ZKIZ Archives


財訊傳媒(0205,前寶雅科技、國基控股、國基資訊科技)專區(關係:0246)

1 : GS(14)@2010-08-29 20:50:32

新聞專區
http://realforum.zkiz.com/thread.php?tid=9011
2 : GS(14)@2010-08-29 20:50:54

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20100827434_C.pdf
3 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 13:15:08

這股可買嗎?
4 : GS(14)@2010-10-17 13:28:57

3樓提及
這股可買嗎?


經營不好,又欠貴利..
5 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 14:50:08

多謝回覆
另想請教...

看港交所披露權益資料,看不明白。
該公司售予李世杰,戴小京認購權,對公司股價有關係嗎?
授予價格係 $10 ,行使價格係兩亳幾至三毫幾,即是話兩亳幾行使,可以以兩亳幾入貨嗎? 咁即係假設股價去到五亳,佢就可以行使權利,賺取差價嗎?
因為咁而長期壓價?

貴利是鄧x頓嗎?和股價有直接關係?
6 : GS(14)@2010-10-17 15:12:39

5樓提及
多謝回覆
另想請教...

看港交所披露權益資料,看不明白。
該公司售予李世杰,戴小京認購權,對公司股價有關係嗎?
授予價格係 $10 ,行使價格係兩亳幾至三毫幾,即是話兩亳幾行使,可以以兩亳幾入貨嗎? 咁即係假設股價去到五亳,佢就可以行使權利,賺取差價嗎?
因為咁而長期壓價?

貴利是鄧x頓嗎?和股價有直接關係?


http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20091216179_C.pdf

派購股權可以是一種福利,會根據股價釐定,行使後,也可以當作高管的信心,但並無影響市場上的股票供求(假設他們不立刻出售股票,如立刻出售,供應即增加),所以和公司股價無關係。

授予價格是象徵式,不用理會。行使價就是成本。所以當股價高過行使價,換股即可賺錢,反之亦然。無人會因為少少錢特登壓價,反而股價愈高對他們愈有利,只是因為真的經營不佳,想炒都無原因...

貴利是鄧普頓,無錯,但這個價錢他們都無錢還,鄧普頓也不會換股,所以仍會是債項。
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20090304885_C.pdf

這張是最新的公告,可以看到所有購股權及CB情況:
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20101004539_C.pdf

不是每一項都影響股價的,太注重股價,反而甚麼都學不了。
7 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 16:04:29

thanks!!!

如果該公司無錢還,鄧譜頓會要它做什麼呢?
炒高股價0.422以上行使權利從而賺取股價差價嗎?
8 : GS(14)@2010-10-17 16:12:45

7樓提及
thanks!!!

如果該公司無錢還,鄧譜頓會要它做什麼呢?
炒高股價0.422以上行使權利從而賺取股價差價嗎?


不一定的,可以迫公司還債,因為它持有的是可換股債,是一個債權,可以迫公司還債,何況他這筆債前幾年已經重續了,今年相信也不例外。

但它是一個價值基金,投資也少,也不會做莊,相信不會這樣做,只會慢慢等價值浮現。

為何你這樣肯定它會升呢?
9 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 16:23:32

係兩年前,小女子愚昧,誤信人,又係話收到消息,識老細之類,會大升,冇止蝕,跟住又睇錯港交所消息,以為會升至0.422smileysmiley
10 : GS(14)@2010-10-17 16:24:24

9樓提及
係兩年前,小女子愚昧,誤信人,又係話收到消息,識老細之類,會大升,冇止蝕,跟住又睇錯港交所消息,以為會升至0.422smileysmiley


信識老細的,我就覺得有點問題了...
11 : GS(14)@2010-10-17 16:26:20

現在沽也欲哭無淚,如果不太佔投資比例高的(約10%),不如加注攤減成本...如果跌破10仙斬掉可也...
12 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 16:29:16

發可換股債收既息其實不算高,有風險,不怕上市公司清盤嗎?
債前幾年已經重續,可以隨時註銷嗎?
13 : GS(14)@2010-10-17 16:35:25

12樓提及
發可換股債收既息其實不算高,有風險,不怕上市公司清盤嗎?
債前幾年已經重續,可以隨時註銷嗎?


這班人都是老老實實做生意,我也每期買它的周刊,其實近來廣告多了很多...

如果上市公司清盤,他做的生意這樣敏感,就算接管也難經營

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20090304885_C.pdf
雖然話日期有限,他有贖回條件,但根據條款,如果發行新股,他們有權要求贖回...
14 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 16:41:13

還錢定係還股票比鄧譜頓呢?
15 : GS(14)@2010-10-17 16:44:26

14樓提及
還錢定係還股票比鄧譜頓呢?


他可以要錢,也可以認股票
16 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 16:52:28

認股票即是將債頂1200萬美金除以現價而得出既股數比佢嗎?
0.422 又係代表咩呢?
thanks!!!
17 : GS(14)@2010-10-17 17:05:56

16樓提及
認股票即是將債頂1200萬美金除以現價而得出既股數比佢嗎?
0.422 又係代表咩呢?
thanks!!!


不是,當公司無論如何發行新股,必須要告知,並要詢問他們他們的意向....

42.2仙是換股的價值..但大可不換當債券即可
18 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 17:07:17

在內地發行這類雜誌,有時話題太敏感,網上平台又未發展得好好..生意難做
19 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 17:10:13

以往有些股贖回CB後大升,係因為生意做得好有錢賺,還是只係當好消息炒作一番呢?
20 : GS(14)@2010-10-17 17:42:44

19樓提及
以往有些股贖回CB後大升,係因為生意做得好有錢賺,還是只係當好消息炒作一番呢?


just a news... If they wants to buy Cb from funds, that means they have cash, not means they runs very good
21 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 17:51:59

請問點解鄧諳頓借錢比佢地呢?
3%息算好嗎?
大可以買收息股呢smiley
22 : GS(14)@2010-10-17 18:03:42

21樓提及
請問點解鄧諳頓借錢比佢地呢?
3%息算好嗎?
大可以買收息股呢smiley


I think they buy China Media Industry.. but lack of stocks to choose...

3% is good if their interest rate from borrowing is lower than 3%
23 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 18:25:58

佢地都係會借日元嗎?
24 : GS(14)@2010-10-17 18:28:45

23樓提及
佢地都係會借日元嗎?


I don't know... buy USD is now nearly 0%...
25 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-17 18:32:49

係喎,日元會升,美金卻不會
26 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-18 19:11:15

想請教另一隻是否老千股可以嗎?
27 : GS(14)@2010-10-18 21:20:59

26樓提及
想請教另一隻是否老千股可以嗎?


去吹水區問啦..
28 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-30 17:47:54

上升了...
29 : GS(14)@2010-10-30 17:48:55

28樓提及
上升了...


試試約20仙
30 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-30 17:50:03

你都睇好嗎?
31 : GS(14)@2010-10-30 17:50:36

30樓提及
你都睇好嗎?


我不會買這類股的,但我會買他們雜誌
32 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-30 17:51:23

已經換馬了...
33 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-30 17:52:19

好不幸,守左咁耐,上星期一放, 琴日就升
34 : GS(14)@2010-10-30 17:53:56

33樓提及
好不幸,守左咁耐,上星期一放, 琴日就升


賣掉就不要想了...
35 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-30 17:55:31

湯兄係做基金經理嗎?
36 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-30 17:56:18

睇過你寫既野, 獲益良多
37 : GS(14)@2010-10-30 18:03:58

35樓提及
湯兄係做基金經理嗎?


不是,只是喜歡研究股票
38 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-30 18:11:34

在你以前提及過的文章,小時已經研究股票
39 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-30 18:16:51

有人話金融海嘯係一生人一次入貨機會, 可惜已經錯過左
40 : 鱷不群(1248)@2010-10-30 21:30:58

39樓提及
有人話金融海嘯係一生人一次入貨機會, 可惜已經錯過左

金融風暴還會有很多次
41 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-30 23:46:22

唔知要等幾耐呢?
42 : GS(14)@2010-10-31 11:38:27

40樓提及
39樓提及
有人話金融海嘯係一生人一次入貨機會, 可惜已經錯過左

金融風暴還會有很多次


五六年有次細,十年有次大
43 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-31 11:56:30

下次又要到幾時呢?
44 : GS(14)@2010-10-31 12:04:36

43樓提及
下次又要到幾時呢?



有人話2012-2013年
45 : 鱷不群(1248)@2010-10-31 12:44:42

42樓提及
40樓提及
39樓提及
有人話金融海嘯係一生人一次入貨機會, 可惜已經錯過左

金融風暴還會有很多次


五六年有次細,十年有次大

三年就足夠一小爆了
46 : GS(14)@2010-10-31 12:47:20

45樓提及
42樓提及
40樓提及
39樓提及
有人話金融海嘯係一生人一次入貨機會, 可惜已經錯過左

金融風暴還會有很多次


五六年有次細,十年有次大

三年就足夠一小爆了


也是啊...
47 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-31 12:47:26

用2008年開始計嗎?
48 : GS(14)@2010-10-31 12:49:15

47樓提及
用2008年開始計嗎?


當然啦
49 : ckm(4183)@2010-10-31 12:59:45

即是出年就到??
50 : GS(14)@2010-10-31 13:16:06

49樓提及
即是出年就到??


一路行一路睇,未來的事說不準
51 : 鱷不群(1248)@2010-10-31 13:20:16

我估計下一波輪到內房,索羅斯都來香港,可能已經聞到燶味
52 : GS(14)@2010-11-20 18:34:26

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20101118189_C.pdf
茲提述本公司於二零零六年四月二十五日就 006年認股權證而刊發之公佈,以及本公
司於二零零九年三月四日就 2008年債券而刊發之公佈。

董事欣然宣佈,於二零一零年十一月十八日,本公司與Templeton訂立契據,據此,本
公司已與Templeton協定提前於契據日期起計3 個營業日內贖回 2008年債券,而基於本
公司支付款項,Templeton同意於有關付款起計 個營業日內放棄其於 2006年認股權證
及 2008年債券下之一切權利及註銷 2006年認股權證及 2008年債券。

53 : GS(14)@2010-11-26 08:01:13

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20101125594_C.pdf

大股東提出要約,以14仙向股東購買股票
54 : ckm(4183)@2010-11-26 13:34:56

但係點解升高咁多呢?
55 : mimer(1366)@2010-11-26 13:37:46

我都想問,但我search唔到呢個postsmiley
56 : ckm(4183)@2010-11-26 14:37:24

希望湯兄賜教
57 : GS(14)@2010-11-26 14:57:48

55樓提及
我都想問,但我search唔到呢個postsmiley


大股東增購wor,還不是看好?!
58 : mimer(1366)@2010-11-26 15:18:16

57樓提及
55樓提及
我都想問,但我search唔到呢個postsmiley


大股東增購wor,還不是看好?!


增購同你炒個成本差咁遠smiley
59 : ckm(4183)@2010-11-26 15:27:13

唔知點解......
60 : GS(14)@2010-11-26 15:29:08

58樓提及
57樓提及
55樓提及
我都想問,但我search唔到呢個postsmiley


大股東增購wor,還不是看好?!


增購同你炒個成本差咁遠smiley


要約要到50%就生效,現時他都有48.62%啦...

可能有一些資金進入吧
61 : GS(14)@2010-11-26 15:31:02

今次還了鄧普頓條數,看來有資金壓力,炒一炒可能會批股
62 : mimer(1366)@2010-11-26 15:31:59

明白,留意下
smiley

發現編輯個功能又轉左小小,靚!

ajax
63 : GS(14)@2010-11-26 15:48:57

如果有改進的,記得出聲呀...
64 : mimer(1366)@2010-11-26 17:10:53

forum好小做到咁,通常簡簡陋陋
65 : GS(14)@2010-11-26 17:44:22

64樓提及
forum好小做到咁,通常簡簡陋陋


我們一直慢慢改緊,上面條bar可以查股價呢...
66 : mimer(1366)@2010-11-26 23:06:48

如果要講,其實可以用現有功能分類分得更好(我覺得):

樓上tag的功能我一向見你們不常用,我試在

http://realforum.zkiz.com/thread ... =%E5%A6%96%E8%82%A1



http://realforum.zkiz.com/thread ... =%E5%A6%96%E8%82%A1

加了妖股這個tag(我唔知要等幾耐,但我剛剛加,可能未睇到,另外個system點用唔好問我),當幾隻不同的股後面同一班人就只需tag相同就可以,而tag可以係無限的,咁就可以盡量一隻股一版,一隻股一版應該最清楚吧

而tag涉及的人力不多,打幾粒字或人名而已

有以上建議因為我見類股好像有另一版,好靜好靜...
67 : GS(14)@2010-11-27 10:36:39

現在我都打算分開晒D股...就是這個原因

個東西是會立刻更新的,不信可試試...但是最多好似得十個

用不用叫壇主放大個tag,給人看到....
68 : GS(14)@2010-11-27 10:41:22

現在我都打算分開晒D股...就是這個原因

個東西是會立刻更新的,不信可試試...但是最多好似得十個

用不用叫壇主放大個tag,給人看到....

如果有問題可以反映下
http://realforum.zkiz.com/viewforum.php?fid=146

不如你領導這個tag小組,搞D人幫幫手
69 : mimer(1366)@2010-11-27 16:53:57

踢番個post上黎,因為暫時好得閒,而且這股似昆水多

wiki的概念就是大家咁高咁大,所以領導就免,給些意見還可以,有興趣其他人也歡迎討論,因為這股似昆水多,哈哈

如你講tag只有十個,那我會建議分tag(我估,d code唔難掛,都係開多個value跟住clone堆code姐,我唔係promgammer,但我估唔難),例子如下圖(因為暫時好得閒)



類別指:正股,創業版,warrant
分類指:以呢隻做例分三類,變身或賣盤時都夠用
相關股票:唔使講啦,你識多過我,十隻夠掛
相關入物:通常tag以space分類,所以英文要加_

如果開多幾款tag(再講一次,我唔係promgammer,但我估d code唔難),其實已根本解決許多問題(所以我覺得發明tag的google勁)
70 : mimer(1366)@2010-11-27 16:57:23

自動tag我覺得好費,所以del了,你們祈望電腦幫你tag甚麼呢?
smiley

還有,上面我試過692 tag 妖股個result出唔到,但我估這些只係小小問題,有興趣可跟進下
如果寫唔多幾個tag就當我無講過喇。
smiley

你請壇主過來望好過喇,那邊,好靜好靜
smiley
71 : ckm(4183)@2010-11-27 17:41:12

這股可再跟上車嗎?
72 : GS(14)@2010-11-27 17:45:57

71樓提及
這股可再跟上車嗎?


