CDW Holdings

Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
#21
There is also another question as to whether the dividend of 1.2c is sustainable. Back to year 2011 and before, they used to generate much lesser and they gave only 0.7c in dividend, which is approximately 5% based on current price. I am quite reluctant to enter now because the potential impact due to the change in its major customer's control over the procurement process, also the fact the FY2012 and FY2013 were exceptional due to the mass production for new products in Q2 2012 and the Chinese government's compensation reflected in FY2013. Excluding these, it would still possibly generate about 1.5c to 2c a year and this make it less attractive at current price. Furthermore, a less significance measurement method, the price has just fell below 200MA, which I think that it is still not the right time for long yet. Just my 2 cents.
Reply
#21
There is also another question as to whether the dividend of 1.2c is sustainable. Back to year 2011 and before, they used to generate much lesser and they gave only 0.7c in dividend, which is approximately 5% based on current price. I am quite reluctant to enter now because the potential impact due to the change in its major customer's control over the procurement process, also the fact the FY2012 and FY2013 were exceptional due to the mass production for new products in Q2 2012 and the Chinese government's compensation reflected in FY2013. Excluding these, it would still possibly generate about 1.5c to 2c a year and this make it less attractive at current price. Furthermore, a less significance measurement method, the price has just fell below 200MA, which I think that it is still not the right time for long yet. Just my 2 cents.
Reply
#22
Source : - From a Hardware zone posting, hat tip to value buddies, they are regular in dividend, but dividend fluctuates.

Company Name Type Expiry Date Record Date Date Paid/Payable Particulars
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 03 Sep 2013 05 Sep 2013 13 Sep 2013 USD 0.005
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 20 May 2013 22 May 2013 31 May 2013 USD 0.007
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 18 Sep 2012 20 Sep 2012 05 Oct 2012 USD 0.005
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 04 May 2012 08 May 2012 25 May 2012 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 22 Sep 2011 26 Sep 2011 07 Oct 2011 USD 0.003
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 07 Jun 2011 09 Jun 2011 20 Jun 2011 USD 0.003
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 21 Sep 2010 23 Sep 2010 07 Oct 2010 USD 0.003
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 04 May 2010 06 May 2010 20 May 2010 USD 0.003
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 17 Sep 2009 22 Sep 2009 07 Oct 2009 USD 0.002
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 07 May 2009 11 May 2009 27 May 2009 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 01 Sep 2008 03 Sep 2008 15 Sep 2008 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 08 May 2008 12 May 2008 26 May 2008 USD 0.001
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 20 Sep 2007 24 Sep 2007 05 Oct 2007 USD 0.001
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 08 May 2007 10 May 2007 23 May 2007 USD 0.002
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 29 Sep 2006 03 Oct 2006 16 Oct 2006 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 10 May 2006 15 May 2006 24 May 2006 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 01 Sep 2005 05 Sep 2005 23 Sep 2005 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 06 May 2005 10 May 2005 20 May 2005 USD 0.00623
Reply
#22
Source : - From a Hardware zone posting, hat tip to value buddies, they are regular in dividend, but dividend fluctuates.

