UMS Holdings

Am I right to say that UMS business is heavily dependent on 1 big customer AMAT. If this big customer is selling, and CEO is also selling, that sounds scary, doesn't it?

(11-06-2014, 07:11 PM)efreet Wrote: Perhaps a new SSH may emerge. The float is not big. If both As sell like that,who had been buying up? I will stay vested, but won't buy anymore until situation clearer. Don't overinvest in a stock. Even if one had done due diligence, also cannot forsee those recent sales one. Or else, we would have sold before the 2 As, tio boh? Problem is the roughly 2 days lag between announcement n actual sales. That's life for an ikan bilis

My point is that if I'm convicted that the company is undervalued, I would buy more shares on the cheap if the fundamentals remain intact, regardless of whether the major share holders are selling their shares. If I hesitate from buying more when it drop below the intrinsic value or initial purchase price, that means I am doubting my initial decision and analysis of the company.

Just to add on the famous quote of Warren Buffet. If I don't understand the business, I don't invest in it.

(11-06-2014, 08:54 PM)BeDisciplined Wrote: Am I right to say that UMS business is heavily dependent on 1 big customer AMAT. If this big customer is selling, and CEO is also selling, that sounds scary, doesn't it?

The major customer accounted for about 85% of revenue, IIRC. The fear is not unwarranted

This stock isn't in my latest shopping list, but its quality deserve my attention...

TA is real time and FA is not. FA is based on last quarterly report and it is as good as then. Provided no major event happened between then and now, otherwise FA is as good as not there. eg lost a big customer. New product got delayed. Cost overrun big time etc

Selling is the only insurance premium worth paying.

On the recent spike in trading activity and massive selling by insiders, I'm wondering whether such unusual spike in trading activity warrants a query from the regulator.

Many great points have been raised by fellow buddies in this thread especially recently with discussions on its business model, customer's intentions, macro outlook etc. Personally, I didn't find Andy's sale to be perplexing since I have seen him sell in great volume in the past while the business carried on steadily. But AMAT sale is different since it is unprecedented. I initially purchased UMS with the knowledge that with AMAT as a SSH, it implies that it has confidence in its subcontractor ability to deliver and the partnership is unlikely to be disrupted. With the stake sale, this premise no longer holds true - I am not saying that AMAT definitely has no more confidence in UMS but rather I cannot say that it definitely does. The fundamentals is no longer the same (to me) - there is an element of uncertainty as Specuvestor wisely wrote about. I did reduce my stake yesterday after contemplating about this. I am penning this now to avoid any hindsight bias but I do wonder will I regret parring down my stake when the dust settles (foresight bias ?) haha ! I hope the Board will issue a similar clarification like in 2012 to reduce this element of uncertainty.

(Vested)

i think what specuvestor speculated matches what might really be happening.

(11-06-2014, 10:41 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: This stock isn't in my latest shopping list, but its quality deserve my attention...

Cityfarmer san

What do you reckon is a good bottom fishing level?

we talked so much about AMAT.. will it good for us to invest on this moat also?

(11-06-2014, 11:22 PM)Nick Wrote: Many great points have been raised by fellow buddies in this thread especially recently with discussions on its business model, customer's intentions, macro outlook etc. Personally, I didn't find Andy's sale to be perplexing since I have seen him sell in great volume in the past while the business carried on steadily. But AMAT sale is different since it is unprecedented. I initially purchased UMS with the knowledge that with AMAT as a SSH, it implies that it has confidence in its subcontractor ability to deliver and the partnership is unlikely to be disrupted. With the stake sale, this premise no longer holds true - I am not saying that AMAT definitely has no more confidence in UMS but rather I cannot say that it definitely does. The fundamentals is no longer the same (to me) - there is an element of uncertainty as Specuvestor wisely wrote about. I did reduce my stake yesterday after contemplating about this. I am penning this now to avoid any hindsight bias but I do wonder will I regret parring down my stake when the dust settles (foresight bias ?) haha ! I hope the Board will issue a similar clarification like in 2012 to reduce this element of uncertainty.

(Vested)

IMO, the decision is rational, no matter the outcome. Buy base on a story, and reduce when story no longer fully valid.

I did read thru the previous posts, and preliminary research. I agree the fear on Andy disposal is unwarranted with his record. Mr. Market's fear should be mainly from AMAT disposal.

How bad is the (likely) damage from AMAT? Hm...