建議還是不好了
73 : GS(14)@2010-11-27 17:47:36

70樓提及
自動tag我覺得好費,所以del了,你們祈望電腦幫你tag甚麼呢?
smiley

還有,上面我試過692 tag 妖股個result出唔到,但我估這些只係小小問題,有興趣可跟進下
如果寫唔多幾個tag就當我無講過喇。
smiley

你請壇主過來望好過喇,那邊,好靜好靜
smiley


好的,我會幫你的,一陣先啦
74 : ckm(4183)@2010-11-27 18:35:33

邊度可以最快搵到最新股票專題回覆呢
75 : GS(14)@2010-11-27 18:36:24

74樓提及
邊度可以最快搵到最新股票專題回覆呢


去zkiz.com 或 realforum.zkiz.com
76 : mimer(1366)@2010-11-27 19:06:56

73樓提及
70樓提及
自動tag我覺得好費,所以del了,你們祈望電腦幫你tag甚麼呢?
smiley

還有,上面我試過692 tag 妖股個result出唔到,但我估這些只係小小問題,有興趣可跟進下
如果寫唔多幾個tag就當我無講過喇。
smiley

你請壇主過來望好過喇,那邊,好靜好靜
smiley


好的,我會幫你的,一陣先啦


有時間就攪下啦,無人趕,包括我,實際我識的cdr通常只係bookmk左呢度,創業版那邊都無...
77 : mimer(1366)@2010-11-27 19:08:05

估唔到真係有人問,這股妖妖地,唔好喇smiley
78 : ckm(4183)@2010-11-27 19:19:21

好慘,放左先至升smiley
79 : GS(14)@2010-11-28 10:35:11

76樓提及
73樓提及
70樓提及
自動tag我覺得好費,所以del了,你們祈望電腦幫你tag甚麼呢?
smiley

還有,上面我試過692 tag 妖股個result出唔到,但我估這些只係小小問題,有興趣可跟進下
如果寫唔多幾個tag就當我無講過喇。
smiley

你請壇主過來望好過喇,那邊,好靜好靜
smiley


好的,我會幫你的,一陣先啦


有時間就攪下啦,無人趕,包括我,實際我識的cdr通常只係bookmk左呢度,創業版那邊都無...


其實呢便好多區,不如每個都行下...

創板區其實變了維基區...

壇主已經調了可以search到tag,可試試
80 : GS(14)@2011-04-02 16:51:19

http://www.inv168.com/phpBB3/vie ... &view=unread#unread
之前十五十六唔知推唔推好, 都係推啦

經濟復蘇, 舊年TVB, 財庫, 星島都賺大錢, 上面D消費都好勁, 呢行照計都唔錯, 業績應該開始賺番錢, 隻野細細粒, 買中的話上升空間可以好大. 最大風險係怕佢亂寫野得罪阿爺, 呢樣都出晒名, 不過兩年前炒左D舊班底之後, 而家應該冇咁驚. 同埋留意交投較疏落, 買賣會有困難.
...

公布左業績, 賺720萬, 主要係稅項會計拉低左, 稅前盈利數字1500萬較有參考價值, 全部係下半年賺既. 盈利雖然唔多, 但相信轉盈只係剛開始, 呢個行業固定成本比例高, 收入增加可以大部分轉化成盈利, 舊年毛利率係66%, 營業額多左七千幾萬, 扣除D非經常收益, 盈利改善左四五千萬左右, 年報話增加既成本主要係新雜誌初期既宣傳費, 唔計呢D, 成本的確冇點多到, 黎緊盈利好大機會爆炸性增長. 不過年報點樣吹水我唔會盡信, 買入原因主要係大股東舊年年尾既動作引起我注意, 第一係大股東幫公司找數提早贖回CB, 第二係提出全購, 兩個動作都相當利好, 俾到人信心. 記得兩年前隻1198都試過出價0.33收購, 之後係點無需多講, 所以此股後市可以繼續睇實.
81 : GS(14)@2011-04-09 10:35:14

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20110331907_C.pdf
大股東墊錢贖債
82 : ckm(4183)@2011-04-29 08:06:52

這股怎樣了????
83 : ckm(4183)@2011-04-29 10:24:29

?
84 : ckm(4183)@2011-04-29 19:11:59

點解日日升呢????????
85 : ckm(4183)@2011-04-29 22:24:42

升到冇朋友
86 : GS(14)@2011-04-30 11:42:35

85樓提及
升到冇朋友


低時我勸你不要追,現在還是不要追,追到就有好消息

唔使理,升到夠自然有野睇
87 : ckm(4183)@2011-04-30 12:44:04

追到就有好消息?
何解呢?
88 : GS(14)@2011-04-30 13:07:04

87樓提及
追到就有好消息?
何解呢?


因為你終於忍唔住買了,到那時就是有好消息的時候,你就放下戒心了...

買呢D股,一是早早買,一是就唔好買
89 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-03 21:46:15

又升了smiley
90 : GS(14)@2011-05-03 21:46:59

89樓提及
又升了smiley


一定唔好補番...至少你現在只是賺少了錢
91 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-03 21:49:36

個心有點...像被男友拋棄一樣心痛
92 : GS(14)@2011-05-03 21:50:59

91樓提及
個心有點...像被男友拋棄一樣心痛


應該不會吧,買得耐股票個個都是咁
93 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-03 21:58:19

好耐未試過放左先至升成咁
94 : GS(14)@2011-05-03 21:59:04

93樓提及
好耐未試過放左先至升成咁



咁真是對唔住
95 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-03 21:59:04

上一次應該係07年了
96 : GS(14)@2011-05-03 21:59:26

95樓提及
上一次應該係07年了


咁好快就股災?
97 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-03 22:00:11

都唔關人事, 自己黑仔smiley
98 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-03 22:00:53

哈, 係就買熊仔smiley
99 : stockwinner(6666)@2011-05-03 22:01:10

佢勝左夠乾, 不過最冇消息就危
rsi已經去到94....
100 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-03 22:01:53

一出消息就...危
101 : GS(14)@2011-05-03 22:04:02

99樓提及
佢勝左夠乾, 不過最冇消息就危
rsi已經去到94....


無消息先好妙,有消息無得炒
102 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-03 22:09:00

升到幾時smiley
103 : stockwinner(6666)@2011-05-03 22:11:13

丙升幾多都無我份, 今日走晒
104 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-03 22:19:52

103樓提及
丙升幾多都無我份, 今日走晒


你都好丫有賺,我係蝕住走
105 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-03 22:20:18

點解要走呢
106 : stockwinner(6666)@2011-05-03 22:24:22

1. 一個月升左成倍
2. rsi > 94
3. 賺左50%, 保持利潤
107 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-03 23:25:00

如果我有貨就唔會捨得放
108 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-08 15:32:07

有冇人知升到幾時呢?smiley
109 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-08 15:32:07

有冇人知升到幾時呢?smiley
110 : hsts(1521)@2011-05-08 15:53:05

109樓提及
有冇人知升到幾時呢?smiley


莊家smiley
111 : hsts(1521)@2011-05-08 15:53:05

109樓提及
有冇人知升到幾時呢?smiley


莊家smiley
112 : ckm(4183)@2011-05-08 16:46:29

慘死....
113 : monster7(4561)@2011-05-29 12:35:48

請問佢同246有乜關係?
114 : greatsoup38(830)@2011-05-29 13:17:26

113樓提及
請問佢同246有乜關係?


之前246個老闆先入主205,後來才賣給財經那班人
115 : stockwinner(6666)@2011-05-29 18:17:07

不知不覺去到0.4
116 : GS(14)@2011-05-29 19:11:20

睇來就有消息
117 : stockwinner(6666)@2011-05-29 21:25:47

有心人壓住唔比上....
118 : monster7(4561)@2011-05-30 14:18:30

上星期經濟日報袁健培貼呢隻,我跟佢買完放左
佢今日貼南興,十點半已經要止蝕
119 : monster7(4561)@2011-05-30 14:22:48

我無買南興btw
120 : GS(14)@2011-05-30 21:50:16

117樓提及
有心人壓住唔比上....


都差唔多到橫行區,其實停一停正常,財經呢排好多廣告,睇消息
121 : stockwinner(6666)@2011-06-13 18:48:05

好恐怖呀!!!!!
122 : GS(14)@2011-06-13 21:28:25

好刺激,太淡無人接,引你注意
123 : Hierro(1191)@2011-06-13 21:33:14

122樓提及
好刺激,太淡無人接,引你注意


我找不到新聞
又沒有新公告

似乎只是趁勢調整
124 : GS(14)@2011-06-13 21:42:00

123樓提及
122樓提及
好刺激,太淡無人接,引你注意


我找不到新聞
又沒有新公告

似乎只是趁勢調整


之前的公告已經提示了要升...
125 : Hierro(1191)@2011-06-13 21:43:37

124樓提及
123樓提及
122樓提及
好刺激,太淡無人接,引你注意


我找不到新聞
又沒有新公告

似乎只是趁勢調整


之前的公告已經提示了要升...


係啦,真的錯失了好機會
126 : GS(14)@2011-06-13 21:44:14

睇來散唔到貨,就慢慢回番
127 : stockwinner(6666)@2011-06-13 21:45:32

沽貨既都係10大持倉戶口
128 : Hierro(1191)@2011-06-13 21:45:42

126樓提及
睇來散唔到貨,就慢慢回番


睇成交都似散唔到貨
似乎暫時仍是安全的
129 : stockwinner(6666)@2011-06-13 21:47:56

食飯時間出左呢個news, 午市既刻呢料

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20110613132_C.pdf
130 : Hierro(1191)@2011-06-13 21:50:27

129樓提及
食飯時間出左呢個news, 午市既刻呢料

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20110613132_C.pdf


這張通告無甚特別吧
131 : stockwinner(6666)@2011-06-13 21:53:45

巧合吧!!!!!
132 : Hierro(1191)@2011-06-13 22:15:46

127樓提及
沽貨既都係10大持倉戶口


這個不明顯
再者,這樣的成交做不到甚麼
133 : fineram(806)@2011-08-12 20:24:05

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20110812257_C.pdf

本公司董事會(「董事會」)謹此知會本公司股東(「股東」)及準投資者,本集團
預期於截至二零一一年六月三十日止六個月將錄得綜合淨盈利,而去年同期則錄
得虧損。預期盈利乃主要由於經濟情況有所改善,加上營業額及營運溢利增長所
致。
本公告所載資料乃董事會根據本集團之未經審核綜合管理賬目作出之初步評
估。於本公告日期,本集團截至二零一一年六月三十日止六個月業績尚未落實,
並須待本公司之審核委員會審閱及(如需要)作出必要調整。本公司將於二零一一
年八月底前刊發本集團截至二零一一年六月三十日止六個月之未經審核業績。
134 : GS(14)@2011-09-06 20:52:59

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20110825466_C.pdf

未算賺得多,大股東墊錢

前景與展望
誠如本集團2010年年報所述,本集團旗下所有雜誌已經進入全面收獲期,營業收入及盈利新高指日可待,本集團股東亦將從中獲利。2011年上半年營業收入增長迅猛,半年盈利已經超過2010年全年,預計2011年全年將創紀錄新高。而本集團將在保持現有雜誌業務營業收入高速增長的同時,繼續向新媒體和全媒體領域發展,向未來一個新媒體及全媒體集團邁進。
董事會將因應瞬息萬變之市場和經濟狀況,不斷檢討及監督本集團之發展策略,並把握機會推動本集團不斷前進。

或然負債
周凱旋(「原告」)於二零一零年八月六日入稟法院就散佈及刊發《財經》雜誌第265期所載對原告構成誹謗之若干報道內容之損害賠償金向本公司提出申索。原告與本公司於二零一一年四月嘗試透過調解方式解決雙方所有爭議。雙方已就調解建議進行溝通,然而調解並未成功,雙方未能就解決爭端或其任何部分之條款達成一致意見。本公司董事認為,評估案件結果乃不切實際。因此,於綜合財務報表中並未作出撥備。
135 : phemey(3929)@2012-02-02 20:53:34

Greatsoup, I am in a dinner meeting now. Someone recommend this stock to me. How do you think?
136 : GS(14)@2012-02-02 21:49:51

135樓提及
Greatsoup, I am in a dinner meeting now. Someone recommend this stock to me. How do you think?


我覺得呢間野業績乏善可陳,賣都是賣前景,但做這些媒體都是一般。

最主要那本財經,我已經無買,上網可睇,況且沒了靈魂後,本野變得好一般,我現在較多看新世紀
137 : GS(14)@2012-02-02 21:51:30

講番股價,當年公司回購番那些高息CB,大股東自己泵水入去,之後又回購股票,股價就炒上,但是無甚麼人接貨,我想他花了不少錢

所以我覺得搞這些的目的是想引錢入來,解決老闆財務問題
138 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-02-03 09:36:24

这票人是中国股市的发起人啊,中国联办,不可小觑!最近有6500万的换手,树欲静而风不止
139 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-02-03 09:41:58

原来觉得是卖壳,应该不会,他们很爱面子的
140 : GS(14)@2012-02-04 12:16:57

138樓提及
这票人是中国股市的发起人啊,中国联办,不可小觑!最近有6500万的换手,树欲静而风不止


不過表演很不滿意
141 : GS(14)@2012-02-04 12:17:08

139樓提及
原来觉得是卖壳,应该不会,他们很爱面子的


我也認同
142 : Clark0713(1453)@2012-03-23 23:38:13

截至二零一一年十二月三十一日止年度經審核末期業績公佈

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... N201203231260_C.pdf
143 : GS(14)@2012-03-24 00:55:20

成長250%,至2,800萬,債重

或然負債
周凱旋(「原告」)於二零一零年八月六日入稟法院就散佈及刊發《Caijing 財經》
雜誌第265期所載對原告構成誹謗之若干報道內容之損害賠償金向本公司提出申
索。本公司於二零一零年十月十三日送交之抗辯書中,本公司對原告之申索予以
否認。原告與本公司已於二零一一年四月二十日出席調解,然而,雙方未能透過
調解方式解除訴訟。香港高等法院將於二零一二年九月審判該訴訟。本公司法律
顧問認為,由於評估案件結果乃不切實際,因此,於綜合財務報表中並未作出撥
備。
144 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-03-25 15:55:30

这个年报没有太多惊喜,言辞也不肯多讲一句话,好像有点心不在焉!如此这般,这个股票着急私有化又回购可转债到底想干什么,不清楚。
145 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-03-25 15:58:37

144樓提及
这个年报没有太多惊喜,言辞也不肯多讲一句话,好像有点心不在焉!如此这般,这个股票着急私有化又回购可转债到底想干什么,不清楚。


把股價搞上去才談
146 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-03-25 16:02:09

他的目的是带联办的兄弟们合法致富,顾虑多多,是个慢郎中,他们的年报说明他们并不在意效益,可能他们还有别的途径吧!
147 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-03-25 16:03:58

146樓提及
他的目的是带联办的兄弟们合法致富,顾虑多多,是个慢郎中,他们的年报说明他们并不在意效益,可能他们还有别的途径吧!


