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

Yes sir! follow boss lee! buy buy buy!

Waterwoods update:
232 units sold left 141 units. (as of 11/7/2014)


They are going to raise the price for 3 bedrooms as not many left.....
http://www.executivecondominium.sg/Waterwoods.html

(06-07-2014, 02:04 PM)kyle Wrote: [ -> ]Read an article on Stproperty already starting coverage of Robin Residence in new Launches.

http://www.stproperty.sg/articles-property/new-launches/robin-residences-at-bukit-timah/a/167953

Waterwoods update:
224 units sold left 149 units, 60% sold out. (as of 4/7/2014)

Replied to Ms Tay today,

Thank you for your email.

Referring to your email dated 18 March 2014, you mentioned: "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." 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."

Firstly, with the Laurels obtaining CSC status in end March; the company would have collected the remaining approximate $100M of proceeds. Netting off dividend repayment to minority owners in the Laurels JV, loan repayments and cash proceeds from the Waterwoods EC project, Sing Holdings currently has a substantial cash balance. With a cash reserves in excess of its operational needs, Sing Holdings is in a strong position to conduct a share buyback scheme or distribute a sizable dividend.

Secondly, I wish to highlight the Board should view share buybacks on the same basis as any land acquisition. This is because substantial value of Sing Holdings is now in the Robin Road site. Buying the company shares now is no different from using the excess cash for land acquisition or any investment opportunities. In addition, a share buyback enables shareholder to enjoy a 40% return. This is because the company now trades at about 70% to its reported NAV of 54.5 cents. Thus for every 38 cents spent by the company in buyback, shareholders obtain a return of 54.5 cents immediately. Under current challenging property conditions, it is tough for the company to seek out land acquisitions providing a 40% return on capital and with such certainty.

Lastly, I wish to highlight during the period of 21 May 2014 to present, Mr Lee Sze Hao and F. H. Lee Holdings, both majority shareholders, have purchased shares from the open market. Given that we, the minority shareholders, had previously voiced out the undervaluation of Sing Holding's; it seems both groups hold similar views that Sing Holdings' fundamental value is being undervalued by the market. It is worth noting Mr. Lee Fee Huang, Mr. Lee Sze Hao and Mr. Lee Sze Leong have deemed interest in F. H. Lee Holdings and sit on the current Board of Directors. Therefore, initiating a share buy back scheme and exercising it should not be of a problem.

I sincerely hope the Board can re-consider its position under present circumstances.

Feel free to edit or send it

Thx CY09.

I was thinking of writing an email after the 2Q interim result. Maybe it is better to write it now. I will forward to my friends and ask them to sign in and emailed to the mgmt. I hope all those who have vested interest and agreed with what CY09 wrote would also forward the email to the management. We need a sizeable group of investors to write to them else the management might decide not to do anything about it. Our last group email to them made them called for a board meeting to discuss our requests. Hence I hope all those who agree with the email content would participate and put in the effort to forward the email to Sing Holdings.

As of 1Q2014 result, net debt to equity is 0.7 times (0.8 in FY2014) with net debt of $158.2m and equity $225.3m. With the $100m receivables from the CSC of The Laurels, Sing Holdings' 70% stake would be around $70m cash. Together with more units of Waterwoods sold and progressive payments collected from Waterwoods which they would use to pare down long term debts, cash would increase significantly while debts are being pared down with collection from Waterwoods....net debt to equity would be 0.3 or 0.4 by 2Q2014. Company could easily do a pay out and if there is an attractive project, company could easy take on debts since net debt to equity might be around 0.3 in 2Q2014.

So please do your part and forward the email if you agree with CY09.

I will post the email as below.....


or you can visit the website to get the email address.

http://singholdings.com/contact-us.html


14 July 2014

Sing Holdings Limited
96 Robinson Road
#10-01 SIF Building
Singapore 068899

Dear Board of Directors and Mr Lee



Referring to your email dated 18 March 2014, you mentioned: "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." 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."

