Kingsmen Creatives

Updating ...

The Board of Directors of Kingsmen Creatives Ltd. wishes to provide an update on the progress of the proposed construction of a multi-storey building on Private Lot A3004218 at Plot 19 in Changi Business Park (the "New Building") which will serve as the Group’s new headquarters.

The groundbreaking for the construction of the New Building was carried out today and the estimated timeline to construct the New Building is about one and half years. The temporary occupation permit is expected to be obtained by middle of 2018.

The total estimated cost for the New Building is approximately S$35 million which includes the leasehold land cost, development charge and other incidental costs but excludes financing cost. The construction of the New Building will be funded through internal resources and bank borrowings and is not expected to have any material financial impact on the earnings per share and net tangible assets per share of the Group for the current financial year ending 31 December 2016.

Delta Lloyd Asset Management N.V. sold 457,100 shares last wednesday.

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/_2017011...eID=436905

Expectations of further weakening in the retail industry?

Delta Lloyd Asset Management N.V. sold another 269,400 shares, reducing their stake to 4.92%; no longer a substantial shareholder.

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/_2017021...eID=439187

I for one do not expect any streamline on rental expenses after the new office is up. They mentioned in one of the agm that the current office was a sale-leaseback with subsidy rental.
So we have to wonder, once the new office is up and subsidy rental is replaced by depreciation, will it be worth the while?

I have seen that Kingsmen have issued their full year 2016 financial results earlier this evening. It will take some time to review and dissect. But as a long term shareholder of the Company, I can already say that given last year's financial performance, I'm deeply disappointed with the Board's proposed Final Dividend - a 25% y-o-y reduction as compared to last years Final Dividend coupled with a paucity of objective commentary to justify the reduction. I'm increasingly concerned that the Board is becoming misaligned with its shareholders - a lack of a well-thought-through Dividend Strategy being a case in point. And is the Damocles Sword of the New Office still colouring the Board's and Management's judgement too much?

The Cheng tenure (as Group CEO) has gotten off to a less-than-satisfactory start IMHO. I really wonder if Andrew and some Board members grasp how important the dividend is to shareholders. I'm losing confidence.

Vested,
RBM

(21-02-2017, 11:18 PM)RBM Wrote: I have seen that Kingsmen have issued their full year 2016 financial results earlier this evening. It will take some time to review and dissect. But as a long term shareholder of the Company, I can already say that given last year's financial performance, I'm deeply disappointed with the Board's proposed Final Dividend - a 25% y-o-y reduction as compared to last years Final Dividend coupled with a paucity of objective commentary to justify the reduction. I'm increasingly concerned that the Board is becoming misaligned with its shareholders - a lack of a well-thought-through Dividend Strategy being a case in point. And is the Damocles Sword of the New Office still colouring the Board's and Management's judgement too much?

The Cheng tenure (as Group CEO) has gotten off to a less-than-satisfactory start IMHO. I really wonder if Andrew and some Board members grasp how important the dividend is to shareholders. I'm losing confidence.

Vested,
RBM

In a glance, i noted (i could be wrong) that treasury shares were used more and more to pay the Management.
Seeing the pathetic margin of retail unit is a very bothering one to me and yet rewarding the Management more and more are decouraging.

Kingsmen used to be able to earn decent ROE by returning substantial earning to shareholders. By returning lesser, the retained earning is likely to earn subpar return. Chasing top line with pathetic margin will be destroying shareholder value than returning most of it.

This company is getting more and more like Clients first, Management second, other stakeholders then after all said and done, throw some bones to shareholders.

There is definitely nothing wrong with clients first and management second, the problem is the barrier for both are LOW.
It is not hard for clients to award to lower price, they may want kingsmen but they want lower price as well.
Same for management (or talented ppl), you reward me more or i can switch boat.

There is hardly a pricing power for kingsmen (even when times were good, their margin was not great).

(22-02-2017, 12:58 AM)ksir Wrote:

(21-02-2017, 11:18 PM)RBM Wrote: I have seen that Kingsmen have issued their full year 2016 financial results earlier this evening. It will take some time to review and dissect. But as a long term shareholder of the Company, I can already say that given last year's financial performance, I'm deeply disappointed with the Board's proposed Final Dividend - a 25% y-o-y reduction as compared to last years Final Dividend coupled with a paucity of objective commentary to justify the reduction. I'm increasingly concerned that the Board is becoming misaligned with its shareholders - a lack of a well-thought-through Dividend Strategy being a case in point. And is the Damocles Sword of the New Office still colouring the Board's and Management's judgement too much?

The Cheng tenure (as Group CEO) has gotten off to a less-than-satisfactory start IMHO. I really wonder if Andrew and some Board members grasp how important the dividend is to shareholders. I'm losing confidence.

Vested,
RBM

In a glance, i noted (i could be wrong) that treasury shares were used more and more to pay the Management.
Seeing the pathetic margin of retail unit is a very bothering one to me and yet rewarding the Management more and more are decouraging.

Kingsmen used to be able to earn decent ROE by returning substantial earning to shareholders. By returning lesser, the retained earning is likely to earn subpar return. Chasing top line with pathetic margin will be destroying shareholder value than returning most of it.

This company is getting more and more like Clients first, Management second, other stakeholders then after all said and done, throw some bones to shareholders.

There is definitely nothing wrong with clients first and management second, the problem is the barrier for both are LOW.
It is not hard for clients to award to lower price, they may want kingsmen but they want lower price as well.
Same for management (or talented ppl), you reward me more or i can switch boat.

There is hardly a pricing power for kingsmen (even when times were good, their margin was not great).

Hi 

Where in the financial statement does it indicate that treasury shares are being used more and more to pay the management? Thanks

(22-02-2017, 12:01 PM)tommykew Wrote:

(22-02-2017, 12:58 AM)ksir Wrote:

(21-02-2017, 11:18 PM)RBM Wrote: I have seen that Kingsmen have issued their full year 2016 financial results earlier this evening. It will take some time to review and dissect. But as a long term shareholder of the Company, I can already say that given last year's financial performance, I'm deeply disappointed with the Board's proposed Final Dividend - a 25% y-o-y reduction as compared to last years Final Dividend coupled with a paucity of objective commentary to justify the reduction. I'm increasingly concerned that the Board is becoming misaligned with its shareholders - a lack of a well-thought-through Dividend Strategy being a case in point. And is the Damocles Sword of the New Office still colouring the Board's and Management's judgement too much?

The Cheng tenure (as Group CEO) has gotten off to a less-than-satisfactory start IMHO. I really wonder if Andrew and some Board members grasp how important the dividend is to shareholders. I'm losing confidence.

Vested,
RBM

In a glance, i noted (i could be wrong) that treasury shares were used more and more to pay the Management.
Seeing the pathetic margin of retail unit is a very bothering one to me and yet rewarding the Management more and more are decouraging.

Kingsmen used to be able to earn decent ROE by returning substantial earning to shareholders. By returning lesser, the retained earning is likely to earn subpar return. Chasing top line with pathetic margin will be destroying shareholder value than returning most of it.

This company is getting more and more like Clients first, Management second, other stakeholders then after all said and done, throw some bones to shareholders.

There is definitely nothing wrong with clients first and management second, the problem is the barrier for both are LOW.
It is not hard for clients to award to lower price, they may want kingsmen but they want lower price as well.
Same for management (or talented ppl), you reward me more or i can switch boat.

There is hardly a pricing power for kingsmen (even when times were good, their margin was not great).

Hi 

Where in the financial statement does it indicate that treasury shares are being used more and more to pay the management? Thanks

Obviously it is at treasury shares portion.
I am assuming the performance shares scheme mostly go to higher management team. If you have insider info to prove otherwise, i will be pleased to be corrected.

Note:
I am actually throwing out comments because I appreciate the quality service of the company and hence would like it to improve (at least to minority shareholders).

Treasury shares were apparently not enough and hence issued more ordinary shares for such purpose.

If that is to align the shareholders interest with Management team, maybe it is a good reason. But it shows the pricing power of the talented human capital (need to issue performance share to retain them?)
If they are really interested in the company, they can always buy in market? When is the last time we actually see any Management team doing share purchase in market except from company buyback which were apparently for performance share scheme??

<used to be my core holdings>

Hi,

Here is my take after a quick read of the financial results.

Profit is down 40% -- but this is almost exclusively because of one-off gains in prior year. Top line revenue and gross profits are unchanged. Structural profit is around 11.5 mln, so a PE of around 11.


Pros

Good free cash flow
Outlook provided by management seems more optimistic than in prior year

Negatives

order book down 10% relative to last year
dividend again cut
employee comp has gone up quite a bit (higher comp for management?)
shares issues

One strange detail. It is written that "The basic and diluted earnings per share are the same as there were no potentially dilutive ordinary shares in issue as at 31 December 2016 and 31 December 2015." However, new shares have been issued (and some bought back) so ouststanding shares should have changed, or what am I missing?


Cash has build up further and now stands at 76mln. What is the take in the forum on this? Why this cash-build-up? To pay for the shiny new headquarter? A preclude to a going private?

(22-02-2017, 08:38 PM)lupolupus Wrote: Hi,

Here is my take after a quick read of the financial results.

Profit is down 40% -- but this is almost exclusively because of one-off gains in prior year. Top line revenue and gross profits are unchanged. Structural profit is around 11.5 mln, so a PE of around 11.


Pros

Good free cash flow
Outlook provided by management seems more optimistic than in prior year

Negatives

order book down 10% relative to last year
dividend again cut
employee comp has gone up quite a bit (higher comp for management?)
shares issues

One strange detail. It is written that "The basic and diluted earnings per share are the same as there were no potentially dilutive ordinary shares in issue as at 31 December 2016 and 31 December 2015." However, new shares have been issued (and some bought back) so ouststanding shares should have changed, or what am I missing?


Cash has build up further and now stands at 76mln. What is the take in the forum on this? Why this cash-build-up? To pay for the shiny new headquarter? A preclude to a going private?

i think potentially dilutive shares usually means outstanding warrrants or rights that can be converted to common shares