Thanks, Musicwhiz.
In other words, we must evaluate now how much the share price should drop for this event to have a margin of safety.
Already dropped 6.5 cents is good enough safety or not to go in now...
(18-01-2013, 09:53 AM)edragon Wrote: [ -> ]Already dropped 6.5 cents is good enough safety or not to go in now...
Haha. I don't think MW will answer that question of what price to enter. We have to do our own due diligence.
If you think it's a one-off event, you can enter the markets in tranches, as we cannot predict how far lower the price can go.
If you think that something is wrong internally and that the culture might be prevalent throughout the company, then you might want to stay away from the company.
Just my thoughts
Margin of safety is subjective when there is uncertainty involved. I have S Chips that are trading below net cash values.
Best to wait it out a bit and see how it develops.
This kind of practice is quite common in local SMEs. Just whether you choose to look into it or not. to have MNC level of compliance, the cost is significantly high.
Drifting lower. Now down 9.5 cents.
Be greedy when other are fearful...not easy to practice.
(18-01-2013, 10:19 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ]This kind of practice is quite common in local SMEs. Just whether you choose to look into it or not. to have MNC level of compliance, the cost is significantly high.
That's why i say AC really "Cho Gang". Some more report to cad ....
(18-01-2013, 10:37 AM)corydorus Wrote: [ -> ] (18-01-2013, 10:19 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ]This kind of practice is quite common in local SMEs. Just whether you choose to look into it or not. to have MNC level of compliance, the cost is significantly high.
That's why i say AC really "Cho Gang". Some more report to cad ....
According to the announcement, somebody wrote to the AC.
The AC got no choice.......
Ever sit in the AC meeting before, anybody??
It is all about asking the obvious questions and getting the answers documented in minutes......for future "references"
(18-01-2013, 10:37 AM)corydorus Wrote: [ -> ] (18-01-2013, 10:19 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ]This kind of practice is quite common in local SMEs. Just whether you choose to look into it or not. to have MNC level of compliance, the cost is significantly high.
That's why i say AC really "Cho Gang". Some more report to cad ....
if I have to guess, I think that auditor found problems. AC has no choice but to look into it.
The management has settled the case with the 2 subcontractors, and taken the hit. If I am senior management and my company is defrauded, the last thing on my mind is to settle the case without exhausting my options. the management need to reveal more on why they chose to settle the case. Its odd.
(18-01-2013, 10:19 AM)freedom Wrote: [ -> ]This kind of practice is quite common in local SMEs. Just whether you choose to look into it or not. to have MNC level of compliance, the cost is significantly high.
i agree with freedom. fraud is one off. but if kingsmen have to change their way of doing business, it is a fundamental problem and will result in lower profitability.
anyway, i thought this kind of arrangement and personal guarantee is part of the normal course of business. but im very concerned why would CAD be even involved in this case. on the surface, it seems like a simple oversight where about 300k was paid out to subcontractor B without management's notice. they could just sack the guy and that be the end of it. but it seems there is more to it....