I recalled that in the past Mr Luong has been selling despite share price keep going up. If he started to increase his stake, I would probably considering selling
[ joking..... ]
The sale of shares by the CEO is a non-event for me since he has been consistently selling shares for years due to personal reasons. But this news coupled with AMAT sale of 193 lots could be a big cause of concern. I honestly thought yesterday selldown was AMAT reducing its stake. Was a little surprised to learn it was Andy. Perhaps AMAT has not sold its shares since then ?
(Vested)
(06-06-2014, 09:45 PM)valuebuddies Wrote: [ -> ]I recalled that in the past Mr Luong has been selling despite share price keep going up. If he started to increase his stake,uncertainty ld probably considering selling [ joking..... ]
Yeah this is probably the best output for ums shareholders knowing what happened yesterday.
Looking at the huge volume yesterday it was quite obvious that someone big sold shares.
So far he sold shares randomly without any correlation with his company prospects. I think a lot of people were worry this could have been AMAT selling UMS which would have added much more uncertainty on the share price since no one really knows what this would have meant to ums. Even if it looks random, one thing tho that I noticed is that Mr Luong sold the last few times shares in quotation days which would have been otherwise very positive for ums. When he started selling yesterday ums was trading at 0.76. After selling 10M stocks ums closed at 0.66. If things go like last time it will recover soon enough.
AMAT selling only 193k of their 20M share, and Andy selling 10M of his 88M, for the "little" profit while sacrificing the remaining to a greater drop of share price is really silly thing to do. They should know that selling their shares will likely impact the share price negatively.
If they really intend to "run road", the best way is to dump as much as possible over a 3days period, and only announce after the 3days notice period is over. So likely, they do not have this intention.
Is there any reason for them to keep the share price low? One possible reason I can think of is to allow a low take-over price in the future.
(06-06-2014, 10:36 PM)NTL Wrote: [ -> ]AMAT selling only 193k of their 20M share, and Andy selling 10M of his 88M, for the "little" profit while sacrificing the remaining to a greater drop of share price is really silly thing to do. They should know that selling their shares will likely impact the share price negatively.
If they really intend to "run road", the best way is to dump as much as possible over a 3days period, and only announce after the 3days notice period is over. So likely, they do not have this intention.
Is there any reason for them to keep the share price low? One possible reason I can think of is to allow a low take-over price in the future.
I don't think Andy has any intentions of privatizing the Company. He has reduced his personal stake from 29% in 2012 to 22% today. He wouldn't have sold his shares (especially in 2012) if he didn't need the money for personal reasons. He has previously sold nearly 7 million shares in March.
(06-06-2014, 10:44 PM)Nick Wrote: [ -> ] (06-06-2014, 10:36 PM)NTL Wrote: [ -> ]AMAT selling only 193k of their 20M share, and Andy selling 10M of his 88M, for the "little" profit while sacrificing the remaining to a greater drop of share price is really silly thing to do. They should know that selling their shares will likely impact the share price negatively.
If they really intend to "run road", the best way is to dump as much as possible over a 3days period, and only announce after the 3days notice period is over. So likely, they do not have this intention.
Is there any reason for them to keep the share price low? One possible reason I can think of is to allow a low take-over price in the future.
I don't think Andy has any intentions of privatizing the Company. He has reduced his personal stake from 29% in 2012 to 22% today. He wouldn't have sold his shares (especially in 2012) if he didn't need the money for personal reasons. He has previously sold nearly 7 million shares in March.
I doubt he has any intention. There can be a third party whom he can sell his shares to for the takeover. Anyway, just my speculation.
Could it be Andy making known of his intention to release 10m shares beforehand and AMAT signalling of its disapproval by selling small share ahead of Andy? AMAT way of saying stop reducing Andy holding, else AMAT can also do the same. Just thinking aloud.
Vested
The Semicon industry is a very cyclical biz. Veterans in this biz will usually sell shares near the peaks and buy back shares near the troughs. When most of your wealth are vested in a cyclical biz, you will rebalance your portfolio during the peaks and troughs to manage your portfolio risks. You won't buy stocks near the peaks and sell near the troughs.
The stock has reached new highs after so many years. Nothing wrong in cashing out some of your gains. Anyway, there are always investors who are willing to buy the stock and then when the stock price rebound to previous highs, anyone will be tempted to take profit.
I was actually trading the stock on that day. What I observe is that there was Algo selling on a massive scale through a foreign broker. I thought institutions were selling but did not expect it to be the CEO.
(Not vested)
1) Andy has been selling over the past 3 years during which time the fundamental of UMS seems to have gone from strength to strength.
2) The selling by AMAT + Andy is a concern indeed – but then again assuming something negative had materialized or is going to happen to UMS which both AMAT and Andy knew about – what is the likelihood that AMAT – being one the most ethical company in the world - would team up with Andy to act and gain unfairly from it, at the expense of other investors ? Highly unlikely IMO.
3) Likely to be a “coincidence” that both were selling within days to each other.
4) “Life is a game” could probably be right – Andy wants to give more investors a chance to own a piece of his outstanding business – ha-ha!
(vested)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Shares sold by Andy Luong over the past 3 years:
26-April- 2012
Number of shares sold = 8,074,000
Average price per share = SGD 0.4765
27-April-2012
Number of shares sold = 4,570,000
Average price per share = SGD 0.47
01-March-2013
Number of shares sold = 948,000
Total consideration = SGD 422,350
Average price per share = SGD 0.4455
04-March-2013
Number of shares sold = 931,000
Total consideration = SGD 406,904
Average price per share = SGD 0.4371
03-March-2014
Number of shares sold = 5,976,000
Total consideration = SGD 3,883,901
Average price per share = SGD 0.6499
04-March-2014
Number of shares sold = 1,024,000
Total consideration = SGD 665,423
Average price per share = SGD 0.6498
05-June 2014 (post-bonus)
Number of shares sold = 10,000,000
Total consideration = SGD 6,939,000
Average price per share = SGD 0.6939 (post-bonus-basis); or =SGD 0.8673 (pre-bonus-basis)
Summary: Number of Shares sold in each year
2012 = 12,644,000
2013 = 1,879,000
2014 = 17,000,000
I never like the idea of a company gong for bonus shares. Stock split is a more efficient way as investors do not have to wait for the bonus shares to be delivered to their CDP account before they can sell those shares. If the shares are to plunge 50% on the ex bonus shares date, retail investors are at the losing end as they are not able to sell all their shares if need to.
Share holders who attend the AGM should also ask the CEO why he choose to sell shares in the open market to cause volatility in shares prices and not go for the less disruptive path via share placement or off market married deals. Especially when the amount of shares sold is quite substantial.
In some cases, share placement might even boost the stock price if the new shareholder is a known institution fund.