China Minzhong Food Corporation

I actually went on such a local mushroom farm tour at seletar many years ago. The farm was called everbloom mushroom you can google about it. I went with a friend, we dropped by unannounced and they just gave us a short tour of their farm then later at the end stirfried some fresh mushrooms for us to sample. Curious place a mushroom farm basically you are using natures wastes to produce food, you can use logs of wood, sawdust, coffee wastes or I gather anything that contains nitrogen can be used some farms even use large lumps of horse manure to produce button mushrooms, that's something to consider the next time when about to bite into your fav mushroom swiss burger at BK

(27-08-2013, 08:56 PM)sgd Wrote: I went with a friend, we dropped by unannounced and they just gave us a short tour of their farm then later at the end stirfried some fresh mushrooms for us to sample.

Wow! The owners are super friendly!

I do not understand why s-chip, we are spoil for choice at STI. Forget about china. It was reported, even their very own PM do not believe in these economic figures, he gauge the economy by electricity usage , railway and etc. So why do we bother?

Is there not enough fundamental value stock in SGX for us to invest?

These china things are questionable, u name them, they have it. They are famous for fake things, from Olympic games, to food stuffs. Never buy vegetable from china, I once bought their kai lan from NTUC, they taste funny. Even their space tech are stolen by hacking into US and Europe computers.

Why invest in s-chip only to get cheated? Invest in Singapore, sure we can trust ourselves.

---

(27-08-2013, 09:33 PM)yewkim Wrote: I do not understand why s-chip, we are spoil for choice at STI. Forget about china. It was reported, even their very own PM do not believe in these economic figures, he gauge the economy by electricity usage , railway and etc. So why do we bother?

Is there not enough fundamental value stock in SGX for us to invest?

These china things are questionable, u name them, they have it. They are famous for fake things, from Olympic games, to food stuffs. Never buy vegetable from china, I once bought their kai lan from NTUC, they taste funny. Even their space tech are stolen by hacking into US and Europe computers.

Why invest in s-chip only to get cheated? Invest in Singapore, sure we can trust ourselves.

On top of this, I would like to raise a point concerning economic data out of China. If you have some s-chip. time to be cautious, some coy revenue down as much as 90%, I do not know how they are going to stay in business. The last time, my factory order was down some 20%, most worker was put on short week. If you work in manufacturing , you should know better.

In China, state are in full control, so are their data, all could be manipulated for political purposes.

(27-08-2013, 09:20 PM)Dividend Warrior Wrote:

(27-08-2013, 08:56 PM)sgd Wrote: I went with a friend, we dropped by unannounced and they just gave us a short tour of their farm then later at the end stirfried some fresh mushrooms for us to sample.

Wow! The owners are super friendly!

These farms in Singapore will generally organize guided tour of their place when you drop by. You can go Qian Hu, Goat Farm, and the others along Lim Chu Kang. It is a way to create awareness.

China arrests British, American investigators
China announces arrest of British, American investigators on charges of privacy violation
Associated PressBy Joe Mcdonald, AP Business Writer | Associated Press – 2 hours 40 minutes ago

Email
Print

RELATED QUOTES
Symbol Price Change
DNB 101.76 -1.72

BEIJING (AP) -- Beijing is tightening control over trade in information that can help companies find their way through China's secretive business world.

On Tuesday, police announced the arrest of two corporate investigators, a Briton and an American who work in Shanghai, on charges of improperly selling personal information about Chinese citizens.

Peter Humphrey and Yingzeng Yu, a married couple, are part of an industry of investigators who help corporate clients screen potential partners and employees or watch for embezzlement and other employee misconduct.

"The opaque nature of the investigation and detention of the Humphreys is troubling at best and puts a serious chilling effect on legitimate efforts to investigate even benign, public information," said James Zimmerman, managing partner of the Beijing office of the law firm Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton.

Chinese leaders want the prosperity that comes from free-market competition but see control over information as a tool to protect the Communist Party's monopoly on power.