Company Name Type Expiry Date Record Date Date Paid/Payable Particulars
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 03 Sep 2013 05 Sep 2013 13 Sep 2013 USD 0.005
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 20 May 2013 22 May 2013 31 May 2013 USD 0.007
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 18 Sep 2012 20 Sep 2012 05 Oct 2012 USD 0.005
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 04 May 2012 08 May 2012 25 May 2012 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 22 Sep 2011 26 Sep 2011 07 Oct 2011 USD 0.003
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 07 Jun 2011 09 Jun 2011 20 Jun 2011 USD 0.003
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 21 Sep 2010 23 Sep 2010 07 Oct 2010 USD 0.003
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 04 May 2010 06 May 2010 20 May 2010 USD 0.003
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 17 Sep 2009 22 Sep 2009 07 Oct 2009 USD 0.002
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 07 May 2009 11 May 2009 27 May 2009 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 01 Sep 2008 03 Sep 2008 15 Sep 2008 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 08 May 2008 12 May 2008 26 May 2008 USD 0.001
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 20 Sep 2007 24 Sep 2007 05 Oct 2007 USD 0.001
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 08 May 2007 10 May 2007 23 May 2007 USD 0.002
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 29 Sep 2006 03 Oct 2006 16 Oct 2006 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 10 May 2006 15 May 2006 24 May 2006 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 01 Sep 2005 05 Sep 2005 23 Sep 2005 USD 0.004
CDW HOLDING LIMITED DIVIDEND 06 May 2005 10 May 2005 20 May 2005 USD 0.00623
Reply
#23
The largest shareholder, Kunikazu Yoshimi, reduced his direct interest from 18,405,221 shares as at 12 March 2013 to 5,505,221 shares now. That's pretty scary...
Reply
#23
The largest shareholder, Kunikazu Yoshimi, reduced his direct interest from 18,405,221 shares as at 12 March 2013 to 5,505,221 shares now. That's pretty scary...
Reply
#24
IMO, their 10% dividend yield is unsustainable. The math is clearly against them.

What I have found out:
- At least 35% of group’s revenue comes from game sets which are going to be obsolete.
- Another 20% is derived from handsets which are "exclusively" sold in Japan. CDW does OEM for Japanese local handset brands and they are not major global brands which means growth is limited while there is pressure as consumer consolidates to global brand names.
- While revenue is falling, labor cost, which accounts for 19% of revenue is rising.

So top line is falling while cost as a % of revenue is increasing.
"Criticism is the fertilizer of learning." - Sir John Templeton
Reply
#24
IMO, their 10% dividend yield is unsustainable. The math is clearly against them.

What I have found out:
- At least 35% of group’s revenue comes from game sets which are going to be obsolete.
- Another 20% is derived from handsets which are "exclusively" sold in Japan. CDW does OEM for Japanese local handset brands and they are not major global brands which means growth is limited while there is pressure as consumer consolidates to global brand names.
- While revenue is falling, labor cost, which accounts for 19% of revenue is rising.

So top line is falling while cost as a % of revenue is increasing.
"Criticism is the fertilizer of learning." - Sir John Templeton
Reply
#25
What actually caught in my attention is the cash reserve they have, and history dividend they have been paying. EPS is good but the most worry part is the concentration on single customer. Yes I do expect revenue and profit to be lower in the coming years, but I remain positive that it will not fall into losses in view of high gross margin on its products. Putting all this in the look, the upside seems challenging and limited, but they should be able to continue giving out good dividend (5-10%) per year.

(not vested)
Reply
#25
What actually caught in my attention is the cash reserve they have, and history dividend they have been paying. EPS is good but the most worry part is the concentration on single customer. Yes I do expect revenue and profit to be lower in the coming years, but I remain positive that it will not fall into losses in view of high gross margin on its products. Putting all this in the look, the upside seems challenging and limited, but they should be able to continue giving out good dividend (5-10%) per year.

(not vested)
Reply
#26
Kunikazu Yoshimi sold another 930 lots on 2 April 2014 and his interest drop to 50.85%

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/_KY_eFOR...eID=289642
Reply
#26
Kunikazu Yoshimi sold another 930 lots on 2 April 2014 and his interest drop to 50.85%

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/_KY_eFOR...eID=289642
Reply
#27
(04-03-2014, 03:00 PM)valuebuddies Wrote: Regarding to those points Greenrookie highlighted below:

1. large amount of share options for directors and executives - all have been fully converted and as of 31.12.2013, there are no outstanding share options in issued. The share options granted to the executive in year 2008 totalling 19,032,000 options which is less than 4% of the total shares in issued, and the exercise price of S$0.07 approximates the quoted price at the issuance date. In short, I think the company is fair enough to the minority shareholders.

2. after prospectus, there is no info on major customers, but I think customers are still concentrated - Yes, the LCD business is still concentrating, I suspect the major customer is Sharp but I can't be sure. And in the latest results announcement, we know that the major customer will cease to involve in the procurement process which results in uncertainty over the sustainability of the future orders.

