New Toyo

Thread Rating:
  • 6 Vote(s) - 3.67 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
After knowing their history for so long, value will be unlocked when the family regain full control for New Toyo. The family is rich and can easily take it private.

There is absolutely no reason to share with minorities. In fact looking at the current business structure, New Toyo is irrelevant. The main contributor is Tien Wah plus the former BAT business.

New Toyo is in net debt. Even unlocking value at M'sia site requires capex unless they sell away the land.

Hopefully I am wrong since there appears to be many well informed buddies here.
Reply
Yen family may play dirty? Possible?

reduce dividend payout to zero and so share price will drop and take it private on the cheap?
And then sell to some other parties at much higher price...

If I am owner, I would do it this way....
[I am not here to promote any stocks. Please always do your own research before embarking on any investment decision. I will not be liable for any of your own decisions. Your use of any information or materials is entirely at your own risk. It is your responsibility to ensure that any products, services or information meet your specific requirements. I do not produce material which meets the objectives of any specific financial and risk profile of investors.]
Reply
If Yen family wants to take company private by force at NAV, probably most minority shareholders would relent and give in...

(15-08-2012, 11:43 AM)greengiraffe Wrote: After knowing their history for so long, value will be unlocked when the family regain full control for New Toyo. The family is rich and can easily take it private.

There is absolutely no reason to share with minorities. In fact looking at the current business structure, New Toyo is irrelevant. The main contributor is Tien Wah plus the former BAT business.

New Toyo is in net debt. Even unlocking value at M'sia site requires capex unless they sell away the land.

Hopefully I am wrong since there appears to be many well informed buddies here.
[I am not here to promote any stocks. Please always do your own research before embarking on any investment decision. I will not be liable for any of your own decisions. Your use of any information or materials is entirely at your own risk. It is your responsibility to ensure that any products, services or information meet your specific requirements. I do not produce material which meets the objectives of any specific financial and risk profile of investors.]
Reply
As for existing smokers, people still buy alcohol with plain labels so it is unlikely smokers will be deterred by plain packaging. Rather, we may just see an increase in cigarette cases, which would allow minors to be as creative as possible, thus potentially encouraging them to take up the habit.

Undoubtedly, plain packaging will fail in reducing youth smoking rates because counterfeit cigarettes are far cheaper and the criminals selling them will not require identification proving the buyer to be over 18 - rates might even increase.

The real danger lies in the smuggling trade. With cigarettes now the most widely smuggled legal product and about 85% of cheap cigarettes sold on London streets being counterfeit, introducing a policy that would only make it easier for criminal outfits to mimic a packet should be cause for grave concern.



******

Society: Second thoughts: Plain packaging will not stop youths smoking, says Richard White

BYLINE: Richard White

SECTION: GUARDIAN SOCIETY PAGES; Pg. 35

LENGTH: 744 words


Australia's health minister Nicola Roxon is aiming for the country to be the first to introduce plain packaging for cigarettes. In what she calls a "courageous" move against the tobacco industry, legislation is expected to come into force on 1 July 2012 that will make all packets a uniform olive green with the name of the brand in small type. The World Medical Association has called on other governments to follow Australia's example.

Here in the UK, health secretary Andrew Lansley says he wants to look at the idea of introducing plain packaging so that brightly-coloured cigarette packets do not lure youths into smoking. The coalition government will launch an official consultation by the end of the year to discuss introducing plain packaging in England as part of its tobacco control plan. It is unlikely to happen soon, however, as ministers and the Department of Health have stated that they want to judge the effectiveness of the measure in Australia before making a firm decision.

The immediate rhetoric in favour of plain packaging is the protection of children: that by having dull, plain packages, minors, and indeed non-smokers, will not be tempted to buy a packet on impulse, having been enticed by the shiny packet. The measure is an extension of the ban on tobacco companies advertising their products.

No evidence exists, however, to suggest that anyone "impulsively" buys cigarettes, nor is there evidence that the policy would make any difference to smoking rates as no country has yet implemented it. Just as a teetotaller would not be persuaded to take up drinking just because WKD is colourful, there is nothing to suggest that non-smokers start smoking because the packet has fancy emblems. In fact, with large text warnings on the front and graphic pictures on the back taking up a large portion of the packaging, there is little left of the manufacturers' own designs.

A display ban in England has already been agreed on, which will come into effect from next year for large stores and 2015 for smaller shops such as newsagents, and if tobacco is being hidden then no one, child or adult, will be able to see the packets whether they are plain or decorated with flashing lights.

Behind the counter

We already have measures to stop children smoking. Cigarettes are always, without exception, kept behind the counter so neither child nor adult has any access to buying tobacco without the cashier physically handing it to them. Even if we accept the rationale that people impulsively want to smoke because the packet lures them in like fish to a worm on a hook, minors are still faced with the problem of needing to be in possession of identification proving they are over 18. Unlike alcohol, cigarettes cannot be pinched off the shelf and placed into a minor's pocket as they hurry out the door and around the back to spark up.

Indeed, if anything, alcohol is a far bigger concern because children can simply pick up a bottle of spirits, place it in their rucksack and walk out. Within minutes, they could suffer alcohol poisoning which could lead to death. There are other dangerous things in a shop that minors can impulsively take, such as paracetamol, but tobacco is not one of them.