The government operates an extensive surveillance network to track China's public and limits access to data on companies and individuals. Since last year it has further narrowed what can be obtained.

Other companies that supply information already are under pressure. In January, four Chinese employees of a unit of Dun & Bradstreet Corp. were sentenced to prison on charges of improperly buying personal data of Chinese citizens.

A string of Chinese companies have been hit by disclosures by investigators about possible financial misconduct that caused their share prices to plunge.

Possibly in response to that, regulations issued in February 2012 prohibit government agencies from disclosing financial or commercial information about a company without its permission.

That made it harder for companies to investigate potential partners or acquisition targets to find liabilities or conflicts of interest. Known as "due diligence," it is a common practice in other countries.

Several dozen reports prepared by Humphrey and Yu for corporate clients contained information that "seriously violated the legitimate rights of citizens," the Shanghai police department said in a statement. It said they were formally arrested on Aug. 16.

That included home addresses and information on family members, real estate and vehicles, the statement said. It said they were sold to clients including manufacturers, law firms and financial institutions.

Such information can reveal links between people and establish who controls a business. That can be essential in a Chinese business world dominated by behind-the-scenes personal connections.

Also last year, communist leaders were embarrassed by news reports that disclosed details of the family wealth of Xi Jinping, the new ruling party leader, and retiring Premier Wen Jiabao.

Humphrey's and Yu's firm, ChinaWhys Ltd., says on its website it "specializes in discreet risk mitigation solutions, consulting and investigation services" aimed at "walking multinationals through the labyrinth of opportunity, risk and unfamiliar cultural environment."

Humphrey, a former reporter for the Reuters news agency, has worked as an investigator for the past 14 years in Asia, focusing on white-collar crime prevention, fraud investigation and crisis mitigation, according to the website. It says Yu has worked for or advised companies in the United States, Hong Kong and China in technology, medical products and other industries over a 25-year business career.

Humphrey and Yu are accused of paying 800 to 2,000 yuan ($130 to $320) per item of personal information, the official Xinhua News Agency said.

A report about the case on the state television midday news showed two people in handcuffs with their faces blurred.

"To obtain this information, I sometimes used illegal means," said the man, a Westerner, speaking in Mandarin. "I want to apologize to the Chinese government."

The latest case could mark an escalation in enforcement against foreign as well as Chinese investigators.

People of Chinese ancestry have been prosecuted in the past on charges of industrial spying or other corporate misconduct but Humphrey appears to be the first non-ethnic-Chinese to face such treatment.

In January, the four former executives of Dun & Bradstreet's Shanghai Roadway D&B Marketing Services Co. were sentenced by a Shanghai court to up to two years in prison. The company was fined 1 million yuan ($160,000).

The British Embassy in Beijing confirmed last week that Humphrey was arrested but gave no details of charges. The embassy said it was providing unspecified consular assistance to his family.

The American Embassy in Beijing said earlier that diplomats visited Yu on July 16. A spokesman said Tuesday he had no additional information.

The detentions coincided with the announcement in July of an investigation into possible bribery of doctors by employees of pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline. That prompted suggestions their case might be linked to Glaxo, but Tuesday's announcement made no mention of that.

Glaxo declined Tuesday to comment.

The announcement said Shanghai police are investigating 126 people on suspicion of improperly gathering personal information and have detained 35.

Chinese companies have reacted angrily to disclosures of information by investigators.

In the highest-profile case, a U.S. firm, Muddy Waters Research, accused Chinese forestry company Sino-Forest Corp. of exaggerating the value of its assets.

Sino-Forest's shares on the Toronto Stock Exchange plunged in value. Canadian police launched an investigation of the company, which filed a lawsuit accusing Muddy Waters of defamation.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/china-arre...07701.html


China's society since the beginning of time dislikes checks-and-balance. They like to centralize power and destroy an independent judiciary simply because such a system is not in the interests of those in power.