錢就不能放在這公司,5這家公司之前的業績真是慘不忍睹
148 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-05-28 10:03:49

该集团合资时尚杂志红秀,116万册了,双周刊,2010年好像还亏损,增长很快,前年增长261%,去年好像是95%,杂志产业太夕阳了,但是时尚杂志好像还可以,一本红秀5元钱,在大陆还是有市场
149 : GS(14)@2012-05-28 23:06:56

148樓提及
该集团合资时尚杂志红秀,116万册了,双周刊,2010年好像还亏损,增长很快,前年增长261%,去年好像是95%,杂志产业太夕阳了,但是时尚杂志好像还可以,一本红秀5元钱,在大陆还是有市场


5塊錢也會一試的,但是真是還在虧,我也沒買財經了
150 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-06-04 15:34:12

我看了下读者回复,杂志口碑不错,但大部分读者的意见是5元钱买,涨价就不买,看来5元钱有无盈利模式是关键,财讯传媒夕阳行业里的翘楚!
151 : GS(14)@2012-06-04 21:47:21

150樓提及
我看了下读者回复,杂志口碑不错,但大部分读者的意见是5元钱买,涨价就不买,看来5元钱有无盈利模式是关键,财讯传媒夕阳行业里的翘楚!


能看到這些資料嗎?
152 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-06-14 08:25:52

京沪两地的timeout杂志也有一定销量,红秀评论很多,大多正面,做杂志的做到这个程度不容易!
153 : GS(14)@2012-06-14 21:57:16

152樓提及
京沪两地的timeout杂志也有一定销量,红秀评论很多,大多正面,做杂志的做到这个程度不容易!


有沒有網絡版?
154 : GS(14)@2012-06-14 21:59:54

http://beijing.timeoutcn.com/
Time out

http://beijing.timeoutcn.com/ArticlesList_102.htm
「我助理對我評價最中肯:萬金油。我是這個也會一點,那個也會一點」。焦愛民的故事很文藝,也很勵志,得從Long long ago說起。

他是貴州人,從小學畫畫,立志當畫家。最愛的畫家是被畢加索譽為「20世紀最偉大畫家」的巴爾蒂斯:「他比較純粹,畫畫沒有任何功利目的,只是為了遵循自己的內心」。在巴爾蒂斯的隔空精神引導下,老焦在貴州大學完成了油畫課程。上世紀90年代春光大好,象牙塔外有各種新生事物的誘惑,老焦沒扛住,最終走出了畫室,成了中國最早一撥平面設計師。在貴州蟄伏了5年,老焦經歷了從手繪到電腦的時代過渡。隨後,他自信滿滿往北京漂移,利用半年時間在一家公司將蘋果電腦體系裡的一切掌握,自此,正式開始了北京的征程。

全中國畫畫、唱歌、寫作的人心目中,北京都是個聖地,在九零年代尤甚。焦愛民喜歡北京,一方面因為它是文化中心,在這裡能找到同類。另一方面,喜歡逛胡同,更喜歡聽兒化音。上世紀末,焦愛民在朋友幫助下創業——借了間辦公室,租了台蘋果電腦,連執照都是借的。整個公司只他一個人,上午打電話,下午「接客」,晚上做設計。他的客戶主要是外企駐京辦,給他們打造產品目錄:「挺簡單的活兒,但我會英文,會設計,服務也挺好,所以第二年就註冊了第二家公司」。在那個時代,大膽就意味著「佔儘先機」。老焦三年創業,一下在北京購買了三套房,從一個文藝北漂成功晉陞到文藝的有產階級。

2006-2007年,焦愛民的人生又不停刷刷翻頁。他開了自己第一家餐廳:老壇酸湯魚。並在朋友的慫恿下,進駐影視圈。以製片人身份介入的第一部電影是尹麗川的《牛郎織女》:「小時候就常租錄像帶看,看的都是好萊塢文藝大片:《雨人》、《大河戀》、《美國往事》、《秋日傳奇》等。《牛郎織女》讓焦愛民以天生聰明迅速掌握了一部電影的操作流程,接下來又跟張一白、徐靜蕾合作,出品了女白領都市題材的《杜拉拉升職記》,然後是《將愛》和《親密敵人》。其中,《杜拉拉升職記》裡焦愛民成功拉來20多個品牌植入,這讓他對內地電影產業更自信了。


「美味關係」
在焦愛民的「產業」裡,工體西路版圖上有兩個點。一個是侃譜云南菜餐廳,一個是侃譜樓下的The Park酒吧。這兩家店被做設計出身的老焦打造的分外有感,用他的話複述,就是:樸素的講究。侃譜和The Park,一個是觀湖勝地,一個采盡了天光,多元、錯落、分層,並賦予適度的精神層面小資產階級情調。老焦的種種飯局、酒局和談事兒、休憩的地方,多是在這兩個地方完成:「辦公室那種正式的枯燥的空間,最容易桎梏思維。反而是在非常規化的工作和談事空間,人更頭腦風暴一些」。

焦愛民在慈云寺開的第一家餐館為老壇酸湯魚,因是初次參與吃喝買賣,經營不善,一年就關張了。第二次則得心應手的多——侃譜,許多人以為是貴州菜,實則為云南菜。名字來自焦愛民喜歡的一個叫蘇珊·桑坦格的美國作家,她創造了「坎普」風格和寫作技巧。老焦因愛慕人家,將坎普變為侃譜——有兩大用意:1,讓你侃大山;2,各方面都力求靠譜。

說到侃譜的原創招牌菜,焦愛民頭頭是道,一個資深吃貨的深邃內在開始綻放光芒——清香茶樹菇,素菜。「茶樹菇一般水分較多,但我們炒得較干,關鍵是要炒出「梗」的清香味。再稍加豆豉,那叫一個下飯。」彝族火把蝦:「蝦燙熟,包錫紙,然後加料,用火烤。把汁料味兒深深熏到蝦肉裡。汁兒味濃烈,但蝦肉依舊原味,入口有一種交錯的味蕾體驗」。作為一個非著名的、萬金油型餐廳掌門人,焦愛民的美食宗旨是:食材本身是什麼特點,做的過程就應該凸現出來。也就是:尊重食物的本來面目,欣賞並保持它的本色。民間的老饕們都會集結而出,遍尋美味。焦愛民也做過瘋狂美食大搜索——那些年,他們的美味記錄都是跟各地駐京辦緊密聯繫在一起的:印象最好的老川辦、云南大廈及烏魯木齊駐京辦,經常是排隊等位,一等好久,在所不辭。

焦愛民的另一力作The Park「是個陽光玻璃匣子」,大面積透明結構讓天光傾瀉而下。老焦的設計是亮點,常有圈裡人在此喝單一麥芽威士忌、談事兒、休憩。這兒的美味是自制辣金槍魚三明治,那是個煎成深金色、封閉的三角形,未入口就芳香四溢,關鍵還在餡料——辣的、熱乎的金槍魚是舌尖上的復合享受。

每天,焦愛民的生活裡一定會有「兩包煙,一杯單一麥芽威士忌,一張碟」,週而復始。他偶爾也下下廚,為自己烹飪原創美味。本著「一切好吃的都該是世界的」,將菜單公佈如下:焦氏菜花——白菜花掰開,用清水煮熟了,撈出來。以花生油炒豬肉末(不要炒太乾),炒完撈出,油換掉。搭配油麥菜,再炒,加點小蔥。然後把剛才煮菜花的水加進來,燜一下,半分鐘就行。此搭配,超下飯。
155 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-06-15 19:26:28

这种风格好想香港有本欧阳某写的《香港味道》,但是写的不够流畅
156 : GS(14)@2012-06-16 10:43:13

這些滿多人看的
157 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-06-16 15:44:50

财经类报纸还是喜欢经济观察和21世纪经济报道
158 : GS(14)@2012-06-16 20:48:09

157樓提及
财经类报纸还是喜欢经济观察和21世纪经济报道


我喜歡第一財經雜誌
159 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-06-29 10:41:31

昨天晚上锻炼路过书摊,看见好多时尚杂志在卖,只是没有红秀,老板说红秀卖完了,很好卖。5块钱介绍时尚的杂志真是奇特,这个价钱什么金融风暴什么欧债危机,都是浮云了,
160 : 承天(1379)@2012-06-29 10:46:26

157樓提及
财经类报纸还是喜欢经济观察和21世纪经济报道
一樣
161 : GS(14)@2012-06-30 10:33:48

157樓提及
财经类报纸还是喜欢经济观察和21世纪经济报道


same as your thought
162 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-07-04 22:03:04

http://finance.sina.com.cn/hy/20120703/174512468392.shtml开新刊了
163 : GS(14)@2012-07-04 22:04:05

呢份好貴
164 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-07-15 11:43:47

红秀、timeout都有潜力,几个职员的微博看出这个单位的人都很闲适
165 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-07-15 11:46:01

业务做的还不错,王波明也有点范,上下基本和气融融,外部关系也不错,关键是新媒体的冲击,传统媒体的走势会怎样,玩 不好是要玩死的
166 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-07-15 11:53:07

電子雜誌未成商業化是肯定的
167 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-07-15 22:07:30

三周年刊的非凡成绩证明了红秀GRAZIA品牌在中国的成功运营,作为国内广销的国际高端时尚双周刊,红秀GRAZIA每期发行1,162,000册。根据2011年第四季度开元调查报告显示:红秀GRAZIA在北京、广州、杭州的增长率达到两位数。
红秀GRAZIA,以其独树一帜的编辑风格深受读者和广告商青睐,它提供了多方位的推广平台,除了杂志载体它还拥有超过300万独立访问量的官方网站www.grazia.com.cn。今年4月,红秀GRAZIA IPAD版本将面世,全国各地活动也如火如荼展开中,例如多城市路演及时尚课堂。GRAZIA男刊更是在众多精彩纷呈的红秀GRAZIA别册中脱颖而出,深受欢迎。

  “我们所取得的优良成绩显示我们品牌正朝着积极正确的方向发展,我们将继续开拓红秀GRAZIA品牌力量,为我们的读者和广告客户发展一个多方位推广平台”财讯传媒集团与Mondadori的中国合资公司董事长Fabrizio Lo Cicero表示。
168 : GS(14)@2012-07-15 23:11:52

http://www.grazia.com.cn/
紅秀
169 : GS(14)@2012-08-11 17:09:21

估唔到財訊搞到單大野出來
http://finance.china.com.cn/stoc ... 120810/940619.shtml
證券市場週刊曝張裕「農殘門」10日宣佈延期出版




《證券市場週刊》封面(來源:資料圖)

  中國網8月10日訊(記者 孫毅)《證券市場週刊》今日宣佈,原定於8月11日出版的第29期雜誌「因故延遲出版」。據悉,該刊今日在其官方微博上宣佈,新一期雜誌將刊登封面文章《張裕「農殘」》(參見中國網財經相關報導:媒體稱張裕葡萄酒檢測出農藥殘留 股價逼近跌停),受此消息影響,張裕A股價今日大跌9.83%,同時創出歷史第二大的單日成交量。

  另據媒體報導,張裕A董秘曲為民在緊急召開針對投資者電話會議中表示,公司將出台措施打消市場疑慮,這些舉措包括:正在聯繫深交所近期發佈澄清公告;將於近期聯繫中央電視台某節目組,進行「配合宣傳」;將國家食品檢測部門對公司葡萄酒的檢測報告投放到各個市場上去等等。

  然而,《證券市場週刊》新一期雜誌延遲出版,與該刊對張裕「農殘門」的報導是否有關,目前尚不得而知。

  據證券市場週刊上述報導,三家國內葡萄酒上市公司的十款葡萄酒在經過國家食品質量監督檢驗中心檢測後,各款葡萄酒均檢出多菌靈或甲霜靈農藥殘留。其中,張裕葡萄酒殘留值超過另兩家。據相關專家介紹,多菌靈為美國禁用的農藥,有導致肝癌的風險。
170 : GS(14)@2012-08-11 17:09:53

http://xueqiu.com/5409716594/22100088
Thunderoar:
回覆@歲寒知松柏: 嗯,《財經》和《證券市場週刊》都是財訊傳媒下的刊物,老闆是王波明。http://www.seecmedia.net/
08-10 16:44
回覆

歲寒知松柏:
回覆@Thunderoar: 財讀傳媒的大股東是聯辦控股,原名「證券交易所研究設計聯合辦公室」(簡稱「聯辦」),由九家全國性非銀行金融機構發起和集資,於1989年3月15日成立。1991年更名為「中國證券市場研究設計中心」,由國家體改委主管,仍沿用「聯辦」簡稱(取義「大家聯合起來辦事」)。
08-10 16:57
回覆
171 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-08-13 14:47:37

浅谈财讯传媒(0205.hk)(2012-01-28 21:29:05)转载▼标签: 杂谈 分类: 调研感受
最近涨了不少,不知道原因。看了下,谈点感受:

1.公司和现代传播类似,属平面媒体,主营收入依赖广告,发行一般不赚钱,发行量只作为广告价格筹码。但财讯有1.25亿独家代理权类无形资产,不知财讯是否拥有刊物所有权还是只是广告代理?中视金桥是将代理相关费用计入成本,所以显得毛利率低且有波动。财讯毛利率较高,但费用率也很高,尤其是营销费用,这点和现代传播相符,所以净利率很难大幅提高。财讯人均工资不算高,不知未来是否有上涨压力。
2. 11年中报时财讯有3.3亿净资产,但其中包括1.25亿代理权、1.19亿商誉这样的“水货”。上半年2亿收入,现金0.83亿,贷款0.24亿,应付主要股东0.86亿,应收类2.17亿,应付贸易款只有0.39亿,其他应付及预提费用0.79亿没有明细说明。过往几年业绩和现金流并不好,估计也贷不到款,发过可转债。
3.其他应付及预提费用10年底明显增加,但没有明细说明,如果预提费用过大有可能从去年底开始藏利润,税率似乎也偏高,还有1.8亿税项亏损未来可充抵。公司现金流不好,利润基数本来就低,所以调节释放业绩的可能性很大,需要侧面了解短期是否有再融资需求。
4.原《财经》主编胡舒立女士09年底带着整个团队离开财讯传媒,加盟财新传媒。

对公司业务不是很了解,希望有了解这公司的朋友能指点一下。
172 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-08-13 23:09:51

http://www.huabook.com/thread-15211-1-1.html
173 : GS(14)@2012-08-14 09:28:59

本野幾靚
174 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-08-17 16:57:12

业绩出来了,汤财兄分析一下了
175 : GS(14)@2012-08-17 22:40:52

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20120817172_C.pdf
盈利增70%,至1,800萬,債較重

銷售及分銷成本(98,237) (101,939)

應收貿易賬款8 207,175 175,157
業務回顧
二零一二年上半年中國宏觀經濟形勢不容樂觀,經濟回落趨勢日漸明顯。但財
訊傳媒集團依然在穩定中獲得收入增長,二零一二年上半年同比收入增長約
12%,營業收入共錄得約港幣23,080萬元,再次創造了中期報告營業收入歷史的
新高。利潤錄得約港幣1,910萬元,同比利潤增長約達到35%。
《Caijing財經》雜誌作為本集團的旗艦,上半年營業收入增長依然強勁,同比增
長達到25%,再次捍衛了《Caijing財經》雜誌作為中國大陸財經類雜誌絕對第一
的榮譽。
作為中國最大的汽車類雜誌,《China Auto Pictorial中國汽車畫報》在中國汽車業
銷售趨緩的形勢下,二零一二年上半年仍然取得了營業收入同比增長6%的成
績。而本集團的另一本汽車類刊物,《Autocar動感駕馭》也取得了營業收入增長,
同比增長8%。
作為本集團時尚類的領軍刊物,《Grazia紅秀》已經成為中國時尚類刊物的一線
品牌雜誌。在中國奢侈品市場日益發展的背景下,二零一二年上半年《Grazia
紅秀》雜誌取得了45%的營業收入增長佳績。本集團生活消費類雜誌,《TimeOut
消費導報》英文版在二零一二年上半年也取得了52%的營業收入增長。另一本
《HisLife他生活》的營業收入增長也達到23%。而僅僅創刊半年餘的《La Revue Du
Vin de France葡萄酒評論》雜誌營業收入亦有增長並獲得業內良好的認知。
中國二零一二年上半年的股市極為低迷,但在此種不利情形之下,本集團面向
證券市場的雜誌,《CapitalWeek證券市場週刊》仍然憑藉專業的金融證券報道,
獲得了10%增長的營業收入。類似的,本集團的另一本面向營銷市場的雜誌,
《VMarketing China成功營銷》亦取得了營業收入的增長,且增長比率達到29%。
雖然二零一二年上半年的經濟形勢不甚理想,但受到倫敦奧運會的影響,體育
市場卻較為活躍。本集團的體育類刊物《Sports Illustrated體育畫報》上半年營業收
入取得了同比45%的良好業績。
綜上所言,雖然受到經濟環境的一定影響,但憑藉多年來經營成功的品牌,本
集團仍然在不利的形勢中取得了營業收入的增長和利潤的大幅提高,這得益
於本集團運營團隊的效率以及各位股東的有力支持。
前景與展望
儘管二零一二年整體的宏觀經濟不容樂觀,但我們相信發展仍然是未來經濟
的主旋律。而本集團也必將順應這種發展的潮流,為社會創造更多的價值,為
股東創造更多的財富。
...
由於本集團某些雜誌的廣告及推廣開支減少,銷售及分銷成本降低3.6%至9,820
萬港元。行政開支增加29.9%至2,700萬港元,此乃歸因於工資上漲、近年推出的
雜誌需增聘人手以處理廣告業務以及北京新辦公室的折舊及租賃開支增加。
176 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-08-18 06:21:12

结余及现金 21,574 比较上期98,117,少接近8000万,怎么回事
177 : GS(14)@2012-08-18 11:33:50

176樓提及
结余及现金 21,574 比较上期98,117,少接近8000万,怎么回事

應收一間聯合控制實體款項52,95 6 45,76 4
應收貿易賬款8 207,175 175,157
其他應付款項及預提費用71,783 84,530
應付關連公司款項2,868 7,025
應付稅項18,88 0 21,62 4
來自直接母公司之貸款9,417 63,325

還了很5,400萬給母公司,另外應收壓了3,200萬
178 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-08-19 10:05:14

现金很少,还大手给母公司还钱
179 : GS(14)@2012-08-19 11:02:14

178樓提及
现金很少,还大手给母公司还钱


母公司在股價上可能出了不少力
180 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-08-26 09:03:33

这个价格不用护盘吧,预提费用减少1000万,这个预提费用是什么?
181 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-08-26 11:00:43

180樓提及
这个价格不用护盘吧,预提费用减少1000万,这个预提费用是什么?


我由2002年的報表查到現在,這金額由差不多沒有,到現在接近9,000萬,可能都是預訂費之類的東西
182 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-09-09 15:31:55

今天买了本红秀,很厚的一本,印刷质量和纸张质量都很好,这种杂志5元一本,每个购买者都有捡便宜的感觉,内容基本是广告为主,照片拍的很精致,业不容易,要是这些名牌真收广告费就发达了!
183 : GS(14)@2012-09-09 16:12:01

182樓提及
今天买了本红秀,很厚的一本,印刷质量和纸张质量都很好,这种杂志5元一本,每个购买者都有捡便宜的感觉,内容基本是广告为主,照片拍的很精致,业不容易,要是这些名牌真收广告费就发达了!


香港能10塊賣一本給我看就好了
184 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-10-11 21:37:54

据数据显示,2012年1-7月杂志刊例排名前十位的已经出炉,分别是世界时装之苑6.8亿,周末画报4.8亿,时尚伊人4.7亿,瑞丽服饰美容4.1亿,服饰与美容3.8亿,时尚芭莎3.4亿,瑞丽伊人风尚3.1亿,悦已2.9亿,中国之翼2.5亿,嘉人2.9亿。南航与东航均超2亿。优家画报、第一财经周刊、外滩画报等均在1.5至1.8亿之间。

半年这个数很可观了,红秀加油了
185 : GS(14)@2012-10-11 22:17:05


186 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-10-24 17:14:38

《东方壹周》(The Week)为财讯传媒集团旗下刊物。《东方壹周》创刊于2011年7月。是财讯传媒集团第一本,也是唯一一本周刊类刊物;《东方壹周》在推出的同时,杂志、iPad、iPhone电子阅读、交互式体验网站和微博“自媒体”同步上线。
说是准备烧一个亿,属于上市公司不?
187 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-10-24 23:13:17

186樓提及
《东方壹周》(The Week)为财讯传媒集团旗下刊物。《东方壹周》创刊于2011年7月。是财讯传媒集团第一本,也是唯一一本周刊类刊物;《东方壹周》在推出的同时,杂志、iPad、iPhone电子阅读、交互式体验网站和微博“自媒体”同步上线。
说是准备烧一个亿,属于上市公司不?


估計是屬的
188 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-10-30 09:15:47

上面那个图例应该有财经,大致位置在10-12左右,红秀2012年已经进入前20名,一般在17-20名附近,最好的是2月11名,还在财经前面,女性时尚杂志吸金能力很强,广告收入前20名基本都是时尚杂志
189 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-10-30 23:15:39

188樓提及
上面那个图例应该有财经,大致位置在10-12左右,红秀2012年已经进入前20名,一般在17-20名附近,最好的是2月11名,还在财经前面,女性时尚杂志吸金能力很强,广告收入前20名基本都是时尚杂志


你有圖嗎?
190 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2012-10-30 23:35:31

查杂志类广告top20名,每月都有排名
191 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-10-30 23:47:25

190樓提及
查杂志类广告top20名,每月都有排名


想問呢兒有? 我每個月update下
192 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-11-17 13:48:19

http://www.mpfinance.com/htm/finance/20121116/news/ec_goq1.htm
【明報專訊】被視為首富李嘉誠紅顏知己的周凱旋指控內地《財經》雜誌的報導,誣陷她向內地貪官輸送金錢,控告代理該雜誌的上市公司財訊傳媒(0205)誹謗。高院昨裁定財訊傳媒把關不力,未把握機會審視內容便推出市面,須向周賠償65萬元。

被指賄賂內地官員

《財經》於2010年6月7日出版的第265期雜誌內,指原訴人周凱旋向原商務部外資司副司長鄧湛等人提供50萬元諮詢費,以感謝鄧幫助長實獲批一些項目。

特委法官馮柏棟昨在判辭中指報導誹謗成分嚴重,暗指周賄賂貪官。被告負責分發雜誌予訂戶,要對讀者、受訪者與公眾負上一定責任。

馮續指《財經》並非報紙,不用急於發行,被告應有機會在雜誌出版前檢視內容,確保可以「出街」。被告看見該期封面的字句「牽涉華人首富李嘉誠」,理應提高警覺檢視內容。

馮又認為,被告並非無意中散播誹謗,亦未能證明自己對誹謗內容不知情,故須向周賠償,但考慮該書在港發行量每期約400至500本,對周傷害較小,且被告在審訊期間已向原告道歉,再有相同誹謗機會較低,不判處加重賠償及禁制令。周凱旋為本港及內地企業家和慈善家,擔任李嘉誠基金會的董事。
193 : GS(14)@2013-08-30 12:14:23

205
轉虧200萬,債一般
194 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2013-11-17 11:44:11

http://finance.caixin.com/2010-04-30/100140285.html
招商局中国基金2亿元注资华人文化产业投资基金
195 : 飞一样的爱情小说(16171)@2013-11-17 11:46:59

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/international/art/20131117/18511722
入股财新,关注!
196 : pcp7838(1616)@2014-03-21 01:03:03

下半年業績較好.
但全年計仍倒退.
債一般,盈利七百萬.
197 : greatsoup38(830)@2014-03-21 01:31:04

205

盈利降一半,至1,300萬,輕債
198 : GS(14)@2014-09-03 02:08:33

大股東賣盤
199 : GS(14)@2014-09-04 10:44:39

http://www.discuss.com.hk/archiver/?tid-23717478.html
200 : GS(14)@2014-09-04 23:56:27

虧損增130倍,至2,600萬,輕債
201 : GS(14)@2014-09-24 15:33:47

網上支付
202 : GS(14)@2014-09-28 01:39:39

配售3.47億份證股權予顧問,每股69仙,做互聯網支付
203 : GS(14)@2015-03-12 17:46:53

huge loss
204 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-07-13 00:05:00

205認購8193股份
205 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-07-13 00:06:27

205認購14億股,又配售26億股@0.1

206 : GS(14)@2015-07-17 17:05:18

80 and 205 exchange shares
207 : Winston(53949)@2015-07-17 18:54:25

呢只近期好多動作,究竟邊個係幕後老闆?
208 : Winston(53949)@2015-07-17 22:51:22

玩轉型,做放數、證券買賣

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20150717898_C.pdf
209 : Winston(53949)@2015-07-17 23:01:55

香港證監會第一類牌照,受規管活動,範圍包括:

為客戶提供股票及股票期權的買賣/經紀服務
為客戶買賣債券
為客戶買入/沽出互惠基金及單位信託基金
配售及包銷證券
210 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-07-18 23:27:04

變左康健系
211 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-08-11 16:24:11

買電子商務平台
212 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-08-21 15:09:28

1供3@0.1
213 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-08-29 13:31:00

虧損降2成,至2,000萬,1.4億現金
214 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-09-10 00:57:07

改做1供5,每股合併後10仙
215 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-09-10 00:57:24

2合1
216 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-09-28 23:15:13

Bubbles and troubles in Hong Kong
24th September 2015

As readers may recall, last year, Lerado Group (Holding) Co Ltd (Lerado, 1225) announced the proposed sale of its core business of baby strollers and infant car seats to Canadian listed firm Dorel Industries Inc (Dorel) for HK$930m. Lerado was planning to squat on most of the cash proceeds and only pay out $0.30 per share, or $228m. For this reason, we opposed the sale, because of concern that Lerado would become a cash shell trading at a discount to its net asset value. Your editor, David Webb, is a disclosed substantial shareholder currently holding over 8%. However, the sale was approved by shareholders on 16-Sep-2014 and completed on 31-Oct-2014.

Our concerns have now proven justified, culminating in current egregious proposals not just by Lerado but by other listed companies. We hope to stop them, if the regulators will require certain parties to play fairer. This article is long and complicated, and we thought about breaking it into pieces, but the picture becomes clearer if you assemble the whole jigsaw, so here it is. Apart from Lerado, this article covers transactions by numerous other listed companies in which you may have an interest, and several billion US dollars of bubbles.

So pour yourself a large coffee and let's get started.
Lerado share movements

The first sign of movement in Lerado came on 25-Nov-2014. Intelligence Hong Kong Group Ltd (IHK) is a company owned 68.27% by Lerado Chairman Henry Huang Ying Yuan (Mr Huang) and 31.73% by his wife, Jamy Huang Chen Li Chu. IHK owns 148,353,540 shares which was 19.50% of Lerado at 31-Dec-2014, before the recent dilutions. On 25-Nov-2014, our system shows those shares moving from CTBC Asia Ltd (the local subsidiary of a Taiwan bank) where they had rested since 30-Dec-2009, to Convoy Investment Services Ltd (Convoy IS), the brokerage sister of Convoy Financial Holdings Ltd (Convoy FH, 1019). Convoy IS is in the process of trying to list on the GEM in the form of CIS Holdings Ltd, which filed an application proof on 23-Mar-2015, sponsored by Quam Capital Ltd.

