Chip Eng Seng

Unlike where TM and CUB site are located in Melbourne CBD, Docklands used to be a disused industrial area which has been zoned for urban renewal. So no surprise it is easy to get approval for residential tower projects there. Wiki : Docklands, Victoria

It will be interesting to see how "fast approval" he will be going forward with the more sensitive CBD projects and if he might start cancelling / reviewing some previously pre-approved projects..

Also, it might take a very long time for the new government to get the ball rolling again and there might be a rush to sell undeveloped sites with few takers given the risk of buying a site and sitting on it for a long time whilst waiting for approval.

Besides with so many projects ongoing and completing in melbourne, there is already a glut of empty and new apartments and rental returns for investors are already taking hit with rents for units actually dropping. Basically a repeat of what happened at the Gold Coast many years ago.
Melbourne rental market swings to favour tenants

Add in the slowing economy from mining bust, budget deficit and increasing unemployment, sustainability of the property prices, in particular for units doesn't look too good. Time to cash out for overseas developers.

Given the uncertainty over the approval process with the new party, does this give CES's Victoria Site (one of the largest in that CBD area) even greater premium since it is already pre-approved?

I am looking at least 100% gain on cost (~ 5 to 7 cents EPS gain).

(26-02-2015, 07:59 PM)BlueKelah Wrote: Unlike where TM and CUB site are located in Melbourne CBD, Docklands used to be a disused industrial area which has been zoned for urban renewal. So no surprise it is easy to get approval for residential tower projects there. Wiki : Docklands, Victoria

It will be interesting to see how "fast approval" he will be going forward with the more sensitive CBD projects and if he might start cancelling / reviewing some previously pre-approved projects..

Also, it might take a very long time for the new government to get the ball rolling again and there might be a rush to sell undeveloped sites with few takers given the risk of buying a site and sitting on it for a long time whilst waiting for approval.

Besides with so many projects ongoing and completing in melbourne, there is already a glut of empty and new apartments and rental returns for investors are already taking hit with rents for units actually dropping. Basically a repeat of what happened at the Gold Coast many years ago.
Melbourne rental market swings to favour tenants

Add in the slowing economy from mining bust, budget deficit and increasing unemployment, sustainability of the property prices, in particular for units doesn't look too good. Time to cash out for overseas developers.

FY2015 might be another record breaking year again in terms of NAV creation for shareholders.

The following projects will obtain TOP in 2015 (as guided by company)

1. Alex Hotel (mid 2015) - NAV gain ~ 30 cents
2. Junction 9 and 9 residence (remaining EPS Gain - 8 cents)
3. Fulcrum ( assumed EPS = 0)
4. Divestment of Victoria Land ( EPS Gain - 5 cents)
5. construction income (EPS - 4 cents)
6. Other recurring income (EPS - 2 cents)


Total EPS Gain = 19 cents
Total NAV Gain = 19 + 30 = 49 cents.

NAV by end of FY2015 = $1.66
20% discount to NAV = $1.33.

http://infopub.sgx.com/Apps?A=COW_CorpAn...c0d38dda37

(25-02-2015, 09:30 AM)vesfreq Wrote:

(24-02-2015, 06:02 PM)CCUV Wrote: ops...only 6c...hmmm....issit a party? I am not too sure

Its higher than previous year. Like the other VB mentioned, it also depends on your entry price. Even at 98 cents high today, its better than bank interest anytime.

For me this definitely need a party to celebrate it after keeping CES for more than 2 years+, which my the average cost is 53c, 6c is 11.27%. This exclude the 2 round of div (8 c in total).

Today just divested my Wing Tai for CES, added another 50,000 units for my family.

The reason to buy is I see the management bring forward the Junction 9 (comm & res) & Fulcrum to TOP @ 4Q 2015. Seems like the management is working hard for us and I believe they will maintain the 6c div. However, expected 2015 is not as good as 2014, but definitely a satisfying result.

Good if one is vested below 80 cents

But with the impending TOP of Alex Park Hotel, the days of sub $1 might be over very soon...

(26-02-2015, 10:10 PM)daddy14m Wrote:

(25-02-2015, 09:30 AM)vesfreq Wrote:

(24-02-2015, 06:02 PM)CCUV Wrote: ops...only 6c...hmmm....issit a party? I am not too sure

Its higher than previous year. Like the other VB mentioned, it also depends on your entry price. Even at 98 cents high today, its better than bank interest anytime.

