Sino Grandness

(10-03-2015, 10:46 AM)simpleman Wrote:

(09-03-2015, 11:14 AM)cyclone Wrote:

(09-03-2015, 08:38 AM)simpleman Wrote: May I know what is the basis of saying that Sino Grandness is a replica of Eratat ?

Btw, who is saying that Sino Grandness is a replica of Eratat ? Not all kwek kwek kwek is a duck.

Cyclone

It was said by Desmndxyz on 2 Mar:

It really looks like a replica of eratat... Tapping on ridiculously high interest bond when it is desperate....

Ppl have short term memory...

Isn't it true Eratat was taping on high interest bond and Sino Grandness is also taping on high interest bond ?

(11-03-2015, 12:32 AM)cyclone Wrote:

(10-03-2015, 10:46 AM)simpleman Wrote:

(09-03-2015, 11:14 AM)cyclone Wrote:

(09-03-2015, 08:38 AM)simpleman Wrote: May I know what is the basis of saying that Sino Grandness is a replica of Eratat ?

Btw, who is saying that Sino Grandness is a replica of Eratat ? Not all kwek kwek kwek is a duck.

Cyclone

It was said by Desmndxyz on 2 Mar:

It really looks like a replica of eratat... Tapping on ridiculously high interest bond when it is desperate....

Ppl have short term memory...

Isn't it true Eratat was taping on high interest bond and Sino Grandness is also taping on high interest bond ?

Similarities:
1) ridiculously high interest bond
2) forever bloating receivables
3) story telling: for eratat is revonation incentive to distributors+new branding strategy, for SG is loquat ipo.

Feel free to add on to the list.

Cyclone

There is huge difference between Sino Grandness and Eratat.
Garden Fresh issued 2 convertible bonds, in 2011 and 2012. Holders of 2012 bonds imposed more lenient conditions.

Asdew invested directly in Sino in early 2014.

In 2014, professionals started preparatory work to list Garden Fresh after bondholders were satisfied that Garden Fresh had achieved the 3-year profit target.

In Dec 14, Thai investors invested in Sino and will lock up more than half of the shares it owns for 10 years.

There are suggestions that bondholders, Asdew and Thai investors did not carry out proper due diligence, and one has to do his own.

A fraudster is unlikely to subject himself to series of examinations because the probability of being exposed is higher.

(09-03-2015, 08:09 PM)Bluechipfan Wrote:

(09-03-2015, 07:37 PM)Wildreamz Wrote: Update on Proposed Spin-Off
http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Sino_Gra...eID=338033

SINO GRANDNESS TO PARTICIPATE AT CHENGDU TRADE EXHIBITION
BETWEEN 22-26 MARCH 2015
http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Sino_Gra...eID=338034

Nothing really interesting to me accept maybe: Commissioned Euromonitor International to conduct independent market research

(vested)

I got a hunch it's about time to take a long position. The biggest problem is people don't trust s-chips. Especially those that didn't pay dividend even though the company concerned is clearly a growth company. In this internet age, it is easy to spread fear than instil confidence when something 'seems' to be wrong. I would not go into the balance sheet and financial statement and the impending IPO because non believer would just brush it off as 'fake'. I just ask myself what if I am the bondholder, the creditor banks, the thai investors? All of them throwing money into this piece of Sh** company? I think the price has come down low enough for me to consider taking a long position.

As part of the Thai strategic investment, Sino G commit on a 10% payout starting from 2015

(10-03-2015, 09:39 PM)Young Investor Wrote:

(10-03-2015, 06:49 PM)specuvestor Wrote:

(10-03-2015, 11:39 AM)Young Investor Wrote:

(09-03-2015, 05:12 PM)chinafarmer Wrote:

(09-03-2015, 08:06 AM)Young Investor Wrote: If Sino G is not a fake company, it should be able to borrow money from the banks to pay the convertible bonds even if IPO is not successful.

If Sino G is not a fake company, sales figures are then real which means receivables are real too. As such, a better test would be its ability to pay off the convertible bonds from its receivabl

In the FY14 results, Trade Receivables amounted to RMB 1,110,207 m. Isn't this amount more than enough to pay off the bondholders?

The first CB will be expired in Jun 15 and second CB in Jul 15. The trade receivables can be used as contingency to pay off the bondholders by then. Sino G mentioned that Garden Fresh has 230 distributors and credit terms and credits limits to customers will be based on the duration of the relationships with the company. Customers with longer and better payment record, will be given longer credit terms.

Are you saying to do Receivables Factoring? Or you are saying the business customers will suddenly agree to pay off their receivables early so Sino G can pay off debt?

Receivables factoring is not advisable as it involved high discount rate, although factoring in China has grown over the year. Business customers will pay off their receivables depend on their credit term.

The question is of course why would the customers suddenly pay off now to reduce SinoG ballooning working capital and not do it say last September for example?

Working capital needs is part of business. You can't just strip out like that because if can be done, they would have done it, like companies with negative WC.

(11-03-2015, 09:55 AM)simpleman Wrote: Asdew invested directly in Sino in early 2014.

In 2014, professionals started preparatory work to list Garden Fresh after bondholders were satisfied that Garden Fresh had achieved the 3-year profit target.

In Dec 14, Thai investors invested in Sino and will lock up more than half of the shares it owns for 10 years.

Problem is: the IPO didn't happen. Bondholders are naturally keen for the IPO to happen. In general when companies increase capital, bond prices are stronger because the buffer becomes larger.

All the more this is a CB, or to be precise Exchangeable bond into IPO shares

Asdew is operator Alan Wang's vehicle. Of the 3 I think TTA investment is most intriguing

Specuvestor

Some investors said that incorporation of companies in the Cayman Islands and Hong Kong points to IPO process being in an advanced stage.

They also said that the appointment Euromonitor suggests that verification of sales etc has been completed.

Do you think they are correct.

(11-03-2015, 04:53 PM)simpleman Wrote: Specuvestor

Some investors said that incorporation of companies in the Cayman Islands and Hong Kong points to IPO process being in an advanced stage.

They also said that the appointment Euromonitor suggests that verification of sales etc has been completed.

Do you think they are correct.

Absolutely not.

None of the above are indicative of whether they have even submitted their listing application to the HKSE.

(09-03-2015, 10:06 PM)newborn1000 Wrote: This planet got so many stocks, why do one that is so difficult............

TOTALLY AGREED!

but it would be interesting to see the end of this...
human nature i guess?

NOT VESTED!

Why do we need to debate on who is correct and who is not? Specuvestor might be wrong in his views but if he's not vested, he lose nothing (maybe his ego). On the other hand, if the vested investors assumed something is correct and held on but the company ended up not as promised, then they will lose more than their ego.

The warnings and red flags around Sino Grandness can't be confirmed (if not they won't be warnings, they will be real fraud), but why not step back and evaluate both sides, rather than just rejecting/debating about the warnings.

(11-03-2015, 04:53 PM)simpleman Wrote: Specuvestor

Some investors said that incorporation of companies in the Cayman Islands and Hong Kong points to IPO process being in an advanced stage.

They also said that the appointment Euromonitor suggests that verification of sales etc has been completed.

Do you think they are correct.