Hyflux

[pianist]

Recently I read ttj want join in the power party...wonder if they are still pursuing this silly idea in sg

[brattzz]

Recently I read ttj want join in the power party...wonder if they are still pursuing this silly idea in sg

yes, it's called TTJ Green.... a matter of fact, their plant could be overseas though... :O :O :O

[pianist]

Recently I read ttj want join in the power party...wonder if they are still pursuing this silly idea in sg

yes, it's called TTJ Green.... a matter of fact, their plant could be overseas though... :O :O :O

power plants won't make monies..even if they do ...they are controlled by higher authority...lol

[yeokiwi]

1) Most are in the red for only a year or two. Only Tuaspring has been in the red since it started for the past 5 years. With the exception of Tuaspring, the rest of the gencos should be able to survive more than a few years.

The power plant was only connected in Aug 2015 and commissioned in 2016. So, it is also in red for last two years.

https://www.water-technology.net/project...wer-plant/

More interestingly, the financial aspect of the plant.


Financing Singapore’s biggest desalination plant

The total cost for the construction of the integrated desalination and power plant is S$890m ($635m approximately).

The project received a $14.4m buyer’s credit loan from the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) in June 2014, to finance the desalination components acquired from Japanese suppliers.

In May 2013, Hydrochem signed a $139m export credit financing agreement with KfW-IPEX Bank to fund the power plant. The financing facility is guaranteed by Euler Hermes Deutschland.

An S$720m ($512m) 18-year term loan for the integrated project was provided by Maybank Singapore and Maybank Kim Eng Securities. The project also received a S$150m ($106m approximately) fund from DBS Bank, Mizuho Corporate Bank, and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation.


Practically speaking, the idea of combining both a power plant and desalination plant is a good idea since the water supply can continue even though there is a power grid failure.

But, on hindsight, they should have a smaller power generator. Apparently, selling to the grid is not that a great idea now.

[BRT]

1) Most are in the red for only a year or two. Only Tuaspring has been in the red since it started for the past 5 years. With the exception of Tuaspring, the rest of the gencos should be able to survive more than a few years.

The power plant was only connected in Aug 2015 and commissioned in 2016. So, it is also in red for last two years.

https://www.water-technology.net/project...wer-plant/

More interestingly, the financial aspect of the plant.


Financing Singapore’s biggest desalination plant

The total cost for the construction of the integrated desalination and power plant is S$890m ($635m approximately).

The project received a $14.4m buyer’s credit loan from the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) in June 2014, to finance the desalination components acquired from Japanese suppliers.

In May 2013, Hydrochem signed a $139m export credit financing agreement with KfW-IPEX Bank to fund the power plant. The financing facility is guaranteed by Euler Hermes Deutschland.

An S$720m ($512m) 18-year term loan for the integrated project was provided by Maybank Singapore and Maybank Kim Eng Securities. The project also received a S$150m ($106m approximately) fund from DBS Bank, Mizuho Corporate Bank, and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation.


Practically speaking, the idea of combining both a power plant and desalination plant is a good idea since the water supply can continue even though there is a power grid failure.

But, on hindsight, they should have a smaller power generator. Apparently, selling to the grid is not that a great idea now.

interesting indeed, thanks for the link. did i read the numbers correctly?

counting in M usd:
construction cost = 635
japan bank loan = 14.4
KfW-IPEX Bank = 139
[i]18-year term loan = 512[/i]
[i][i]fund from DBS Bank etc. = 106[/i][/i]
[i][i]adding last 4 items together, [/i][/i][i][i]funds obtained = 771.4[/i][/i]

in any case, i take term loan alone, 512/635 makes 80% leverage...that's impressive.

[corydorus]

I don't see any reason to save anyone. Business is not charity. We have seen quite a few collapse in Bonds already.
Worst come to worst, it will be taken over at collapsed value. The plant still can continue to be ran just under different ownership or special management if needed for national security. So I think the likely recourse is for Hyflux to save itself. That's imo. Sure, I could be totally wrong.


Not vested

[specuvestor]

^^ true that. You can change the Structure and the Asset & Business remains

Unless it’s systemic or disruptive, Govt may have to intervene to provide smooth transition but we have excess in power. So I do believe in intervention but have to be balanced and not also to the other extreme of unbridled capitalism

[CY09]

http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Hyflux%2...eID=504657

Hyflux's cash burning ways continue.

With its 100 mil bonds due soon and continuous cash burn average of 50 mil per quarter, Hyflux may use up its 240 mil cash pile by end of this year. It definitely needs refinancing of some sorts. The best hope is that bankers extend more bank loans for them, given that in the bond market, the yield of Hyflux's 2019 bond is more than 10%. I think Perp holders can forget about redemption until the sale of Tuas Spring and redemption of 2019 bonds. This is because a 8% yielding financial instrument seems to be one of the cheapest source of financing Hyflux can tap on.

For ordinary shareholders, there seems to be no course of actions except an orderly liquidation where prep holders getting cash first and then shareholders. It is better than the value destruction current mgmt is doing. Perhaps a local share activist can mount its actions against Hyflux demanding for an ordinarily liquidation instead of letting a mgmt continue their terrible job and getting paid for it. In 3 years time, NAV for ordinary shareholders is likely to be negative

[karlmarx]

Companies usually try to sell their businesses as a going concern, as it fetches a higher price than halting operations, laying off employees and selling the PPE. PPE are worth less when they are not operating in a going concern. It is likely that Hyflux shareholders will not get anything if they decide to close shop and lelong their PPE.

Hyflux is doing the only thing it can now by selling Tuaspring as a going concern.

The only positive outcome that shareholders can hope for is that Tuaspring is sold at or above its book value, such that there will be something left over for them after the debt holders are paid. Ordinary shareholders will get wiped out if Tuaspring is sold at half its book value or less.

Interested buyers want a huge discount to book, while Olivia Lum wants to sell at close to book. The longer the negotiation, the more the cash burn, the less Hyflux can get for the sale.

The parties interested in supplying Hyflux with capital is probably also waiting for the divestment of Tuaspring to be completed before proceeding. Because of the low share price, the capital raised will probably cause huge dilution to existing shareholders.

As such, the only logical reason anyone will be holding Hyflux shares is because he/she thinks that Tuaspring can be sold at close to book, therefore allowing for most of Hyflux debt to be repaid, and reduce the need to raise capital on unfavourable terms. Thus ensuring the shares remain valuable. Since probably the only party to buy Tuaspring at close to book is the government, anyone holding Hyflux shares now is hoping for a bailout from the government.

[Behappyalways]

Who would want to buy a loss making company at book value?

Even without tuaspring the company is still loss making and not close to breakeven as stated in the p/l statement. This is because under accounting, the perpetual bonds are treated as equity hence the 'interest' payments are not in the p/l statement. For prudence I added the 'interest' into the p/l because I found it 'unfair' to have the interest income coming from the perpetual bonds included in the p/l statement while payments are excluded.