For me this definitely need a party to celebrate it after keeping CES for more than 2 years+, which my the average cost is 53c, 6c is 11.27%. This exclude the 2 round of div (8 c in total).

Today just divested my Wing Tai for CES, added another 50,000 units for my family.

The reason to buy is I see the management bring forward the Junction 9 (comm & res) & Fulcrum to TOP @ 4Q 2015. Seems like the management is working hard for us and I believe they will maintain the 6c div. However, expected 2015 is not as good as 2014, but definitely a satisfying result.

(25-02-2015, 09:49 AM)BlueKelah Wrote:

(25-02-2015, 09:30 AM)westin1 Wrote: Wonder why so weak, results so good yet cant fly... thought this is an undervalued gem but sigh... a pity...

This is called priced in, everyone who is buying property stocks will know about CES and TOP of Alexandra. A bumper 44c EPS and only 6c paid out.

Market is forward looking. Besides expectations of earnings is not very clear on the Aussie side. Had TM gone ahead and to complete on time, stock would definitely have moved more.

not forgetting despite the TOPs, CES debt and gearing is still skyhigh. depending on how interest rate trending as per USA FED, this could pose a big risk.

Change of CEO with such good performance is also quite a big thing. Sure the company can give any good sounding excuse they want but could it signify things in the company not so good such that they had to "golden handshake" first?

For me I classifying the debt as good debt and bad debt.

Bad debt is you loan money to purchase into some unproductive assets:
1. pay urself high salary
2. excess share buy back that aim to push the share price
3. invest to some unproven projects
4. any other bad things that unable to service the loan - u just name it

So, potential bad debt is mainly Australia properties. However, worst scenario just earn less money but not loss money.


Good debt is the one that invested on productive assets:
1. bring more recurring income with profit and able to service the loan
2. projects that bring more profit

CES is very good to manage the debt too. They don't aim to maximize the profit and thus sale it fast which mean offload the risk to buyers (I am sorry to CES buyers if this saddened you, however don't worry, CES never take all the profit...).

Good debt is like Alexandra Hotel & CES centre. Both got recurring income and high capital gain (especially the hotel).

Alexandra Mall & Junction 9 also considered as good debt. Selling and completing fast. No risk to pay the debt.

Do let me know if you spotted any bad debt that I had missed out..


The major risk i see is not from the company, but from forumers. Some really push very hard for CES. I worry the company will burst by this. lol

I aim for long term investment and never sell CES (this also because the Mr Market outsmart me n-times in the past)

Well said.

A lot of analysts/forummers just methodically compute the debt-equity ratio and then jump to immediate conclusion that CES's gearing ratio is high, without going one step further to analyze the true nature of debt.

(26-02-2015, 10:40 PM)daddy14m Wrote:

(25-02-2015, 09:49 AM)BlueKelah Wrote:

(25-02-2015, 09:30 AM)westin1 Wrote: Wonder why so weak, results so good yet cant fly... thought this is an undervalued gem but sigh... a pity...

This is called priced in, everyone who is buying property stocks will know about CES and TOP of Alexandra. A bumper 44c EPS and only 6c paid out.

Market is forward looking. Besides expectations of earnings is not very clear on the Aussie side. Had TM gone ahead and to complete on time, stock would definitely have moved more.

not forgetting despite the TOPs, CES debt and gearing is still skyhigh. depending on how interest rate trending as per USA FED, this could pose a big risk.

Change of CEO with such good performance is also quite a big thing. Sure the company can give any good sounding excuse they want but could it signify things in the company not so good such that they had to "golden handshake" first?

For me I classifying the debt as good debt and bad debt.

Bad debt is you loan money to purchase into some unproductive assets:
1. pay urself high salary
2. excess share buy back that aim to push the share price
3. invest to some unproven projects
4. any other bad things that unable to service the loan - u just name it

So, potential bad debt is mainly Australia properties. However, worst scenario just earn less money but not loss money.


Good debt is the one that invested on productive assets:
1. bring more recurring income with profit and able to service the loan
2. projects that bring more profit

CES is very good to manage the debt too. They don't aim to maximize the profit and thus sale it fast which mean offload the risk to buyers (I am sorry to CES buyers if this saddened you, however don't worry, CES never take all the profit...).

Good debt is like Alexandra Hotel & CES centre. Both got recurring income and high capital gain (especially the hotel).

