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

Is there any tell tale sign/reason that major shareholders transfer their shares in nominee account to personal CDP account ?
Easy and more direct to execute sales ?
or ...

(08-11-2013, 09:32 AM)cfa Wrote: [ -> ]Is there any tell tale sign/reason that major shareholders transfer their shares in nominee account to personal CDP account ?
Easy and more direct to execute sales ?
or ...

No It just means they require more voting rights or they are readjusting their share financing portfolio.

Its the transfer in from CDP to nominee that Im more worried.

(08-11-2013, 09:38 AM)propertyinvestor Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-11-2013, 09:32 AM)cfa Wrote: [ -> ]Is there any tell tale sign/reason that major shareholders transfer their shares in nominee account to personal CDP account ?
Easy and more direct to execute sales ?
or ...

No It just means they require more voting rights or they are readjusting their share financing portfolio.

Its the transfer in from CDP to nominee that Im more worried.

Why you think more worry from CDP to nominee ? Thanks.

(08-11-2013, 09:38 AM)propertyinvestor Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-11-2013, 09:32 AM)cfa Wrote: [ -> ]Is there any tell tale sign/reason that major shareholders transfer their shares in nominee account to personal CDP account ?
Easy and more direct to execute sales ?
or ...

No It just means they require more voting rights or they are readjusting their share financing portfolio.

Its the transfer in from CDP to nominee that Im more worried.

Actually they can still vote by proxy under the nominees account. It is not about the voting.

CDP to nominees may means they are getting margin financing for their shares. See latest example of what can happen when subt,shareholder used margin financing

http://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/hkstock...7832.shtml

may feed a vicious cycle of margin calls triggered by a rumour.

Thanks. Learnt something new today.

(08-11-2013, 10:00 AM)opmi Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-11-2013, 09:38 AM)propertyinvestor Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-11-2013, 09:32 AM)cfa Wrote: [ -> ]Is there any tell tale sign/reason that major shareholders transfer their shares in nominee account to personal CDP account ?
Easy and more direct to execute sales ?
or ...

No It just means they require more voting rights or they are readjusting their share financing portfolio.

Its the transfer in from CDP to nominee that Im more worried.

Actually they can still vote by proxy under the nominees account. It is not about the voting.

CDP to nominees may means they are getting margin financing for their shares. See latest example of what can happen when subt,shareholder used margin financing

http://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/hkstock...832.shtmle

may feed a vicious cycle of margin calls triggered by a rumour.

Sometimes its about the voting. Not all nominees account service provider has a policy of proxying the owners of their respective holdings because under companies act, a person or corporation can only appoint up to 2 proxies.

if the Nominee is currently holding shares in the company on behalf of more than 2 people, it would be difficult for them to decide who should they proxy. So most of them would just either adopt a

a) A no proxy policy
b) first request first proxy basis

And yes, transfer of shares in usually indicates that the shareholder is probably taking a loan and is subject to market risk

If you are the biggest shareholders in that nominee account, they will usually call to ask if you want the proxy.
Some nominees doing that.

If not, I go buy 1 lot and go 'first come first serve' then vote the substantial shareholder vote...I wish...hhahaha.

(08-11-2013, 10:31 AM)propertyinvestor Wrote: [ -> ]Sometimes its about the voting. Not all nominees account service provider has a policy of proxying the owners of their respective holdings because under companies act, a person or corporation can only appoint up to 2 proxies.

if the Nominee is currently holding shares in the company on behalf of more than 2 people, it would be difficult for them to decide who should they proxy. So most of them would just either adopt a

a) A no proxy policy
b) first request first proxy basis

And yes, transfer of shares in usually indicates that the shareholder is probably taking a loan and is subject to market risk

I am not so sure on the limitation. CPF is able to issue proxies for those vested with CPF fund, so the limitation of two seems impractical.

I might be wrong, time to do research on this topic...

CPF can only issue 'observer' status to CPFIS holders. The law to issue CPF proxy directly not implemented yet.

This law may change the dynamics of grassroot activism as CPFIS holders may be big holders of blue chips.

(08-11-2013, 10:42 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ]

(08-11-2013, 10:31 AM)propertyinvestor Wrote: [ -> ]Sometimes its about the voting. Not all nominees account service provider has a policy of proxying the owners of their respective holdings because under companies act, a person or corporation can only appoint up to 2 proxies.

if the Nominee is currently holding shares in the company on behalf of more than 2 people, it would be difficult for them to decide who should they proxy. So most of them would just either adopt a

a) A no proxy policy
b) first request first proxy basis

And yes, transfer of shares in usually indicates that the shareholder is probably taking a loan and is subject to market risk

I am not so sure on the limitation. CPF is able to issue proxies for those vested with CPF fund, so the limitation of two seems impractical.

I might be wrong, time to do research on this topic...

Yes CPF is able to do that because the companies act was amended recently to allow CPF to proxy its members with no restrictions