3. business direction - IMO having factories in China not only reduces the overall productions and operation costs, but also to stay close to its customers as I believe that it's products should ultimately be delivered to other factories in China as well.

On the financial information side, I noticed a significant drop in revenue and EBITA from 4Q2013 announcement, but it still produces a decent US$0.62c EPS for Q4 and US$2.41c EPS for FY2013, which translates into PE of 4.7. It maintained the interim and final of US$0.005 and US$0.007 respectively which is approximately 50% payout (this is not high).

The good things about this company is the huge net cash (about S$11.5c versus share price of S$14c), generous dividend yield (more than 10% yield), fabulous gross margin (more than 20%), low PE and below book valuation.

My only concern would be the significant concentration on 1 major customer. Unlike UMS, we have very limited information on this major customer and it could be just a time bomb as likely it will turn into losses without the support from this major customer.

I would appreciate if fellow members can contribute your views over this company, meanwhile I will continue to put this under my high priority watchlist.

1. Yes, there are no more options outstanding. I too, think the options are fair as the exercise price is approximately at the market price when they were given in 2008.
However, the company recently called for a new share purchase mandate again. The shares issued, Treasury shares outstanding, and the total share capital (shares issued + treasury shares) in the past 3 yrs are:
2011 2012 2013
Shares issued 483,048,221 459,842,221 474,362,221
Treasury shares 21,306,000 44,512,000 29,992,000
Total share capital 504,354,221 504,354,221 504,354,221

As you can see, the treasury shares fluctuate substantially. This is because the company does share buy backs (a lot of buybacks were done at approximately $0.07-0.1 in 2012), then uses the treasury shares when the options are exercised.
Nothing wrong with that, but it does mean that future dilution cannot be ruled out. With the recent share repurchase mandate, I think they are planning on issuing options again.
To be conservative, I tend to use the total number of shares when calculating NAV as this is constantly 504,354,221. As long as the treasury shares are not cancelled, I include them in my calculations, although admittedly, this is not normal practice. I do so as the company has a record of using the treasury shares as such.

2. The future earning power of the company, IMO, is the major question mark. As noted in AR2013, the major customer has cut orders drastically. The management themselves admit that any improvement in earnings from the LCD backlights division is unlikely to cover the drop in earnings from the parts and accessories division.
Also, in 2013, 8 million units of backlights are manufactured for smartphones, while 32 million units are for the gamesets, digital cameras etc.
As management rightly and honestly pointed out, the smartphones will likely see some resilience or even increase in orders, but the 32million units have been decreasing over the years. Gamesets and digital cameras are just getting replaced by smartphones.
This for me, is the biggest worry.
Backlights division barely matched 2012 results only because a client made additional orders in the 2H.
What happens in 2014?

If backlights do poorly, parts and accessories is ALREADY doing very poorly in 2013, and the office automation, although showing improvement, is still negative and in any case, is insignificant, then the results for 2014 may be very ugly indeed.

3) The financial figures you quoted doesn't take into account the 2 extraordinary items:
- Gain on bargain purchase of USD 2mil
- Payout from the disposal of CD Suzhou. This sum is parked under "other operating income". I don't think theres a breakdown of how much exactly, but it should be the bulk of the $4mil or so as the other components of "other operating income" is interest income, which is not large.
So I would take into account that $6mil of the profit is "extraordinary"
That means a NP of $5.3mil only! As opposed to $11.3mil currently.

The redeeming factor is they are poised to receive the last instalment from the disposal of CD Suzhou in 2014, which is about SGD $5.4mil, or USD $4.312mil. In other words, there will be a substantial "Extraordinary item" for 2014 as well to prop up earnings.

Overall, I think the markets are too fixated on the high dividend yield. Remember each time u receive dividends, the "value" of the company drops as cash is used to payout.

