BBR Holdings

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
(09-02-2015, 08:06 AM)revelationofpyramids Wrote: I assume BBR had recognized 60% of revenue for Bliss. Maybe wrong, but won't be wrong too much. I estimate total project pre-tax profit is $43m+ based on selling price of $1,300 psf and cost price of $1,007 psf. So 40% unrecognized is the figure i have above.

I also think BBR got a good deal at Yishun 4, considering CES bought Yishun Avenue 9 land at $794 psf compared to BBR $629 psf. Both sites offer 40% commercial and 60% resi. The lower price is maybe because BBR cannot sell the shops unit by unit but must keep for investment or sell whole.

The average selling price PSF of Bliss is around $1,000 - $1,100 psf, based on a table in The Edge this week. I am quite sure it isn't $1,300 psf, even property guru shows the ave monthly psf as much lower (peak of $1,200 psf and low of $900 psf)
I don't know the average construction costs but it is likely lower than $1,000 psf too
Bliss TOP is sometime in 4Q2015.
Traditionally for residential projects, most of the revenue recognition is around the middle phase to the late phase of the project, so I do think there's still substantial unrecognised profit in Q1 and Q2 2015.

<vested>
Reply
I get my estimate from URA website. Look for Bliss@Kovan caveats. Most units were sold at close to $1,300 psf and upwards. These are the smaller units of 3 bed and below. But later, prices were lower - close to $1,000psf because they are mainly the penthouse units with lots of terrace space and also these are very few units only. So i think if u read some reports on the net and the say $1,000+ psf they mean the recent transactions or in those months where only the big remainder units are sold. $1,250-1,300 psf is probably a good guess based on the URA figures. Check the 2102 March to October transacted prices and you will see what I mean.
Reply
(09-02-2015, 10:02 AM)revelationofpyramids Wrote: I get my estimate from URA website. Look for Bliss@Kovan caveats. Most units were sold at close to $1,300 psf and upwards. These are the smaller units of 3 bed and below. But later, prices were lower - close to $1,000psf because they are mainly the penthouse units with lots of terrace space and also these are very few units only. So i think if u read some reports on the net and the say $1,000+ psf they mean the recent transactions or in those months where only the big remainder units are sold. $1,250-1,300 psf is probably a good guess based on the URA figures. Check the 2102 March to October transacted prices and you will see what I mean.

The article in The Edge was a table of all projects with TOP this year. And it stated the $1000+ psf is the average psf of all units sold thus far (about 95% sold), not the recent transactions.
While the URA is a good way to have some form of a gauge, there are 2 problems with this. The site only lists the past transactions in the previous 2 years. i.e. there are only 64 records. We all know there are more than 64 units sold.
Also, not all units sold have caveats lodged. It is not a necessity, although it is commonly done.
Lastly, the big units of 2000+ sq ft, are 4 times the size of some of the smaller units of 500+ sq ft, so the "weightage" in terms of ave psf is correspondingly 4times for these large units. Hence, its not very accurate to just have a rough scan through the URA records and guess the psf.
Having said that, I have no idea how the edge article got the ave psf either.
Reply
BBR Holdings records S$301.7 million revenue

for the 9 months ended 30 September 2015

Highlights:

Stronger gross profit margin at 6% for 9M2015

 Net asset value at S$132.2 m or 42.93 cents per share

 Healthy order book of S$515 million


SINGAPORE, 6 November 2015 – Mainboard-listed BBR Holdings (S) Ltd (BBR控股) (BBR or the Group) records S$301.7 million in revenue for the nine months ended 30 September 2015 (9M2015), a 40% decline as compared to the corresponding period in 2014 (9M2014). Net profit attributable to equity holders decreased from S$11.6 million for 9M2014 to S$2.0 million for 9M2015.

IMHO, I'm expecting a pretty lacklustre FY2015 (Earnings prob around 1 cent or so), and a pretty lacklustre 9M2016 as well.
BUT 4Q2016 should have some earnings fireworks, leading to eventual record earnings in FY16. That should be reflected in the share price movement sometime in late 2H2016.