There can be any number of reasons for such transfers, but one possibility is that the shares are security for a loan. Banks and brokers are exempt from disclosing security interests in shares pledged to them. It wouldn't be so worrying were it not for the fact that Mark Mak Kwong Yiu (Mr Mak), CEO of Convoy FH and a director of Convoy IS, is also claimed to be an INED of Lerado since 25-Apr-2014. Mr Mak joined Convoy as CFO in 2002.

You may recall that in Some bubbles for New Year (31-Dec-2014) we warned about a bubble then called Finsoft Corporation (Finsoft, 8018), which was then trading at $1.235 (adjusted for the subsequent 2:1 split), with a market value of HK$4.94bn, or 110 times its net asset value. Convoy FH owned over 5% of Finsoft. The stock didn't stop there though. It reached a high of $2.92 on 20-May-2015, when Finsoft was valued at HK$11.68bn. Since then, it has crashed 94.8% to its close on Wednesday (23-Sep-2015) at $0.139, down a net 88.7% since our article. Finsoften aren't what they seem.

The Finsoft bubble allowed Convoy FH to book unrealised gains of HK$238.4m for 2014. It sold 40m shares (2%) of Finsoft on 20-Jan-2015 for about $73.5m (split-adjusted: $0.919 per share) and went below the 5% disclosure threshold. The sale was purportedly on-market but it was far larger than market volume that day of 1.925m shares so the disclosure must be wrong.

Returning to Lerado, another large chunk of 96,805,800 shares (12.71% at 31-Dec-2014) was held by Hwa Foo Investment Ltd (Hwa Foo), 30% controlled by Patrick Chen Chun Chieh (Mr Chen), an Executive Director and the son of the late co-founder of Lerado, and 70% by his mother. He joined the board on 3-Apr-2008 following his father's death on 14-Feb-2008. On 8-Sep-2014 those shares moved from HSBC (where they had rested since 27-Jun-2007) to UBS Securities HK Ltd , and then, more interestingly, they moved to small broker Win Fung Securities Ltd (Win Fung) on 9-Dec-2014, two weeks after IHK's holding moved to Convoy IS. So the Huangs and the Chens had moved custody of 32.21% of Lerado after leaving it untouched for years. More on Win Fung below.
Dispute with Dorel

First let's mention that on 10-Feb-2015, Lerado announced that it was in dispute with Dorel over the final net asset value of the business, which may lead to a partial repayment of the purchase price, in an unspecified "significant" amount.

On 27-Mar-2015, Lerado announced that it could not reach agreement with Dorel, so under the terms of the sale they had agreed to go to arbitration with an independent accountant, not yet appointed. In the 2014 annual results announcement on 30-Mar-2015, Lerado revealed that the disputed amount was HK$307m, which accordingly had been booked as a liability in the balance sheet. Still, Lerado ended 2014 with cash of $797m or HK$1.048 per share and no bank borrowings. The disputed amount was about $0.404 per share, so even if they have to pay all of that back, there would have been $0.644 per share of cash, and net assets of $633m or $0.832 per share.

On 20-Jul-2015, Lerado announced that it and Dorel had appointed RSM Nelson Wheeler as the independent accountant to determine the disputed items. Two months later, the result has not yet been announced. If Lerado were to win all of it, then the pro forma net asset value at 31-Dec-2014 increases to $1.236 per share.
Lerado swaps shares for property from CIFG

The day after the results, 31-Mar-2015, Lerado announced the acquisition of a property in Guangzhou from China Investment and Finance Group Ltd (CIFG, 1126) for HK$39m, but despite being flush with cash, only HK$1m was payable in cash and the rest in 76m new Lerado shares (9.49% of then existing shares) issued under the general mandate at $0.50 each, again a discount to cash and NAV per share.

The intended use of the property is as premises for the residual business of Lerado, which is mainly mobility scooters for the elderly and disabled, or what it calls "medical products". However, even if intended use of the property sounds plausible, the issue of shares at a discount to net cash and NAV was entirely inappropriate. The deal completed on 17-Apr-2015, giving CIFG a 8.59% stake in Lerado. Our system shows that CIFG deposited the shares into CCASS with Astrum Capital Management Ltd (Astrum) on 5-May-2015.

CIFG is not a regular listed company, but is a closed-end investment company listed under Chapter 21. This prohibits taking controlling positions (over 30%) in companies, and requires it to adhere to its stated investment restrictions. We asked the Stock Exchange why CIFG was allowed to invest in property in the first place. The result was this "clarification announcement" on 7-Aug-2015, admitting that investment properties were outside the scope of CIFG's Investment Policy and blaming it on the former Chairman and Vice Chairman. They had been removed by the Board on 14-Sep-2012, 6 months after becoming uncontactable.
Lerado begins money-lending and stockbroking

The "Prospects" section of Lerado's 2014 results indicated a new direction. The board had "concrete financial knowledge and background" and had decided to diversify into "securities trading, money lending business and other financial and property investment." It revealed that on 23-Feb-2015, Lerado had agreed to buy an unnamed target company, for HK$1.6m plus its net asset value. The target was a securities broker and planned to engage in margin financing business after the acquisition was completed. On 17-Apr-2015, Lerado announced that it would reallocate HK$300m of its cash pile for these activities.

On 2-Jul-2015 Lerado announced the name of the target, Yim Cheong Share Broking and Investment Co Ltd, and that the acquisition was completed that day. This was then renamed Black Marble Securities Ltd (Black Marble Securities), and Lerado intended to pump HK$200m into it. This small, nearly-dormant broker at that point had a minimal two licensed staff and minimal holdings in its CCASS account shown here.

Policy note: This highlights a defect in the Listing Rules: if you make a "Major Acquisition" (over 25% of your total assets), then you need shareholders' approval, but if you buy or establish a small company and then pump your funds into this new line of business, then this is completely exempt, even though shareholders are exposed to very new and different risks.

Lerado had also established BlackMarble Capital Ltd, incorporated 28-Jan-2015, a licensed money-lender. The application was gazetted on 27-Feb-2015 and the license was granted on 22-May-2015.
Lerado option grants

On 12-Feb-2015, Lerado granted options over 75m new shares (equivalent to 9.86% of the existing shares), of which half went to an unspecified number of employees, and half to "5 consultants". The options were exercisable for 2 years at $0.592 per share. It makes no sense whatever to be granting options which exercise at less than net cash per share, and much less than NAV per share, diluting both. Staff could have been incentivised with a restricted share purchase scheme to use the company's cash to buy stock in the market, which closed at $0.58 on the date of the option grants.

Despite being options of 2 years duration, 48m of the 75m were quickly exercised. We arranged an inspection of the share register on 14-Apr-2015 to discover who had been in such a hurry. We combined that with two filings of allotments by Lerado, which did not name the recipients. Here are the results:
Shareholder   Shares   Date entered   Status
Chu Chun Ting   7,500,000   11-Mar-2015   1 employee, 1 consultant
Kung Yiu Fai   7,500,000   11-Mar-2015
Chan Kam Fuk   7,500,000   17-Mar-2015   employee
Law Yee Man, Thomas   3,000,000   17-Mar-2015   employee
Wang Zewei   7,500,000   20-Mar-2015   consultant
Wong Sin Fai, Cynthia   7,500,000   20-Mar-2015   consultant
Kwok Wai Leung   7,500,000   2-Apr-2015   consultant
Total so far   48,000,000   14-Apr-2015   3 employees, 4 consultants

That leaves 1 more consultant who has not exercised the options. We recognise some of these names:

  Chan Kam Fuk is Dominic Chan Kam Fuk (Dominic Chan), proprietor of accountancy firm Dominic K.F. Chan & Co. He was appointed as Company Secretary of Lerado on 1-Aug-2014.
  Thomas Law Yee Man (Mr Law), an architect, is an INED of two listed companies, AcrossAsia Ltd (AcrossAsia, 8061) and Sage International Group Ltd (Sage, 8082). Here's a connection: Mr Law joined AcrossAsia on 28-May-2010, replacing Mr Mak of Convoy, who resigned as INED four days earlier. Perhaps Mr Mak helped to arrange Mr Law as his replacement at AcrossAsia. And here's another connection: Leung Tin Fu (Mr Leung), founder and Chairman of Sage until 14-Dec-2007, is also a pre-IPO holder of 10% of Convoy IS. Dominic Chan was an INED of Sage, resigning the same day as Mr Leung. We don't know what role Mr Law plays as an "employee" of Lerado.

  Cynthia Wong Sin Fai (Cynthia Wong) is a solicitor who consults for Robertsons and has been Company Secretary of Suncorp Technologies Ltd (Suncorp, 1063) since 15-Feb-2011. We'll come back to that. We don't know what role she plays as a "consultant" to Lerado.

  Wang Zewei (Mr Wang) is the name of the person who in 2014 sold 22.5% of Sincere Smart International Ltd to Hao Wen Holdings Ltd (Hao Wen, 8019) for HK$69m, valuing the business at $306.7m when it had net assets of $2.9m. Two other companies, Capital VC Ltd (Capital VC, 2324) and Unity Investments Holdings Ltd (Unity, 0913), bought 14% and 29.5% for $42.7m and $90m respectively, without naming the vendor(s). For more, see our article Hao Wen, Capital VC and Unity today. We don't know what role Mr Wang plays as a "consultant" to Lerado. He was the only mainlander on the list, and he gave an office address at 10 Gaoxin South 4th Road, Nanshan District, Shenzhen.

Incidentally, Mr Mak was also an Executive Director of Computech Holdings Ltd, now named China Mobile Games and Cultural Investment Ltd (CMG, 8081), from 30-Jul-2008 to 28-Apr-2014, three days after he joined Lerado. In fact he was the only ED of CMG from 17-Sep-2009 to 8-Nov-2011. The Convoy FH IPO prospectus dated 29-Jun-2010 said that despite this, Mr Mak considered Convoy his main focus and "has devoted more than 80% of his time to his duties" at Convoy during 2007-2009 and he would continue to allocate a similar proportion of his time to Convoy after listing. That basically meant that CMG only had about 0.2 Executive Directors!

Win Fung acted as the placing agent for CMG in a placing on 22-Apr-2015.

The option shares were deposited into CCASS via various brokers as follows. Click on the dates to see the movements in CCASS:
Date   Broker   Number
15-Apr-2015   SBI China Capital Financial Services Ltd (SBI CCFS)   7,500,000
29-Apr-2015   Win Fung   7,500,000
8-May-2015   Gransing Securities Co Ltd (Gransing)   7,500,000
27-May-2015   Gransing   7,500,000
24-Jun-2015   Prudential Brokerage Ltd   7,500,000
4-Aug-2015   Convoy IS   3,000,000
13-Aug-2015   UOB Kay Hian (HK) Ltd   7,500,000
Total      48,000,000

It appears likely that Mr Law deposited his 3m shares with Convoy IS, as all the other deposits matched the 7.5m option grants.

Incidentally, the other pre-IPO investor in 10% of Convoy IS is Howard Jiang Qi Hang, who featured in several previous investigations on Webb-site Reports.

Gransing is a name you will see again - it has acted 4 times as a placing agent for Convoy FH, in a bond placing on 21-Jan-2015 and a bond placing on 16-Sep-2014 as well as two unannounced bond placings on 8-Jul-2014 and 14-Nov-2014 mentioned in Convoy FH's annual report. Gransing's client list in Webb-site Who's Who also shows that it has acted as placing agent for Hao Wen, Suncorp and WLS Holdings Ltd (WLS, 8021), a company which we cover below.
CIFG-Lerado cross-holding

On 22-Apr-2015, probably in response to queries from the regulators, Lerado made a "voluntary announcement" trying, and in our view failing, to justify its decision to use shares rather than cash to buy the property from CIFG.

On 21-May-2015, Lerado announced that it had agreed to subscribe for 130m shares (12.44%) of CIFG at at $0.275, or $35.75m in total, setting up a cross-holding between the two, as CIFG still held 8.59% of Lerado. This was, incidentally, highly dilutive to CIFG, a 66.9% discount to its NAV per share at 30-Apr-2015 of $0.83. This fact was omitted from the CIFG announcement. The issue completed on 2-Jun-2015. Our system indicates that Lerado deposited 70m CIFG shares with Gransing on 23-Jun-2015, and deposited 60m CIFG shares with Kingston Securities Ltd (Kingston) the next day.

On 11-Aug-2015, Lerado cut its holding in CIFG from 128.8m shares (12.32%) to 103.392m shares (9.89%), selling the shares at an average $0.196, a 29% loss. As the stake was cut below 10%, Lerado is no longer a "substantial shareholder" and "connected person" of CIFG under the Listing Rules.

Policy note: the disclosure threshold for substantial shareholdings in HK-listed companies was reduced by law from 10% to 5% on 1-Apr-2003, but the Listing Rules have never been updated to match this.
Lerado issues shares to CAID (0048)

On 26-May-2015, Lerado announced the acquisition of Brilliant Summit Ltd from China Automotive Interior Decoration Holdings Ltd (CAID, 0048), for HK$45m, but again, not using any of the cash pile. Instead, it issued 75m shares at $0.60 each, or 7.82% of the enlarged issued shares of Lerado, further diluting existing shareholders. The target was "engaged in the trading of garment accessories, such as nylon tape, polyester tape and polyester string". It had net assets of just $7.24m and a net profit in the year to 31-Mar-2015 of $0.9m.

In giving reasons, Lerado claimed that "certain fabric products and expertise knowledge of the Target Group can be utilised in the Group's business of manufacturing medial products, including but not limited to powered and non powered mobility aid, wheel chairs and other durable equipment". Stretching the polyester tape further, they claimed that the Target Group's "sizable clientele" would allow Lerado to "penetrate into a new market." This rather ignores the fact that Lerado already had its own expertise in sourcing fabrics for baby strollers, infant car seats and mobility aids over many years.

CAID had purchased Brilliant Summit from its manager, a Mr Cheung Ngai, for HK$42m on 15-May-2013. He apparently goes by the name of "Elman" and apart from Brilliant Summit (products here), he runs another company in the same line of business called San Wah Holdings Ltd. CAID, announcing the sale of Brilliant Summit to Lerado, said that "as a result of the constantly increasing costs of sales and competition, the Company is of the view that its business is not expected to grow at its current rate without further investments and developments." CAID intended to hold the Lerado shares "to achieves earnings in the form of capital appreciation."

