I did read between the line in what you posted, it is exactly what you have said that "you don't care about NAV or CAGR" but me has a different opinion.

Value not realised? You don't know but also pretend to be a smart when you are not too? The fund has stated the value realises at year 2020. "Stock market is always being influenced by alot of factors and looking at CAGR and NAV alone make you inexperienced." is your inexperienced statement too. I am only concern on the difference between price and value, not market sentiment.

Let me recap if your puny brain cannot understand. By looking at the NAV, the fund achieves an annual CAGR 18% since inception has outperformed the benchmark KLCI index by great margin. If you are buying the NAV at a 25% discount now, eventually when the fund liquidate at 2020, you will get back an even higher annual CAGR than the fund manager Capital Dynamics. So it's very simple but looks like your puny brain cannot understand it. Let me quote again from Warrent Buffet that "...those who cannot understand the concept of margin of safety in 5 minutes will not get it through even after 10 years."

Wouldn't you realise whatever you said reflect your puny brain as well by now? When you become rude start to use arse, I arse you back too. It is just a reflection .

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8c890dfa-eed8-11...l#ixzz2BH6AXCee

Swiss regulators target Laxey partners

By James Mackintosh in London and Haig Simonian in Zurich

Swiss banking regulators are recommending criminal action against Laxey Partners, the $2bn London hedge fund, for breaching disclosure rules by using contracts for difference to build a big stake secretly in the country’s biggest building services company.

The Swiss Federal Banking Commission (EBK) found the activist hedge fund “parked” stakes with banks in order to get round disclosure rules, a move that sparked an outcry from the management of the target company, Implenia, when Laxey took a 22 per cent stake.

The possible action comes amid controversy in both Switzerland and the UK about the use by hedge funds of opaque derivatives to take hidden positions in companies.

The EBK said in a statement posted on its website last night it was planning to file a criminal complaint with the Federal Department of Finance, which would then decide whether to mount a prosecution.

“Laxey de facto placed Implenia shares with counterparties (parking), thus making sure to be able to redeem the shares at any time through contracts for difference,” the watchdog said in its ruling.

“This strategy corresponds to an indirect share acquisition according to stock exchange legislation, and is therefore subject to disclosure obligations.”

Laxey said it would appeal against the ruling. It said it used standard contracts for difference and had no access to the voting rights of the shares.

“We see this decision by the banking commission as a political decision,” said Roger Bühler, a director of Laxey.

Implenia is now considering filing a lawsuit to suspend Laxey’s voting rights and seize its stake in the company following the ruling, and said it could report Laxey to the UK regulator, the Financial Services Authority.

Anton Affentranger, chairman of Implenia, said: “Owing to their illegal conduct, Laxey will have to withdraw as an Implenia shareholder.”

Laxey, an activist fund run by Colin Kingsnorth, has been in a battle with Implenia about its holding since it was declared last April.

Under Swiss law the EBK cannot take action itself against Laxey as it is not regulated in the country. But it issued a “declaratory ruling” that Laxey infringed its disclosure obligation, which could be used to support civil action against the hedge fund.

“This is much better and easier for the public,” a spokesman for the EBK said.

The EBK’s move follows aggressive buying of stakes in small and mid-sized Swiss companies by foreign predators over the past three years.

Matters reached a head last year, following Laxey’s raid on Implenia and the separate moves by an Austro-Russian consortium on Sulzer, the Swiss engineering group.

The targets claimed secret stake-building, with positions of as much as 32 per cent being taken before being declared, breached Swiss stock market regulations.

A public outcry over the issue led to legal changes closing loopholes and reducing the previous 5 per cent threshold for disclosure to 3 per cent.

Activist hedge funds have proven controversial in Europe over the past few years, with German and Dutch politicians branding them “locusts” after attacks on companies where the funds alleged management was underperforming.

But the issue of disclosure of stakes held through contracts for difference and other derivatives – where an investor can gain economic exposure to price moves without holding shares – has proven controversial in the UK too. Britain’s Financial Services Authority has just finished a consultation on the rules, with both representatives of big institutional shareholders and big hedge funds recommending more disclosure. Laxey has supported increased disclosure in the UK.

Three new members to LY just to post on this thread.



This post has been edited by Boon3: Nov 5 2012, 08:24 AM

I find it very interesting.
This topic was first started by Vv.SoViEt.vV.
The messsage was very good even on hindsight now.

