From a FM point of view, ICPA is judged at NAV, not by some Tom, d*** or Harry's standard on the share price movement.

Can't liquidate ICAP for 18% presently will only give you the problem, not to me and other long term investors.

This post has been edited by kinwing: Aug 24 2012, 03:04 PM

Unforeseen circumstances should not stop us from holding long term stocks, or else we should not have invest in the beginning because we are so scare and shit hell out by the power of 'unforeseen circumstances'?

Discipline value investors do have plenty of time to wait and plan for stock disposals at least at par with NTA/NAV/intrinsic value and not to mention if one could sold at premium and can simply avoid to dispose at cheap price. Value investors are always not in a hasty mode of disposing shares especially during bear market, then it should not be a problem to trade illiquid shares with a longer time horizon. If someone claims that an emergency situation to raise cash urgently will raise the liquidity problem for those illiquid shares, then he should blame himself why he put short term cash to buy shares or why he does not prepare some cash buffer instead of blaming the discount for illiquidity? It's always somebody else's wrong but himself.

Furthermore, a liquid share does not guarantee the investor can sell at an attractive price, so it further proves that there is a risk an investor who needs cash urgently might just force to dispose shares at cheap price irregardless the shares are liquid or illiquid. Please take note that liquidity is not an issue, in fact the investment time horizon does matter.

Now I come back to the fact that someone might try to justify that the fund should open up the dividend policy in order to rectify the discount issue. So when investors receive the cash dividend from the fund, it is up to them to allocate the fund and normally they will just re-invest the fund by acquiring additional units if the fund is outperformer. However, don’t forget that ICAP is a close-end (“CE”) fund, it is not like the open-end Unit Trust (“UT”) fund that can issue new units to get fresh proceed if those unit holders re-invest the dividend. For a CE fund, once it distribute cash, it has less proceed to invest and whatever the re-investment decision made by unit holders has nothing to do with the CE fund, and thus the dividend policy greatly reduce the speed to accumulate wealth through the fund and thus defeat the objective of setting up the fund. (Note: This is why even the UT fund always encourage the unit holders to automatically convert the distribution into new units cuz it knows the distribution of cash will lower its efficiency to grow the capital).

If I would be given a choice to grow my capital of RM1 to RM5 after 10 years (inclusive dividend and capital appreciation) through a UT with dividend policy, I would rather to go for a fund with no dividend policy that can grow my capital from RM1 to RM8 though the fund’s NAV is RM10 which means it trades at 20% discount after 10 years. So would you go for a UT which can only grow its NAV to RM5 in 10-year time so you can redeem your UT at NAV of RM5 or you would like to put your $ in a CEF which can grow the NAV to RM10 but traded at a discount of RM8 in 10-year? No prize for the right answer .

I also don't know if it won't give 'long' term investors problem, so I don't generalise facts like you that illiquidity will give 'everyone' problem which could your own perception. For me, I will take the illiquidity risks by enjoying the illiquidity premium.

No, I am not interested to read your sig. You have your own fantasy, I have mine .

You still do not get me. When shit happened, whether your shares traded on par, above NAV below NAV, traded in liquid or illiquid will not matter, because you may not be able to get the amount of disposal proceed you wanted at that moment because of your wrong timing in disposal.

So why blame the fund of which is not cater for you only? Yourself has nothing to blame because you are trying to liquidate your investment at a wrong time? Why you don't have any other emergency fund instead of relying your fund of which supposed to be ready lock-in for long term investment?

Instead of blaming your poor financing planning and so you should try to improve on that, you blame on liquidity. Put your own fault as somebody else's fault is an easier way out, isn't it?

This post has been edited by kinwing: Aug 24 2012, 04:03 PM

A "million reality", haha . I am enjoying in reading this also, why not you spending your time in making your 'million reality', it worth more your effort and time instead of b****ing how ICAP is inferior than you at this thread that TTB might not even aware of this.

This post has been edited by kinwing: Aug 24 2012, 04:07 PM

firee818 you know what is day-dreaming, or will you trust the word post by any Tom, d*** or Harry from the cyberworld. Must be someone still having his fantacy at the lala land

It is nothing related to CFA, don't drag that in .