As for existing smokers, people still buy alcohol with plain labels so it is unlikely smokers will be deterred by plain packaging. Rather, we may just see an increase in cigarette cases, which would allow minors to be as creative as possible, thus potentially encouraging them to take up the habit.

The NHS Information Centre report, Statistics on Smoking: England, 2011 noted that last year over a quarter of children aged 11-15 had tried smoking while 5% confessed to being regular smokers.

Undoubtedly, plain packaging will fail in reducing youth smoking rates because counterfeit cigarettes are far cheaper and the criminals selling them will not require identification proving the buyer to be over 18 - rates might even increase.

The real danger lies in the smuggling trade. With cigarettes now the most widely smuggled legal product and about 85% of cheap cigarettes sold on London streets being counterfeit, introducing a policy that would only make it easier for criminal outfits to mimic a packet should be cause for grave concern.

Richard White is the author of Smoke Screens: The Truth About Tobacco and writes about the latest policies on tobacco control.

Captions:

David Hockney's Freedom is Choice displays the cigarettes at a tobacconists in Germany
Reply
Yen family need to be thorough questioned. If other Cigaratte related Co. all doing so well, why would ppl want to believe its EPS is falling.

Same like Bonvest, you can keep the share for your grandson and then it will rise with inflation, hopefully?

Feel like giving up but where to find safer yield? The yield hope is stable enough?
Reply
(15-08-2012, 11:27 PM)ValueBeliever Wrote: Yen family need to be thorough questioned. If other Cigaratte related Co. all doing so well, why would ppl want to believe its EPS is falling.


New Toyo's 2Q group profit fell from $8.69m to $6.35m on two counts.
First, its associated companies, including Shanghai Asia, contributed $2.38m in 2Q 2011; but a small loss in the corresponding period of the current year.
Not only Shanghai Asia did not contribute in 2Q 2012 after becoming a cash company, it incurred a one-off loss of RMB 7.7m in 2Q 2012, paying its CEO the last bit of his salary and professional fees in search of a new business.
Second, in 2Q 2011, Tien Wah recorded a gain of $0.62m from disposal of a property.
Stripping off the profits from associated companies and disposal gain, 2Q 2011 profit would have been $5.69m, lower than the $6.35m of 2Q of the current year.
Reply
People are inherently selfish..

Given the new chairman conservative stance (Young Gary), there might not be any special dividends at all.
a. keep to invest in new businesses
b. reduce debt to a much lower level

(15-08-2012, 11:27 PM)ValueBeliever Wrote: Yen family need to be thorough questioned. If other Cigaratte related Co. all doing so well, why would ppl want to believe its EPS is falling.

Same like Bonvest, you can keep the share for your grandson and then it will rise with inflation, hopefully?

Feel like giving up but where to find safer yield? The yield hope is stable enough?
[I am not here to promote any stocks. Please always do your own research before embarking on any investment decision. I will not be liable for any of your own decisions. Your use of any information or materials is entirely at your own risk. It is your responsibility to ensure that any products, services or information meet your specific requirements. I do not produce material which meets the objectives of any specific financial and risk profile of investors.]
Reply
Basically, dividends are paid out of earnings.
For New Toyo is about 40% to 50%.

The special dividends they received should be
used to reduce their debts which incurred interest expense.

Final dividend may also be reduced as earnings declined.

Of course, this is subject to management decision.Dodgy

Price is well supported at around 28 cts.
Reply
I reiterate what I heard from Senior Yen during the last AGM. That since he is just a shareholder now in NTI, he will also want to get the most (i.e. dividends) out from NTI. You can make your own call if that will happen.
Reply
2009
EPS - 3.53
Dividend - 2
57% payout

2010
EPS - 3.91
Dividend - 1.94
50% payout

2011
EPS - 4.51
Dividend - 1.94
43% payout

2012 (6mth)
EPS - 1.53
Dividend -0.8
53% payout


Is there a problem?


(15-08-2012, 11:43 AM)greengiraffe Wrote: After knowing their history for so long, value will be unlocked when the family regain full control for New Toyo. The family is rich and can easily take it private.

There is absolutely no reason to share with minorities. In fact looking at the current business structure, New Toyo is irrelevant. The main contributor is Tien Wah plus the former BAT business.

New Toyo is in net debt. Even unlocking value at M'sia site requires capex unless they sell away the land.

Hopefully I am wrong since there appears to be many well informed buddies here.

Hope father can tell son to pay out more special dividend Smile

(16-08-2012, 01:40 PM)psolhawk Wrote: I reiterate what I heard from Senior Yen during the last AGM. That since he is just a shareholder now in NTI, he will also want to get the most (i.e. dividends) out from NTI. You can make your own call if that will happen.
[I am not here to promote any stocks. Please always do your own research before embarking on any investment decision. I will not be liable for any of your own decisions. Your use of any information or materials is entirely at your own risk. It is your responsibility to ensure that any products, services or information meet your specific requirements. I do not produce material which meets the objectives of any specific financial and risk profile of investors.]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 7 Guest(s)