It was a simple and good warning message. A closed end fund should not be trading more than its worth.
Some comments made.

A bit exaggerated?

Topic starter, Vv.SoViEt.vV reply

Quote: You will never find well managed stocks like ICAP trading at a discount to their NAV because demand for the stock generally will outstrip supply and thus the price will be higher.



ICAP today trades at 2.38 and it traded as low as 1.90+ in 2011. I wonder if klsestockreview would like to reconsider his statement made in Jan 2008 that 'avoiding this counter at all cost is very funny advise'. The TS had made a good warning on ICAP back in Jan 2008.

Interesting to read back the past comments.
AhYap's posting on ICAP is good. Very rational and non egoistic.

There will be proxy fight to over turn the existing board, so you will a lot more proxy here also .

---

Added on November 5, 2012, 9:29 amIndeed it traded as low as 1.30 in Oct 2008.

This post has been edited by kinwing: Nov 5 2012, 09:29 AM

Dear 2-post forumer, you do know the return that you quote for Public Bank (based on point-to-point share price) do not include the return from dividend?

Anyway, back to topic. Long-term performance is important, but one should also look at recent performance, IMO.

No, IMO I only look at performance since inception.

You are entitled to your view

Not all people have the chance to invest at inception. When ICAP was launched, i was still studying in college.

Let say an investor wants to invest now. Yes, he/she will still look at how the fund performance since inception (7 years ago), but what also matters to him/her is how the fund performance in recent years (1-3 years). Am i wrong?

Taking this to the extreme i.e. Berkshire Hathaway. Do you only look at the performance since inception, which is 46 years ago? If yes, then i nth to say . But i will suggest that you write a letter to Mr. Tan, because by your logic, he shouldn't compare his fund performance since inception with Berkshire performance starting from the same day. Likewise, we shouldn't compare ICAP performance with a particular stock/fund at other date because only return since inception is important.

Disclosure: Yours truly does not have any interest, or going to have any interest in the foreseeable future, in iCapital.biz Bhd share. Any conflict of interest, if any, is that yours truly used to be an ex-employee of Capital Dynamics.

Cheers

Dear tohff7, of course i know that the return does not include return from dividend. what i am saying is, if PBB does not give any dividend like ICAP, its share price would be half its price!

It is premature to make this kind of statement.
Unless one has crystal ball to know this assumption.
We only can compare what had happened, what is happening.
We cannot know what if ABC did this or that in the first place and draw out a conclusion from it.

This may be the reason why Icap is trading significant discount to its NAV due to no dividend issue as well.

I thought many good companies do trade at good discounts from their NAV, or worst still RNAV.

Why not investors buy directly those cos than to park their money with Icap.

BTW, these companies like Diaman do give reasonable Dividends too.

exactly my point. theoretically, if PBBank don't pay out dividend doesn't mean share price will be lower. With higher capital ratio, they can actually grow their loan books faster. Well, just another assumption

The same apply to ICAP that with higher capital ratio, the absolute NAV will grow faster.

True (also higher fees btw). That's why i was pointing out to merger that you can't compare point-to-point return just like that without taking into account the dividend from PBBank

and icap being close-ended fund vs proper stock with dividends. Aiyo, you talk to someone where he already invested in icap, sure everything to him is good. i also lazy reply him unless i get paid. whatever i post here is already sufficient to prove the history whether this stock is worth to be invested.

Saturday AGM and EGM will be very interesting. Laxey will definitely asked for voting by poll. Assuming Laxey and London are in together, their combined stake is 18.7m shares.

Typical crowd for iCap AGM is 500-600 ppl. Let say the turnout is good with 800 ppl. Each shareholders will need to have about 24,000 shares in order to collectively win/defeat the voting by poll.

Worrying? Fret not. By now, i think there might have been "calls" to "specially notify" individuals in the Top 30 shareholders to attend the AGM. Together with other shareholders, they can defeat the nomination of outside director.

Worrying that people might sway to Laxey proposal in order to realise quick return? Hardly a chance (Laxey crucial mistake). iCap shareholders are true believers in TTB. Just ask anybody who attended the previous AGM.

Sounds more like politics now

Some news on icapital.biz

Hot stock icapital rises 4% on hostile takeover reports
Hot stock icapital.biz rises 4% on hostile takeover reports


Hostile takeover of iCapital.biz?
PETALING JAYA: Closed-end fund iCapital.biz Bhd, managed by seasoned fund manager Tan Teng Boo, has become the target of opportunistic investors who may embark on a hostile takeover of the company, insiders close to the matter confirmed.