I will stay on the sidelines and wait for it to dip to closer to $0.11-$0.12 range before reassessing again.
(Yes, I know that is very substantially lower than NAV but I feel a much larger MOS is required considering the variables, and the near certainty that 2014 is going to be a tougher year for the company than 2013)
Any suggestions of this company being worth $0.2-0.29 based on CURRENT VALUATIONS, imo, is way off the mark.
(There's an earlier link where someone did a very simple analysis of the book value alone to derive that figure)
Reply
#27
(04-03-2014, 03:00 PM)valuebuddies Wrote: Regarding to those points Greenrookie highlighted below:

1. large amount of share options for directors and executives - all have been fully converted and as of 31.12.2013, there are no outstanding share options in issued. The share options granted to the executive in year 2008 totalling 19,032,000 options which is less than 4% of the total shares in issued, and the exercise price of S$0.07 approximates the quoted price at the issuance date. In short, I think the company is fair enough to the minority shareholders.

2. after prospectus, there is no info on major customers, but I think customers are still concentrated - Yes, the LCD business is still concentrating, I suspect the major customer is Sharp but I can't be sure. And in the latest results announcement, we know that the major customer will cease to involve in the procurement process which results in uncertainty over the sustainability of the future orders.

3. business direction - IMO having factories in China not only reduces the overall productions and operation costs, but also to stay close to its customers as I believe that it's products should ultimately be delivered to other factories in China as well.

On the financial information side, I noticed a significant drop in revenue and EBITA from 4Q2013 announcement, but it still produces a decent US$0.62c EPS for Q4 and US$2.41c EPS for FY2013, which translates into PE of 4.7. It maintained the interim and final of US$0.005 and US$0.007 respectively which is approximately 50% payout (this is not high).

The good things about this company is the huge net cash (about S$11.5c versus share price of S$14c), generous dividend yield (more than 10% yield), fabulous gross margin (more than 20%), low PE and below book valuation.

My only concern would be the significant concentration on 1 major customer. Unlike UMS, we have very limited information on this major customer and it could be just a time bomb as likely it will turn into losses without the support from this major customer.

I would appreciate if fellow members can contribute your views over this company, meanwhile I will continue to put this under my high priority watchlist.

1. Yes, there are no more options outstanding. I too, think the options are fair as the exercise price is approximately at the market price when they were given in 2008.
However, the company recently called for a new share purchase mandate again. The shares issued, Treasury shares outstanding, and the total share capital (shares issued + treasury shares) in the past 3 yrs are:
2011 2012 2013
Shares issued 483,048,221 459,842,221 474,362,221
Treasury shares 21,306,000 44,512,000 29,992,000
Total share capital 504,354,221 504,354,221 504,354,221

As you can see, the treasury shares fluctuate substantially. This is because the company does share buy backs (a lot of buybacks were done at approximately $0.07-0.1 in 2012), then uses the treasury shares when the options are exercised.
Nothing wrong with that, but it does mean that future dilution cannot be ruled out. With the recent share repurchase mandate, I think they are planning on issuing options again.
To be conservative, I tend to use the total number of shares when calculating NAV as this is constantly 504,354,221. As long as the treasury shares are not cancelled, I include them in my calculations, although admittedly, this is not normal practice. I do so as the company has a record of using the treasury shares as such.

2. The future earning power of the company, IMO, is the major question mark. As noted in AR2013, the major customer has cut orders drastically. The management themselves admit that any improvement in earnings from the LCD backlights division is unlikely to cover the drop in earnings from the parts and accessories division.
Also, in 2013, 8 million units of backlights are manufactured for smartphones, while 32 million units are for the gamesets, digital cameras etc.
As management rightly and honestly pointed out, the smartphones will likely see some resilience or even increase in orders, but the 32million units have been decreasing over the years. Gamesets and digital cameras are just getting replaced by smartphones.
This for me, is the biggest worry.
Backlights division barely matched 2012 results only because a client made additional orders in the 2H.
What happens in 2014?

If backlights do poorly, parts and accessories is ALREADY doing very poorly in 2013, and the office automation, although showing improvement, is still negative and in any case, is insignificant, then the results for 2014 may be very ugly indeed.

