Sino Grandness

(07-04-2016, 09:34 AM)CityFarmer Wrote:

(07-04-2016, 12:52 AM)crubs Wrote: specuvestor

your statement "^^ i assume u are aware who audits the numbers that u are quoting? It's not BDO" is meaningless and unconstructive.

Well, it is as meaningful as rotating auditor for listed companies. It is not on assumption of fraud, but on different audit opinion, which is subjective at time.

Constructive or otherwise it is in context of this post since curb quoted from the accounts so the basis should be clear:

(02-04-2016, 12:51 PM)specuvestor Wrote: I'm not a fan of BDO but do look at the I-2 and 3 basis

Nonetheless I wasn't expecting them to submit before AGM so kudos that they managed to get it through before quarter end

At least Piao Piao bothered to read but not totally correct in saying "if BDO uncomfortable" and bond redemption "happened" (bond holders never received a single cent back so far, except for the RMB19.5m of SHK CB redemption). The scope of BDO is very clear in the auditor's report: the are responsible for the Cayman entity that is 3 weeks old and no accounts has been prepared as per bottom of I-2. I'm not about to stir a hornet's nest but forumers should read to be updated with information and decide as per u deem fit.

It is also obvious to me that Butcher has little experience with S-chips where "only the paranoid survives". Unlike other VBs I choose to analyse companies based on their merits rather than "branding therefore never touch them", but never a second do I forget what jurisdiction the companies are in. Similarly if one analyse a trading company versus a Telco, the margin of safety and comfort has to be adjusted accordingly

as usual, this will be noise in a few months time. Why bother to debate on " whether BDO is credible or not"... What's the intention ultimately, shorting?

I doubt anyone has the balls to short now.. Please show us if you are shorting. I will be impress and respect since you do actually short and not just talk this stock down.

It's like a doctor urging the patient to be cautious based on his analysis and observation and of course wealth of experience. Not to say that the consultation is gratis.
But then, people just don't like being told what to do, even provided with good faith.

Kudos to Specuvestor for his calm words in stormy (or should i say hostile) environment.

Not vested, but what a great show (read: study case) so far.
HM: The correctness of a decision can't be judged from the outcome.

(07-04-2016, 11:18 AM)alex Wrote: as usual, this will be noise in a few months time. Why bother to debate on " whether BDO is credible or not"...  What's the intention ultimately, shorting?

I doubt anyone has the balls to short now.. Please show us if you are shorting. I will be impress and respect since you do actually short and not just talk this stock down.

So a long-only fund manager should never has negative view (talk down) on any stock, since he/she will never short? 

(07-04-2016, 10:53 AM)specuvestor Wrote:

(07-04-2016, 09:34 AM)CityFarmer Wrote:

(07-04-2016, 12:52 AM)crubs Wrote: specuvestor

your statement "^^ i assume u are aware who audits the numbers that u are quoting? It's not BDO" is meaningless and unconstructive.

Well, it is as meaningful as rotating auditor for listed companies. It is not on assumption of fraud, but on different audit opinion, which is subjective at time.  

Constructive or otherwise it is in context of this post since curb quoted from the accounts so the basis should be clear:

(02-04-2016, 12:51 PM)specuvestor Wrote: I'm not a fan of BDO but do look at the I-2 and 3 basis

Nonetheless I wasn't expecting them to submit before AGM so kudos that they managed to get it through before quarter end

At least Piao Piao bothered to read but not totally correct in saying "if BDO uncomfortable" and bond redemption "happened" (bond holders never received a single cent back so far, except for the RMB19.5m of SHK CB redemption). The scope of BDO is very clear in the auditor's report: the are responsible for the Cayman entity that is 3 weeks old and no accounts has been prepared as per bottom of I-2. I'm not about to stir a hornet's nest but forumers should read to be updated with information and decide as per u deem fit.