Btw, I think fund management service provided by Philip Capital not bad .

The NAV was RM1 in Oct 2010, and it's now RM2.96. A compounded annual return of 18% for NAV. How about return of share price if you bought at the lowest at RM1.30 in Oct 2008 and hold long term until now at RM2.38? Share price appreciation at a CAGR 20% in 4 years. You did not buy at 4 years ago so you are not long term enough to enjoy this CARG of at least 18% or more to 20%. I am sorry you arse is fried .

---

Added on November 4, 2012, 3:58 pm I am seeing a naive one .

This post has been edited by kinwing: Nov 4 2012, 03:58 PM

The life span of the fund till 2020, so I have 8 more years to wait with a CAGR 18% for NAV and possible it will reach at RM8 to RM10. Indeed it is stated in the prospectus of the fund is for long term.

Initially you are arguing you want long term return but ICAP does not deliver good long term return to work your ass out, and now you said you want to sell in short term, so what do you want? Long term or short term? Clear your mind first before you start to talk. By they way, does troll has ass at the back? May be he got one in front at the mouth and no wonder when he talks his breath sting.

This post has been edited by kinwing: Nov 4 2012, 05:44 PM

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 .

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

No, IMO I only look at performance since inception.

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

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

Tan: iCapital.biz to oppose nomination of 3 directors (Update)

By John Loh

KUALA LUMPUR: Capital Dynamics, which is the fund manager for closed-end fund iCapital.biz Bhd, would seriously consider resigning if any of the three directors, which it was opposed to, were elected to the board.

iCapital.biz, managed by seasoned fund manager Tan Teng Boo, was opposing the nomination of Andrew Pegge, Lo Kok Kee and Low Nyap Heng, as directors

In a memorandum issued to shareholders, Capital Dynamics said it would seriously consider resigning as fund manager and investment manager.

Tan said on Tuesday the objective of the three directors - who were not nominated by iCapital -- was "very short term".

“From our research, their objective is to hit and run,” Tan said.

Starbiz reported a request has been put forward to iCapital.biz to have the three persons elected to the board.

Shareholders will vote on this at iCapital.biz's coming AGM this Saturday.

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.

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?f.../20121106115518


Looks like I can't vote Lo Kok Kee in also or else TTB will resign , haha .

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/busines...al-listed-fund/

Capital Dynamics gets SC nod for world’s first dual-listed fund

By Lee Wei Lian and Zurairi AR November 06, 2012
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 6 — Capital Dynamics, which is battling a possible hostile takeover of its icapital.biz fund, has received approval from the Securities Commission to apply to establish the world’s first dual-listed fund, its managing director Tan Teng Boo said today.

icapital.biz is facing a possible hostile takeover of its boardroom by foreign funds ostensibly over the undervaluation of the fund’s share price.

Tan said the dual-listed fund was a way to narrow the discount of icapital.biz’s share price as well as fulfil the promise to shareholders that the fund manager would find a way to allow them to invest globally.

He said however that he could not disclose how the new dual-listed fund and icapital.biz would be linked.

Tan said however that if any of the three nominees he perceives to be hostile are voted to the board in the company’s AGM on November 10, he will “seriously consider” resigning as fund manager which would also scuttle the plans for the dual-listed fund. The three nominees are Andrew Pegge, Lo Kok Kee and Low Nyap Heng.

Pegge is the founder and director of European hedge fund Laxey Partners and he, Lo and Low were nominated by Evelyn Ho Lai Ming, who holds 50,000 shares out of total 140 million.

Four out of icapital.biz’s six directors are up for re-election in the upcoming AGM.

Tan said that given Pegge’s track record in his own funds, it appeared that Pegge would bring a different philosophy in managing the fund.

“Why has the fund (icapital.biz) been successful? It is because the board can work together,” he said in a media briefing today. “You ask me to work with Pegge, we will be fighting.”

MORE TO COME

Photo of Andrew Pegge.


Attached thumbnail(s)

The fund manager Capital Dynamics' formal reply to Laxey Partner.




Attached File(s)
 FORMAL_RESPONSE_TO_LAXEY_PARTNERS_LTD_ACCUSATIONS.pdf ( 340.71k ) Number of downloads: 64