上市公司分析谨防三高
1 :
GS(14)@2010-11-28 11:24:00http://bbs.esnai.com/frame.php?f ... .com/forum-4-1.html
上市公司分析谨防三高
夏草
看病的时候,医生常提醒大家要注意三高，这三高指的是高血压、高血脂、高血糖，审阅上市公司财务报表时，也要注意三高，但此三高彼非三高，这三高指的是高成长、高毛利及高现金。
对于一位价值投资者，三高意味着这家公司成长性好、盈利能力强及财务弹性高，股神巴菲特就喜欢这样的股票，这也成了价值投资者择股的理想标准，遗憾的是白马非马，现实中碰到三高股票时，如果发现该公司市盈率很低，不要以为真得找到估值洼地，这洼地可能就是你投资的泥沼，一旦陷入，痛苦一生。
纳斯达克上市公司绿诺科技（RINO）近日承认财务造假：
On November 18, 2010, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of RINO International Corporation (the “Registrant”) a Nevada corporation, concluded that previously issued audited financial statements of the Registrant for its fiscal years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009, which were included in the Registrant’s Annual Reports on Form 10-K for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009, and previously issued interim unaudited financial statements which were included in the Registrant’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the periods ended March 31, 2008 to September 30, 2009 should no longer be relied on. 1 The Board also concluded that previously issued interim unaudited financial statements which were included in the Registrant’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the periods March 31, 2010, June 30, 2010 and September 30, 2010 should no longer be relied on inasmuch as such financial statements incorporate results from 2008 and 2009.
The conclusion of the Board that the financial statements for the above-described periods should not be relied upon was based on statements made by the Registrant’s Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Zou Dejun, after consultation with the Registrant’s Chief Accountant, who reported to the Board that the Registrant did not enter into two contracts for which it reported revenue during the Registrant’s 2008 and 2009 fiscal years.
绿诺科技实体大连绿诺环境工程科技有限公司主要从事flue gasdesulfurization (“FGD”， 烟气脱硫) system，由于该公司具有环保概念，且高成长（09年收入增长55%，净利增长165%）、高毛利（09年毛利率将近40%，净利率近50%），高现金（09年末现金占资产总额的52%），导致该公司股价一度冲至35美元，如今看来这一切都是骗局，该公司涉嫌虚构收入、虚增资产，账面的2。59亿元资产疑大部分涉嫌虚构，包括现金、应收账款及预付账款，该公司造假有两个明显征兆，一是盈利能力超强，二是存货周转率畸低，账面资产基本是非实物资产；独立机构Muddy Waters通对其主要客户的确认及工商局年检报表的调查发现了该公司财务异常，以下是绿诺科技09年财报及2010年Q3节选数据：
绿诺科技造假却不是个案，最近大家热议的纳斯达克上市公司中国高速频道（CCME）疑有相同的造假情节，中国高速传媒实际运营的公司为福建分众传媒有限公司，成立于2003年，主要业务是利用城际巴士车载电视做媒体广告，是目前中国最大的巴士车载电视媒体，覆盖全国35座一级城市，辐射316座二、三级城市4000多条客运主干线，近23000辆城际巴士、机场巴士、旅游巴士车载电视独家广告经营权。 2010年6月3日，中国高速传媒股票转板至纳斯达克全球精选市场交易。
中国高速频道财报呈现出典型的三高症状，高成长（2010年前三季度收入增长142%，净利增长150%）、高毛利（2010年前三季度毛利率73%，净利率44%）、高现金（2010年第三季度末现金占资产总额的77%，笔者怀疑该公司虚构收入、虚减费用、虚增资产，账面的1.7亿美元基本为虚构，这是网上贴的该公司十大红旗警讯：
10 redflags of CCME
1. Why did insider sell the stock at $9 two weeks before the stock running up to $22? Are the insiders so stupid and a poor market timer?
2. Where is the share buyback that was announced?
3. Where is the dividend?
4. Why did CCME have exceptionally low interest income ratio, while VISN the opposite, among the four competitors?
Here is the Interest Income/Ending Cash Balance ratio in percentage for Q2.
...... FMCN（分众传媒）: 0.19%
...... AMCN（航美传媒）: 0.20%
...... VISN（华视传媒）: 0.83%
...... CCME（中国高速频道）: 0.06%
Notes:
(1) These were for Q2 2010
(2) The denominator was Ending Cash Balance.