Investing in China means you have to behave like them and play by their rules, which usually involves some form of dishonesty and corruption and power abuse. If such behaviour is fine with you, then go ahead. Investing in China could be profitable.

But if such behaviour sickens you, then better to stay away from China and invest in countries where the rule of law is far stronger. Sure, such countries are not perfect and there are cases of corruption and fraud. But they are more likely to be exposed and less likely to happen.

I also learnt my lesson in S-chips the hard way.

If china company, which is cash rich, tells you that they don't pay dividends because they want to keep the money to expand like Buffett-style, they are most likely lying to you. They most probably will find a way to pocket the money themselves - such as buying of equipment/property/shares from a company that is related to themselves somehow at an inflated price.

(27-08-2013, 10:33 PM)investor101 Wrote: China arrests British, American investigators
China announces arrest of British, American investigators on charges of privacy violation
Associated PressBy Joe Mcdonald, AP Business Writer | Associated Press – 2 hours 40 minutes ago

Email
Print

RELATED QUOTES
Symbol Price Change
DNB 101.76 -1.72

BEIJING (AP) -- Beijing is tightening control over trade in information that can help companies find their way through China's secretive business world.

On Tuesday, police announced the arrest of two corporate investigators, a Briton and an American who work in Shanghai, on charges of improperly selling personal information about Chinese citizens.

Peter Humphrey and Yingzeng Yu, a married couple, are part of an industry of investigators who help corporate clients screen potential partners and employees or watch for embezzlement and other employee misconduct.

"The opaque nature of the investigation and detention of the Humphreys is troubling at best and puts a serious chilling effect on legitimate efforts to investigate even benign, public information," said James Zimmerman, managing partner of the Beijing office of the law firm Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton.

Chinese leaders want the prosperity that comes from free-market competition but see control over information as a tool to protect the Communist Party's monopoly on power.

The government operates an extensive surveillance network to track China's public and limits access to data on companies and individuals. Since last year it has further narrowed what can be obtained.

Other companies that supply information already are under pressure. In January, four Chinese employees of a unit of Dun & Bradstreet Corp. were sentenced to prison on charges of improperly buying personal data of Chinese citizens.

A string of Chinese companies have been hit by disclosures by investigators about possible financial misconduct that caused their share prices to plunge.

Possibly in response to that, regulations issued in February 2012 prohibit government agencies from disclosing financial or commercial information about a company without its permission.

That made it harder for companies to investigate potential partners or acquisition targets to find liabilities or conflicts of interest. Known as "due diligence," it is a common practice in other countries.

Several dozen reports prepared by Humphrey and Yu for corporate clients contained information that "seriously violated the legitimate rights of citizens," the Shanghai police department said in a statement. It said they were formally arrested on Aug. 16.

That included home addresses and information on family members, real estate and vehicles, the statement said. It said they were sold to clients including manufacturers, law firms and financial institutions.

Such information can reveal links between people and establish who controls a business. That can be essential in a Chinese business world dominated by behind-the-scenes personal connections.

Also last year, communist leaders were embarrassed by news reports that disclosed details of the family wealth of Xi Jinping, the new ruling party leader, and retiring Premier Wen Jiabao.

Humphrey's and Yu's firm, ChinaWhys Ltd., says on its website it "specializes in discreet risk mitigation solutions, consulting and investigation services" aimed at "walking multinationals through the labyrinth of opportunity, risk and unfamiliar cultural environment."

Humphrey, a former reporter for the Reuters news agency, has worked as an investigator for the past 14 years in Asia, focusing on white-collar crime prevention, fraud investigation and crisis mitigation, according to the website. It says Yu has worked for or advised companies in the United States, Hong Kong and China in technology, medical products and other industries over a 25-year business career.

Humphrey and Yu are accused of paying 800 to 2,000 yuan ($130 to $320) per item of personal information, the official Xinhua News Agency said.

A report about the case on the state television midday news showed two people in handcuffs with their faces blurred.