It is also obvious to me that Butcher has little experience with S-chips where "only the paranoid survives". Unlike other VBs I choose to analyse companies based on their merits rather than "branding therefore never touch them", but never a second do I forget what jurisdiction the companies are in. Similarly if one analyse a trading company versus a Telco, the margin of safety and comfort has to be adjusted accordingly

Singapore incorporated companies are given 18 months from incorporation to hold their 1st AGM with the 1st set of accounts.

Maybe Cayman Island and BVI have the same requirements.

Anyway GF Group Holding and GF Beverage Group are investment holding companies and they have not carried any business since incorporation. BDO may have reviewed these 2 companies' simple accounts and deemed an audited accounts of these 2 companies not necessary.

If these companies are exempted companies, they also do not need to file audited accounts.

(07-04-2016, 10:53 AM)specuvestor Wrote:

(07-04-2016, 09:34 AM)CityFarmer Wrote:

(07-04-2016, 12:52 AM)crubs Wrote: specuvestor

your statement "^^ i assume u are aware who audits the numbers that u are quoting? It's not BDO" is meaningless and unconstructive.

Well, it is as meaningful as rotating auditor for listed companies. It is not on assumption of fraud, but on different audit opinion, which is subjective at time.  

Constructive or otherwise it is in context of this post since curb quoted from the accounts so the basis should be clear:

(02-04-2016, 12:51 PM)specuvestor Wrote: I'm not a fan of BDO but do look at the I-2 and 3 basis

Nonetheless I wasn't expecting them to submit before AGM so kudos that they managed to get it through before quarter end

At least Piao Piao bothered to read but not totally correct in saying "if BDO uncomfortable" and bond redemption "happened" (bond holders never received a single cent back so far, except for the RMB19.5m of SHK CB redemption). The scope of BDO is very clear in the auditor's report: the are responsible for the Cayman entity that is 3 weeks old and no accounts has been prepared as per bottom of I-2. I'm not about to stir a hornet's nest but forumers should read to be updated with information and decide as per u deem fit.

It is also obvious to me that Butcher has little experience with S-chips where "only the paranoid survives". Unlike other VBs I choose to analyse companies based on their merits rather than "branding therefore never touch them", but never a second do I forget what jurisdiction the companies are in. Similarly if one analyse a trading company versus a Telco, the margin of safety and comfort has to be adjusted accordingly

Hi Specuvestor

If pioapiao is correct, it is important for investor like us to know.

cheers
oldman9.

(07-04-2016, 12:03 PM)CityFarmer Wrote:

(07-04-2016, 11:18 AM)alex Wrote: as usual, this will be noise in a few months time. Why bother to debate on " whether BDO is credible or not"...  What's the intention ultimately, shorting?

I doubt anyone has the balls to short now.. Please show us if you are shorting. I will be impress and respect since you do actually short and not just talk this stock down.

So a long-only fund manager should never has negative view (talk down) on any stock, since he/she will never short? 

Hahaha.. nice one CF. I have no answer for your comment!  Speaking of funds, do they hedge? I think they only de-risk if in this case.

Relax guys, don't get upset or flarred up.

True, I am noob and there is alot more to learn. I am just giving my thoughts, not against you.

Ultimately, those buddies who saw value and bought Sino G should be in the money right now.

(07-04-2016, 02:18 PM)Oldman9 Wrote: Hi Specuvestor

If pioapiao is correct, it is important for investor like us to know.

cheers
oldman9.

Oldman9

Specuvestor has stated that "the scope of BDO is very clear in the auditor's report: the are responsible for the Cayman entity that is 3 weeks old and no accounts has been prepared as per bottom of I-2" 
 

If his statement has made you uneasy, you may want to read the draft prospectus of Qiniqin Foodstuffs Group (Cayman) Company Limited, which was incorporated in the Caymans Islands on 14 January 2016. The reporting accountant, Pricewaterhouse, has stated that no audited financial statements have been prepared by Qinqin. The auditors of Qinqin's subsidiaries were Chinese entities. 

You may also read listing prospectus filed by other companies.

Maybe Specuvestor mixed up the roles of auditors and reporting accountants.

Reporting accountants are not expected to conduct audits.


http://www.bdo.co.uk/capital-markets/act...ransaction