Singapore Post

(17-12-2015, 09:52 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: SingPost board is under a spot-light, after the CEO resigned...

(not vested)

Don flags worries about SingPost
17 Dec 2015 09:00
By Grace Leong

The shock resignation of Singapore Post (SingPost) group chief executive Wolfgang Baier last week underscores the problems the firm has with corporate governance, according to National University of Singapore (NUS) Business School associate professor Mak Yuen Teen.

Prof Mak said the firm has seen CEOs come and go while being a laggard when it comes to board renewal. Dr Baier stunned market watchers last week when he resigned after four years at the post and after what many analysts praise as a radical transformation of the firm that has turned it into a global logistics force.

A check shows that Dr Baier's predecessor Wilson Tan was the third SingPost group CEO to resign in a five-year span when he stepped down in April 2010.

While Prof Mak noted that SingPost was named last month as one of the top 50 Asean publicly listed companies in terms of corporate governance, "there were certain practices that troubled (him)".

He pointed to the long tenure of some of SingPost's independent directors and questioned the relevance of the skills and experience of some of them in the light of the firm's transition into an e-commerce logistics player.

His other concerns include a possible lack of clarity between the roles of the board or executive committee and management and the experience of the transition team they have in place to oversee the integration process after several acquisitions, including that of e-commerce provider TradeGlobal Holdings.
...
Source: Straits Times

(22-12-2015, 05:37 PM)Tiggerbee Wrote: More corporate governance issues..

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/SGX%20An...eID=383296

The Board of Directors of Singapore Post Limited (the "Company") refers to the
announcement dated 18 July 2014 in relation to the Company's acquisition of the entire
issued and paid-up share capital of F.S. Mackenzie Limited (the "Transaction").
Due to an administrative oversight, it was stated that none of the directors or controlling
shareholders of the Company had any interest, direct or indirect in the
Transaction. The Company would like to clarify that none of the directors or
controlling shareholders of the Company had any interest, direct or indirect in the
Transaction, save for Mr Keith Tay Ah Kee who, as disclosed in the announcement
relating to the Company's acquisition of Famous Holdings Pte Ltd on 18 January
2013, is a non-executive Chairman and shareholder of Stirling Coleman Capital
Limited. Stirling Coleman Capital Limited was the arranger of the Transaction.
Accordingly, Mr Tay, as reflected in Board minutes, had abstained from all voting by
the Board of the Company in relation to the Transaction.
Issued by Singapore Post Limited on 22 December 2015.

what a coincidence in timing..... what happen to whiter than white..

(22-12-2015, 07:03 PM)sg550319 Wrote:

(17-12-2015, 09:52 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: SingPost board is under a spot-light, after the CEO resigned...

(not vested)

Don flags worries about SingPost
17 Dec 2015 09:00
By Grace Leong

The shock resignation of Singapore Post (SingPost) group chief executive Wolfgang Baier last week underscores the problems the firm has with corporate governance, according to National University of Singapore (NUS) Business School associate professor Mak Yuen Teen.

Prof Mak said the firm has seen CEOs come and go while being a laggard when it comes to board renewal. Dr Baier stunned market watchers last week when he resigned after four years at the post and after what many analysts praise as a radical transformation of the firm that has turned it into a global logistics force.

A check shows that Dr Baier's predecessor Wilson Tan was the third SingPost group CEO to resign in a five-year span when he stepped down in April 2010.

While Prof Mak noted that SingPost was named last month as one of the top 50 Asean publicly listed companies in terms of corporate governance, "there were certain practices that troubled (him)".

He pointed to the long tenure of some of SingPost's independent directors and questioned the relevance of the skills and experience of some of them in the light of the firm's transition into an e-commerce logistics player.

His other concerns include a possible lack of clarity between the roles of the board or executive committee and management and the experience of the transition team they have in place to oversee the integration process after several acquisitions, including that of e-commerce provider TradeGlobal Holdings.
...
Source: Straits Times

(22-12-2015, 05:37 PM)Tiggerbee Wrote: More corporate governance issues..

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/SGX%20An...eID=383296

The Board of Directors of Singapore Post Limited (the "Company") refers to the
announcement dated 18 July 2014 in relation to the Company's acquisition of the entire
issued and paid-up share capital of F.S. Mackenzie Limited (the "Transaction").
Due to an administrative oversight, it was stated that none of the directors or controlling
shareholders of the Company had any interest, direct or indirect in the
Transaction. The Company would like to clarify that none of the directors or
controlling shareholders of the Company had any interest, direct or indirect in the
Transaction, save for Mr Keith Tay Ah Kee who, as disclosed in the announcement
relating to the Company's acquisition of Famous Holdings Pte Ltd on 18 January
2013, is a non-executive Chairman and shareholder of Stirling Coleman Capital
Limited. Stirling Coleman Capital Limited was the arranger of the Transaction.
Accordingly, Mr Tay, as reflected in Board minutes, had abstained from all voting by
the Board of the Company in relation to the Transaction.
Issued by Singapore Post Limited on 22 December 2015.

what a coincidence in timing..... what happen to whiter than white..

No smoke without fire.
Just hope there is nothing unseemly when the smoke clears.

SingPost board reacted on the report. IMO, I have confidence on corporate governance in SingPost, but I am skeptical that the current board structure is able to facilitate a success to shift from an "old" mail biz, to a "new" e-comm biz...