3) The financial figures you quoted doesn't take into account the 2 extraordinary items:
- Gain on bargain purchase of USD 2mil
- Payout from the disposal of CD Suzhou. This sum is parked under "other operating income". I don't think theres a breakdown of how much exactly, but it should be the bulk of the $4mil or so as the other components of "other operating income" is interest income, which is not large.
So I would take into account that $6mil of the profit is "extraordinary"
That means a NP of $5.3mil only! As opposed to $11.3mil currently.

The redeeming factor is they are poised to receive the last instalment from the disposal of CD Suzhou in 2014, which is about SGD $5.4mil, or USD $4.312mil. In other words, there will be a substantial "Extraordinary item" for 2014 as well to prop up earnings.

Overall, I think the markets are too fixated on the high dividend yield. Remember each time u receive dividends, the "value" of the company drops as cash is used to payout.

I will stay on the sidelines and wait for it to dip to closer to $0.11-$0.12 range before reassessing again.
(Yes, I know that is very substantially lower than NAV but I feel a much larger MOS is required considering the variables, and the near certainty that 2014 is going to be a tougher year for the company than 2013)
Any suggestions of this company being worth $0.2-0.29 based on CURRENT VALUATIONS, imo, is way off the mark.
(There's an earlier link where someone did a very simple analysis of the book value alone to derive that figure)
Reply
#28
Share re-purchase somehow is an assurance to the existing shareholders of the company especially the minority. At the current price, I don't think the management would launch another round of shares buy back. Based on the figures you provided, it seems that the percentage of the treasury shares made up to only 8.8% (max), so is the difference of 8.8% on NAV significant? Different persons would have come out with different view, but to me it's not material at all. If I were to acquire shares of a company, it has to be at least 20% or more undervalued based on my analysis. Excuse my ignorance, is the total outstanding issued shares used in computing the EPS or NAV inclusive the preference shares?

Regarding the future earning power, I can't add much but to agree with you. The past doesn't guarantee the future, and thus it will be rather speculative to enter now when the major customer has ceased to get involved in the procurement. We would have to wait and see for the next 2 quarters.

If we exclude the one-off mass production in 2012 and disposal of CD Suzhou site, the company still managed to generate 1.5 to 2 US cents per year, more than 10% earning yield based on current share price, which is quite decent (in the past).

What actually draw my attention is not only the 10% dividend, but also the large amount of cash reserve they have. Even if the more than 10% earning yield is not sustainable, even if the company cuts it's dividend by half, I would still think that the company is a buy so long as it continues making (smaller) profits.

From the information available at the moment, 29c is definitely not the fair value, but we won't know for the future.
Reply
#28
Share re-purchase somehow is an assurance to the existing shareholders of the company especially the minority. At the current price, I don't think the management would launch another round of shares buy back. Based on the figures you provided, it seems that the percentage of the treasury shares made up to only 8.8% (max), so is the difference of 8.8% on NAV significant? Different persons would have come out with different view, but to me it's not material at all. If I were to acquire shares of a company, it has to be at least 20% or more undervalued based on my analysis. Excuse my ignorance, is the total outstanding issued shares used in computing the EPS or NAV inclusive the preference shares?

Regarding the future earning power, I can't add much but to agree with you. The past doesn't guarantee the future, and thus it will be rather speculative to enter now when the major customer has ceased to get involved in the procurement. We would have to wait and see for the next 2 quarters.

If we exclude the one-off mass production in 2012 and disposal of CD Suzhou site, the company still managed to generate 1.5 to 2 US cents per year, more than 10% earning yield based on current share price, which is quite decent (in the past).

What actually draw my attention is not only the 10% dividend, but also the large amount of cash reserve they have. Even if the more than 10% earning yield is not sustainable, even if the company cuts it's dividend by half, I would still think that the company is a buy so long as it continues making (smaller) profits.

From the information available at the moment, 29c is definitely not the fair value, but we won't know for the future.
Reply
#29
(08-04-2014, 04:12 PM)valuebuddies Wrote: Share re-purchase somehow is an assurance to the existing shareholders of the company especially the minority. At the current price, I don't think the management would launch another round of shares buy back. Based on the figures you provided, it seems that the percentage of the treasury shares made up to only 8.8% (max), so is the difference of 8.8% on NAV significant? Different persons would have come out with different view, but to me it's not material at all. If I were to acquire shares of a company, it has to be at least 20% or more undervalued based on my analysis. Excuse my ignorance, is the total outstanding issued shares used in computing the EPS or NAV inclusive the preference shares?

