I thought it is interesting to look back at these 2 companies.
Both were listed almost at the same time, both are china companies distributing consumer foods.
Why did one go from strength to strength while the other one failed?
What are key indicators that we can see in this example to discern a better in the same industry?
I am not sure about Synear. For Hsu Fu Chi, the strong governance from Transpac Capital in the earlier years probably provided HFC with money for expansion and also adhere to good corporate practices.
Synear, just like some other S-chips, raised lots of money via IPO and share placements.
In march 2008, they had 2 billions RMB and now in the last quarter, Synear is only left with 700 million RMB.
$1.3 Billion or about S$250 millions have been spent and the end result is a pathetic 13cts share price as of yesterday.
Where did the money go?.... Hmmm...
(15-07-2011, 07:41 AM)Drizzt Wrote: [ -> ]I thought it is interesting to look back at these 2 companies.
Both were listed almost at the same time, both are china companies distributing consumer foods.
Why did one go from strength to strength while the other one failed?
one of the big mistakes/confusion that i find it puzzling is that investors and even analyst could not differentiate between a true s-chip and one that has operation in china but not a s-chip. Hsu Fu Chi is not really an s-chip. It's own and manage by 4 taiwanese brothers but has all it's operations in China. So it is really a T-chip in a sense.Likewise would you call Stamfordland an Australian company or a singapore company. All of Stamfordland operations is in Australia and NZ.
A better comparison for HFC would be Want2 b4 it got delisted. You can compare against China Lifestyle against Synear. both not doing well. common thread for S-chips...no need to say more.