Looking at the Lee's buys and the share price performance, my personal view is that the Lees kinda have squandered most of the goodwill of the minority shareholders.
Good evening everyone.
1 5bd sold...213 units sold left 160 units.
<vested>
(10-06-2014, 11:06 AM)Behappyalways Wrote: [ -> ]Looking at the Lee's buys and the share price performance, my personal view is that the Lees kinda have squandered most of the goodwill of the minority shareholders.
I dont believe they give a damn about what shareholders think.
Hi,
We can do something about this. In fact, we can consider sending another round of letter. This is because the mgmt has mentioned in their previous letter:
"With regard to a share buyback scheme, the Board is of the view that the basic criteria is that a company must have cash in excess of its operational and expansion needs. A share buyback mandate, when exercised, may not address the under performance of the share price as seen in the case of some local property / construction companies where the effect on share price is minimal. In fact, share prices of some of these companies are lower than before the shares were bought back." and "In view of the funding requirement as explained above and without a large cash float, the Board is of the view that it would not be appropriate for our Company to deploy its financial resources to embark on a share buyback scheme or to distribute a sizeable dividend, as these may curtail its ability for business expansion and compromise its financial position."
Their statements were true at the time of their writing. However, with the collection of the Laurels proceed which will be reflected as cash on the B/S and proceeds from Waterwoods EC, their stand will weaken a lot. In addition, we may have to counter argue that the aim of us is not primarily for a better share price; But to create value by using the excess cash to buy up Sing Holding's shares in the open market and cancelling it (if possible). This will increase the NAV/value of the smaller pool of shares.
My worry is that Boss Lee may preempt this move and move quickly to deploy the excess cash in a industrial property acquisition or investment instruments. Therefore as minority shareholders, we may have to act quickly once Sing Holding's Q2 result is released in Aug and a high cash balance is shown. In our letter, we will have to explain how buying Sing Holdings shares will be a better investment decision than some property acquisition.
For example, If Sing Holdings NAV is 55 cents and market price is 40 cents, the company will "earn 15 cents for every 40 cents invested into its own shares". P.S I am not very good in explaining how a share buy back can be linked to increasing returns to current shareholders.
(14-06-2014, 10:53 PM)CY09 Wrote: [ -> ]Hi,
We can do something about this. In fact, we can consider sending another round of letter. This is because the mgmt has mentioned in their previous letter:
"With regard to a share buyback scheme, the Board is of the view that the basic criteria is that a company must have cash in excess of its operational and expansion needs. A share buyback mandate, when exercised, may not address the under performance of the share price as seen in the case of some local property / construction companies where the effect on share price is minimal. In fact, share prices of some of these companies are lower than before the shares were bought back." and "In view of the funding requirement as explained above and without a large cash float, the Board is of the view that it would not be appropriate for our Company to deploy its financial resources to embark on a share buyback scheme or to distribute a sizeable dividend, as these may curtail its ability for business expansion and compromise its financial position."
Their statements were true at the time of their writing. However, with the collection of the Laurels proceed which will be reflected as cash on the B/S and proceeds from Waterwoods EC, their stand will weaken a lot. In addition, we may have to counter argue that the aim of us is not primarily for a better share price; But to create value by using the excess cash to buy up Sing Holding's shares in the open market and cancelling it (if possible). This will increase the NAV/value of the smaller pool of shares.
My worry is that Boss Lee may preempt this move and move quickly to deploy the excess cash in a industrial property acquisition or investment instruments. Therefore as minority shareholders, we may have to act quickly once Sing Holding's Q2 result is released in Aug and a high cash balance is shown. In our letter, we will have to explain how buying Sing Holdings shares will be a better investment decision than some property acquisition.
For example, If Sing Holdings NAV is 55 cents and market price is 40 cents, the company will "earn 15 cents for every 40 cents invested into its own shares". P.S I am not very good in explaining how a share buy back can be linked to increasing returns to current shareholders.
Very Simple, just quote warren Buffett theory its like buying back $1 at the price of 90cents.
The shares can always be held as treasury shares and placed out to institutional investors in future. If Lee is so worried about overpaying for the shares, he can always impose the condition that the shares can only be bought back if its trading at a discount to book value.
2013 Annual Report
Page 92
33. Capital management
.......
The Group manages its capital structure and makes adjustments to it, in light of changes in economic conditions. To maintain or adjust the capital structure, the Group may adjust the dividend payment to shareholders, RETURN CAPITAL TO SHAREHOLDERS or issue new shares........
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
even without including the cash from the CSC of the Laurels(Mar 2014) which I suppose they collected in Apr 2014(2Q2014), the debt to equity will continue to fall as they collect progressive payments from Waterwoods and use it to pare down debts. Well let's hope they preach what they say..........
(14-06-2014, 10:38 PM)propertyinvestor Wrote: [ -> ] (10-06-2014, 11:06 AM)Behappyalways Wrote: [ -> ]Looking at the Lee's buys and the share price performance, my personal view is that the Lees kinda have squandered most of the goodwill of the minority shareholders.
I dont believe they give a damn about what shareholders think.
There is a little LKY in all of us. As long as we believe we are doing the right thing (matter of whose perspective), we should firmly ignore what others say. Treat them like opposition members - noises only.
I think I will buy more Sing Holdings shares.
No need to send letters to complain. Apply Singapore's golden rule of the workplace; not happy, quit. In this case, not happy, sell the shares.
I am not trying to be sarcastic or mean. But for better or worse, this is the kind of values our society has fostered upon us all. I have been on the receiving end myself. And I have given up trying to reform people by talking about values. I now just learn to set my sails to follow the winds.
Waterwoods -217 units sold left 156 units (as of 15/06/2014)
Update: The Laurels May 2014
Cumulative Units Sold to-date: 228
Median Price ($psf) in the Month: 2717
Units sold in the month: 1
Cumulative Units Launched but Unsold: 1
Total Number of Units: 229
Update: Waterwoods EC May 2014
Cumulative Units Sold to-date: 203
Median Price ($psf) in the Month: 814
Units sold in the month: 16
Cumulative Units Launched but Unsold: 170
Total Number of Units: 373