(not vested)

RESPONSE TO BUSINESS TIMES ARTICLES

The Board of Directors of SingPost refers to the articles “SingPost made
‘administrative oversight’ in 2014 deal disclosure” and “More questions about
corporate governance at SingPost” in The Business Times on 23 December 2015.

In view of the seriousness of the issues raised in these articles, Mr Keith Tay Ah Kee
has requested the Chairman of the Board for Special Auditors to be appointed
immediately to investigate these issues thoroughly and to report directly to the Board
and the Audit Committee. Mr Tay has also requested that such report be made available
for inspection by the Singapore Exchange, the Info-communications Development
Authority of Singapore and other regulators, and that appropriate disclosure should also
be made to shareholders and other stakeholders.

The Chairman of the Board has acceded to the request and has instructed Management
to proceed accordingly.

Mr Tay has also stressed that he will recuse himself completely from this matter during
the investigation and that he will render all assistance and cooperation to the Special
Auditors if and when required.

Meanwhile the internal processes relating to M&A will be disclosed to the media for a
better understanding of SingPost’s corporate governance in this area. Information in
respect of other areas will also be disseminated progressively.

Issued by Singapore Post Limited on 23 December 2015.

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/SGX%20An...eID=383459

A bloody waste of time and resources (my heart bleeds for SingPost shareholders).

Just an open and shut case. Check the minutes of meeting and confirm that 1. Keith Tay has declared his interests and 2. He has abstained from voting. Chairman and/or Company Secretary are good enough to make the declarations. Why succumb to the crazy comments of the sh*it stirrers and throw good money at some special auditors for nothing!

(23-12-2015, 10:39 AM)HitandRun Wrote: A bloody waste of time and resources (my heart bleeds for SingPost shareholders).

Just an open and shut case. Check the minutes of meeting and confirm that 1. Keith Tay has declared his interests and 2. He has abstained from voting. Chairman and/or Company Secretary are good enough to make the declarations. Why succumb to the crazy comments of the sh*it stirrers and throw good money at some special auditors for nothing!

Insiders to check-and-confirm another insider? An 3rd party is needed, and the best is external auditor. 

(23-12-2015, 10:56 AM)CityFarmer Wrote:

(23-12-2015, 10:39 AM)HitandRun Wrote: A bloody waste of time and resources (my heart bleeds for SingPost shareholders).

Just an open and shut case. Check the minutes of meeting and confirm that 1. Keith Tay has declared his interests and 2. He has abstained from voting. Chairman and/or Company Secretary are good enough to make the declarations. Why succumb to the crazy comments of the sh*it stirrers and throw good money at some special auditors for nothing!

Insiders to check-and-confirm another insider? An 3rd party is needed, and the best is external auditor. 

At every instance when someone throws a spurious accusation? 

And if a shareholder is so KS, would he be satisfied with merely the external auditor? What if they are in cahoots (e.g. Enron)? Where would this road end?


P.S. The way I read the facts, this is probably a case whereby the lawyer/company sect did not vet the circular properly. There is no need to waste further resources on such an administrative mistake.

(23-12-2015, 12:57 PM)HitandRun Wrote:

(23-12-2015, 10:56 AM)CityFarmer Wrote:

(23-12-2015, 10:39 AM)HitandRun Wrote: A bloody waste of time and resources (my heart bleeds for SingPost shareholders).

Just an open and shut case. Check the minutes of meeting and confirm that 1. Keith Tay has declared his interests and 2. He has abstained from voting. Chairman and/or Company Secretary are good enough to make the declarations. Why succumb to the crazy comments of the sh*it stirrers and throw good money at some special auditors for nothing!

Insiders to check-and-confirm another insider? An 3rd party is needed, and the best is external auditor. 

At every instance when someone throws a spurious accusation? 

And if a shareholder is so KS, would he be satisfied with merely the external auditor? What if they are in cahoots (e.g. Enron)? Where would this road end?


P.S. The way I read the facts, this is probably a case whereby the lawyer/company sect did not vet the circular properly. There is no need to waste further resources on such an administrative mistake.

Not at any instance, but at a sensitive period, after the CEO resigned abruptly, and public articles on the company governance.

I am advocating that simple and low-cost preemptive measures are the most efficient and effective solution. At a billion-dollar market cap company, getting an external auditor to vet the issues, is a low-cost decision. 

(not vested)

Good time to buy perhaps

Dun think it good time to buy yet, stock is not at its lows, there is still some ali baba hype priced in, maybe around 1.20 or less can consider...

sent from my Galaxy Tab S

To sustain its 7 cents dividends, annually, Singpost will need to generate 150 Mil for dividends to ordinary shareholders, 35Mil in income taxes, 8 Mil in interest, 14 Mil to perpetual holders and 40 Mil for maintenance capex. This current half, the company has generated 96 Mil in operating cashflow before WC changes. Extrapolate it to a full year, its 192Mil. * I ignored paying down its debts

This is cutting very close. Singpost's large cash pile is dwindling due to dividends paid and the funding of acquisitions/retail mall construction.

If I were to consider from the angle of a business which produces a stable 7 cents dividend, I will want at least 4.5% yield (higher than perpertual holders or CPF Special Account rate). At that yield, Singpost will be $1.55. I won't pay it at current price or $1.90 per share. And even at 7 cents dividends, I am skeptical of the dividends. Unless business picks up drastically, Singpost can't maintain the dividends. A more sustainable level of dividends is 6 cents/share (back to the good old days)