"To obtain this information, I sometimes used illegal means," said the man, a Westerner, speaking in Mandarin. "I want to apologize to the Chinese government."

The latest case could mark an escalation in enforcement against foreign as well as Chinese investigators.

People of Chinese ancestry have been prosecuted in the past on charges of industrial spying or other corporate misconduct but Humphrey appears to be the first non-ethnic-Chinese to face such treatment.

In January, the four former executives of Dun & Bradstreet's Shanghai Roadway D&B Marketing Services Co. were sentenced by a Shanghai court to up to two years in prison. The company was fined 1 million yuan ($160,000).

The British Embassy in Beijing confirmed last week that Humphrey was arrested but gave no details of charges. The embassy said it was providing unspecified consular assistance to his family.

The American Embassy in Beijing said earlier that diplomats visited Yu on July 16. A spokesman said Tuesday he had no additional information.

The detentions coincided with the announcement in July of an investigation into possible bribery of doctors by employees of pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline. That prompted suggestions their case might be linked to Glaxo, but Tuesday's announcement made no mention of that.

Glaxo declined Tuesday to comment.

The announcement said Shanghai police are investigating 126 people on suspicion of improperly gathering personal information and have detained 35.

Chinese companies have reacted angrily to disclosures of information by investigators.

In the highest-profile case, a U.S. firm, Muddy Waters Research, accused Chinese forestry company Sino-Forest Corp. of exaggerating the value of its assets.

Sino-Forest's shares on the Toronto Stock Exchange plunged in value. Canadian police launched an investigation of the company, which filed a lawsuit accusing Muddy Waters of defamation.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/china-arre...07701.html


China's society since the beginning of time dislikes checks-and-balance. They like to centralize power and destroy an independent judiciary simply because such a system is not in the interests of those in power.

Investing in China means you have to behave like them and play by their rules, which usually involves some form of dishonesty and corruption and power abuse. If such behaviour is fine with you, then go ahead. Investing in China could be profitable.

But if such behaviour sickens you, then better to stay away from China and invest in countries where the rule of law is far stronger. Sure, such countries are not perfect and there are cases of corruption and fraud. But they are more likely to be exposed and less likely to happen.

I also learnt my lesson in S-chips the hard way.

If china company, which is cash rich, tells you that they don't pay dividends because they want to keep the money to expand like Buffett-style, they are most likely lying to you. They most probably will find a way to pocket the money themselves - such as buying of equipment/property/shares from a company that is related to themselves somehow at an inflated price.

Doesn't this article further reinforce the fact that their companies cannot be trusted? Without transparency, how would investors know whether the company is a good or bad one? If that is the case, I think SGX should not even think about listing china firms...

(27-08-2013, 12:10 AM)weijian Wrote: About 1.5years ago, CMZ was a popular thread with some of the forumers like dzm87 making a contrarian call. He was one of the sole fellas who was doing so and he too, was dejected. I believe SMOL, Jared Seah posted something along the lines of 'keep your chin up...this is what trains your contrarian instinct, making calls that others wouldn't and blah blah blah......'. In the next 6 months, CMZ rosed by about 80-100%.

By relating this, i am not making a call that this will be so. But through the lessons of history and also practising some so-called 2nd level thinking (borrowed from the words of Howard Mark of Oattree Capital), do keep your emotions in check and continue thinking and digging.

Had the time to read finish the Glaucus report and all the prior posts here.

Yes, it could have been a profitable decision 1.5 years back then when the stock went back up 80 to 100% (but I exited slightly earlier). However, one thing that reinforces for me is that a profitable decision doesn't always necessary means one's process is correct. Sometimes, when we have done our research and the price react to what we hope for, we think we are the genius but for all you may know, the stock could have reacted to reasons which you have not accounted for.