The transaction completed on 16-Jun-2015. We can see that CAID deposited the 75m new Lerado shares with Win Fung in two batches, 40m on 23-Jun-2015 and 35m on 14-Jul-2015. Of all the brokers it could use, why this little firm, and why is this the same firm in which Mr Chen and one of the option holders also deposited their Lerado shares? The shares are positioned in the same custodian ahead of an important vote on Lerado's future. To summarise those deposits of shares with Win Fung:
Shareholder   Shares   Deposit date
Mr Chen (Hwa Foo)   96,805,800   9-Dec-2014
An exercised option holder   7,500,000   29-Apr-2015
CAID   40,000,000   23-Jun-2015
CAID   35,000,000   14-Jul-2015
Total   179,305,800   

CAID's new INED or mooncake coordinator

For some light relief, on 4-Sep-2015 CAID appointed a new INED and audit committee member, Ms Adeline Ng Li La, who "has over 10 years of experience in human resources and corporate management". She also has a Certificate of Human Resources Management from HK Baptist University and is "a senior administrative officer of a renowned international technology company in Hong Kong". Wow, she sounds highly qualified, doesn't she?

A quick search discovers her Linked In page (copy here). Since May 2015, she has been personal assistant to the General Manager of Amadeus Hong Kong Ltd - and her duties include "supervise the receptionist and the cleaning lady", "coordinate mooncake distribution", "manage pantry cabinet" and planning the Christmas party. Now this of course is all important work, but probably not that relevant to the duties of a listed company director and audit committee member. We wonder how she was introduced to CAID. This is probably not what HKEx had in mind when it started promoting board diversity, but it's what you get when as a regulator, you let controlling shareholders vote on INED elections.
CAID and Convoy

On 30-Jun-2015, CAID announced a placing via Convoy IS, listing the Financial Adviser as Opus Capital Ltd (Opus Capital) and using the full 20% general mandate of 276.48m shares at $0.485, a 19.2% discount to the closing price of $0.60. However, the price then collapsed, and on 9-Jul-2015, they cut the placing price to $0.345, a 42.5% discount to the original closing price. The placing completed on 21-Jul-2015. Our CCASS analysis shows that 125.48m shares were deposited with Astrum, only 68m with Convoy IS and 25m with Kingston, with the remaining 58m to 4 other brokers.

CAID's interim results for 30-Jun-2015 disclosed a huge unrealised gain of RMB 448.6m (HK$561m) on "held-for-trading investments" which then had a market value of RMB564.0m (HK$705m). In other words, a gain of about 389% in 6 months. No normal stock will give you that, but a bubble stock will. Net tangible assets at 30-Jun-2015 were RMB761.9m (HK$952m) or about $0.689 per share, so the investments accounted for 74% of that.

CAID's interim report contains the following statement, which we regard as false and misleading:

"At 30 June 2015, there was no significant investment held by the Group."

Policy note: Some of the listed companies which have recently reported exceptionally large percentage gains on listed securities must own bubble stocks. If you know what stocks a listed company owns, then you would be able to take the SFC's concentration warnings into account and discount those investments to what you regard as fair value, rather than relying on inflated market valuations. But unfortunately, the Stock Exchange and SFC do not require such disclosure, even when inflated listed investments make up the bulk of a companies net assets. They simply rely on the company having to announce losses as inside information after the bubble has burst, rather than telling you that they hold bubble stocks in the first place.

This is despite the fact that Listing Rules Appendix 16 paragraphs 32(4) and 40(2) (or on GEM, Rules 18.41(4) and 18.59) require that companies disclose "significant investments held, their performance during the financial [year/half-year] and their future prospects". It seems that SEHK just doesn't want to enforce this.

Although the Listing Rules which require such disclosure contain no definition of "significant", it should be seen in the context of the size of the holder's balance sheet and therefore the potential impact on shareholder value if the market value of the investments were to change. Whether the investment is "held-for-trading" or as a long-term "available for sale" asset is irrelevant to the potential impact on shareholder value, except for the fact that profits tax applies to trading.

Separately, many listed companies have avoided the notifiable transaction rules in Chapter 14 by declaring themselves to be "in the business" of trading securities. This then allows them to invest as much of their shareholders' money as they like on purchasing "held-for-trading" securities without announcing the transactions, because they are deemed transactions "of a revenue nature in the ordinary and usual course of business" under Listing Rule 14.04(1)(g). The Stock Exchange should close this loophole. Investments in securities, regardless of how they are booked, should be subject to the notifiable transaction rules.

You might wonder then why CAID did not just cash in some of its $705m of investments rather than raise $94.2m in a placing of 20% new shares, claiming that it needed the money. The results failed to identify these spectacular investments, but noted that by 31-Aug-2015, the value had decreased by 23.5% since the end of June. That's about HK$224m of loss.
CIFG and Lerado: parallel open offers

On 17-Aug-2015, Lerado announced a massive 3:1 open offer of new shares at $0.15 each, a 68% discount to the market price of $0.47, with no excess applications. The primary underwriter is Gransing, the Financial Adviser is Octal Capital Ltd (Octal Capital) and the IFA is Opus Capital, the same as the Financial Adviser to CAID.

As we've said before, deep discount open offers are a form of extortion of existing shareholders, because they are faced with the choice of either being heavily diluted economically, or putting in cash to prevent the dilution. Unlike rights issues, the holder does not have the third option of selling his entitlements to recover the discount and thereby mitigate the economic damage. For this reason, the UK Listing Rules include a limit (set decades ago) of not more than a 10% discount on open offers. Hong Kong, still in many ways a developing market, allows this extortion to continue. See UK Listing Rule 9.5.10.

Adding to this abuse is that an open offer often involves no ability for shareholders to make "excess application" for unsubscribed shares. Nor are the unsubscribed shares sold in the market to capture the premium above the issue price for the benefit of passive shareholders. This leaves the underwriter with the benefit of the discount on shares which shareholders cannot or do not subscribe. In these circumstances, the open offer in practice is a conditional placing of deeply discounted shares with the "underwriter", subject to a right of first refusal by existing shareholders pro rata to their holdings.

Gransing cannot end up as a controlling shareholder of Lerado, so it has to have sub-underwriters. From a disclosure of interest, we can see that Capital VC (mentioned above) is a sub-underwriter for 370m shares, or 9.64% of the enlarged capital. Another disclosure shows that Barry Lau Wang Chi is a sub-underwriter for 370m shares. He is a Responsible Officer of Adamas Asset Management (HK) Ltd (Adamas), which will feature below.

On 9-Sep-2015, CIFG announced a huge 8:1 open offer with no excess applicatoins, "underwritten" by Black Marble Securities, which is owned by Lerado. The Financial Adviser to CIFG is Akron Corporate Finance Ltd (Akron) and the IFA is Opus Capital, the same as Lerado's IFA and CAID's FA.

As Lerado owns less than 10% of CIFG, the underwriting is not a "connected transaction". However, it is blatantly clear that Lerado has a "material interest" in the CIFG transaction and should be prohibited from voting in the EGM of CIFG to approve the open offer. Furthermore, Lerado stands to benefit from any unsubscribed shares at the discounted offer price. As there are no excess applications, this is in effect a discounted placement with Lerado subject to clawback by existing holders.Listing Rule 2.15 states:

"Where a transaction or arrangement of an issuer is subject to shareholders' approval under the provisions of the Exchange Listing Rules, any shareholder that has a material interest in the transaction or arrangement shall abstain from voting on the resolution(s) approving the transaction or arrangement at the general meeting."

Correspondingly, we submit that CIFG should not be permitted to vote in the Lerado EGM, because obviously Lerado is engaged in a commercial transaction with CIFG to provide it with funding under the CIFG open offer.
Mr Chen's "disposal" at a 53% loss

Now, according to a disclosure of interest, on 9-Sep-2015, Mr Chen, ED of Lerado, sold his entire interest of 97,823,800 shares, including a personal holding of 1,018,000 shares and those held by Hwa Foo. Some of it was on-exchange at $0.25, but most of it was off-market at $0.22 because total market volume that day was only 7,625,800 shares. When we look at CCASS movements, on the settlement date of 11-Sep-2015 we see his personal holding of 1,018,000 shares leaving Core Pacific Yamaichi, and only 2,805,800 shares leaving Win Fung, and there have been no reductions in Win Fung's balance since then. So it appears that the other 94,000,000 shares were transferred, off market, to other clients of Win Fung and remain there.

As an ED of Lerado, Mr Chen would have been prohibited from voting in favour of the proposed open offer, so it is a matter of great concern that these shares may have been placed in friendly hands, along with the positions held by CIFG and CAID, to vote in favour (if they are not required to abstain).

This disposal, at a deep discount to cash and to net asset value, of a key block of shares, really makes no economic sense for Mr Chen. If he was unhappy with the effects of the proposed open offer, he could have joined us in voting against the proposal. He was only prohibited from voting in favour. At a purported disposal price (for most of his shares) of $0.22, he appears to have accepted a loss of 53% since the open offer was announced. We find this hard to believe. Accordingly we urge the SFC to investigate the true nature of the transactions and who has bought the shares. We would be surprised if the "buyers" had not been mentioned elsewhere in this article.

China 33 Media (8087)

There's another open offer we need to tell you about, and the background is this.

On 26-Jan-2015, China 33 Media Group Ltd (C33M, 8087) announced that its controlling shareholder, Lizhong Ltd (Lizhong), which had held 243.756m shares (43.13%) had 5 days earlier pledged 192m shares (32.00%) to a lender and on 22-Jan to 26-Jan Lizhong had sold its remaining 66.756m shares (11.13%) in the market. They didn't say who the lender was, but a subsequent disclosure of interest shows that it is funds managed by Adamas, which was mentioned above. Our analysis shows the average price received by Lizhong in the 3 days was $0.4192 per share, a total of $27.98m. Now, why did Lizhong need to sell those shares and borrow that money by pledging the remainder? Read on.

On 10-Apr-2015, CIFG, via its 100% subsidiary New Express Investment Ltd, agreed to subscribe 120m shares (16.67%) of China 33 Media Group Ltd (C33M, 8087) at $0.22, exhausting its general mandate, for a total of HK$26.4m. The deal completed on 22-Apr-2015, diluting Lizhong from 32.00% to 26.67%. Our system shows that on 6-May-2015, CIFG deposited its C33M shares with Gransing.

Three months later, on 24-Jul-2015, C33M announced a massive 7 for 1 open offer at $0.10, a 75.6% discount to the closing price of $0.41, without excess applications. The Financial Adviser was Octal Capital (the same as for Lerado's open offer), and the underwriters were Gransing, Kingston and RHB OSK Securities HK Ltd (RHB OSK). The IFA again was Opus Capital, the same as for Lerado. Lizhong undertook to take up part of its entitlement amounting to 844,799,700 shares, which to the nearest thousand is 4.4 shares for each share it owns, not 7. That would cost it $84.5m, but of course, it had already raised about $27.98m by selling shares in the market in January, so there was a funding gap of $56.5m, or about $0.294 per existing share, which it might have borrowed from Adamas funds.

If CIFG was to maintain its holding, it would have to put in another $0.70 for each share it held. It had sold a few shares but still held 113.622m (15.78%). The share price dived 26.8% on the day after the news, but the prospect strangely seemed to delight CIFG, which undertook not to sell any more and to take up all its entitlements to 795.354m shares at a cost of $79.5m. However, on 4-Aug-2015, C33M announced that it and Gransing had agreed to cut CIFG's commitment to 290m shares. As a result CIFG would be diluted to 7.01% of C33M.

Under GEM Listing Rule 10.39(1) or Main Board Listing Rule 7.24(5)(a), if an open offer is at a ratio higher than 1 for 2 then it must be approved by "independent" shareholders excluding the controlling shareholder or, if none, the executive directors and their associates. So the largest holder of C33M, Lizhong, could not vote in favour at the EGM, as it is an associate of the Chairman.

How convenient, then, that there was another "independent" shareholder who could vote in favour. Look at the EGM results on 31-Aug-2015. CIFG almost certainly voted its 113.622m shares in favour, and only 2,050 other shares voted in favour, while 28,638,000 shares voted against. The open offer was thereby approved, and the prospectus was published on 14-Sep-2015.
Update, 26-Sep-2015

The C33M open offer prospectus discloses that several sub-underwriters have been engaged. Gransing, with a commitment of 1,905,200,300 shares (33.07% of the enlarged shares), engaged SBI CCFS for 800m shares (13.89%) and 3 other unnamed sub-underwriters for a total of 540m shares (9.37%), each with less than 5% of enlarged shares. RHB OSK, with a commitment of 500m shares (8.68%) had engaged 2 unnamed sub-underwriters to take all of them.

Kingston, with an underwriting commitment of 1500m shares (26.04%), had engaged but then terminated 4 sub-underwriters to take all of it. One was Harvest Aspect International Ltd, which a filing shows is owned by William Yu Tsung Chin, for 644.64m shares (11.19%). The remaining 3 each had less than 5% but totaled 14.85%. After these 4 were terminated, Kingston engaged a single sub-underwriter for the whole lot. Guess who? Black Marble Securities (owned by Lerado).

SBI CCFS and Black Marble have each failed to file a disclosure of interest.

The denominator in the calculation of percentage for disclosure of interests under s308 of the Securities and Futures Ordinance is based on the number of "issued shares", not the number which may be in issue in the future. So in a 7:1 open offer, there are new shares equivalent to 700% of existing shares. All the filings by the underwriters and sub-underwriters in the C33M case use the wrong denominator (the number of shares which will be in issue if the open offer completes) and hence show the wrong percentage, which should be multiplied by a factor of 8. Anyone with an underwriting commitment equal to 5% or more of the existing shares (in the case of C33M, 36m shares) should make a filing, and clearly, that has not happened, with several sub-underwriters of Gransing, RHB OSK and Kingston. The SFC should require them to correct their filings and to procure filings by their sub-underwriters, including those which have now been terminated.
GreaterChina Professional Services (8193)

Now let's look at how Lerado (via Black Marble Securities) and Akron (Financial Adviser to CIFG on its open offer) have been working together in another transaction.