5. Why does CCME has extremely high margin relative to its competitors?
In Q2, 2010, CCME reported a margin of 79%, while its competitors reported low or negative margin. VISN was 23% and AMCN was -10%.
Again, are they all in China? CCME must have some magic power to achieve that.
6. How can CCME generate 3.4x revenue per LCD than its competitors?
CCME has roughly 55-60k displays; VISN has like 120k LCDs. In Q2, 2010. VISN’s total revenue was $31 million and CCME generated $53 million from much less LCDs. Each CCME’s LCD generated 3.4x more revenue than that of VISN. How can CCME do this?
7. Why CCME selling expense is so low? CCME selling expense is 3% of revenue . However, its competitors are much higher, FMCN 38%, VISN 22%.
You have to believe that CCME is operating in completely different market from FMCN or VISN's. These costs have to rise if the number is even being correctly reported. Seems to be too low ???
Are you forgetting what happened to AMCN. Go back and review AMCN which too started out strong, but the concession fees rose quickly to 73% of revenue.
8. How can CCME increase its revenue by more than 20 fold while sales force remain almost flat?
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1...
According to SEC form DEFM14a 2009-10-05 page 118-151, CCME's revenue grew more than 20 fold from 2006 to 2009 while its sales force almost remained flat.
CCME reported revenues of $4 million, $26 million, 63 million and $95 million for year 2006 2007, 2008 and 2009, correspondingly. The reported people in sale force for 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 are 58, 76, 63[note 1] and 63, corespondingly.
-------------------------------2006 --- 2007 ---2008 ----2009
REVENUE(MILLION) ---4 26--- 63--- 95
SALE FORCE ---58[p151]--- 76[p151]--- 63[p148] ---63[p118]
In year 2007, 2008 and 2009, CCME experienced amazing revenue growth of 600%, 142% and 50%, correspondingly. However, its sale force has not changed significantly over this period. Moreover, In 2008, its sale force even dropped from to 63 from 76 of 2007.
Note 1: 63 in 2009 is the reported number on June, 2009. 2008 number is a approximation based on the statement "There were no significant difference in the size of the sales force for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and 2008" on page 148 of form DEFM14a.
9. Why did CCME list the likes of VISN, AMCN, FMCN as its competitors, while none of these other companies has listed CCME as a competitor? Note that VISN, AMCN, and FMCN have listed each other as competitors. Check their 10-Ks. Were FMCN, VISN, AMCN just too blindsided to see a formidable emerging competitor on the horizon? Or Was it something else?
10. Why are so many shares sold short? There is high short interests in RINO whose story is still unfolded. The shorts are not so dumb and stupid after all.
Sentiment : Sell
http://bbs.imeigu.com/viewthread.php?tid=5929&extra=&page=1
高成长、高毛利及高现金本是白马股的标志，可如今有些死马当活马，甚至当白马，人造三高诱惑投资者，由于造假技巧太拙劣，大部分理性投资者用脚投票，这些公司一般市盈率都很低：
但也有少数公司造假技术很高明，骗过了大部分理性投资者，使其估值也明显偏高，这样的公司才是最可怕的，这些公司往往由四大审计，由顶级投行推荐，但不管四大还是顶级投行，都是市场一分子，他也有可能被蒙骗甚至共谋，对于三高的公司，我们要小心取证。
附：中国忠旺三高之谜
夏草
中国忠旺（01333.HK）号称铝型材行业世界老三、中国老大， 2009年5月8日，忠旺在香港挂牌上市，募得净额近95亿港元，当时成为2009年全球最大的IPO，董事长刘忠田也因此成为中国首富。笔者发现该公司存在高成长、高毛利及高现金三大财务迷局。
这是该公司近四年营收及净利：
忠旺2009年度实现净利35亿元，同比净增85%，如此靓丽的业绩实在令人惊叹；根据该公司2009年报分部报告，2009年收入增长主要依赖出口美国收入急剧增长：
2009年度，忠旺内销收入其实下降了30%；但出口收入井喷，尤其出口美国收入，从上年的2.14亿元一下子增长至报告期的56.57亿元，净增25倍有余。这就有意思了：国内市场受益于4万亿投资不但没有增长，反而下降三成；而美国市场仍处于困境却出现井喷，且对美国出口不是直销，据年报称出口往美、澳的产品，有八、九成非直接运到美、澳客户手中，而是先销往在内地的“中间人”，再分销出口。以美国为例，51.8亿元人民币的销售(占美国销售额92%)经中间人出口，这家中国铝型材贸易公司成为忠旺2009年单一最大客户，占去年公司收入37%。
媒体很快就找到忠旺涉嫌虚假出口美国的间接证据：美国普查局(U.S.Bureau of Census)的数据显示，2009年美国由中国进口的“铝挤压制品”(即铝型材)价值为5.14亿美元，或35亿元人民币。换言之，若比较此两数据，忠旺一家销往美国的金额，竟较全中国向美国出口铝型材的价值多出六成。
对此质疑，忠旺也很快澄清称口径不同导致，原因可能包括，美国统计铝型材的标准与公司有所不同，美国或将部分产品，例如用于飞机、船舶的铝型材拨入运输类别，而非归类为“铝型材”。公司又指出，产品经船运往美国，须时两个月，时间差也可能造成双方统计的差异。
这不是忠旺业绩第一次被质疑，《经济观察报》2009年9月14日发表《中国忠旺十大客户疑云》质疑忠旺IPO招股书十大客户不实，之后，该报对此公开致歉，承认报道不实；忠旺也邀请安永复核了前十大客户和纳税情况，安永开始称审计程序受限，这导致忠旺股价暴跌，后来安永撤回了审计受限的意见，但忠旺俨然已成为一家问题上市公司，业界都戴着一付有色眼镜看待这家公司，怀疑其业绩注水。
坚强的忠旺继续以高成长回击媒体的质疑，2010年4月29日，该公司发布2010年第一季报，第一季报又一次超分析师预期，单季实现净利高达13亿元，收入同比增长37%。遗憾的是该公司股价目前依然非常疲软，市盈率不到8倍。
忠旺铝型材分为工业铝型材和建筑铝型材，后者毛利率很低，能做到20%就很不简单了，这是刚上市的罗普斯金（002333.SZ）披露的铝型材加工业上市公司的毛利率:
这是忠旺2009年报披露的分部收入:
忠旺工业铝型材单价远超建筑铝型材，该公司毛利主要来源是工业铝型材，2009年占比高达95%：
忠旺工业铝型材毛利率2009年度高达43.6%，而2010年第一季度更是突破50%：
人们不禁要问：为什么建筑铝型材都陷入亏损，工业铝型材为何有如此高的毛利率？铝产业链分为铝土矿、氧化铝、电解铝和铝加工，受铝价低迷影响，铝产业链整体极其不景气，中国铝业等上市公司2009年度暴出巨额亏损，在此行业背景下，为何忠旺能一枝独秀？且其一枝独秀不是靠国内市场，而是还陷入金融危机困境中的美国市场，而这个美国市场其实也是内销转外销，忠旺先销售给境内客户，只是不知境内客户最终是否销售给美国客户？忠旺出口美国代理商是何方神圣，一年就做了50亿的单子？这家神秘的客户与忠旺是否存在事实的关联关系？是否同受刘忠田控制？
笔者发现忠旺除了高成长、高毛利之外，还存在明显的高现金现象。该公司近两年资产规模急剧膨胀：
2009年末忠旺资产总额已高达244亿元，净资产也从2006年末的24亿元增长至2009年末的142亿元。笔者发现该公司2009年末的现金及现金等价物高达137亿元，2008年末这个数只有43亿元：
忠旺截止2009年末244亿资产总额中，有56%是现金及现金等价物，如此巨额现金显然悖离正常需求；而该公司2009年报除股权融资募集84亿元外，还新增银行借贷29亿元，这29亿新增银行借贷据忠旺称是代地方国企借款，由地方政府担保。忠旺俨然成了地方政府的融资平台，笔者严重怀疑忠旺137亿元现金余额不实，忠旺既然可以成为地方政府的融资平台，更可以成为刘忠田私人融资平台；笔者甚至怀疑忠旺涉嫌虚构收入、虚增资产，而虚增资产相当部分放入货币资产项目。
基于忠旺财报的高度异常，忠旺有必要进一步披露主要客户名单，尤其是美国最终客户名单以及境内出口代理商纳税单据，以证明其井喷的美国出口收入是真实的。
2 :
monday18(10821)@2011-05-27 18:12:41咁可怕！我地d 小股民唔識就好易ko！