Based on your 2015 eps estimate, the PE is like 3.7 times, assuming the recent low price of 74 cents. Thats quite insane because it literally implies that it would take 3.7 years to to achieve payback for investing in CES.
For a biz which achieves payback in 3.7 years, its surely cheap to enter. One Rochester took 6 months to achieve payback. For a company, the size of CES 3.7 years is not very long.
At 74 cents, the dividend yield is 5.4 pct assuming 4 cents ordinary dividends. At its 52 week peak price of 96 cents, the dividend return was (6/96) 6.25 pct based on recent 6 cents. 5.4 pct dividend yield is a close fight with the historic 6.25 pct dividend yield.
Did your estimate incorporate Fulcrum relaunch this year? Correct me if i'm wrong.
(02-08-2015, 11:18 PM)Curiousparty Wrote: [ -> ]NAV at start of 2015 $1.17
Hotel revaluation $0.25
2015 EPS $0.20
2016 EPS $0.21
Fernvale (estimated TOP - 2019) $0.19
TM project (estimated TOP 2019) $0.25
Estimated RNAV (as of now) $2.10
Is the current share price of only $0.745 far too low and unjustified?
___________
Recent Share Buybacks
$0.772 ( 1,309,400 shares) - 29 June 2015
$0.794 (745,500 shares) - 5 June 2015
_____________________________________________________________________________
(03-08-2015, 10:15 AM)vesfreq Wrote: [ -> ]Based on your 2015 eps estimate, the PE is like 3.7 times, assuming the recent low price of 74 cents. Thats quite insane because it literally implies that it would take 3.7 years to to achieve payback for investing in CES.
For a biz which achieves payback in 3.7 years, its surely cheap to enter. One Rochester took 6 months to achieve payback. For a company, the size of CES 3.7 years is not very long.
At 74 cents, the dividend yield is 5.4 pct assuming 4 cents ordinary dividends. At its 52 week peak price of 96 cents, the dividend return was (6/96) 6.25 pct based on recent 6 cents. 5.4 pct dividend yield is a close fight with the historic 6.25 pct dividend yield.
Did your estimate incorporate Fulcrum relaunch this year? Correct me if i'm wrong.
(02-08-2015, 11:18 PM)Curiousparty Wrote: [ -> ]NAV at start of 2015 $1.17
Hotel revaluation $0.25
2015 EPS $0.20
2016 EPS $0.21
Fernvale (estimated TOP - 2019) $0.19
TM project (estimated TOP 2019) $0.25
Estimated RNAV (as of now) $2.10
Is the current share price of only $0.745 far too low and unjustified?
___________
Recent Share Buybacks
$0.772 ( 1,309,400 shares) - 29 June 2015
$0.794 (745,500 shares) - 5 June 2015
_____________________________________________________________________________
Vesfreq you probably know using PE for developer stock is not useful at all if not irrelevant given lumpy earnings from tops, etc.. yield wise 4c will probably be the norm, u forgot to mention the last div payout was disappointing, likely causing some sell from disappointed opmi.
Sg prop market just started downtrend. Better time to enter would be when bidding for land sales becomes more competitive again showing prop market starting to recover
sent from my Galaxy Tab S
Interesting that they have reduced share count by close to 16 million shares, allowing them to have a higher EPS though profit has fallen.
Anyway, the key is price to book for a developer, so, the discount if anything has widened.
I think one way to play this is that after election, property will rebound story.
The other way is to wait and watch
I use CNAV method for developer/construction stocks, considering all the assets that will be generating income with a discount factor (investment properties, development properties etc etc), cash, all the current and non current liabilities, and still found that CES is the one of the most undervalued among a list of developer stocks in SGX, as in 'undervalued among the list' and not considering the macro factor such as the cooling property market
monitoring closely
jjlim84 Wrote:I use CNAV method for developer/construction stocks, considering all the assets that will be generating income with a discount factor (investment properties, development properties etc etc), cash, all the current and non current liabilities, and still found that CES is the one of the most undervalued among a list of developer stocks in SGX, as in 'undervalued among the list' and not considering the macro factor such as the cooling property market monitoring closely
Sorry what is CNAV ? Thank you
haha managed to hit 70cents today, remember not so long ago some VB was saying 70cent soon...
Interest rate rise coming, property and REIT sector will be hit badly.
This is when high gearing company like CES will suffer badly if they don't do something about their debt.