GreaterChina Professional Services Ltd (GPS, 8193) is listed on GEM and owns Greater China Appraisal Ltd, which values real estate and other assets. On 13-Nov-2014, GPS began to deviate from its core business, by buying 80% of Golden Vault Ltd, which indirectly owns a mainland advertising business with in-elevator poster frames and LCD displays in Changshu, PRC, for HK$110m in promissory notes.

Golden Vault had turnover of RMB 7.34m in 2013 and net assets of RMB 5.73m (HK$7.16m) at 30-Sep-2014. This business was valued by Roma Appraisals Ltd at $184m, because, hey, elevators are difficult to get into - especially when they are going up. That valuer is owned by Roma Group Ltd (Roma, 8072) and the financial adviser on the profit forecast was Akron.

A disclosure of interest shows that on 11-May-2015, China Environmental Energy Investment Ltd (CEEI, 0986) increased its holding in GPS from 2.63% to 5.13%, buying 21.495m shares at $0.556 per share. From our CCASS system we see the shares deposited with Southwest Securities (HK) Brokerage Ltd (SWSHK, formerly Tanrich Securities Co Ltd).

On 8-Jul-2015, Roma announced that it had agreed to lend up to HK$58m to Brilliant One Holdings Ltd (Brilliant One) for 12 months at 12% p.a., secured by 310.85m shares in an unnamed GEM-listed company and guaranteed by persons named Ip Kwok Kwong and Wong Chi Keung, the ultimate owners of Brilliant One. That non-disclosure of the GEM company's name was silly, because it was easily determined that Brilliant One was the 36.23% controlling shareholder of GPS, which eventually announced the loan facility on 4-Aug-2015. Ip Kwok Kwong is the MD of GPS, while Wong Chi Keung (this one) is an accountant with 13 INED positions. The loan facility includes a maximum loan-to-value ratio of 65%. So if they draw the full loan, then the share price falling below $0.287 would trigger a top-up obligation. The shares were moved from Emperor Securities Ltd to Infast Brokerage Ltd on 9-Jul-2015.

On 9-Jul-2015, the day after the share pledge, GPS announced a huge proposed placing of shares under a specific mandate, 2.6bn shares at $0.10, a 74.4% discount to the market price of $0.39, via Black Marble Securities, which is owned by Lerado. The Financial Adviser is Akron (the same as for Lerado's open offer). That represents 303% of the existing shares, and they are not even bothering to make the shares available to existing shareholders by an open offer or rights issue. Simultaneously, it was proposed that SEEC Media Group Ltd (SEECM, 0205) would subscribe 1.4bn shares at the same price, a total of $140m, for 28.82% of the enlarged shares.

Policy note: As we mentioned above, open offers or rights issues larger than 1 for 2 (a 50% enlargement of issued shares) must be subject to shareholders' approval with controlling shareholders abstaining, or if there are none, then with executive directors and their associates abstaining. That does provide some small measure of protection, (unless the vote is being manipulated with warehoused shares). However, this protection is negated by the fact that a massive placing under a "specific mandate" can be approved without requiring controllers or executive directors to abstain. The Listing Rules should be amended to close the loophole so that controllers/executive directors should be required to abstain from voting in favour of any proposal to approve a "specific mandate" that enlarges the issued shares by more than 50%.

Brilliant One, which has pledged its controlling shareholding to Roma, was allowed to vote to approve this outrageous proposal.

Of the $395.1m net proceeds, GPS intends to use $100m in its money-lending subsidiary, Colbert Finance Ltd, and $150m to develop its securities brokerage business. It doesn't own a stockbroker yet, but it plans to either buy one or set one up. The EGM approved the placing on 14-Sep-2015 without objection. With an avalanche of shares due to hit the market at $0.10, it is quite impressive that the stock still closed at $0.495 on 23-Sep-2015.
SEECM (0205)

Now let's look at a fourth open offer involving Lerado (via Black Marble Securities) and Opus Capital.

SEECM is, or was, principally engaged in advertising agency, distribution of books and magazines. And securities trading, of course, like all shoddy companies should be. It announced its investment in GPS on 10-Jul-2015.

On 17-Jul-2015, SEECM announced that it had agreed to subscribe 103.02m shares (16.67%) of China New Economy Fund Ltd (CNEF, 0080) at $0.385, for a total of HK$39.66m, exhausting CNEF's general mandate. CNEF is another Chapter 21 investment company, and that was a 61.5% discount to the NAV of CNEF at 30-Jun-2015 of $1.00. As we noted in our article Some Bubbles for New Year on 31-Dec-2014, CNEF had shares in the Finsoft bubble alongside Convoy FH, and Tony Tai Man Hin, the CFO and Company Secretary of CNEF, was an INED of Finsoft. He retired from Finsoft on 5-May-2015. The CNEF announcement of the subscription named Astrum as the placing agent and did not mention the discount to NAV.

Also on 17-Jul-2015, SEECM announced that it is applying to the SFC to set up a stockbroker. Now everyone wants to be a broker. Lerado, GPS and SEECM.

On 19-Aug-2015, SEECM announced a huge open offer, 3 for 1 at $0.10, a 61.5% discount to the market price of $0.26. The Financial Adviser is Opus Capital (the FA of CAID and the IFA of C33M and Lerado), the IFA is Hercules Capital Ltd (Hercules) and the underwriter is Black Marble Securities, owned by Lerado. Again there will be no excess applications, so the "underwriter" gets the benefit of discounted unsubscribed shares. Of net proceeds of $624m, SEECM plans to use HK$365m to set up a stockbroker, $30m to set up a corporate finance advisory and asset management firm and $225m for the acquisition and operation of an unspecified e-commerce platform.

The shares dived on the news, dropping 35.4% to $0.168 the next day. But they weren't done yet. On 9-Sep-2015, they decided to increase the carnage by consolidating the shares 2:1 and then changing the offer terms to 5 new shares for each consolidated share at $0.10, equivalent to $0.05 before the consolidation. So the offer discount becomes an effective 80.8% discount to the original closing price of $0.26. This will raise a bit less though, HK$519m. This news caused another drop in the price, by 16.7% from $0.156 to $0.13 the next day. So the stock price had now halved even before putting the plan to a vote.

A circular for the capital reorganisation went out on 18-Sep-2015 for an EGM on 12-Oct-2015. We urge shareholders to vote against the resolutions. They are special resolutions that require a 75% majority to pass, so blocking it is more feasible than usual. If it passes, then a circular to propose the open offer is due out on 28-Oct-2015.
Chan Cheong Yee and CESHK

There is a common person to a number of these companies. Chan Cheong Yee (C Y Chan) is a Responsible Officer of China Everbright Securities (HK) Ltd (CESHK). CESHK is the investment manager of four Chapter 21 companies: CIFG, CNEF, China Innovation Investment Ltd (CII, 1217) and China Investment Development Ltd (CID, 0204). C Y Chan is an ED of all 4 companies, and he is also an ED of Capital VC.
CID (0204)

CID is in its own little bubble - it closed on 23-Sep-2015 at $0.157, compared with NAV of $0.024 at 31-Aug-2015.
CEEI (0986)

Now remember we mentioned CEEI, the investor in GPS? On 12-Nov-2014, CEEI announced a placing of 48,190,489 shares at $0.97 per share to raise HK$46.28m, exhausting the general mandate, followed by a huge 8:1 rights issue at $0.195 per share, an 82.4% discount to the market price of $1.11, to raise between $376m and $451m. Excess applications were allowed. At the time, CEEI had no substantial shareholders.

Win Fung was both the placing agent and the rights issue underwriter. The placing was on a best efforts basis, and on 27-Nov-2014, the placing price was cut to $0.66. The placing was completed on 3-Dec-2014, and all the shares were deposited into the CCASS account of Win Fung for its clients. Not a single share moved out of that account until after the EGM to approve the rights issue. And guess what, the EGM results on 18-Dec-2014 show that the number of shares voted in favour of the rights issue was 48,437,576, just 247,087 more than the number of placing shares.

On 12-Mar-2015, CEEI announced that it would start investing in "quality stock and other financial products", so don't say you weren't warned! On 17-Apr-2015, CEEI announced that it had bought 51m shares (0.337%) of Suncorp (mentioned above) that day in the market for HK$61.45m at an average of $1.205 after a huge run up in the share price following completion of a placing at $0.245 per share on 13-Apr-2015. The stock closed at $0.204 on 23-Sep-2015, down 83% since the purchase by CEEI. Some of the other investments by CEEI are covered below.
WLS (8021)

Now let's tell who may have benefitted from a huge bubble in the shares of WLS Holdings Ltd (WLS, 8021), a construction company.

As background, on 21-Oct-2014, WLS announced that CIFG would subscribe for 79m shares (16.67% of enlarged) at $0.177, a 0.6% premium to market, exhausting the general mandate. On the face of it, WLS had no other substantial shareholders. The deal completed on 31-Oct-2014. The shares were deposited with Fordjoy Securities and Futures Ltd (Fordjoy) on 5-Nov-2014. CIFG rapidly sold off the shares, from 12-Nov-2014, dropping below 5% on 3-Dec-2014.

WLS owns a licensed money-lender, Gold Medal Hong Kong Ltd, incorporated on 19-Mar-2014 and licensed on 26-Nov-2014.

On 21-Jan-2015, WLS announced a 5:1 share consolidation and a proposed massive placing of 540m consolidated shares (563.16% of the existing shares) at $0.30 via SWSHK (then Tanrich Securities Co Ltd). The Financial Adviser was Akron. This placing price was a 42.3% discount to the adjusted closing price of $0.52. At the 5-Mar-2015 SGM to approve the placing, votes in favour were 89,597,500, or 18.69% of the issued shares. Total turnout was only 19.00%. We suspect most of those votes in favour were shares previously held by CIFG, but we'll never know for sure.

Of the 540m shares, we know that CEEI took 63m shares (9.91% of enlarged), because it announced the subscription on 18-Mar-2015. Disclosures of interests show that Samuel Chiu Se Chung, a licensed Representative of Roofer Securities Ltd, also subscribed 9.9%. Unity, mentioned above, subscribed 31.5m shares (4.95%), as did Capital VC, mentioned above and Avant Capital Management (HK) Ltd (Avant), as asset manager. Mr Ye Ruiqiang subscribed 4.95%. As of 31-Dec-2014, he owned 6.44% of Capital VC.

There are 4 subscribers whom we cannot identify. A person named Zhang Yan subscribed 40.67m shares (6.40%) which were probably deposited with Emperor Securities Ltd, and a person named Zheng Wanying subscribed 31.33m shares (4.93%). A person named Civic Cheung Sun Kei subscribed 54m shares (8.49%) and another named Cheung Kam Hong subscribed the same number.

A person named Wong Chun Wah subscribed 23m shares (3.62%). It's a common name but we see that the same number went to the custody of Henik Securities Ltd, where there is a licensee called Wong Chun Wah. Similarly a person named Ma Kin Lung subscribed 31.0m shares (4.88%), and we see that number deposited with Get Nice Securities Ltd, where Ma Kin Lung is a licensed representative.

A person named Tam Siu Ki subscribed 54m shares (8.49%), increasing his stake to 9.28%. That may or may not be the same as Simon Tam Siu Ki, who was a representative of RHB OSK (then known as Prudence Securities Co Ltd) until his license was revoked on 30-Oct-2003 for rat-trading and other trading malpractices. In summary, then after the placing, the holdings were:
  Name   Shares   Stake %
1   CEEI (0986)   63,000,000   9.91
2   Samuel Chiu Se Chung   63,000,000   9.91
3   Tam Siu Ki   59,000,000   9.28
4   Cheung Kam Hong   54,000,000   8.49   
5   Cheung Sun Kei, Civic   54,000,000   8.49
6   Zhang Yan   40,670,000   6.40
7   Avant   31,500,000   4.95
8   Capital VC (2324)   31,500,000   4.95
9   Unity (0913)   31,500,000   4.95
10   Ye Ruiqiang   31,500,000   4.95
11   Zheng Wanying   31,330,000   4.93
12   Ma Kin Lung   31,000,000   4.88
13   Wong Chun Wah   23,000,000   3.62
  Total   540,000,000   85.71

The WLS placing completed on 27-Mar-2015 and the CCASS deposits are here. By that time, the stock had more than doubled to $1.25. Unlike the allotments after the IPO, there was no concentration warning. Yet 13 holders held 85.71% of the stock.

The price continued to climb. On 15-May-2015, with the stock at $2.26, 7.53x the placing price, WLS announced a 7:1 bonus issue. The stock spiked again and was suspended at $4.27 on 17-Jun-2015, prompting the company to announce that it was negotiating for a possible share issue. After a brief correction to $2.50, it was suspended again on 19-Jun-2015, pending announcement on 23-Jun-2015 of a "framework agreement" for possible subscriptions by Avant and Shin Kong Capital Management Inc (SKCM) of 1920m and 5760m shares (post-bonus) at $0.06875, a 78% discount to the bonus-adjusted closing price of $0.3125, to raise $528m gross and enlarge the issued shares by 151%.

While the stock was suspended, it went ex-bonus on 23-Jun-2015 and the bonus shares were distributed on 3-Jul-2015, so for 10 days straddling the half-year point, only 1/8 of the company was tradable. When trading in those shares resumed on 24-Jun-2015, the stock shot up again on heavy volume, reaching a daily high of $1.22 on 26-Jun-2015. Remember that most of the existing shares had been issued at a bonus-adjusted $0.0375, so they were now up 32.5x. WLS closed at $1.05 on 30-Jun-2015, allowing those listed companies which held the stock to book enormous "fair value gains" in their interim results. At the end of June, WLS had a market capitalisation of HK$5341m, compared with net tangible assets at 30-Apr-2015 of HK$282m ($0.055 per share), so it was trading at 18.9x NAV.

Disclosures of interest indicate that SKCM was using a vehicle called SKCM TMT I, L.P., which was 50% owned by Chiang Chun Yi and 50% by Yam Tak Cheung, and managed by SKCM TMT GP Co. Ltd, which is 40% owned by SKCM. After all that excitement, SKCM backed out of the deal on 8-Aug-2015 citing disagreement over due diligence on WLS, but Avant signed a new agreement on 12-Aug-2015 to continue to subscribe 1920m shares at $0.06875, conditional on WLS issuing at least 252m shares in a fund-raising exercise so that Avant ends up with 29.48% of less - certainly under the 30% takeover trigger.