European hedge fund Laxey Partners has accumulated close to 10 million shares in iCapital.biz, representing just under a 6.9% stake. Laxey has a track record of targeting listed funds that trade below their net asset values (NAVs).

It is fairly common for institutional funds that have bought stocks of closed-end funds trading at a sharp discount to their NAVs to vote for their liquidation.

A request has been put forward to iCapital.biz to have one Andrew Pegge made a director of the company, along with two others Lo Kok Kee and Low Nyap Heng. Shareholders will vote on this at iCapital.biz's coming AGM this Saturday. As such, the AGM is being touted as a must attend for all shareholders who will no doubt be presented with arguments from both sides, namely the current management of iCapital.biz, headed by Tan and from parties associated with Laxey.

Pegge is the founder and a director of Laxey and has been embroiled in bitter shareholder disputes in the past. He has been described as a shareholder activist and manages funds that look to take advantage of “discount volatility” in investment trusts.

Together with Lo, they had embarked on a very similar move in Singapore last year, taking a position in SGX-listed closed-end fund United International Securities (UIS) and seeking board representation on the basis of championing a narrowing of the gap between the market price of UIS with that of its NAV. Laxey and Lo have also embarked on similar efforts in Malaysia in the past with Amanah Millenia Fund and Amanah Harta Tanah PNB2, respectively.

Another substantial shareholder has also emerged in iCapital.biz, in the form of London Investment Management Co Ltd, with a 6.5% stake. It isn't clear if this fund is in cohort with Laxey but they are both the largest shareholders in iCapital.biz, collectively owning at least 18.7 million shares (or 13.4%) out of the total 140 million iCapital.biz shares.

Although far from having a simple majority of iCapital.biz shares, this combined stake does wield some power considering that the remaining shareholders of iCapital.biz seem to be spread out.

According to iCapital.biz 2012 annual report, it has more than 3,000 shareholders. But about 65.8% of its shares are held by about 2,000 minorities who hold between 100-10,000 shares. Tan's Capital Dynamic Assets Management Sdn Bhd, which manages the closed end fund, has only 689,000 shares or a 0.49% stake.

Sources close to iCapital.biz said that Tan was very concerned about the moves to have new members on board and will consider stepping down if shareholders were to give in to the request.

In what is seen as a defensive mode, iCapital.biz has put up two individuals to be elected to the board, namely Datuk Tan Ang Meng, the former CEO of Fraser & Neave Holdings Bhd and Dr Yin Thing Pee, a medical specialist.

iCapital.biz shares have seen some active trading this week and hit a 52-week intra-day high of RM2.56 yesterday and then closing at RM2.49, up almost 9% from early last week.

iCapital.biz has had a decent performance since its listing in October 2005, with its NAV rising from 99 sen then to RM2.95 as at Oct 24. The performance of its share price has also outpaced the FBM KLCI. However, its stock has traded below its NAV, a gap which earlier this month stood at about 30%. The gap has since narrowed to around 19%.

iCapital.biz's ethos is to allow long-term shareholders to benefit from value investing and is helmed by the respected Tan, who is a sought-after commentator of economic and corporate affairs. Laxey though is likely to put forward a simple and pragmatic suggestion to iCapital.biz shareholders: liquidate your company and cash in at its NAV (or close to it).

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?f...95&sec=business


英國Laxey基金委3代表入局
資本投資恐爆控制權爭奪戰
大馬 2012-11-06 08:13

（吉隆坡5日訊）資本投資（ICAP，5108，主板封閉式基金組）股價長期低迷，令英國積極活動型投資機構Laxey夥伴和倫敦投資管理基金有機可乘，悄悄累積資本投資的股權近14%，同時提名3名代表進駐資本投資董事部，令資本投資的董事部爭奪戰可能一觸即發。

資本投資一度漲至2.56令吉

疑因董事部搶購股權，資本投資今日在逆市中創下自2008年1月以來最高點，一度飆升多達18仙或7.56%到2令吉56仙，儘管收市前漲幅收窄，最終仍以起11仙到2令吉38仙大唱豐收，是全場漲幅第10大的股項，惟成交量僅37萬2千400股。

