Very sarcastic ah?

I did not say which stock bro.
Based on the numbers alone (which are all facts), would you really, really consider that as an investment?
If yes then buy more.
If you think not, then do you think other 'investors' will buy based on those numbers?

This post has been edited by Boon3: Aug 16 2012, 11:01 AM

Why am I so anti "investors"?



I dunno bro.
Can I ask? Why some of you don't like me telling it as it is?
Should I dress up my opinions and make them sound good good so to please the "investors" here?

Asam laksa? yucks!
Smelly tofu? even more yuks!



I am starting to like fish head.

Yes, different preference. This solves and clears out the very core facts that I had just pointed. Problem solved. See? The world is now much better.

So how you answer the following simple question based on an imaginary stock? ( Would this be a good investing exercise? )

2011 EPS - 136 sen
2010 EPS - 106 sen
1Q EPS - 30 Sen

Estimate (Hope) dividend of 1.00.
Current dividend yield based on Estimate (Hope) dividend - 4.2%.

Great 'investing' idea?

Based on the numbers alone (which are all facts), would you really, really consider that as an investment?
If yes then would you buy more?
If you think not, then do you think other 'investors' will buy based on those numbers?

No you cannot answer by saying you already own this stock. (This is simple investing exercise so this option answer is not open. )

Die! I never once check the par value of a share before!

Don't worry, no hard feelings. I was pretty sure I wasn't going to get a reply.

Haha! Well put!

Reagrding the ACE fella. Yesterday I forgot to Q at 9 sen. Today, Q too big already. Maybe tomorrow. See nasib.

Me no buaya. I like fish head not man head. HAHA!

Thanks for taking the effort to answer.
I like your other questions that you have put. But for this simple exercise, try to answer it without these issues. Try to take it as an unknown stock.
Rational of the exercise is easy.
If you cannot put yourself as an investor and buy the stock based on a 'possible' 4.2% dividend yield then how do you expect OTHERS to invest in the stock? If no others invest, ie if no others buy/chase after the stock, then how would this stock going up in share price?
Are you willing to live and hope to prosper based on current dividends? Assume your cost is lower at 20, you are looking at just 5% yield.
Is this the best option for your money?
Earnings or EPS cannot be ignored. The chain of equation is simple, if earnings don't grow, where would you get money for future dividends?

Fish head sounding really good now... rainy morning.

Yes many thinks trading = contra trading.

31 sen!!!

Need to adjust my planning....

Bro, no need to quote famous investors leh but since you brought it up, did you know that WB had always insisted that growth is part of value? This is one factor many fail to realise. Thinking is simple. How can a company be considered great or of value when there is no growth in earnings? It really goes hand in hand, growth and value.

So based on that example, I guess you admit the yield of 4.2% is not attractive. Then what about earnings? Earnings is ify. Y-Y shows small decline but Q-Q shows tremendous turnaround. So question is simple. Based on the given FACTS, would that unknown stock be considered an investment?

The problem is when I use the name, people here are biased to the answer. The stock name means much more to them than the actual facts.
Can this be right?
Should you invest based on the company name or should you invest based on actual facts?
Haha... looks like i have shaken the mighty 'investing' in this forum. Kinda good, isn't it?

Many fail to remember WB has one acccount in which he trades quite a fair bit. In this account, because the size of the position he buys isn't big, he doesn't report those transactions.
Many still don't realise that WB sells. He doesn't buy and hold forever for ALL his stocks. There are many he will sell for a good profit.

Really?
I don't agree! Why I hold something from Holland!

Eh? No sell call yet on R*** yet?

Haha! I know. They call me anti investors.

Hey, based on that example, without the stock name, would you consider that as an investment opportunity? I would dearly love to hear your answer.

Thanks.
Seriously I accept different perspective.
But at least, since this is an open forum, lets hear all the different views. Let me be the anti I. Just share the views and not use different perspective as a blunt execuse.

Now here's something interesting I read this morning.

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?f...81&sec=business
That Singapore reit promised a 6% yield payout....
Now isn't that a much better prospect than....... (better don't say name, people so sensitive)
Plus point, Sing dollars so strong and stands a better chance to grow vs our ringgit.

100mil+ from Genting and 50+mil from GentingM?
And what about GentingP and Genting Singapore?
If add those two in, how much?

I heard ppl buy Genting for their annual free room vouchers lah. True ah?

The reason why I chose to ignore management issue because no one likes to talk about that here. The assumption is that everyone just accept it as good. However, since you started on it, I had highlighted before (but got no answer. LOL! I wonder why) I had asked why the MANAGEMENT had parked the bulk of the money into that account classified as 'placement of funds with related company'? That 'safe' deposit, as i joked about here, is worth some 460+ million. Now is what's the management doing it here correct? Yes, that said fund gives back Panamy some interest but the interest payment is not consistent and the rate is low. Do check yourself. Last I saw it was a little more than 3 percent. (Any feedback on this or am not going to get one?)

EPS. I would have love to talk about EPS growth. Now that you had diligently brought the table, how exactly would you define these numbers?

(FY year)-sen
2008-85.73
2009-82
2010-85
2011-136
2012-109
2013-30(1st Qtr)

Would I call that a growth stock based on that numbers? No. I would call it a company which had tremendous short growth in 2011. It just hit the jackpot in 2011 (Was the reason based on the sudden growth in housing projects in Middle East?) and since 2011, the numbers are showing decline.
Yes, as you said it correctly, the earnings grew suddenly. This has always been my opinion but as you know, discussions on this stocks in recent months were totally biased towards dividends.

And you remember the one reply I made on comparing DLady and Panamy? I asked why DLady shares kept growing and why Panamy did not? Was the answer earnings growth?

Ok company's products. I like Panasonic products. I am fanci. However, sad thing is, they last too long. Just the other day, my friend wanted to buy fan. I told him don't worry and I ordered 3 units of Bayu fan for him. See unless there is another housing boom, I don't think we going to see much boom. That's my opinion. And yes, the flat TV boom. That helped Pana earnings too right? But that boom, that looked like it has peaked. This is my observation lah.

___________

And the conclusion?
A company with 'questionable' (no growth) earnings and a possible dividend yield of 4.2% yield based on current prices.
Is this an attractive investment proposition?
If your own answer is no, then how do you expect other investors to buy up this stock?
That's really my simple question to you.

This post has been edited by Boon3: Aug 16 2012, 01:19 PM

The management keeps the huge amount of cash without any investment is better than "simply invest and then makes loss". This sounds stupid but it's actually happening to many many small(and so called undervalued) companies. - I would not have compared with other companies since our chat today focused on Panamy. Anyway, what about the other option? Since it doesn't know what to invest, ie 'simply invest and then make loss", why not give back to shareholders? By not doing so, this is like that said related company is enjoying a cheap loan from Panamy. Is that right?

I failed to reply you on one point. Rather rude not to reply you.

The farthest left of the chart, I see the prices between 8-9+. If Panamy eps then was 85 sen. that stock would have been super cheap. Would this not be a reason why it went up? Plus the dividends it was giving, investing then made sense. My view la.

Now? Stock not cheap. No immediate growth seen and current dividend yield is low. Any catalyst to invest now?

And how did speculating get involve?

Since too lazy, is ok for you not to read. I won't be insulted.