The Age (Melbourne, Australia)
July 29, 2015 Wednesday
First Edition
Bitter stoush over Tower
________________
Two Singaporean property owners with rival developments in Queen Street have become embroiled in one of Melbourne's most litigious real estate disputes.
One, Chip Eng Seng, is a construction giant listed on Singapore's stock exchange and the developer behind one the city's most controversial skyscrapers, Tower Melbourne, touted as one of the tallest residences in the CBD.
The other, a neighbouring property owner in Queen Street called Colonial Range, is a company controlled by wealthy private Singaporean investors - the Chow family.
The pair are locked in a bitter stoush over Tower Melbourne's impact on a development Colonial Range has planned next door that is fast becoming one of Melbourne's most litigious real estate conflicts.
The rivals have launched half a dozen actions against each other in the past two years. They include two Supreme Court appearances, a Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal case, several Building Appeal Board sittings and a formal complaint to Victoria's ombudsman.
Chip Eng Seng's Australian arm, CEL Australia, wrote to hundreds of Tower Melbourne apartment buyers this week expressing "frustration" about its soaring 71-storey project after protracted legal wrangling caused lengthy delays.
"There has currently been an unexpected delay in demolishing the existing building to allow construction of Tower Melbourne," CEL said.
CEL's 220-metre tower on the corner of Bourke Street made headlines when its apartments were sold months before the building gained planning approval in 2012. Colonial Range says the tower threw its plans for a 27-level mixed-use office, apartment and retail complex next door at 140 Queen Street, approved before Tower Melbourne's, into disarray.
A move in March by Colonial to cancel Tower Melbourne's planning permit was dismissed in VCAT.
Another ongoing spat over proposed works to protect Colonial Range's building during Tower Melbourne's construction was heard by the BAB, appealed to the Supreme Court and will again be adjudicated by the BAB in September.
Colonial Range's representative Jason Hopp said the Chow family wanted appropriate protection for their property. "The owners felt it was an overdevelopment of the site and that it couldn't be built without damaging our property," he said.
CEL's Australia representative, Tim Pearce, would not comment or confirm when construction of Tower Melbourne would proceed.
(17-08-2015, 10:01 PM)Curiousparty Wrote: [ -> ]The Age (Melbourne, Australia)
July 29, 2015 Wednesday
First Edition
Bitter stoush over Tower
________________
Two Singaporean property owners with rival developments in Queen Street have become embroiled in one of Melbourne's most litigious real estate disputes.
One, Chip Eng Seng, is a construction giant listed on Singapore's stock exchange and the developer behind one the city's most controversial skyscrapers, Tower Melbourne, touted as one of the tallest residences in the CBD.
The other, a neighbouring property owner in Queen Street called Colonial Range, is a company controlled by wealthy private Singaporean investors - the Chow family.
The pair are locked in a bitter stoush over Tower Melbourne's impact on a development Colonial Range has planned next door that is fast becoming one of Melbourne's most litigious real estate conflicts.
The rivals have launched half a dozen actions against each other in the past two years. They include two Supreme Court appearances, a Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal case, several Building Appeal Board sittings and a formal complaint to Victoria's ombudsman.
Chip Eng Seng's Australian arm, CEL Australia, wrote to hundreds of Tower Melbourne apartment buyers this week expressing "frustration" about its soaring 71-storey project after protracted legal wrangling caused lengthy delays.
"There has currently been an unexpected delay in demolishing the existing building to allow construction of Tower Melbourne," CEL said.
CEL's 220-metre tower on the corner of Bourke Street made headlines when its apartments were sold months before the building gained planning approval in 2012. Colonial Range says the tower threw its plans for a 27-level mixed-use office, apartment and retail complex next door at 140 Queen Street, approved before Tower Melbourne's, into disarray.
A move in March by Colonial to cancel Tower Melbourne's planning permit was dismissed in VCAT.
Another ongoing spat over proposed works to protect Colonial Range's building during Tower Melbourne's construction was heard by the BAB, appealed to the Supreme Court and will again be adjudicated by the BAB in September.
Colonial Range's representative Jason Hopp said the Chow family wanted appropriate protection for their property. "The owners felt it was an overdevelopment of the site and that it couldn't be built without damaging our property," he said.
CEL's Australia representative, Tim Pearce, would not comment or confirm when construction of Tower Melbourne would proceed.
this news is over two weeks old liao... CP you finally started shorting CES izzit??