I like the phrases you use to describe them !
My Layman term to describe them is :
Act on impulse when things are red hot,
then stuck with the baby when market turned, and called them long term investment !
(20-08-2014, 09:32 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: [ -> ]NOL always have ah gong behind it - another Temasek milestone after lifting stake from less than 50% to a subsidiary when shipping cycle was running real hot during the peak of last cycle.
Seems like Temasek like momentum investing in its long term strategic process...
Whatever lah, without Temasek, NOL is also another pile of scraps... better off keep things simple and invest in ks players like Godfather Ow
Odd Lots Vested
GG
(20-08-2014, 09:32 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: [ -> ]NOL always have ah gong behind it - another Temasek milestone after lifting stake from less than 50% to a subsidiary when shipping cycle was running real hot during the peak of last cycle.
Seems like Temasek like momentum investing in its long term strategic process...
Whatever lah, without Temasek, NOL is also another pile of scraps... better off keep things simple and invest in ks players like Godfather Ow
Odd Lots Vested
GG
NOL is heavily in debt and cannot raise enough funds if it goes on rights. So, it is likely IPO their logistics business as it can be sold at a multiple valuation price and also allow them to retain control. After IPO, they may merge or sold the loss-making shipping business. Whichever way, as long as it benefit the long-term investors, go for it asap.
long = wrong term investments... lol
(20-08-2014, 10:13 PM)Layman A Wrote: [ -> ]I like the phrases you use to describe them !
My Layman term to describe them is :
Act on impulse when things are red hot,
then stuck with the baby when market turned, and called them long term investment !
(20-08-2014, 09:32 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: [ -> ]NOL always have ah gong behind it - another Temasek milestone after lifting stake from less than 50% to a subsidiary when shipping cycle was running real hot during the peak of last cycle.
Seems like Temasek like momentum investing in its long term strategic process...
Whatever lah, without Temasek, NOL is also another pile of scraps... better off keep things simple and invest in ks players like Godfather Ow
Odd Lots Vested
GG
(20-08-2014, 10:22 PM)rainmaker Wrote: [ -> ] (20-08-2014, 09:32 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: [ -> ]NOL always have ah gong behind it - another Temasek milestone after lifting stake from less than 50% to a subsidiary when shipping cycle was running real hot during the peak of last cycle.
Seems like Temasek like momentum investing in its long term strategic process...
Whatever lah, without Temasek, NOL is also another pile of scraps... better off keep things simple and invest in ks players like Godfather Ow
Odd Lots Vested
GG
NOL is heavily in debt and cannot raise enough funds if it goes on rights. So, it is likely IPO their logistics business as it can be sold at a multiple valuation price and also allow them to retain control. After IPO, they may merge or sold the loss-making shipping business. Whichever way, as long as it benefit the long-term investors, go for it asap.
NOL is like another SIA, but a ocean going one. Most nations will have their ocean national carrier and in this case NOL for Singapore.
I've spoken with a very well known veteran in this industry before. These carriers will never die off even though they might bleed most of the time. Their country will bail them out times and times again due to national interest.
Cheers!
Let say if i am to invest in Keppel, Singpost, SIA, Singtel and NOL. Tell me why should i put my money in NOL ?
http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/premium/...t-20140821
PUBLISHED AUGUST 21, 2014
HOCK LOCK SIEW
Better for NOL to list logistics unit than to sell it
BYMALMINDERJIT SINGH
msingh@sph.com.sg @MalminderjitBT
Spin-off option: Listing APL Logistics may be a more strategic decision as it will allow NOL to tap the capital markets for a profitable business and raise more liquidity. - PHOTO: BLOOMBERG
THE confirmation by Neptune Orient Lines (NOL) that it is considering selling off its logistics unit or listing it as a separate entity comes as the logistics and shipping company explores desperate measures to keep the group afloat.
While a spin-off listing could prove to be a masterstoke, the option of selling the logistics business appears puzzling and may in fact pave the way for the company to eventually get rid of its other assets.
NOL has cautioned investors that these considerations are preliminary and exploratory in nature and are part of continuing evaluation of options to improve the group's strategic positioning and performance. But the fact remains that rescue measures have to come fast, the reason being that the group is in dire straits.
It recently posted a second-quarter net loss of US$53.7 million, 55 per cent worse than the US$34.6 million loss it incurred a year earlier. This marked the third straight quarter that the group was in the red, putting it on course for another loss-making financial year. In 2013, NOL lost US$76 million for the full-year, which could have been worse had it not been for the one-time US$200 million gain on disposal of its headquarters building in Singapore. The year before, it recorded a net loss of US$412 million. NOL has made losses in each of the last five full financial years (2009-2013), with the exception of 2010, earning cumulative losses of US$1.24 billion over this period.
As allocator of capital, we have an easier tasks... if interests of companies not align with ours, stay away and look for the next one...no needto be stubborn for whatever reasons...
(21-08-2014, 07:29 AM)corydorus Wrote: [ -> ]Let say if i am to invest in Keppel, Singpost, SIA, Singtel and NOL. Tell me why should i put my money in NOL ?
The crux of the issue isn’t over whether selling or listing the logistics unit is smarter. That is just debating on the optimal way of arranging the deck chairs while the Titanic is sinking. It is the similar inconsequential debate over the sale of NOL building all over again.
Unlocking capital only works as a turnaround if the manager needs the capital to implement certain business restructurings to stem the bleeding or to deploy them into new business ventures. Without a proper game plan, whatever capital raised will be sucked back into working capital beast again.
While a Temasek led bailout is undoubtedly good for management, that would likely devastate existing minority shareholders. I feel a lot of NOL investors are confusing the concept between NOL (The Group) being government backed with NOL (The Shares) being government backed. Citibank might be too big to fail, but that doesn’t mean Citibank shareholders are too big to fail.
My advice to anyone thinking of vesting in NOL: buy or hold them because you have made an informed conclusion that the business will recover, not because of a vague notion that the government will not let it go belly up.
