Hi JanQuin, Thank you for the kind compliments.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Research, research and research - Please do your own due diligence (DYODD) before you invest - Any reliance on my analysis is SOLELY at your own risk.
I think there remain a lot to be discussed and explored in more details on the business prospects of BWI going forward along the following categories/sub-topics: 1)China DS business/ China Export business. 2)China Manufacturing / Wholesale business (MW). 3)Taiwan DS business. 4)Indonesia DS business. 5)DS business in other existing markets (excluding China, Taiwan and Indonesia). 6)New markets: DS 7)Tap into upstream value chain of synergistic businesses –Tuas new skincare product manufacturing facility. 8)Inorganic growth. 9)DS model vs Online model / E-commerce 10) Stock valuation ; Upside risks vs Downside risks Will look into them…………….
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Research, research and research - Please do your own due diligence (DYODD) before you invest - Any reliance on my analysis is SOLELY at your own risk.
I have particular interested on E-commerce impact. Surely, it is not a sure-win strategy, and is highly depending on execution. The E-commerce has just started, and we have seen early success. The last thing we want from E-commerce, is to erode the moat from personalized-service, and management involvement in DS model, IMO.
(01-06-2016, 11:52 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: I have particular interested on E-commerce impact. Surely, it is not a sure-win strategy, and is highly depending on execution. The E-commerce has just started, and we have seen early success. The last thing we want from E-commerce, is to erode the moat from personalized-service, and management involvement in DS model, IMO.
(not vested)
DS company sells its proprietary range of products through its DS representatives/distributors in the field. Pure online company sells its proprietary range of products (or other third-party non-proprietary products) to customers without any of its representatives/distributors present in the field. For a DS company to also set-up a pure online platform offering the same range of proprietary products even at the same pricing (i.e. price at which its representatives/distributors offer end consumers), would not constitute to be a “channel conflict” from the perspective of end consumers (same price on both platforms). However, it would constitute to be a “channel conflict” from the perspective of its representatives/distributors, as online sales compete with distributors sales in the field. But this conflict could be overcome by paying commission to distributors when their affiliated customers place orders online. Hence, IMO, under the DS model, e-commerce could be exploited by DS company only to the extent of complementing and enhancing its operating efficiency of ordering/re-ordering and administration. To eliminate customer facing time under the DS model altogether with pure online platform is equivalent to change of business model. ________________________________________________________________________________________
Research, research and research - Please do your own due diligence (DYODD) before you invest - Any reliance on my analysis is SOLELY at your own risk.
i came across BWL taiwan 06/07 newsletter on their facebook group. I found a paragraph stating that their Jan to May revenue is 1.1 billion.. will you be able to help me to verify it? my chinese skill isn't very good.
According the latest BWL bi-monthly bulletin (June/July 2016), Taiwan revenue for the 5 months (Jan to May) of this year has reached TWD 1,100 million (~SGD 45.833 m) ; equivalent to 81% of Taiwan FY2015 revenue of TWD 1,280 million (~ SGD56.393 m)
Taiwan Revenue (SGD million) 1Q2014 = 2.418 (= 11% of FY2014 Revenue)
2Q2014 = 4.157 (= 18% of FY2014 Revenue)
3Q2014 = 4.940 (= 22% of FY2014 Revenue)
4Q2014 = 11.196 (= 49% of FY2014 Revenue) 1Q2015 = 4.465 (= 8% of FY2015 Revenue)
2Q2015 = 10.244 (= 18% of FY2015 Revenue)
3Q2015 = 14.125 (= 25% of FY2015 Revenue)
4Q2015 = 27.559 (= 49% of FY2015 Revenue)
1Q2016 = 20.221 (= Y % of FY2016 Revenue)
Apr/May 2016 = 25.612
2Q2016 = ??????? (already exceeded 1Q2016 number ; with one month (june) to go, likely to surpass the highest quarterly 4Q2015 figure of 27.559)
As such, Group 2Q2016 revenue would be a new all time high quarterly record if it were to come in at above the highest group quarterly 4Q2015 revenue of 40.945 m.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Research, research and research - Please do your own due diligence (DYODD) before you invest - Any reliance on my analysis is SOLELY at your own risk.
(01-06-2016, 11:52 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: I have particular interested on E-commerce impact. Surely, it is not a sure-win strategy, and is highly depending on execution. The E-commerce has just started, and we have seen early success. The last thing we want from E-commerce, is to erode the moat from personalized-service, and management involvement in DS model, IMO.
