Boustead Projects

Tks.

Odd lots vested.

(01-06-2015, 11:08 AM)Curiousparty Wrote: outstanding shares = 320mil.

For investment properties, it is reflected at "original book value - accumulated depreciation" (i.e. carrying value) in the balance sheet.

To get actual market valuation, BP would engage consultants to do so. (page 2 of prospectus)

(01-06-2015, 02:21 AM)calebseah Wrote: Hey guys,

How did you guys to calculate the RNAV?
I Was reading the latest unaudited result,
Using Net Asset = 252,645,000
Outstanding shares = 15,000,000

I got a big number of $16.843... Did i get it wrongly?

Hi!

Based on what i can see is that the valuation works out to 367.8m in terms of valuers valuation, but given boustead projects do not revalue their properties.

Are we going to say that its real nav is higher if it gets revalued but it won't right?
The realised profit only comes when they sell it the property then they will reap the valuation valued by valuers...?

(vested)

(01-06-2015, 10:28 PM)Curiousparty Wrote: Tks.

Odd lots vested.

It is a good gesture, to state your interest, on key post of company. A view from interested party, and 3rd party, are usually carrying different weight.

Thanks for the update.

Regards
Moderator

Moderator log:

I have removed a post, which focus only on a person. Please don't focus on any individual. We are all here to benefit from other's sharing and view.

A reminder, you are free to put anyone into your ignore-list, if you find him/her unbearable.

Regards
Moderator

if u read the prospectus, u can see that one of BP strategies is also to "sell" developed industrial properties, other than D&B and DBL.

when these properties are sold, the revaluation gain (if any) would be realized. Over the years, they have been disposing of properties on and off.

tks.

(01-06-2015, 11:48 PM)calebseah Wrote:

(01-06-2015, 11:08 AM)Curiousparty Wrote: outstanding shares = 320mil.

For investment properties, it is reflected at "original book value - accumulated depreciation" (i.e. carrying value) in the balance sheet.

To get actual market valuation, BP would engage consultants to do so. (page 2 of prospectus)

(01-06-2015, 02:21 AM)calebseah Wrote: Hey guys,

How did you guys to calculate the RNAV?
I Was reading the latest unaudited result,
Using Net Asset = 252,645,000
Outstanding shares = 15,000,000

I got a big number of $16.843... Did i get it wrongly?

Hi!

Based on what i can see is that the valuation works out to 367.8m in terms of valuers valuation, but given boustead projects do not revalue their properties.

Are we going to say that its real nav is higher if it gets revalued but it won't right?
The realised profit only comes when they sell it the property then they will reap the valuation valued by valuers...?

(vested)

(31-05-2015, 01:45 AM)Nick Wrote: To be fair, with the exception of REITs, I can't think of many listed companies with a large rental income stream trading at their RNAV level. Companies such as Hwa Hong (freehold UK, SG assets), Ho Bee Land (prime UK properties and Metropolis), HK Land (crown jewels all over Asia) and UIC (owns Singland) trade at a significant discount to their RNAV. I won't find it surprising that BP (owns leasehold industrial properties) trade at a discount too. Perhaps, this is due to the RNAV failing to capture the PV of the corporate and tax cost in these corporate entities.

I would prefer valuing BP using the income stream method since it is unlikely to be liquidated. I have no idea what income stream the D&B division will post. But as you have mentioned, the DB&L earnings should be easily extrapolated. More contracts, more earnings. The converse is also true.

(Not Vested)

CP is rehashing what he has been saying in CES thread. Similarly Nick is saying what I have said there... stock cannot trade near RNAV for asset heavy company which by definition reduces the ROIC, unless they have high payout ratio like the REITS. The again when you have high payout ratio you have low growth as you cannot recycle the asset but have to make cash calls as and when.

(02-06-2015, 09:31 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: Moderator log:

I have removed a post, which focus only on a person. Please don't focus on any individual. We are all here to benefit from other's sharing and view.

A reminder, you are free to put anyone into your ignore-list, if you find him/her unbearable.

Regards
Moderator

My post may be repetitive but I have to say again as the problem arises again and again.
Fyi, if you find a post improper, you can report to Moderators. Just let Moderators decide what to do. You can also put a member to Ignore List. Focus on the topic, NOT on person. Let's make the forum a condusive place for intelectual idea challenge and exchange.
Thanks for your cooperation.

BP (2016 Forecast)
a. recurrent EPS (4.7 cents)
b. development profit (5 cents)
Total EPS = 9.7 cents.
% of recurring income = 48%.

CES (2016 Forecast)
a. recurrent EPS (4 cents); hotel ops might be incurring losses in initial 2-3 years, dragging down EPS
b. development profit (12 cents from Nine Residence/Junction 9, excluding Fulcrum)
Total EPS = 16 cents.
% of recurring income = 25%.
Hence, CES is trading closer and closer to 80 cents...

_______
1. The quality of recurring income is very different. BP's lease is 12 leases for MNC/high quality end users (e.g. high VA industries, etc). CES has to bid for construction projects every year.

2. BP is not in the business of "selling" properties and hence has no inventory risk (i.e. does not bid for land and build ahead of orders). Each and every of its properties is leased out for recurrent income. Not sure why the huge discount to RNAV. Some discount is no doubt warranted but not sure about such a huge discount, unlike developers like Wing Tai, CES, etc.

3. REITS trade at slight discount to RNAV, ~10% discount. This is understandable. This is the ultimate aim of BP as stated in prospectus.

(01-06-2015, 08:58 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: Dear Curiousparty,

I noticed that there is request for you to declare the vested interest. Please declare the interest in your next post, for the benefit of readers, as an active buddy in this thread.

Thank you

Regards
Moderator

Hi Moderator,

If there is a request for Curiousparty to declare his vested interest, but he does not wish to. Will you ban him?

Kindly clarify your comment and rules in the forum. Thanks.

(02-06-2015, 11:33 AM)Curiousparty Wrote: BP (2016 Forecast)
a. recurrent EPS (4.7 cents)
b. development profit (5 cents)
Total EPS = 9.7 cents.
% of recurring income = 48%.

CES (2016 Forecast)
a. recurrent EPS (4 cents); hotel ops might be incurring losses in initial 2-3 years, dragging down EPS
b. development profit (12 cents from Nine Residence/Junction 9, excluding Fulcrum)
Total EPS = 16 cents.
% of recurring income = 25%.
Hence, CES is trading closer and closer to 80 cents...

_______
1. The quality of recurring income is very different. BP's lease is 12 leases for MNC/high quality end users (e.g. high VA industries, etc). CES has to bid for construction projects every year.

2. BP is not in the business of "selling" properties and hence has no inventory risk (i.e. does not bid for land and build ahead of orders). Each and every of its properties is leased out for recurrent income. Not sure why the huge discount to RNAV. Some discount is no doubt warranted but not sure about such a huge discount, unlike developers like Wing Tai, CES, etc.

3. REITS trade at slight discount to RNAV, ~10% discount. This is understandable. This is the ultimate aim of BP as stated in prospectus.

So what you are saying is that BP doesn't have to bid and buy land.
Instead, in Design-build projects, BP just does the building? Who bids and owns the land then?
In DBL projects, BP still has to bid and buy the land, but the end user (client) commits to a long term lease to amortize the costs of building, but the ownership is still with BP right

I do get your point about BP having end user secured before building, so that mitigates the risk a bit, compared to other developers who have to build and try to sell. But BP still has to bid and maintain a land bank so there's still inventory risk and associated costs

<vested from Boustead dividend in specie>