(26-08-2013, 02:11 PM)Some-one Wrote: [ -> ] (26-08-2013, 01:36 PM)Behappyalways Wrote: [ -> ]100 marks for CMZ's management on CREATIVITY
two weeks ago there was this interview on Glaucus in TheEdge Magazine.......They are now looking at Singapore and HK markets......I bet more questionable companies will appear....
Glaucus's price target $0.
http://chinaminzhong.com.sg/analyst_coverage.htm
That's good. I like to see bearish reports instead of bullish reports from the analysts. 
http://www.theedgesingapore.com/the-dail...eport.html
"Six of the seven analysts covering Minzhong recommend investors buy the stock, while one rates the stock a hold, Bloomberg data show."
It showed that it is risky to rely on analyst's reports to invest...
(26-08-2013, 02:47 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ] (26-08-2013, 02:11 PM)Some-one Wrote: [ -> ] (26-08-2013, 01:36 PM)Behappyalways Wrote: [ -> ]100 marks for CMZ's management on CREATIVITY
two weeks ago there was this interview on Glaucus in TheEdge Magazine.......They are now looking at Singapore and HK markets......I bet more questionable companies will appear....
Glaucus's price target $0.
http://chinaminzhong.com.sg/analyst_coverage.htm
That's good. I like to see bearish reports instead of bullish reports from the analysts.
http://www.theedgesingapore.com/the-dail...eport.html
"Six of the seven analysts covering Minzhong recommend investors buy the stock, while one rates the stock a hold, Bloomberg data show."
It showed that it is risky to rely on analyst's reports to invest...
Later on, see who quietly dropped coverage....
An interesting read the report. I especially like the picture with the caption "Magic Mushrooms"
i wonder how will a circuit breaker (as recently proposed & announced by sgx) gg to help in this case today?
if there was one, long term shareholders will not suffer >40% drop today, on the other hand it will disadvantage shortsellers
if there was none, shortsellers are most happy
(26-08-2013, 04:20 PM)pianist Wrote: [ -> ]i wonder how will a circuit breaker (as recently proposed & announced by sgx) gg to help in this case today?
if there was one, long term shareholders will not suffer >40% drop today, on the other hand it will disadvantage shortsellers
if there was none, shortsellers are most happy
IMO, the circuit breaker will only slightly slow-down the sell-off, and will not make a difference in this case. Decline of 50%, will trigger the circuit breaker 5 times, and the delay are 25 minutes...
The proposed operation detail of the circuit breaker below
http://www.sgx.com/wps/wcm/connect/cp_en...r_Friendly
(26-08-2013, 04:57 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ] (26-08-2013, 04:20 PM)pianist Wrote: [ -> ]i wonder how will a circuit breaker (as recently proposed & announced by sgx) gg to help in this case today?
if there was one, long term shareholders will not suffer >40% drop today, on the other hand it will disadvantage shortsellers
if there was none, shortsellers are most happy
IMO, the circuit breaker will only slightly slow-down the sell-off, and will not make a difference in this case. Decline of 50%, will trigger the circuit breaker 5 times, and the delay are 25 minutes...
The proposed operation detail of the circuit breaker below
http://www.sgx.com/wps/wcm/connect/cp_en...r_Friendly
It will still make a difference, in this case, the counter will be halted after the 1st circuit breaker.....
(26-08-2013, 05:18 PM)desmondxyz Wrote: [ -> ] (26-08-2013, 04:57 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: [ -> ] (26-08-2013, 04:20 PM)pianist Wrote: [ -> ]i wonder how will a circuit breaker (as recently proposed & announced by sgx) gg to help in this case today?
if there was one, long term shareholders will not suffer >40% drop today, on the other hand it will disadvantage shortsellers
if there was none, shortsellers are most happy
IMO, the circuit breaker will only slightly slow-down the sell-off, and will not make a difference in this case. Decline of 50%, will trigger the circuit breaker 5 times, and the delay are 25 minutes...
The proposed operation detail of the circuit breaker below
http://www.sgx.com/wps/wcm/connect/cp_en...r_Friendly
It will still make a difference, in this case, the counter will be halted after the 1st circuit breaker.....
The sgx link seemed not working in my previous post.
I put up a different link here, which explained the circuit breaking operation. The counter will not halt upon triggering of circuit breaker, it will only limit the trading within a 10% band. The band will move down for next 10% after 5 minutes interval, and so on...
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/busi...08220.html
Unless you are an insider , you will never really know the "truth" until it's public news. To me if i buy now (buying during adverse report or market's bad news) is a "Tikum, Tikum". Been there before. Got burned to the tune of $30-40K.
God Bless us All.
Shalom.
Still vested in some "S CHIPS" .
(26-08-2013, 02:28 PM)d.o.g. Wrote: [ -> ] (26-08-2013, 01:58 PM)pianist Wrote: [ -> ]if i am not wrong, auditors are not held liable as they were merely providing an assurance service. based on IIA standards, auditors cannot even prevent fraud? is this true
Auditors are only paid to EXPRESS AN OPINION that the accounts are "true and fair". These opinions come with the usual disclaimers that they are reliant on documents as provided by management etc.
Auditors are not paid to CERTIFY that the accounts are "true and fair". Such certification puts the auditor at risk of a lawsuit if it turns out that the accounts are not "true and fair".
Many people assume that auditors do certify the accounts, when in fact they expressly do not. The only time auditors get into trouble is when they are grossly negligent e.g. ignoring obvious red flags, or when they are actively complicit e.g. Enron where Arthur Andersen helped to destroy evidence.
Which is to say, if the auditors decline to issue an unqualified opinion, there is definitely a problem with the accounts. But if the auditors issue an unqualified opinion, it doesn't mean there is nothing wrong, it just means the auditors didn't find anything that was of concern.
Frauds are usually uncovered by whistleblowers, whether disgruntled employees, customers or suppliers, who may or may not also be participants in the fraud. Auditors seldom uncover frauds, for the simple reason that the checks undertaken by auditors would suffice only to uncover the most basic/stupid frauds. Then again, many of the S-chips were/are what I consider "stupid frauds" and it still took the auditors ages (sometimes never) to figure out that something was amiss. So it looks like auditors do even less work than that.
(26-08-2013, 02:41 PM)safetyfirst Wrote: [ -> ]whose bread i eat, whose song i sing.
I dont really blame the auditors, in my own line of job, if i express my unbiased view all the time, i would end up offending many people and be out of job pretty soon.
Sometimes when i suggest what is the best course of action in my area of expertise, and my boss who obviously knows nothing in these areas, insist that i follow his instructions. I smile and i say "yes boss". Such is life. Haha when i earn enough to buy small pieces of good businesses, then i can kiss my boss goodbye. That was my thoughts when i was younger, now, i take great pleasure in gloating over silly views by my boss, afterall, it is to his disadvantage, not mine.
I always believe auditors should not be paid by the company. My suggestion is all listed companies pay a sum to a fund based on their market cap, and the fund appoints the auditors systematically for the SGX companies.
Where you get paid, that's where your incentive will be.
From my understanding (correct me if i am wrong), auditors are just reporting whatever a company wants to reveal to them. And most companies are smart enough not to be stupid. So are the auditors too. So there, ARS are just for your own judgement, not auditors.
Not to be too discouraged, if banks can make NPLs, so can we make NPIs(non-performing-investments)? NO?