Yamada Green Resources

Now we know why even their own CFO sold off the stock!!!

(01-08-2012, 09:40 PM)Stockerman Wrote: Property generally goes up ... But biological assets such as logs , abalones etc are really subjective ... Oceanus case - anyone still remembered?

Current yamada case reminiscent of Oceanus dubious case ?

It is a little different. I remember Oceanus recorded an accounting profit based on 'changes in fair value of biological assets' to inflate their profits. For Yamada, up to 3Q2012 statements, there isn't any gain recorded from such 'fair value changes'.

I guess they are going to record a loss on their 'eucalyptus trees investment' (attempt to go upstream) after been denied a logging license. Either way, it does not look good - (1) This could simply be a honest mistake by Mgt which just reflects their incompetency, or (2) ways for vested parties to siphon cash away from the company.

The asset gain was already built in right from the start!

Who came up with the original value of their asset? Is it one of their "paid" auditors?

Why was the CFO so eager to sell off ? She smelt RAT right from start and investors are again taken for a ride to Alice Wonderland !

When insiders know that there is potential in a company, there will be lots of trading activities, etc...Humans are greedy
if they cannot buy it directly, they will get friends of friends of friends to buy...

Look at Portek before the GO. Good news always got leaked out. SGX can do nothing...

(02-08-2012, 09:39 PM)weijian Wrote:

(01-08-2012, 09:40 PM)Stockerman Wrote: Property generally goes up ... But biological assets such as logs , abalones etc are really subjective ... Oceanus case - anyone still remembered?

Current yamada case reminiscent of Oceanus dubious case ?

It is a little different. I remember Oceanus recorded an accounting profit based on 'changes in fair value of biological assets' to inflate their profits. For Yamada, up to 3Q2012 statements, there isn't any gain recorded from such 'fair value changes'.

I guess they are going to record a loss on their 'eucalyptus trees investment' (attempt to go upstream) after been denied a logging license. Either way, it does not look good - (1) This could simply be a honest mistake by Mgt which just reflects their incompetency, or (2) ways for vested parties to siphon cash away from the company.

PROPOSED SUBSCRIPTION OF 82,187,000 NEW ORDINARY SHARES IN THE SHARE CAPITAL OF THE COMPANY AT THE ISSUE PRICE OF S$0.119 FOR EACH SUBSCRIPTION SHARE (THE “SUBSCRIPTION”)

http://info.sgx.com/webcoranncatth.nsf/V...70052678D/$file/YMD-Placement.pdf?openelement [SGX Announcement]

The Subscriber is special purpose vehicle wholly owned by Mr Sam Goi Seng Hui. Mr Goi is the Executive Chairman of Tee Yih Jia Group (a global food and beverage group with operations in Singapore, Malaysia, USA, Europe and China); and Yangzhou Junhe Real Estate Group (a growing property development company in China).

(Not Vested)

yamada green up 120%... madness man lol

(20-02-2013, 10:42 AM)felixleong Wrote: yamada green up 120%... madness man lol

Mr Sam has a golden touch on stock

I would be wary when it comes to following the rich man's touch. Such people have very deep pockets and they run a business where investing in related companies brings about synergies to their existing business. Probably once Tee Yih Jia gets large enough with its related investments, he would want to list it in an IPO and get very good valuations!

(20-02-2013, 10:58 AM)Musicwhiz Wrote: I would be wary when it comes to following the rich man's touch. Such people have very deep pockets and they run a business where investing in related companies brings about synergies to their existing business. Probably once Tee Yih Jia gets large enough with its related investments, he would want to list it in an IPO and get very good valuations!

Even with the hike, the PE is low @ 4-5 with company with ROA of 25%. The previous price is hammered down due to S-Chip fear.

Mr Sam got a good deal, assuming no fraud on accounting.

(20-02-2013, 11:08 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: Even with the hike, the PE is low @ 4-5 with company with ROA of 25%. The previous price is hammered down due to S-Chip fear.

Mr Sam got a good deal, assuming no fraud on accounting.

Would ROA be a more appropriate method to measure returns compared to say ROE or ROIC? Is Yamada Green considered an asset-heavy company?

Thanks!

(20-02-2013, 11:21 AM)Musicwhiz Wrote:

(20-02-2013, 11:08 AM)CityFarmer Wrote: Even with the hike, the PE is low @ 4-5 with company with ROA of 25%. The previous price is hammered down due to S-Chip fear.

Mr Sam got a good deal, assuming no fraud on accounting.

Would ROA be a more appropriate method to measure returns compared to say ROE or ROIC? Is Yamada Green considered an asset-heavy company?

Thanks!

IMO, ROA is the real return of investment of a business, while ROE includes the efficiency of managing the capital. To access a business model profitability, i always focus on ROA. But as overall company profitability, ROE is also meaningful. It is always good to gain from others' money.

In Yamada case, ROA and ROE are very similar, likely due to no or little leverage.

In FY 2012, revenue is 111 mil with total asset of 115 mil. I will consider it as asset-heavy business, but with good return.