<vested - 1750 lots>
Reply
(08-11-2015, 11:33 PM)GFG Wrote: BBR Holdings records S$301.7 million revenue

for the 9 months ended 30 September 2015

Highlights:

Stronger gross profit margin at 6% for 9M2015

 Net asset value at S$132.2 m or 42.93 cents per share

 Healthy order book of S$515 million


SINGAPORE, 6 November 2015 – Mainboard-listed BBR Holdings (S) Ltd (BBR控股) (BBR or the Group) records S$301.7 million in revenue for the nine months ended 30 September 2015 (9M2015), a 40% decline as compared to the corresponding period in 2014 (9M2014). Net profit attributable to equity holders decreased from S$11.6 million for 9M2014 to S$2.0 million for 9M2015.

IMHO, I'm expecting a pretty lacklustre FY2015 (Earnings prob around 1 cent or so), and a pretty lacklustre 9M2016 as well.
BUT 4Q2016 should have some earnings fireworks, leading to eventual record earnings in FY16. That should be reflected in the share price movement sometime in late 2H2016.

<vested - 1750 lots>

FY15 results released:

BBR Holdings delivers S$425.5 million revenue for the full year ended 31 December 2015

Highlights:

Net asset value at S$132.8 m or 43.12 cents per share

 First and final (tax-exempt one-tier) dividend of 0.4 cents per share

 Healthy order book of S$415 million

EPS of 0.76cents, slightly worse off than I expected in an earlier post.
Reply
Just finished reading the 2015AR.
Few highlights:
1. Diversification (or rather diworsification) into a few new businesses: solar panel rental, ppvc & retail shopping centre.
2. While the existing Core businesses continue the poor result.
General construction continue bleeding.
Msia unit's profit was more than the group's total net profit. How ironic.

3. Currently share price at about $0.17 while Book Value at $0.43 and yet the Management continue to do nothing.
From capital allocation perspective, this reflects badly on the ability of the capital allocator (aka CEO).
4. Yet, his pay was above S$1.5M when the net profit was S$2.6M.
Ohh and don't forget the dividend is cut down to 0.4cent, which will only be about $1.2M.

My takes:
1. If the activist shareholders are well established in Sg, this should be a potential co to "improve" on.
2. With majority shareholders owning less than 35%, the task will not be too tough.
3. Take a big enough stakes, divest unprofitable businesses, buy back shares.

I am a small fish hence the rhetoric and not bold action.

Of course this is just my personal view and should be taken as a pinch of salt.

<vested, non core>
My views are your Gilbert & Sullivan's:
"The flowers that bloom in the spring, have nothing to do with the case".
Reply
http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/1Q16_Pro...eID=401118

Expected to report net loss for Q1.
Diworsification story continues.
Capital allocator incompetency continues.

Let's see if the top person's pay is still above S$1.5M??

<vested>
My views are your Gilbert & Sullivan's:
"The flowers that bloom in the spring, have nothing to do with the case".
Reply
Anyone attended the AGM?
Care to share insights?

BBR has acquired both Moderna Homes and Angels Medical Pte Ltd fully such that they are now subsidiaries
OK I see the logic behind Moderna Homes (PPVC), but they are losing money and has negative NAV. The acquisition price seems way excessive

Angels Medical has never made sense to me.
Reply
Preferably the new businesses they acquire should have synergy to their existing core business and improve the overall group's business. Also, the new businesses must be revenue, earnings and cashflows accretive to the core business. If not, why the sense to diversify? That will be diworsification instead, taking on more distractions from their core business and drags down the group's overall revenue, earnings and cashflows.
Reply
(27-04-2016, 12:30 PM)jeremyow Wrote: Preferably the new businesses they acquire should have synergy to their existing core business and improve the overall group's business. Also, the new businesses must be revenue, earnings and cashflows accretive to the core business. If not, why the sense to diversify? That will be diworsification instead, taking on more distractions from their core business and drags down the group's overall revenue, earnings and cashflows.

The acquisition news came out after AGM so Prob nobody asked, but BBR has a stake in Angels Medical for some years now, and it's totally unrelated
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)