根據文告，Laxey夥伴將在本週六（11月10日）進行的股東大會中，尋求3名人選出任資本投資董事，和現有董事部人選一較高下。

目前持有資本投資5萬股的何麗明（譯音），建議讓Laxey董事安德魯佩駒出任資本投資的非獨立非執行董事，同時尋求讓羅國琪（譯音）和劉葉亨（譯音）擔任獨立非執行董事。

反觀，資本投資的現有股東東姑阿末亞哈亞、盧健炳（譯音）、哈倫賓哈林拉昔、東姑阿都阿茲賓東姑伊布拉欣，則捍衛當權派的“人馬＂，力挺花莎尼控股（F&N，3689，主板消費品組）前首席執行員拿督陳鴻明和尹廷平（譯音）出任董事獨立非執行董事。

市場人士表示，以目前情況來看，哪幫人馬的勝數高仍不得而知，最後結果將由小股東的支持意願決定。

基於董事紛擾，資本投資發文告，強烈鼓勵所有股東參與該公司在股東大會，以捍衛長期權益。

“不瞭解Laxey意圖＂

“公司並不瞭解Laxey的意圖，但據瞭解，Laxey以往也曾購入其他封閉基金的股權，最終導致相關基金結清。＂

資本投資董事經理陳鼎武也將針對此事於明日進行特別匯報會以讓投資者瞭解該內部問題，同時披露資本投資如何改善估值的策略。

根據《星洲財經》向該公司的相關人士瞭解，資本投資確實出現董事部份歧，若Laxey成功擁護3名董事進駐董事部，不排除引發企業活動。

他透露，資本投資只接獲Laxey的書面通知，並未和他們進行任何洽談，現也只能猜測Laxey的下一步棋。

“我們可以肯定的是，Laxey和資本投資的投資理念不同，Laxey是短期投機者，但資本投資卻是長期投資者。＂

8個月內逐步累積

資本投資自金融風暴後股價一直低迷不振可能是Laxey能夠趁“虛＂而入的原因，Laxey和倫敦管理投資基金在過去8個月，逐步累積資本投資的股權，促使雙方現已持有資本投資近14%股權，收窄了資本投資的股價和淨資產值的鴻溝。

金融風暴以後，資本投資一直以低於淨資產值交易，偶爾甚至折價高達29%。該股最近的淨資產值達2令吉96仙。

Laxey5年前
向Amanah Millenia出手

據悉，Laxey在5年前曾對馬股的AmanahMillenia進行相同策略，Laxey當時累積AmanahMillenia的股權高達19.41%，最終導致該基金解散。

不同的是，Amanah Millenia的表現不及資本投資，Amanah Millenia股價偏低的同時，淨資產值一直裹足不前，但資本投資的淨資產值卻不斷提昇。

陳鼎武在早前的特別股東大會中曾強調，公司將保留基金投資策略，同時將探討其他投資選項，以惠及所有股東。

依市場分析，股東將支持哪一方仍是未知數，資本投資旗下Capital Dynamics資產管理和數股東現持有基金約3%股權，相信堅持長期投資方向的投資者很可能繼續支持資本投資。

不過，由於資本投資過去數年的表現平平，長期持有者的比例已逐漸減少，因此，一些短期投資者趁此次的董事風暴套利仍不足為奇，若資本投資最終被迫解散，將可立即釋放回酬給股東，因此小股東可能轉為支持Laxey夥伴。

一些市場人士也揣測，現有大股東可能會在市場吸購股票以捍衛控制權，這將為該股帶來短線交易機會。（星洲日報／財經）
http://biz.sinchew.com.my/node/66920

Open letter from Laxey Partners. It proposes share buy back.

---

Added on November 6, 2012, 3:43 pmAs far to my information, TTB's counter fight would be dual listing of ICAP in oversea market (possible Singapore or Hong Kong). Amidst with the dual listing, the fund would be able to change its mandate to invest overseas, most likely this will come with rights issue and also issuance of warrants.

This post has been edited by kinwing: Nov 6 2012, 03:55 PM


Attached File(s)
 POV_from_Laxey_Partners.pdf ( 269.56k ) Number of downloads: 43

Either way proposes by Laxey or TTB have pushed up the share price, I am quite upset on this .

---

Added on November 6, 2012, 3:52 pmI will object every resolutions proposed by Laxey Partner except the one to appoint Lo Kok Kee as INED.

This post has been edited by kinwing: Nov 6 2012, 03:52 PM