ValueBuddies.com : Value Investing Forum - Singapore, Hong Kong, U.S.

Because rules are written this way, everyone should adopt "In SGX we trust" attitude?
When a parent "punishes" a child, it is best he/she explains why, unless you want the child to turn rebellious. In the grown up world, the court of law do not punishes, it merely metes out a sentence. Even so, the judge would write in length why. Is SGX above all this?

(09-01-2012, 08:07 PM)Sfsh12 Wrote: [ -> ]Because rules are written this way, everyone should adopt "In SGX we trust" attitude?
When a parent "punishes" a child, it is best he/she explains why, unless you want the child to turn rebellious. In the grown up world, the court of law do not punishes, it merely metes out a sentence. Even so, the judge would write in length why. Is SGX above all this?

I believe it is more about SGX being given a right to break a deadlock. The company can always argue that they did nothing wrong, so what to do if SGX does not believe it?

Let's talk about "SGX don't believe you." The China Sky saga can be briefly summarized as follows:

China Sky: The maintenance expenses was audited by the external auditors in 2009 and they found nothing wrong.
SGX: I don't believe you and the external auditors. I want you to appoint the Special auditors whom I only believe.
China Sky: The IPT with an ID has been approved by the lead ID who can vouch that they are within the rules and regulations.
SGX: I don't believe you and the lead ID. I want you to appoint the Special Auditor whom I only believe.
China Sky: I will ask the external auditors to review the Fujian Land acquisition as part of their year end audit.
SGX: I don't believe you and the external auditors. I thought I told you that already. I want you to appoint the Special Auditor whom I only believe.
China Sky: Why Is the Special Auditor so Special? They like to charge high fees and take years to finish their work.
SGX: I don't believe you and I don't care. It's either the Special Auditor or I see you in court.

(09-01-2012, 11:56 PM)Sfsh12 Wrote: [ -> ]Let's talk about "SGX don't believe you." The China Sky saga can be briefly summarized as follows:

China Sky: The maintenance expenses was audited by the external auditors in 2009 and they found nothing wrong.
SGX: I don't believe you and the external auditors. I want you to appoint the Special auditors whom I only believe.
China Sky: The IPT with an ID has been approved by the lead ID who can vouch that they are within the rules and regulations.
SGX: I don't believe you and the lead ID. I want you to appoint the Special Auditor whom I only believe.
China Sky: I will ask the external auditors to review the Fujian Land acquisition as part of their year end audit.
SGX: I don't believe you and the external auditors. I thought I told you that already. I want you to appoint the Special Auditor whom I only believe.
China Sky: Why Is the Special Auditor so Special? They like to charge high fees and take years to finish their work.
SGX: I don't believe you and I don't care. It's either the Special Auditor or I see you in court.

Emotional statements can make one party looks bad.
And you quote from only one horse's mouth.

When I read the words from the other horse's mouth, it looks ok what.
http://info.sgx.com/webcoranncatth.nsf/V...800459D63/$file/12162011ChinaSky.pdf?openelement

No proper disclosure of use of large sum of money is already against the listing rule.
And, they said the money is refunded. Do you believe?

Not sure what's the fuss about following SGX requests.

There is already reasonable doubts with current. It will be quite silly for SGX to continue to rely on current auditor view only to change their concerns which will be gross negligent. I fully support SGX effort in this.

My logic is simple - if you have nothing to hide and are above board, then you should not be dodgy or evasive. This stinks of something potentially bad......IMHO.

What puzzled the local investors is, why there are more than 40 ' S ' chips involved in account fraudulents in past 5/6 years, (some showing cash in B/S but cash was no longer there), SGX/MAS chose to ignore them but not this China Sky ?

On the issue of acquisition of land in Fujian, you will need to read the following response from China Sky to get their side of the story.

In summary, the deposits of land use rights/construction costs were dislcose in the AR from 2006-2010. The contemplated expansion plans did not materialise and were not required to be disclose under exceptions set out in rule 703.

Show Cause Letter dated 27 Sept 2011
http://info.sgx.com/webcoranncatth.nsf/V...D003EC307/$file/Appendix_A-5.pdf?openelement

Response to SGX reprimand on 22 Dec 2011
http://info.sgx.com/webcoranncatth.nsf/V...E00157B93/$file/SGX_Reprimand_Response_Annexure.pdf?openelement

Police have the right in Singapore to stop me in the streets to ask for my particulars.

Of course I buay song. Why check me? I look like thief izzit?

If I nothing to hide, I just show my IC and make complain later that police profiling middle-aged chinese! You know - do the Singaporean thing.

What's so big deal about showing my IC? At East Coast I even surrender it to rent a bike!

3 of my Singaporean friends tried to calm me down and advised me to show my IC to police. I iron teeth die die don't show. Now these 3 Singaporean friends say they don't know me already.

So am I making a song and dance about nothing for the sake of "principe", or do I have something to hide? Maybe my IC with Ah Long and I don't want others to know?

国有国法 家有家规

If you want to get listed in SGX, then make sure you are prepared to follow their rules and submit to their policing. Simple as that!

Not happy? Like someone posted earlier, go through the whole hassle first and then sue SGX if they don't find anything wrong, for wasting your time and money. Right now, you're already wasting time and money protesting against SGX anyway...