Sing Holdings

[cyborg]

Notice of a Director's (including a director who is a substantial shareholder) Interest and Change in Interest.
Name of Registered Holder : LEE SZE HAO

Open market purchases of
(i) 200,000 shares on 4 January 2011 at $0.355 per share; and
(ii) 749,000 shares on 5 January 2011 at $0.357997 per share

[dydx]

Today's (5Jan11) announcement says MD Lee Sze Hao bought a total of 949 lots on 4Jan11 and 5Jan11 and paid an average price of $0.357365/share.....
http://info.sgx.com/webcorannc.nsf/Annou...endocument

This amounts to a $339k additional investment and commitment for Lee.

[freedom]

always good to see directors are buying shares to show confidence.

[brattzz]

when up 2 cts today at 3 million traded.. waos! :O

[Big Toe]

This is looking very much like roxy pacific. Value slowly being appreciated.
Earnings are already being locked in for the next 2 years or so.
Mr Market likes certainty.

[ichiran]

Posting a reply from Kevin Scully to my question on "Why would replenishing landbank unlock discount to NAV ?"
-------------------------------------------------------------
Without its recent Robin Court puchase Sing Holdings would be mainly a cash company when the revenue from the sale of the Laurels and its other projects come in. There is no premium for listed company with just cash. But when its starts to replenish its landbank with good (well priced land purchases), this will generate a future stream of profit and increase its RNAV even further. Here investors would be looking at the profit margin from the new landbank benchmarked against previous landbank purchases to confirm the management's ability in identifying good sites.

Kevin on 7 January 2011 08:20 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------

[freedom]

Posting a reply from Kevin Scully to my question on "Why would replenishing landbank unlock discount to NAV ?"
-------------------------------------------------------------
Without its recent Robin Court puchase Sing Holdings would be mainly a cash company when the revenue from the sale of the Laurels and its other projects come in. There is no premium for listed company with just cash. But when its starts to replenish its landbank with good (well priced land purchases), this will generate a future stream of profit and increase its RNAV even further. Here investors would be looking at the profit margin from the new landbank benchmarked against previous landbank purchases to confirm the management's ability in identifying good sites.

Kevin on 7 January 2011 08:20 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin's point is valid. There will be no premium for a company with cash only. Actually most time, it is negative unless there is a credit crunch again and companies with debt get punished. It requires profitable operation to have PE or multiples of NAV.

[Big Toe]

If the management of the property developer is competent,
I would rather them sit on the cash while waiting for the next opportunity.
Sure, the operating expenses will slowly drain the cash away...but it sure beats
them buying up land just for the sake of replenishing its land bank.

Liquidity can be a very good thing. And to say that there should not be any premium attached to such a company is just shallow.
Property development is a form of investment and should never be activity or process driven.

An example is a bachelor who is 40 and have not found a wife.
Does it mean that he had to get married just because he is 40?
No, he should get married when he found the right person.
And of course, the right thing to do is to enlarge his social circles and put in more effort
so that the chances of finding a suitable wife is higher.

[freedom]

Robon Drive alone not enough to kill it mah?

77 mil, more than half of its market value

[psslo]

Behappy,

Can the high ROE be also a result of high gearing? I believed SingHldg is highly geared at 110%.

Hi, my guess is what he is implying is that people are worried if the company would continue to do as well after The Laurels. Replenishing good land bank shows that the company could continue to perform.

Fair Value?

Well everyone buys it for different reasons so value varies. For me I am buying it because of ROE(Return on Equity). I got my fair share of asset play of which I buy companies below their NTA but I realise that the company could stay below NTA for a very long time and there is nothing much a minority shareholder could do about it. ROE is much better because it shows how well the company is performing using the company's equity, meaning how well they are using the company's funds. In Sing Holdings' case, they would be earning around $150m within the next 2-3 years time. They have a present equity of around $140m. That's about 30% annual compounded return. The company is relative easy to analyse because relative few assets, namely Bellerive Project which is 94% sold and TOP 1Q2011, strata office units in Biztech Center(around $33m book value) which they are continuing to sell down, The Laurels which is 87% sold and only 5% recognition and lastly the $77.3m land parcel in Robin Drive. But then the trick is how not to overpay. I use present book value. They are trading presently at less than 1. Look at Osim, trading at 7times book value, crazy....just a corner stock.

ROE maybe tricky because profits in the future are usually hard to forecast. For example high tech counters, it could boom and bust in a relative short time. But for Sing Holdings, as a friend said, it is easier to forecast because you can check how many units are sold.


My fair value is above 2X present NTA which is 60++ cents but have to check on sentiment then because Mr Market may turn optimistic on property. By the way, Sing Holdings is a niche property developer and most of their present land parcels are in high end area