Singapore Press Holdings (SPH)

(03-09-2019, 07:44 PM)valueinvestor Wrote: https://links.sgx.com/1.0.0/corporate-an...89416ad719

Bought again another 200k @1.93 . They should know what price to buy back than outsiders.

SPH's nature has changed:
From Value stock ---> Speculative stock

It's no longer a boring print ad business. SPH has to compete to IT giants like Google, which stands no chance.

I kept reading the possibility of "privatisation" of SPH on this platform.
But given the very diverse shareholding structure, who is likely to initiate the privatization.
Unlike SMRT or NOL, Temasek has no direct holdings in SPH. Who else?

Privatization of SPH is nearly impossible. SPH is not just a company without a controlling shareholder. Changes to the board requires the government's approval. Major changes to the shareholding (beyond 5%) also requires government's approval. There is also no point acquiring all the common shares unless the management shareholders are willing to sell, which again requires government approval.

(04-09-2019, 02:54 PM)wonghw12 Wrote: Privatization of SPH is nearly impossible. SPH is not just a company without a controlling shareholder. Changes to the board requires the government's approval. Major changes to the shareholding (beyond 5%) also requires government's approval. There is also no point acquiring all the common shares unless the management shareholders are willing to sell, which again requires government approval.

Only quite old timer knows all these details.

It shows how much the G wants to control SPH.

It was really very, very important for the G.

Now!


Hm......

Nothing stays the same forever except death and taxes.

(04-09-2019, 05:26 PM)Temperament Wrote:

(04-09-2019, 02:54 PM)wonghw12 Wrote: Privatization of SPH is nearly impossible. SPH is not just a company without a controlling shareholder. Changes to the board requires the government's approval. Major changes to the shareholding (beyond 5%) also requires government's approval. There is also no point acquiring all the common shares unless the management shareholders are willing to sell, which again requires government approval.

Only quite old timer knows all these details.

It shows how much the G wants to control SPH.

It was really very, very important for the G.

Now!


Hm......

Nothing stays the same forever except death and taxes.

 
It is actually 3% limit under the Newspaper and Printing Act.

If buying back share still fail to arouse buying interest from others , it is as good as throwing good money into the drain. Will the management admit this ?

Perhaps privatisation was the wrong term to use, since a government ownership of SPH would make it a public entity.

The more accurate term is nationalisation, which would result in SPH being wholly-owned by the nation. Much like PSA, CAG, SMRT, and so on.

If such a move is found to be desirable by the state, I don't see how NPAA -- which was probably intended to block unfriendly interests from taking ownership and editorial control of SPH's media arm -- may block such a move.

The government is still very much interested in controlling SPH's media arm, regardless of the availability of alternative media. Because the practical purpose of SPH's media arm is not commercial, SPH's media arm will continue to exist even if it is losing money. This means that SPH as a listed entity, will have an even smaller share price than present.

This is not ideal, because it will reflect poorly on the government, and cause much grief for investors.

But if the government nationalises SPH at present valuation, it will likely be over-paying, given the likelihood of further erosion of profit in its media arm.

(04-09-2019, 07:28 PM)karlmarx Wrote: Perhaps privatisation was the wrong term to use, since a government ownership of SPH would make it a public entity.

The more accurate term is nationalisation, which would result in SPH being wholly-owned by the nation. Much like PSA, CAG, SMRT, and so on.

If such a move is found to be desirable by the state, I don't see how NPAA -- which was probably intended to block unfriendly interests from taking ownership and editorial control of SPH's media arm -- may block such a move.

The government is still very much interested in controlling SPH's media arm, regardless of the availability of alternative media. Because the practical purpose of SPH's media arm is not commercial, SPH's media arm will continue to exist even if it is losing money. This means that SPH as a listed entity, will have an even smaller share price than present.

This is not ideal, because it will reflect poorly on the government, and cause much grief for investors.

But if the government nationalises SPH at present valuation, it will likely be over-paying, given the likelihood of further erosion of profit in its media arm.

SPH is a public company. Why should the drop in its share price reflect poorly on the government?
Furthermore, is there any strong reason for the government to privatize or nationalise the SPH? I can't see any at the moment.


SPH still makes decent profit from media business, though it's on the declining trends. It' still early days yet to talk about bailout.

SPH is not a normal public company. It's a company run by gov appointed officials.
Similar to NOL's failure, people tend to push the blame to gov

It's not early to talk about bailout. SPH's business is in serious decline.

This CEO must be very smart in business , from Army to shipping , now into media and property , student hostel , home for the ages .