(not vested)
DS company sells its proprietary range of products through its DS representatives/distributors in the field. Pure online company sells its proprietary range of products (or other third-party non-proprietary products) to customers without any of its representatives/distributors present in the field. For a DS company to also set-up a pure online platform offering the same range of proprietary products even at the same pricing (i.e. price at which its representatives/distributors offer end consumers), would not constitute to be a “channel conflict” from the perspective of end consumers (same price on both platforms). However, it would constitute to be a “channel conflict” from the perspective of its representatives/distributors, as online sales compete with distributors sales in the field. But this conflict could be overcome by paying commission to distributors when their affiliated customers place orders online. Hence, IMO, under the DS model, e-commerce could be exploited by DS company only to the extent of complementing and enhancing its operating efficiency of ordering/re-ordering and administration. To eliminate customer facing time under the DS model altogether with pure online platform is equivalent to change of business model. ________________________________________________________________________________________
According the latest BWL bi-monthly bulletin (June/July 2016), Taiwan revenue for the 5 months (Jan to May) of this year has reached TWD 1,100 million (~SGD 45.833 m) ; equivalent to 81% of Taiwan FY2015 revenue of TWD 1,280 million (~ SGD56.393 m)
Taiwan Revenue (SGD million) 1Q2014 = 2.418 (= 11% of FY2014 Revenue)
2Q2014 = 4.157 (= 18% of FY2014 Revenue)
3Q2014 = 4.940 (= 22% of FY2014 Revenue)
4Q2014 = 11.196 (= 49% of FY2014 Revenue) 1Q2015 = 4.465 (= 8% of FY2015 Revenue)
2Q2015 = 10.244 (= 18% of FY2015 Revenue)
3Q2015 = 14.125 (= 25% of FY2015 Revenue)
4Q2015 = 27.559 (= 49% of FY2015 Revenue)
1Q2016 = 20.221 (= Y % of FY2016 Revenue)
Apr/May 2016 = 25.612
2Q2016 = ??????? (already exceeded 1Q2016 number ; with one month (june) to go, likely to surpass the highest quarterly 4Q2015 figure of 27.559)
As such, Group 2Q2016 revenue would be a new all time high quarterly record if it were to come in at above the highest group quarterly 4Q2015 revenue of 40.945 m.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Result should be better, as the Taiwan Jan to May sales figure is post tax. By googling, Taiwan Corporate tax is 15%, but hard to figure out the tax since we dont have the profit figure
According the latest BWL bi-monthly bulletin (June/July 2016), Taiwan revenue for the 5 months (Jan to May) of this year has reached TWD 1,100 million (~SGD 45.833 m) ; equivalent to 81% of Taiwan FY2015 revenue of TWD 1,280 million (~ SGD56.393 m)
Taiwan Revenue (SGD million) 1Q2014 = 2.418 (= 11% of FY2014 Revenue)
2Q2014 = 4.157 (= 18% of FY2014 Revenue)
3Q2014 = 4.940 (= 22% of FY2014 Revenue)
4Q2014 = 11.196 (= 49% of FY2014 Revenue) 1Q2015 = 4.465 (= 8% of FY2015 Revenue)
2Q2015 = 10.244 (= 18% of FY2015 Revenue)
3Q2015 = 14.125 (= 25% of FY2015 Revenue)
4Q2015 = 27.559 (= 49% of FY2015 Revenue)
1Q2016 = 20.221 (= Y % of FY2016 Revenue)
Apr/May 2016 = 25.612
2Q2016 = ??????? (already exceeded 1Q2016 number ; with one month (june) to go, likely to surpass the highest quarterly 4Q2015 figure of 27.559)
As such, Group 2Q2016 revenue would be a new all time high quarterly record if it were to come in at above the highest group quarterly 4Q2015 revenue of 40.945 m.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Result should be better, as the Taiwan Jan to May sales figure is post tax. By googling, Taiwan Corporate tax is 15%, but hard to figure out the tax since we dont have the profit figure
It make sense to talk about profit before corporate tax (PBT) or post tax (NPAT).
But when one talk about revenue (post tax), it normally means revenue net of sales tax (including consumption tax), not revenue net of corporate tax, I reckon.
BWI as a group reports all its revenues net of sales tax.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Research, research and research - Please do your own due diligence (DYODD) before you invest - Any reliance on my analysis is SOLELY at your own risk.
Homepage
PR Newswire
