(02-02-2018, 11:55 AM)weijian Wrote: [ -> ]Hi CY09,
The rig that MPM had with SCM, is already sold to Borr Drilling. Isn't explicitly mentioned but the numbers add up.
https://www.valuebuddies.com/thread-1795...#pid143274
http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/SCM%20Pr...eID=473339
hi holyimage,
Rather than "good connections", in some sense i think Temasek is doing national service by been a "capital provider of last resort". The local OnG industry is substantial and a critical mass needs to be sustained to maintain the ecosystem - from the upstream rig builders to the service providers (up/downstream). Previously, the Gov's help came in the form of (1) delayed implementation of foreign worker quota tightening and (2) nudge the banks to keep their credit lines open by offering co-sharing of risk.
The worst (in terms of oil price) is probably over but it is still long winter in the upstream markets. While both companies have been given a lifeline but it is not guaranteed they can survive. But it is always good to have Big Daddy behind.
but why MPM and not Ezra or Ezion etc?
(04-02-2018, 04:31 PM)touzi Wrote: [ -> ]Sean Lee's interview with Zaobao. He admitted that the crisis caught him by surprise and seems determined to turn the company around (out of obligation). Wish him well.
http://www.zaobao.com.sg/zfinance/person...204-832596
Creditors and shareholders all suffered heavy losses , but he could afford to fly to Japan with his families to do skiing in January.
I dont think the holiday has much of an issue. He probably had savings from his 6-figure annual salary earned while running MPM.
What amuses me is that if he is determined to save the company and that he was part of the team who ran MPM to the ground; he should not be offering himself a remuneration package for saving the company, which will dilute shareholder significantly (CEO and sibling remuneration package will form 8% of the enlarged share capital). The value of the remuneration package assuming 2.8 cents per share is higher than the sum of the past 5 years of fee he drew from MPM.
The actions and words of the CEO does not match and that is a red flag for any would be investors.
The way he put it as if he volunteer to stay back to turn the company around .
(04-02-2018, 05:35 PM)cfa Wrote: [ -> ]The way he put it as if he volunteer to stay back to turn the company around .
that sounds sooo familiar!! highly paid volunteer!!! hehehe! :
was wondering what was temasick thinking when they purchase the uob's 10% of MPM....
From the largest investor's perspective:
http://www.straitstimes.com/business/com...-in-people
I hope the Teo's decision is not influenced by Darren's friendship with Sean Lee. Darren and Sean are childhood friends and the amount the Teo's invested is small beer compared to their wealth. To me, the vote of confidence from people like Jeffrey Hng of Penguin is more important. He knows the industry and he is also putting in his own money (and from the way he runs Penguin, he must be frugal
).
This is not a comment on the sensibility of investing in MPM, but personally I have a huge disdain for people who screw up and then make a big moral show of how they intend to "save everyone" from the mess he/she created in the first place. Instead of apologizing for the screw up, such individuals try to spin the whole thing into a lonely hero saving mankind despite overwhelming odds narrative.
From a reputation perspective, it's a sure win bet. If he succeeds, he will be lauded as a never give up savior who turned things around. If he fails, he will be a tragic hero who went down with the flames. Seen enough of public/corporate politicians to smell this BS from a mile away.