Firstly, with the Laurels obtaining CSC status in end March; the company would have collected the remaining approximate $100M of proceeds. Netting off dividend repayment to minority owners in the Laurels JV, loan repayments and cash proceeds from the Waterwoods EC project, Sing Holdings currently has a substantial cash balance. With a cash reserves in excess of its operational needs, Sing Holdings is in a strong position to conduct a share buyback scheme or distribute a sizable dividend.

Secondly, I wish to highlight the Board should view share buybacks on the same basis as any land acquisition. This is because substantial value of Sing Holdings is now in the Robin Road site. Buying the company shares now is no different from using the excess cash for land acquisition or any investment opportunities. In addition, a share buyback enables shareholder to enjoy a 40% return. This is because the company now trades at about 70% to its reported NAV of 54.5 cents. Thus for every 38 cents spent by the company in buyback, shareholders obtain a return of 54.5 cents immediately. Under current challenging property conditions, it is tough for the company to seek out land acquisitions providing a 40% return on capital and with such certainty.

Lastly, I wish to highlight during the period of 21 May 2014 to present, Mr Lee Sze Hao and F. H. Lee Holdings, both majority shareholders, have purchased shares from the open market. Given that we, the minority shareholders, had previously voiced out the undervaluation of Sing Holding's; it seems both groups hold similar views that Sing Holdings' fundamental value is being undervalued by the market. It is worth noting Mr. Lee Fee Huang, Mr. Lee Sze Hao and Mr. Lee Sze Leong have deemed interest in F. H. Lee Holdings and sit on the current Board of Directors. Therefore, initiating a share buy back scheme and exercising it should not be of a problem.

I sincerely hope the Board can re-consider its position under present circumstances.
Thank You.

Yours Sincerely
Shareholder A's name
Shareholder B's name
.....
.....
Shareholder E's name

They might ignore the email or give another excuse for not conducting share buyback or special dividend. They are in better position to know the cash flow condition of the company, I believe whatever mentioned in the letter already been through their mind, the only reason why it never happen is simply because the management has something else in mind or they just simply want to keep the company undervalued with excessive cash pile, as simple as that.

Why not Oust the management? Somebody propose a resolution to pass a vote of no confidence on the management. They only control at most 45% of the company shares.

(14-07-2014, 10:04 AM)propertyinvestor Wrote: [ -> ]Why not Oust the management? Somebody propose a resolution to pass a vote of no confidence on the management. They only control at most 45% of the company shares.

Quite hard to get 10% to do requistion.

Minority Shareholders collectively have to signal their displeasure by consistently vote AGAINST all RESOLUTIONS (except the dividend one) at AGM.
And get Board to publish the voting details on SGXNET.

(14-07-2014, 10:17 AM)opmi Wrote: [ -> ]

(14-07-2014, 10:04 AM)propertyinvestor Wrote: [ -> ]Why not Oust the management? Somebody propose a resolution to pass a vote of no confidence on the management. They only control at most 45% of the company shares.

Quite hard to get 10% to do requistion.

Minority Shareholders collectively have to signal their displeasure by consistently vote AGAINST all RESOLUTIONS (except the dividend one) at AGM.
And get Board to publish the voting details on SGXNET.

Anybody wants to contact Mr David Gerald from SIAS to assist? Its about time somebody takes the lead. All minority shareholders who are interested can offer to pledge their shares to form the requisite 10% and call for EGM.

ok I just sent out the email to sing holdings. 5 names......pls support if you own shares and agree to the content to the email. They simply have too much cash at the moment so let's 'remind' them to adjust the capital structure.

(15-06-2014, 11:51 AM)Behappyalways Wrote: [ -> ]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..........

From observations (CMA, Petris, etc), SIAS only step in when minority shareholders are obviously being whacked. Sing holdings haven't reached that stage yet.


For the 10% idea, u organise the effort is it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk