Sino Grandness

(27-03-2019, 12:36 PM)daiwa888 Wrote: From what I understand about China companies, especially those with majority or all of their operations in China, that would mean that their cash flows are mainly within China.  

If the holding company is listed overseas such as in Hong Kong or Singapore exchange,  those offshore cashflow requirements have to be funded by overseas income.  However, if the Group has little or no overseas income, then the overseas cashflow/expenses will need to be funded either through offshore fund raising exercise (overseas loan or placement) or the PRC subsidiaries will need to apply to the PRC authorities to remit cashflow offshore.

In Sino Grandness case, I believe the placement proceeds are meant for their overseas cashflow requirement since they have sufficient cash balance within China.

I know where you are coming from. But this placement is also to increase working capital. Why does sfig need more cash for working capital when it has hundreds of millions in China. 

If the placement was solely to redeem the loan, this is believable

It is much more routine to remit money nowadays vs say 10 years ago... thats why China been doing Dim Sum bonds, invoicing in RMB and currency swaps with other Central Banks... gradual internationalisation

(18-01-2019, 10:32 AM)specuvestor Wrote: In theory 12 months later or 10 days after SAFE approval. Their SAFE seems different from the SAFE that other companies routinely request to remit money

Wash rinse repeat

(17-01-2019, 08:11 PM)dreamybear Wrote: Sino Grandness has requested for the lifting of trading halt today(SGX company annoucement) and also made an announcement relating to the 2011/2012 bonds. I read and re-read the doc, but am still unable to understand the situation, but it does seem like it has money to pay ????

"2. BONDS REPAYMENT EXTENSION

.......... ten  (10)  business  days  after  the  date  on  which  the  relevant  company  parties obtain the necessary PRC foreign exchange approvals for the remittance out of the  PRC  of  funds  for  the  payments  to  be  made  by  such  company  parties pursuant  to  the Amended  and Restated  Agreement,  or  such  other  date  or  time as the parties may agree in writing;
.............
(a) The  2012  SB2  Bonds and  2011  SB2  Bonds  shall  be  repaid  and  fully  redeemed  by Garden Fresh HK on the New Completion Date; "

https://links.sgx.com/FileOpen/Sino_Annm...eID=540739

The beauty of equity market...

Placement at X price disregard of fundamental
Share move above X price up
No lock in period for subscribers (not sure how it is regulated even for lock in)


Not implying anything, quite a few of such episodes.... Most didn't end went....

This time, TTA who has insiders info is saying, return my cash!! 😅😅😅 says a lot abt their position already!!! 👍💪😅

Shareholders should write in to the authorities. Why is the company which suppose to have RM$622m cash in their latest balance sheet has to resort in selling new shares at a steep discount to NTA in order to raise funds to pay off S$6.75m loan?

(28-03-2019, 06:52 PM)Behappyalways Wrote: Shareholders should write in to the authorities. Why is the company which suppose to have RM$622m cash in their latest balance sheet has to resort in selling new shares at a steep discount to NTA in order to raise funds to pay off S$6.75m loan?

I don't agree. Shareholders should sell their shares if they don't believe the story. Writing to the authorities is unlikely to change anything. In the unlikely event that the authorities do act and suspend the counter, shareholders will be worse off. But we must also know that shareholders who are invested or are still willing to invest more are the willing ones. The very ones that go to Hong Lim Park and blame the government when they lose money. So I don't think they will sell. Those who realized their mistakes would have been out long ago. 
Every time a stock gets into trouble, people will blame the company and someone will step in to provide an 'amplyfying' voice for them. Everyone is to blame apart from the shareholders themselves. This is not going to be helpful. It simply convinced these people that others are always to be blamed for their mistakes and that taxpayers should be responsible for their losses. A better way is for this so call 'voice' to organize a session and point to them where they had gone wrong. And hopefully everyone will know that nobody is going to help them if they don't help themselves in the first place.

Just to sidetrack a bit on a technicality: actually suspension is not meant to protect exisitng shareholders; it is meant to protect potential "future" shareholders

Writing in, alerting authorities are part and parcel of shareholder activism. So that's a separate topic of whether shareholders should know the concept of caveat emptor. As usual I think it should be a balance of these 2: Questionable companies on one hand allowed to do as they please and entitled shareholders on the other. 中庸之道

(29-03-2019, 01:11 AM)amperex Wrote:

(28-03-2019, 06:52 PM)Behappyalways Wrote: Shareholders should write in to the authorities. Why is the company which suppose to have RM$622m cash in their latest balance sheet has to resort in selling new shares at a steep discount to NTA in order to raise funds to pay off S$6.75m loan?

I don't agree. Shareholders should sell their shares if they don't believe the story. Writing to the authorities is unlikely to change anything. In the unlikely event that the authorities do act and suspend the counter, shareholders will be worse off. But we must also know that shareholders who are invested or are still willing to invest more are the willing ones. The very ones that go to Hong Lim Park and blame the government when they lose money. So I don't think they will sell. Those who realized their mistakes would have been out long ago. 
Every time a stock gets into trouble, people will blame the company and someone will step in to provide an 'amplyfying' voice for them. Everyone is to blame apart from the shareholders themselves. This is not going to be helpful. It simply convinced these people that others are always to be blamed for their mistakes and that taxpayers should be responsible for their losses. A better way is for this so call 'voice' to organize a session and point to them where they had gone wrong. And hopefully everyone will know that nobody is going to help them if they don't help themselves in the first place.

fascinating quant / maths

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-sino-...58599.html

(04-06-2019, 08:32 PM)specuvestor Wrote: fascinating quant / maths

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-sino-...58599.html

These reports sound like those robot-generated types. There seems to be plenty of such "robo-reports" on the web these days now.

Can't expect too much since the company generates "hundreds of thousands" of stuff daily. Stuff of Quants indeed.
https://simplywall.st/company

(16-01-2019, 02:10 PM)piaopiao Wrote:

(13-01-2019, 12:03 AM)specuvestor Wrote: Faith is now broken
http://tta.listedcompany.com/newsroom/08...00913E.pdf

(17-05-2018, 07:47 AM)specuvestor Wrote:

(28-02-2018, 07:06 PM)specuvestor Wrote: Let's see if the Thais will continue the tradition in May

It’s quite incredible... the faith shareholders have

“In respect of convertible loan which is due on 16 May 2018, parties are in discussion to restructure the convertible loan. The Company will keep shareholders updated on any developments as and when appropriate.”

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/SGFIG%20...eID=505760

Specuvestor, your analysis is superb. Should have heeded your warnings.

Specuvestor,

What's your advice now?

An investor had paid SGD 6.8 mil for Sino Grandness shares.

And now another investor is paying USD 30 mil (RMB 200 mil) for Garden Fresh shares.