Asian Pay Television Trust (APTT)

[CY09]

How much money does the stabilising agents have in their ammo and how many days are they suppose to maintain the price.

Also how many % must the price fall below IPO price before the agents have to start stabilising?

[lonewolf]

I think I can now conclude that the 'underwriter' theory is without merit; but see for yourself and make your own conclusion. I charted the 1st day and 1 week percentage change of IPO from Mar 2012 till the most recent listing - Soilbuild. The Catalist counters were included but they dun usually have any underwriters for the listing.

And in case you guys are wondering which counters had 6 underwriters, it was IHH and Religare.

[Image: UnderwritersVsGains_zps3a255348.jpg]

[Temperament]

In the old days when i was still goondo in shares and there was no such thing as PC, only NCR machines available, it seemed IPOs were the talk & pastime of the day. And those in the knows were making money stagging every IPO issues. Those days underwriters and business owners somehow or other left much more meat on the table. i suppose without PC and financial softwares, it was so much harder to calculate the "total actual worth " of of a business. What say you?

[felixleong]

lol underwater liao, GG to those investors who loaded on this counter
guess CRT was a lot better for the yield and asset

[KopiKat]

I think I can now conclude that the 'underwriter' theory is without merit; but see for yourself and make your own conclusion. I charted the 1st day and 1 week percentage change of IPO from Mar 2012 till the most recent listing - Soilbuild. The Catalist counters were included but they dun usually have any underwriters for the listing.

And in case you guys are wondering which counters had 6 underwriters, it was IHH and Religare.

[Image: UnderwritersVsGains_zps3a255348.jpg]

Your charts are telling me a few things,

1. During bullish times (since 2012), the chances of making $$ from IPO stags (1st day) is very high. In your charts, only 1 is underwater. Almost no one (those who applies for the IPOs anyway) bothers too much about company fundamentals..

2. After only 1 week, we start to see more of them going underwater (4 in your charts, with 2 from Catalist). Perhaps, the smarter ones have already taken profits, especially from the stocks of poorer fundamentals (?). Guess who'll usually be left carrying the babies? Most likely the less informed and "uneducated" (as in stocks "education") ones... I used to be one of them...

It'll be interesting to see the longer term performance, especially when we hit a negative mkt sentiment period of time...

[Temperament]

i just wonder 1st day IPO price is like this, how come over-subscribed 5 times and excess allotment taken up only by private placement too. (Correct me if i get my facts wrong). O. K. Pop & Mom investors are only "Tikum Tikum" but what about companies or investment institutions? Are they too or they understand something that retailers will never know?- For the long term?

[CY09]

It is possible many people (even those financially savvy) who just apply, hoping to do a hit & run when they get the shares the moment it opens above. This is because they are aiming for the IPO opening hype.

So to get or not to get, is what they are truly seeking for. After it falls back to IPO price, they are not interested. There maybe another group of parties (part TA, part FA) who were looking basic ratios like yield etc, however upon seeing the actual sentiment that the IPO is so weak with prices falling, they are inhibited from buying (aka their psychology).

[zf87]

I think I can now conclude that the 'underwriter' theory is without merit; but see for yourself and make your own conclusion. I charted the 1st day and 1 week percentage change of IPO from Mar 2012 till the most recent listing - Soilbuild. The Catalist counters were included but they dun usually have any underwriters for the listing.

And in case you guys are wondering which counters had 6 underwriters, it was IHH and Religare.

[Image: UnderwritersVsGains_zps3a255348.jpg]

Thanks for the plots. But if you plot the average gain Vs numbers of underwriters probably you will appreciate the merit. Moreover, the non-underwriter case may not be included in the plots, since the "theory" says the fewer the underwriters, the more responsibility/risk they take.

just my 2 cents.

[lonewolf]

Thanks for the plots. But if you plot the average gain Vs numbers of underwriters probably you will appreciate the merit. Moreover, the non-underwriter case may not be included in the plots, since the "theory" says the fewer the underwriters, the more responsibility/risk they take.

just my 2 cents.

I can do that but how should average gain be defined? I took the data from shareinvestor since it was easily available.

Catalist was included just for completeness.

Frankly I still struggled to see the merit in the 'theory' as even those with just one underwriter has negative and positive change. If the theory is correct, then all the listing should really be positive. The same is also true for listings with >3 underwriters especially MGCCT and CroesusRT.

I think we are seriously off-topic; so maybe we should start a thread to discuss this.

[UPDATE] I have created 'Underwriter' Theory of Subscription to IPOs thread to continue discussion on this. Pls post follow-up comments on this topic over there so that we dun go off-topic over here. Thanks!

[felixleong]

bad IPO at a bad time
dunnoe they can support it at 92 cents or not
if break, might go to 88c or less