Homepage
PR Newswire
17-10-2014, 10:15 AM
Thanks for the summary write up; that’s about the gist of the company affairs so far.
I am still puzzled by the 45M loan to CHC @8% which is good money for anyone, and how did the company come to have this lobang.
Was there some kind of collateral loan obligations? Or maybe there was some long standing relationship between some people, and based on trust.
It is to be noted that churches and temples receive lots of $ coming from tithes and almsgiving. With the $ received, they in turn pay it forward by donating to others.
It is ok so long as everything is arranged under proper corporate governance. Am wondering – are they considered ‘opportunist’ in this particular case.
I will be watching out for the company’s course of biz direction, of course the dividend payouts in the coming years.
Going forward, my gut feeling is that they will focus more into properties and financing, although logistics will still remain their core biz. There is a saying when you are in biz: the bigger the tree, the bigger the shade.
This is not a call to buy, esp from someone who knows nuts about technical and analysis; me using only common sense and gut feeling.
I am still puzzled by the 45M loan to CHC @8% which is good money for anyone, and how did the company come to have this lobang.
Was there some kind of collateral loan obligations? Or maybe there was some long standing relationship between some people, and based on trust.
It is to be noted that churches and temples receive lots of $ coming from tithes and almsgiving. With the $ received, they in turn pay it forward by donating to others.
It is ok so long as everything is arranged under proper corporate governance. Am wondering – are they considered ‘opportunist’ in this particular case.
I will be watching out for the company’s course of biz direction, of course the dividend payouts in the coming years.
Going forward, my gut feeling is that they will focus more into properties and financing, although logistics will still remain their core biz. There is a saying when you are in biz: the bigger the tree, the bigger the shade.
This is not a call to buy, esp from someone who knows nuts about technical and analysis; me using only common sense and gut feeling.
(17-10-2014, 12:21 AM)Raks Wrote: I first bought Freight Links years back at price approximately 0.055. The final buying decision was because the Khuas do not look like blood suckers. Senior Khua was the permanent honorary president of public free clinic society, vp of the singapore buddhist lodge etc... Kind of reminds me of the old Chinese Merchants 儒商。 The Khua family took over when Freight links has horrible debt-to-equity ratio, did a sell and lease back of their properties and invest into many (diworsified for many) places. I thought Sabanna Reits was relevant and selling the real property was an act of unlocking value. Like wise, they invest in LTH, one of the chemical storage that I thought was interesting. I kind of believe that sale-and lease back is not wrong on its own, just what are they going to do with the money?
For a few years, the metrics looks to be improving; although I kept reminding myself that the rental will kick in and become a drag on the profit margin for the logistic division.
Opted for scrip since day one and then sold half of my shares when it hit my target at ca. 1.07 - Whatever I'm holding I take it as free gift as the price moved up 1x. (This is not the right way to decide buy or sell but knowing myself well enough, I can now hold on to vibrant fearlessly even back to 0.05. After all the hard work, I gave into fear of loss and "cut" losses during GFC. )
EPS wise, now Vibrant, does looks like it's improving all the time. However, the cash flow from operation is getting worse. Cash from finance... Taking loan, repaying loan, and getting interest... The debt-equity looks too scary to me for brick and mortar. Vibrant issue notes at rather high interest and loan it out for higher interest.
I am not capable of analyzing financial stocks (bulk of vibrant's EPS comes from finance). Trending EPS, div yield etc is not fundamental enough to me. I remember vaguely that liability for bank is the money they have (need to pay interest) while asset is what they loan out (could make money by interest and fees etc). Then hedge against losses due to various factors.... This is where I can't see what Vibrant is doing. Big boys like Citibank, Bank of America write of millions here and there; fine millions here and there. Vibrant has a market cap of 200-300M. Some buddies mentioned Vibrant is doing something beyond their depth. Some one mentioned they took the opportunity. CHC can get money with minimal cost... I could neither agree nor disagree. With money, it's possible that they could have hired the right person and have done their due diligence.
Liability is the money they have and asest is money loan out to CHC etc, a higher debt-equity could simply means even more EPS for Vibrant share holders .... Should I analyse Vibrant as a pure logistic player? Majority of revenue still from non-finance biz ??? So... I keep half... And hope that they can be Berkshire one day. I will get excited if they do sale and lease-back again and buy an insurance company(Please dont take it too seriously about the Vibrant-->Berkshire)
(Vested, with odd lots.)