Blumont

[CityFarmer]

I agree with you on this. Each case will have to be looked at on a case by case basis. The more common experience in s-chips especially has been big plunge, then halt, then announcement of irregularities or poor results. It would be hard to argue that those announcements have no material impact. Furthermore increasing the number of such investigations will improve the risk for any potential violators of getting caught, thus reducing incentive for foul play.

I have seen "blames" on SGX on regulation, especially on S-Chips. SGX should bear part of the "blames", as the vetting body for listing applications. But is SGX bearing its fair share of the "blames"? May be not, IMO

SGX key roles are day-to-day supervision of market, regulation base on existing SGX Rules, and of course, the listing application base on Listing Manual.

The expectation on SGX, seems more of a private banker, than a regulating body, base on the "blames", IMO

Let's me borrow a term learned from Mr. specvestor, SGX has been a "kitchen sink", although SGX shouldn't be fully excused from the "blames"

[Clement]

I agree with you on this. Each case will have to be looked at on a case by case basis. The more common experience in s-chips especially has been big plunge, then halt, then announcement of irregularities or poor results. It would be hard to argue that those announcements have no material impact. Furthermore increasing the number of such investigations will improve the risk for any potential violators of getting caught, thus reducing incentive for foul play.

I have seen "blames" on SGX on regulation, especially on S-Chips. SGX should bear part of the "blames", as the vetting body for listing applications. But is SGX bearing its fair share of the "blames"? May be not, IMO

SGX key roles are day-to-day supervision of market, regulation base on existing SGX Rules, and of course, the listing application base on Listing Manual.

The expectation on SGX, seems more of a private banker, than a regulating body, base on the "blames", IMO

Let's me borrow a term learned from Mr. specvestor, SGX has been a "kitchen sink", although SGX shouldn't be fully excused from the "blames"

On paper I agree with you. Investors are expected to bear risk and have their eyes open. No one was coerced into investing, trading or speculating. However, the current approach will frustrate the objective of greater retail participation. The problem is our regulators do not seem to be trying hard enough to fight the perception of a rigged market.

[CityFarmer]

Singapore bourse probes short-selling in Blumont, Asiasons

The Singapore Exchange (SGX) said it is investigating the short-selling in shares of Blumont Group and Asiasons Capital on Monday despite the trading curbs imposed on the two stocks.

"There was short-selling in the two designated counters, Asiasons Capital and Blumont Group, on Monday, contrary to the trading directions given to the designated securities," Kelvin Koh, head of SGX’s market surveillance unit, said on Thursday.

“We will be investigating these cases and take the appropriate disciplinary actions as necessary,” he added.
...
http://www.theedgesingapore.com/the-dail...asons.html

[kbl]

Did outgoing chairman make S$16.57 million just hours before Friday's slump?

Investor Central
Ashish Saxena

10-10 -2013



Neo Kim Hock pledged his 'nil-paid' rights, which were sold by a bank on Wednesday and Thursday last week. Lynne Ng Su Ling, after selling shares last Wednesday, sold more in an off-market deal yesterday.

10/10/2013 – Just hours after a relentless fall in its stock price, Blumont Group Ltd named Alexander Molyneux as the chairman designate.

Mr Molyneux will serve as a non-independent non-executive chairman of the group.

Mr Neo Kim Hock, the present executive chairman, will step aside and will assume the role of the non-executive deputy chairman.

Mr Molyneux, on October 7, agreed to acquire 95 mln shares from Mr Neo and another 40 mln shares from an undisclosed "non-substantial non-director individual shareholder" of the company.

At present, Mr Neo owns 249.77 mln shares (about a 9.67% stake) of Blumont.

Once the transaction is complete, Mr Molyneux will own a 7.83% stake in Blumont, bought at S$0.40/share.

According to the press release, the purchase price of S$0.40 per share is 'subject to price adjustments'.

Apparently, the purchase price of S$0.40/share represents a premium of over 200% on Tuesday's closing price of S$0.13.

After the proposed rights issue of Blumont, Mr Molyneux would own a 5.22% stake in the company.

Closing on October 10, the proposed rights issue would see the company issuing about 861 mln shares at 5 cents/share, to raise about S$43 mln.

Mr Molyneux is expected to acquire the stake on or before November 6.

Investor Central. We keep your investments honest.




http://www.investorcentral.org/

<Not Vested>

[Behappyalways]

Hmmm...strange...... if the sale on Tuesday is due to forced sale(2nd announcement), the bank is 'more punctual' this time round in informing.....


http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/FORM1V49...eID=258948

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Form1_NK...eID=259443

[cfa]

Did outgoing chairman make S$16.57 million just hours before Friday's slump?

Investor Central
Ashish Saxena

10-10 -2013



Neo Kim Hock pledged his 'nil-paid' rights, which were sold by a bank on Wednesday and Thursday last week. Lynne Ng Su Ling, after selling shares last Wednesday, sold more in an off-market deal yesterday.

