugged up.
Equally concerned vested holder
You are obviously in love with the stock. You are giving me a warning not to post on this stock. But U have not substantiated your posts with any facts.
If I am not mistaken, Valuebuddies resides on the internet ---- the media platform--- so why belittle the power of the internet in helping make easy access to facts and discussion based on these facts.
Even Musicwhiz -- as moderator does not write with such a disrespectful tone wrt my posts--- what gives you that privilege?
I am fully cognisant of the contents of my post and am not afraid to stand by them.
MW---- Do U understand what I meant when I say....."Some will consider this as heresy"; Now?
U may consider me not a heretic--- but interestingly,
green giraffe has!!
I am no green environmentalist---just a concerned investor and I hope a decent human being concerned about other human beings--- I post what may be a weakness in FFWong investment in OM Holdings.
I have said enuff and I will stop all posts on the Boustead thread henceforth. I do not lose anything from that.
If all the moderators agree with your views, I will stop posting in Valuebuddies, henceforth.
Wish U guys all the best in your investments!
Regards,
Qiaofeng
(06-03-2012, 08:40 PM)Qiaofeng Wrote: [ -> ] (06-03-2012, 12:32 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: [ -> ]Qiaofeng, u really sounded like some green environmentalist. Seriously, internet is a extremely powerful tool and plenty of information can be uncovered if one is extremely diligent.
Unfortunately if one assume that you can ride on such abundance of online info to make big money, it will actually degrade the actual significance of real work.
Should you be a Boustead shareholder or a concern public, I strongly urged you to call up the company and voice your concerns. I am very confident that the IR person at Boustead will be able to clarify your doubts.
There is no point speculating on this forum. In fact, should one fail to observe posting rules, there could a risks of running foul of integrity and face undesirable consequences of legal consequences like in recent cases of online postings including on this forum.
In any case, based on Boustead's track record, they did walk away from some projects that they have announced and deemed environmentally and economically not feasible - a huge water project in Tianjing back in 2006/07. Would appreciate that you do some research before making implications based on the abundant of online info that you have dugged up.
Equally concerned vested holder
You are obviously in love with the stock. You are giving me a warning not to post on this stock. But U have not substantiated your posts with any facts.
If I am not mistaken, Valuebuddies resides on the internet ---- the media platform--- so why belittle the power of the internet in helping make easy access to facts and discussion based on these facts.
Even Musicwhiz -- as moderator does not write with such a disrespectful tone wrt my posts--- what gives you that privilege?
I am fully cognisant of the contents of my post and am not afraid to stand by them.
MW---- Do U understand what I meant when I say....."Some will consider this as heresy"; Now?
U may consider me not a heretic--- but interestingly, green giraffe has!!
I am no green environmentalist---just a concerned investor and I hope a decent human being concerned about other human beings--- I post what may be a weakness in FFWong investment in OM Holdings.
I have said enuff and I will stop all posts on the Boustead thread henceforth. I do not lose anything from that.
If all the moderators agree with your views, I will stop posting in Valuebuddies, henceforth.
Wish U guys all the best in your investments!
Regards,
Qiaofeng
I am indeed in love with the counter. Otherwise, I would not have held on to the stock for coming to a decade. In any event, the stock has not failed to delivery string solid returns during my holding period and hence my steadfast believe in Boustead's management. These are simple facts that one can retrieve from SGX database.
As for postings, there are real warnings pertaining to forumers on this platform. It is better to err on the caution in view of recent wind in Singapore. Bear in mind, there are some amongst us that have postings removed, banned from postings recently and being threatened with legal suits by people who really can't afford to lose.
Investments is simply a game of numbers. Equities investments is very simple - binary - win or loss.
Anyway, everyone only have 1 life, live it to the fullest and be responsible for one's action. When you are on the verge to the next journey, that is when all doesn't really matter. If I ever kicked the bucket, I also can't enjoy all my monetary success.
To each its own. All the best. Nothing personal just reminders on some OB markers. Have the courage to engage Boustead management on your concerns as they will not fail to clarify your doubts.
Hi Qiaofeng and Greengiraffe,
I think I should cool thing down before words get too heated and misunderstandings get too deep.
Even though I am a long-time shareholder of Boustead (>5 years), I do NOT consider what he posted as potentially defamatory or inflammatory. He has links to news articles and facts to back up his post and evidence does show that manganese mining is poisonous and hurts communities who live too closely. As I have mentioned, many industries (not just manganese) hurt people living nearby through pollution and (illegal) dumping into rivers and streams. Therefore, I think it is futile to ignore that such events do occur, but it is good if we can clarify or confirm if there is indeed harm being done.
As for greengiraffe, my advice is to tone down and relax. There are a few options you can take:-
1) If you are disturbed by the facts and news articles, you can choose to sell off your shares in Boustead.
2) If you are concerned and worried as a shareholder, then you can email the IR to clarify. I have spoken to the IR personnel before and they are very helpful and accommodating to retail shareholders.
3) If you think the argument bears no merit or has no basis, you can choose to substantiate your counter-argument by digging up facts and articles to support. Then we can have a constructive and healthy argument.
4) You can choose to completely ignore the postings.
I would just like to remind that discussions and conversations in all threads should be kept civil and free from insinuations and/or personal attacks. This is in keeping with the spirit of free speech and sharing.
Thank you.
(07-03-2012, 05:27 PM)psolhawk Wrote: [ -> ]http://info.sgx.com/webcoranncatth.nsf/V...A00306828/$file/Boustead_Announcement-Boustead_Subsidiary_Awarded_SGD12M_Design-and-Build_Contract_for_Hafary_Logistics_Facility-07.03.2012.pdf?openelement
New $12M facility order
Thanks. It's Design and Build, and a small contract (S$12 Million).
Am keeping an eye out for Design, Build and Lease deals, to bolster their GFA to >90,000 sqm. I would expect them not to clinch any such deals this month; perhaps either April or May.
Interestingly though, there was a DB&L contract awarded almost a year ago in March 2011 to Continental Automotive.
Let's wait and see how things go.
Musicwhiz, do u know if this involved leasing? A tile seller is not like IBM or Continental, their financials may not be so strong to buy the entire building. But $12M is not that big for a company either...
(08-03-2012, 10:57 AM)Contrarian Wrote: [ -> ]Musicwhiz, do u know if this involved leasing? A tile seller is not like IBM or Continental, their financials may not be so strong to buy the entire building. But $12M is not that big for a company either...
Nah I don't think so. Hafary probably contracted with Boustead Projects on a lump-sum basis for the entire project, to be completed CY 4Q 2012. Boustead Projects usually charges on a cost-plus basis, so that it can handle any rise in material costs while locking in specific margins.
(08-03-2012, 11:13 AM)Musicwhiz Wrote: [ -> ] (08-03-2012, 10:57 AM)Contrarian Wrote: [ -> ]Musicwhiz, do u know if this involved leasing? A tile seller is not like IBM or Continental, their financials may not be so strong to buy the entire building. But $12M is not that big for a company either...
Nah I don't think so. Hafary probably contracted with Boustead Projects on a lump-sum basis for the entire project, to be completed CY 4Q 2012. Boustead Projects usually charges on a cost-plus basis, so that it can handle any rise in material costs while locking in specific margins.
Very easy to differentiate bewteen construction and ownership - when there is project value mentioned, its a pure construction contract. When there are no value highlighted, its a design-build-lease that is going into their future "REIT" portfolio.