Alexandra Mall & Junction 9 also considered as good debt. Selling and completing fast. No risk to pay the debt.

Do let me know if you spotted any bad debt that I had missed out..

FY15 EPS might not match FY14 exceptional EPS but FY15 NAV gain should exceed that for FY14.

(26-02-2015, 10:10 PM)daddy14m Wrote:

(25-02-2015, 09:30 AM)vesfreq Wrote:

(24-02-2015, 06:02 PM)CCUV Wrote: ops...only 6c...hmmm....issit a party? I am not too sure

Its higher than previous year. Like the other VB mentioned, it also depends on your entry price. Even at 98 cents high today, its better than bank interest anytime.

For me this definitely need a party to celebrate it after keeping CES for more than 2 years+, which my the average cost is 53c, 6c is 11.27%. This exclude the 2 round of div (8 c in total).

Today just divested my Wing Tai for CES, added another 50,000 units for my family.

The reason to buy is I see the management bring forward the Junction 9 (comm & res) & Fulcrum to TOP @ 4Q 2015. Seems like the management is working hard for us and I believe they will maintain the 6c div. However, expected 2015 is not as good as 2014, but definitely a satisfying result.

Interesting definition on debt. I reckon all debts are borrowed with a good story e.g. productive asset, otherwise lender will not let go the money, right?

Unfortunately the story might be beyond borrower control, especially so amid the volatility and uncertainty nowadays...

Good or bad debt, should be determined by the structure of the debt, rather the way it is used, IMO

(26-02-2015, 10:52 PM)Curiousparty Wrote: Well said.

A lot of analysts/forummers just methodically compute the debt-equity ratio and then jump to immediate conclusion that CES's gearing ratio is high, without going one step further to analyze the true nature of debt.

(26-02-2015, 10:40 PM)daddy14m Wrote:

(25-02-2015, 09:49 AM)BlueKelah Wrote:

(25-02-2015, 09:30 AM)westin1 Wrote: Wonder why so weak, results so good yet cant fly... thought this is an undervalued gem but sigh... a pity...

This is called priced in, everyone who is buying property stocks will know about CES and TOP of Alexandra. A bumper 44c EPS and only 6c paid out.

Market is forward looking. Besides expectations of earnings is not very clear on the Aussie side. Had TM gone ahead and to complete on time, stock would definitely have moved more.

not forgetting despite the TOPs, CES debt and gearing is still skyhigh. depending on how interest rate trending as per USA FED, this could pose a big risk.

Change of CEO with such good performance is also quite a big thing. Sure the company can give any good sounding excuse they want but could it signify things in the company not so good such that they had to "golden handshake" first?

For me I classifying the debt as good debt and bad debt.

Bad debt is you loan money to purchase into some unproductive assets:
1. pay urself high salary
2. excess share buy back that aim to push the share price
3. invest to some unproven projects
4. any other bad things that unable to service the loan - u just name it

So, potential bad debt is mainly Australia properties. However, worst scenario just earn less money but not loss money.


Good debt is the one that invested on productive assets:
1. bring more recurring income with profit and able to service the loan
2. projects that bring more profit

CES is very good to manage the debt too. They don't aim to maximize the profit and thus sale it fast which mean offload the risk to buyers (I am sorry to CES buyers if this saddened you, however don't worry, CES never take all the profit...).

Good debt is like Alexandra Hotel & CES centre. Both got recurring income and high capital gain (especially the hotel).

Alexandra Mall & Junction 9 also considered as good debt. Selling and completing fast. No risk to pay the debt.

Do let me know if you spotted any bad debt that I had missed out..

(27-02-2015, 10:00 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: Interesting definition on debt. I reckon all debts are borrowed with a good story e.g. productive asset, otherwise lender will not let go the money, right?

Unfortunately the story might be beyond borrower control, especially so amid the volatility and uncertainty nowadays...

Good or bad debt, should be determined by the structure of the debt, rather the way it is used, IMO

By right, lender will not lend without a good story. Sometimes, the story teller also too good with story telling that bad story also sounds like some hollywood fantasy.

There was a notice from ICPAS (now ISCA) which says that all loans callable on demand has to be classified as current liabilities, even though repayment more than 12 months later. That also immediately affects the computation of gearing (ie, debt to equity ratio). As such, it goes beyond that "good story" and the user has to understand how basis of the figures used to compute gearing.

Though... for the many, the substance of loan callable on demand (imo) is still a long term loan.