10/10/2013 – Just hours after a relentless fall in its stock price, Blumont Group Ltd named Alexander Molyneux as the chairman designate.

Mr Molyneux will serve as a non-independent non-executive chairman of the group.

Mr Neo Kim Hock, the present executive chairman, will step aside and will assume the role of the non-executive deputy chairman.

Mr Molyneux, on October 7, agreed to acquire 95 mln shares from Mr Neo and another 40 mln shares from an undisclosed "non-substantial non-director individual shareholder" of the company.

At present, Mr Neo owns 249.77 mln shares (about a 9.67% stake) of Blumont.

Once the transaction is complete, Mr Molyneux will own a 7.83% stake in Blumont, bought at S$0.40/share.

According to the press release, the purchase price of S$0.40 per share is 'subject to price adjustments'.

Apparently, the purchase price of S$0.40/share represents a premium of over 200% on Tuesday's closing price of S$0.13.

After the proposed rights issue of Blumont, Mr Molyneux would own a 5.22% stake in the company.

Closing on October 10, the proposed rights issue would see the company issuing about 861 mln shares at 5 cents/share, to raise about S$43 mln.

Mr Molyneux is expected to acquire the stake on or before November 6.

Investor Central. We keep your investments honest.




http://www.investorcentral.org/

<Not Vested>

The answer is so obvious .

[specuvestor]

[Let's me borrow a term learned from Mr. specvestor, SGX has been a "kitchen sink", although SGX shouldn't be fully excused from the "blames"

Thanks for quoting me Mr CityFarmer but that's probably not the way to use the term

http://www.valuebuddies.com/thread-763-p...l#pid62661

[kbl]

SouthGobi Resources fires CEO Alexander Molyneux

Financial Post Published 12/9/2012

Mining giant Rio Tinto Ltd has terminated the chief executive of SouthGobi Resources Ltd, removing one of the only remaining links to the Robert Friedland era in its Mongolian business.

The move Wednesday to fire Alexander Molyneux is part of Rio's effort to improve strained relations with the Mongolian government and get SouthGobi's idled mine re-started. It comes just a day after Mr Friedland launched an initial public offering of Ivanplats Ltd, his first big move since resigning from Turquoise Hill Resources Ltd (formerly Ivanhoe Mines).

Rio Tinto took control of Turquoise Hill in April in order to get its hands on the giant Oyu Tolgoi mine in Mongolia. It also ended up with some non-core assets. One of them is the majority stake in SouthGobi, which controls the Ovoot Tolgoi coal mine (also in Mongolia). And SouthGobi was turning into a major political headache for Rio Tinto.

Shortly before Rio got control of Turquoise Hill, Mr Friedland cut a deal to sell its SouthGobi stake in to Aluminum Corp of China Ltd (Chalco).

This infuriated many Mongolians, who dislike their powerful Chinese neighbours and worry about falling under their thumb. The timing of the announcement was particularly bad because Mongolia was in the midst of an election cycle and political rhetoric was elevated.


The Mongolian government quickly suspended SouthGobi's licences on Ovoot Tolgoi, and the parliament passed a foreign investment law the main purpose of which appeared to be stopping this deal.

Mr Molyneux, SouthGobi's then-CEO, said last month that he thought the Chalco deal had virtually no chance of success.

Without clear regulation on the foreign investment law or without a process through which such foreign investment proposals can be reviewed and considered, it's almost impossible to see how Chalco can navigate its bid through the Mongolian government infrastructure, he said on a conference call.

Apparently, Chalco agreed, it dropped the bid a couple of weeks later.

It is understood that Rio Tinto was not pleased about Mr Molyneux's public comments, seeing them as detrimental to its relations with the government. It also wanted to bring someone into SouthGobi with mining experience who could manage a re-start of the mine.

As a former investment banker, Mr Molyneux was not that person. He was replaced Wednesday with Rio Tinto veteran Ross Tromans.

Rio's move also distances SouthGobi from the Friedland era. Mr Molyneux was personally hired by Mr Friedland to run the coal business, and is one of his longtime business associates. But SouthGobi is now controlled by Rio Tinto, and no one was surprised that Rio wants one of its own people running it.

http://business.financialpost.com/2012/0...drops-bid/

<not vested>

[CityFarmer]

[Let's me borrow a term learned from Mr. specvestor, SGX has been a "kitchen sink", although SGX shouldn't be fully excused from the "blames"

Thanks for quoting me Mr CityFarmer but that's probably not the way to use the term

http://www.valuebuddies.com/thread-763-p...l#pid62661

Or should it be investors are kitchen sink and blame SGX for their bad investment decision? It is used as verb, rather than a noun.

[specuvestor]

kitchen sinking is a verb when they dump all their problems, related and unrelated, blaming one issue... that's why it will be appropriate to oceanus... I doubt Blumont will kitchen sink now because they probably don't want to lower their stock price further