Regarding the future earning power, I can't add much but to agree with you. The past doesn't guarantee the future, and thus it will be rather speculative to enter now when the major customer has ceased to get involved in the procurement. We would have to wait and see for the next 2 quarters.

If we exclude the one-off mass production in 2012 and disposal of CD Suzhou site, the company still managed to generate 1.5 to 2 US cents per year, more than 10% earning yield based on current share price, which is quite decent (in the past).

What actually draw my attention is not only the 10% dividend, but also the large amount of cash reserve they have. Even if the more than 10% earning yield is not sustainable, even if the company cuts it's dividend by half, I would still think that the company is a buy so long as it continues making (smaller) profits.

From the information available at the moment, 29c is definitely not the fair value, but we won't know for the future.

Just want to point out:
Share repurchase is only reassuring to minorities if the repurchased shares are cancelled. Or at least kept as treasury shares indefinitely.
The rationale is it reduces the number of shares, increasing your share of future earnings.
However, it is much less assuring if the shares purchased are then issued to cover options immediately after purchase.
In this case it does nothing for the minority shareholder.
It may still indicate that the management feels shares are undervalued, but the recent sale of personal stakes by management kinda throws that logic out.
I don't think it's terribly overvalued, but I wouldn't buy but just wait for now till there's more visibility to earnings.
I also note there's no mention about order books.
Or perhaps I missed that out?
Reply
#29
(08-04-2014, 04:12 PM)valuebuddies Wrote: Share re-purchase somehow is an assurance to the existing shareholders of the company especially the minority. At the current price, I don't think the management would launch another round of shares buy back. Based on the figures you provided, it seems that the percentage of the treasury shares made up to only 8.8% (max), so is the difference of 8.8% on NAV significant? Different persons would have come out with different view, but to me it's not material at all. If I were to acquire shares of a company, it has to be at least 20% or more undervalued based on my analysis. Excuse my ignorance, is the total outstanding issued shares used in computing the EPS or NAV inclusive the preference shares?

Regarding the future earning power, I can't add much but to agree with you. The past doesn't guarantee the future, and thus it will be rather speculative to enter now when the major customer has ceased to get involved in the procurement. We would have to wait and see for the next 2 quarters.

If we exclude the one-off mass production in 2012 and disposal of CD Suzhou site, the company still managed to generate 1.5 to 2 US cents per year, more than 10% earning yield based on current share price, which is quite decent (in the past).

What actually draw my attention is not only the 10% dividend, but also the large amount of cash reserve they have. Even if the more than 10% earning yield is not sustainable, even if the company cuts it's dividend by half, I would still think that the company is a buy so long as it continues making (smaller) profits.

From the information available at the moment, 29c is definitely not the fair value, but we won't know for the future.

Just want to point out:
Share repurchase is only reassuring to minorities if the repurchased shares are cancelled. Or at least kept as treasury shares indefinitely.
The rationale is it reduces the number of shares, increasing your share of future earnings.
However, it is much less assuring if the shares purchased are then issued to cover options immediately after purchase.
In this case it does nothing for the minority shareholder.
It may still indicate that the management feels shares are undervalued, but the recent sale of personal stakes by management kinda throws that logic out.
I don't think it's terribly overvalued, but I wouldn't buy but just wait for now till there's more visibility to earnings.
I also note there's no mention about order books.
Or perhaps I missed that out?
Reply
#30
I used to think that the company might declare special dividend, but with the continuous selling of shares by the majority shareholder, I would now think otherwise. Just don't understand what is their plan with the excess $$..
Reply
#30
I used to think that the company might declare special dividend, but with the continuous selling of shares by the majority shareholder, I would now think otherwise. Just don't understand what is their plan with the excess $$..
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)