For all the due diligence I had done back then, I too had missed the private subsidiaries' concerns. In the end, we neither have a crystal ball nor are w able to throw some tea leaves and predict the future. The best we can do is to either ensure all grounds are covered in a most efficient manner or be ready to walk away if it's too good to be true. Likewise, this goes the same for a investment loss. Sometimes, a decision goes wrong when we miss certain aspects but that's fine as long as you learn where your mistake is. Journal it down or write it in your portfolio tracker. So, next time, it reinforces your decision. I do that whenever I make some bad calls or when I notice something which can improve my research process.

Despite all the chatter, I would like to ask if anyone here has managed to dig around and see if the claims in the Glaucus report are true?

It seems no one, not even the analyst are saying that the glaucus report is not true? Is everyone just believing a report evidence wholesale?

I am trying to dig around now..

(28-08-2013, 12:18 AM)dzwm87 Wrote:

(27-08-2013, 12:10 AM)weijian Wrote: About 1.5years ago, CMZ was a popular thread with some of the forumers like dzm87 making a contrarian call. He was one of the sole fellas who was doing so and he too, was dejected. I believe SMOL, Jared Seah posted something along the lines of 'keep your chin up...this is what trains your contrarian instinct, making calls that others wouldn't and blah blah blah......'. In the next 6 months, CMZ rosed by about 80-100%.

By relating this, i am not making a call that this will be so. But through the lessons of history and also practising some so-called 2nd level thinking (borrowed from the words of Howard Mark of Oattree Capital), do keep your emotions in check and continue thinking and digging.

Had the time to read finish the Glaucus report and all the prior posts here.

Yes, it could have been a profitable decision 1.5 years back then when the stock went back up 80 to 100% (but I exited slightly earlier). However, one thing that reinforces for me is that a profitable decision doesn't always necessary means one's process is correct. Sometimes, when we have done our research and the price react to what we hope for, we think we are the genius but for all you may know, the stock could have reacted to reasons which you have not accounted for.

For all the due diligence I had done back then, I too had missed the private subsidiaries' concerns. In the end, we neither have a crystal ball nor are w able to throw some tea leaves and predict the future. The best we can do is to either ensure all grounds are covered in a most efficient manner or be ready to walk away if it's too good to be true. Likewise, this goes the same for a investment loss. Sometimes, a decision goes wrong when we miss certain aspects but that's fine as long as you learn where your mistake is. Journal it down or write it in your portfolio tracker. So, next time, it reinforces your decision. I do that whenever I make some bad calls or when I notice something which can improve my research process.

Borrow words from Lim&Tan:
2. Admittedly, such detailed forensic research which requires a lot of time and resources is beyond the reach of local analysts like myself.

I believe that most of us work alone in investing. Unless we know how and where to look for it, otherwise we will surely miss out parts of the details in any research done.

(28-08-2013, 12:55 AM)BlueKelah Wrote: Despite all the chatter, I would like to ask if anyone here has managed to dig around and see if the claims in the Glaucus report are true?

It seems no one, not even the analyst are saying that the glaucus report is not true? Is everyone just believing a report evidence wholesale?

I am trying to dig around now..

If you are searching for the other side of the story.

http://research.maybank-ib.com/pdf/docum...3_2789.pdf

Quote:Minzhong’s biggest investor isn’t concerned. PT Indofood Sukses Makmur, the parent of Indonesia’s biggest instant-noodle maker and Minzhong’s largest shareholder, is comfortable with its investment, director Thomas Tjhie said yesterday by telephone from Jakarta.
Indofood, which doubled its stake in Minzhong to 29.3 percent in March, conducted due diligence on the company before it made its investment, Tjhie said, adding that he has spoken to Minzhong’s chief financial officer about the Glaucus report.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-26...-asia.html

Of course, negative news far outweigh positive opinions, since Minzhong is still, unfortunately, quiet on this.

This is CMZ's CFO since 2004: http://www.ntu.edu.sg/NanyangAlumniAward...4%9F).aspx

If he is a defrauding us knowingly, at least we could put him in prison (I think).