Now this long and winding road takes us back to Lerado. On 18-Aug-2015, WLS announced two placings via Black Marble Securities, owned by Lerado. The underwritten tranche is of 360m shares (7.08% of existing shares) at $0.06875, and there is a further "best efforts" placing of 5400m shares (106.15%) at the same price, at 82.1% discount to the closing price of $0.385. Together these could raise $389.22m mostly for, you guessed it, money-lending and securities business. The shares closed on 23-Sep-2015 at $0.27, down 74.3% since the end of June, but still at 4.9x NAV.
Raise the umbrellas: China Jicheng (1027)

Perhaps the most ridiculous bubble in our market at present (although there is a lot of competition for that title) is umbrella maker China Jicheng Holdings Ltd (CJ, 1027) which listed on 13-Feb-2015. It peaked on 18-Sep-2015 at $3.18 with a market value of HK$47.7bn, compared with net tangible assets in the 30-Jun-2015 interim results of $399.6m, or $0.0267 per share. So it was trading at 119x NTA.

Adjusting for a 25:1 stock split in June, CJ's IPO priced the shares at $0.044, so was up 72.3x since the IPO. This gives new meaning to the term "umbrella movement". The initial custody positions of the 150m IPO shares (25%) are in our records here. The top 3 brokers will now be familiar to you: Gransing (8.72% of CJ), Win Fung (8.18%) and SWSHK (3.73%), a total 20.64% or 82.54% of the float.

On 14-May-2015, the SFC warned that 16 shareholders owned 24.02% of CJ, or 96.08% of the float, leaving 0.98% of CJ for everyone else. The stock closed at $13.76 the day before that warning, or $0.5504 after the stock split, so it is up 5.14x since then.

In its annual results for 31-Mar-2015, CEEI (mentioned above) disclosed a holding of 12.67m shares (2.11%) in CJ at a purchase cost of $1.10 per share, which means they were allocated in the IPO, because they have never traded that low. After the stock split that will be 316.75m shares at $0.044. So CEEI doesn't always pay bubble prices for bubble shares - it occasionally gets in at the bottom.

The controlling shareholder of CJ is its Chairman, Huang Wenji, with 11.25bn shares (75%) which, on paper, makes him a US$ umbrella multi-billionaire. We note that on 17-Sep-2015, he deposited 1.5bn shares into CCASS with Black Marble Securities, owned by Lerado. That could be preparation for a placing of existing shares and possibly a subscription of new ones, if anyone is dumb enough to buy them.

Lerado interim results show massive gain

Lerado is one of several companies which have made enormous market gains in the first half of 2015 without disclosing what stocks it bought. In the 30-Jun-2015 interim results, it disclosed "held-for-trading investments" comprising "equity securities listed in Hong Kong" of HK$702.1m. It also said that by 28-Aug-2015, the value had declined by 11%. It booked an unrealised gain of $626.5m, implying a purchase cost of $75.6m and a gain of 829% in 6 months or less. No normal stock does that. Whatever stock(s) they hold, it must be bubble paper, and investors deserve to know what it is so that they can make their own assessment of "fair value" rather than relying on an artificial market price.

After providing for $105m of profits tax on the gains, Lerado had net tangible assets at 30-Jun-2015 of $1220m, or $1.27 per share. But if those gains evaporate, then the NTA drops to $698.5m, or $0.728 per share. Both figures are before dilution from the proposed open offer. If the offer proceeds, then that NAV would be diluted to about $0.430 (with the gains) or $0.295 (without the gains). Both figures assume that Lerado loses the Dorel arbitration, which is worth $307m, which is $0.320 per share before the open offer or $0.080 per share after the open offer.
Capital VC's open offer

On 13-Mar-2015, Capital VC announced a 5:1 share consolidation to be followed by a 7:1 open offer at $0.25 per consolidated share without excess applications. That was a 76.5% discount to the adjusted closing price of $1.065 per share. The Financial Adviser was Akron, and the "underwriter" was SBI CCFS. The last published NAV at 28-Feb-2015 was an adjusted $4.821, so the issue discount to NAV was 94.8%. The stock sold off on the news, down 39.9% the next day to an adjusted $0.64.

Policy note: Chapter 21 investment companies like Capital VC have to publish their NAV monthly. This involves valuing all their listed investments at market prices, so they know what they are. Until 2002, these announcements had to be published in newspapers, so space was at a premium. Now that announcements are online for the last 13 years, this is no longer the case. Yet the Listing Rules still only require Chapter 21 companies to disclose the top 10 investments once per year in the annual report. This is ridiculous. The top 10 investments should be disclosed every month so that shareholders know what risks they are taking.

Again, investors faced the extortion of having to either see the investment heavily diluted, or put in more cash, and no excess applications were allowed, so it is really a placing with the "underwriter" subject to first refusal of existing holders pro rata. The underwriter benefits from any unsubscribed shares at a discount to market. To eliminate the possibility of SBI CCFS holding a controlling stake, it had to arrange sub-underwriters. They included Gransing, for 180m shares, Jun Yang Securities Co Ltd (Jun Yang Securities), for 152m, Avant, for 142.5m, and Fordjoy, for 80m shares.

Incidentally, SBI CCFS is 52% owned by Cao Guo Qi, a director of several listed companies, and 48% by Zhang Xiongfeng, the current Chairman of CMG, mentioned above.

On 11-Jun-2015, Capital VC shareholders approved the consolidation and open offer without objection. Voting turnout was only 14.39% of the issued and eligible shares, probably including the 6.44% owned by Ye Ruiqiang.

Policy note: shareholders are often unaware of opportunities to protect themselves by voting against such egregious proposals, because the SFC does not require banks and brokers who hold their stock to inform them of EGMs and seek voting instructions. As a result, most banks and brokers, in the small print of the client contracts, state that they are not obliged to do so. This is a major barrier to investor participation in governance, and the SFC should act to resolve this, as we said in our submission Principles of Responsible Regulation (26-May-2015).

On 24-Jun-2015, six days before Capital VC's financial year-end, it announced that it was changing its year-end to 30-Sep-2015, so it would produce a second set of condensed "interim" results for the 12 months to 30-Jun-2015. The purported reason for this was:

"to align the Company's financial year end date with that of the Company's principal associate, CNI Bullion Limited, which is the Group's substantial investment."

This holds no water though. Remember, Capital VC is a Chapter 21 investment company, so under Rule 21.04(3)(a), it is not allowed to take "legal, or effective, management control of underlying investments" and under Rule 21.04(3)(b) it is required to maintain a "reasonable spread of investments". So there is no logical reason to align the year ends of Capital VC and any of its investments, including CNI Bullion Ltd, which only accounted for 9% of Capital VC's NAV at 31-Dec-2014.

So what was the real reason for extending the year-end? In our view, to delay the annual disclosure of the portfolio. It's so embarrassing to have to show that your castle is built on sand.

On 15-Jul-2015 Capital VC announced that its NAV at 30-Jun-2015 was $9.0782 per share, and on 27-Aug-2015 it announced the second interim results for the 12 months to June. Capital VC booked a pre-tax profit on financial assets of $1314m for the 12 months, compared with $163m in the first 6 months, so the second-half profit was $1151m. As an investment company, it does not distinguish between realised and unrealised gains, but we can deduce them from the amount of deferred tax, which is tax that is only payable when they cash out. Note 8 shows deferred tax of $132m, so as profits tax is 16.5% they have about $800m of net unrealised gains, probably in bubble stocks.

Anyway, with that NAV in mind, let's return to the open offer. 7:1 at $0.25, versus NAV of $9.0782, so the open offer would dilute NAV to $1.354 before expenses. Shareholders who did nothing would lose 85% of their net asset value. Yet, when the offer closed on 9-Jul-2015, only 23.7% of the shares were subscribed. That left the underwriters and whoever was behind them with 66.75% of the company, acquired at $0.25 per share. The market price closed that day at $0.32. Due to market losses in July, the NAV closed that month at $1.0292, and $0.8824 at the end of August. Amazingly there was nobody with a disclosed 5% shareholding after the offer closed.

Meanwhile, even in market price terms, the shareholders who did not subscribe (and most of them did not vote against the open offer) had seen the price collapse from $1.065 before the open offer to $0.32, even while Capital VC was racking up huge gains as a holder of the unnamed inflated stocks.
Jun Yang (0397)

Jun Yang Securities is owned by Jun Yang Financial Holdings Ltd (Jun Yang, 0397). Until August, this was known as Jun Yang Solar Power Investments Ltd, but that's out of fashion, so now, like everyone else, it wants to be a financial services powerhouse.

Note 24 on page 113 of Jun Yang's 2014 annual report reveals that it owned 2.49% of Tech Pro Technology Development Ltd (Tech Pro Technology, 3823) and 4.49% of Town Health International Medical Group Ltd (Town Health, 3886). Those had a market value of about HK$235m and $280m respectively, out of total listed equities of $854m. Jun Yang booked an unrealised gain on held-for-trading investments of HK$350m for 2014, without which it would have made a loss before tax of $98m.
Tech Pro Technology (3823)

This is another bubble stock, up 93.14% in 2014, and it has kept on going, up a net 22.62% this year so far. It closed on 23-Sep-2015 at $1.87, valuing the firm at HK$12.13bn. When a company includes the syllable "Tech" in its name twice, you know it is desperate for attention. The company makes LED lamps and losses. Oh and football. Yes, it has bought a French soccer club, FC Sochaux-Montbeliard SA. After all, why sponsor the shirts when you can buy the whole thing?

The interim report at 30-Jun-2015, shows net tangible assets of RMB475m (HK$594m) or about HK$0.092 per share. Turnover for the period was RMB111m, so if you annualize that you get RMB222m or HK$278m. So the shares are trading at about 20.4x NTA and about 44x turnover.

L&A (8195)

This is another bubble stock. L & A International Holdings Ltd (L&A, 8195) makes cashmere sweaters. It listed on 10-Oct-2014 after a placing at $0.06 per share (adjusted for the 10:1 split on 21-Apr-2015). In the placing, the top 10 placees received 89.74% of the float. It closed on 23-Sep-2015 at $2.92, up 48.7x since the listing. The market value is HK$11.68bn, compared with net tangible assets of HK$129m at 31-Mar-2015, or about $0.032 per share, so it trades at 90x book value. Revenue for the year was $350m, so it trades at 33x sales.

Despite this ridiculous valuation, or perhaps because of it, CEEI bought 69.384m L&A shares (1.73%) in the market from 17-Apr-2015 to 12-May-2015, spending a total of HK$112.7m or an average of $1.62 per share. This was announced on 12-May-2015. Of course, we don't know who the sellers were. Lucky them.

On 24-Jun-2015, the SFC issued a concentration warning, noting that 19 shareholders held 23.18% out of the 25% float.
Roundup

What you have seen here is a repeated pattern of abuse. The key steps in several transactions are:

  Position votes in friendly hands which are not visibly connected to controlling shareholders or executive directors, by issuance of new shares or transfer of existing shares.
  Arrange loan financing for any existing controller to take up entitlements, or even sell shares in the market with enough time gap to deter allegations of insider dealing.
  Announce either (i) a large, deep-discount open offer without excess applications; or (ii) a "special mandate" placing, which in the first case will need "independent" shareholders' approval and in the latter, just shareholders' approval.
  Use friendly votes to approve the proposal which damages the financial interests of anyone who cannot or does not put up cash (in the case of a placing, this isn't even an option).
  Complete the fund-raising and receive deeply discounted shares as the underwriter, sub-underwriter or placee of the shares.

Hong Kong deserves better if it wishes to make a claim to be a world-class financial centre.

© Webb-site.com, 2015
217 : GS(14)@2016-03-11 16:59:10

盈警
218 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-03-26 00:19:52

虧損降25%,至5,600萬,5.5億現金
219 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-07-09 07:30:18

又搞金融公司
220 : GS(14)@2016-09-05 03:09:17

虧損增65%,至3,300萬,4.3億現金
221 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-09-20 04:09:14

前主買回物業
222 : GS(14)@2016-09-21 17:58:18

205 hold 243 802
223 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-01-10 12:14:48

根據目前可得之資料,本公司董事會(「董事會」)謹此知會本公司股東及準投資者,
預計本集團之持作買賣投資於截至二零一六年十二月三十一日止年度將分別錄得
已變現虧損及未變現公平值收益約10,400,000港元及約77,100,000港元。
224 : GS(14)@2017-01-10 12:21:15

公告
持作買賣投資之
已變現虧損及未變現收益
本公告乃財訊傳媒集團有限公司(「本公司」,連同其附屬公司統稱為「本集團」)
根據香港聯合交易所有限公司證券上市規則(「上市規則」)第13.09條及香港法例
第571章證券及期貨條例第XIVA部之內幕消息條文(定義見上市規則)而作出。
根據目前可得之資料,本公司董事會(「董事會」)謹此知會本公司股東及準投資者,
預計本集團之持作買賣投資於截至二零一六年十二月三十一日止年度將分別錄得
已變現虧損及未變現公平值收益約10,400,000港元及約77,100,000港元。
225 : GS(14)@2017-04-03 03:42:03

虧損維持5,800萬,3.2億可變現資產,持有8217、802
226 : GS(14)@2017-07-05 04:34:43

盈警
227 : GS(14)@2017-09-11 17:52:10

虧損增50%,至5,200萬,1億可變現資產
228 : GS(14)@2018-01-17 09:48:22

本公司董事會(「董事會」)謹此知會本公司股東(「股東」)及準投資者,基於目前
可得之資料,預計本集團截至二零一七年十二月三十一日止年度將錄得重大股東
應佔虧損。該重大虧損乃主要因於香港上市股本證券之持作買賣投資之未變現公
平值虧損及已變現虧損所致,分別為63,800,000港元及96,000,000港元。
229 : GS(14)@2018-04-01 12:10:48

虧,1,100萬可變現資產,持有243、802
230 : GS(14)@2018-09-02 11:43:32

虧,輕債,持243、802
財訊 傳媒 0205 前寶 寶雅 科技 國基 控股 資訊 專區 關係 0246
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=270531

[貼圖]石國基

1 : GS(14)@2011-04-09 20:57:10


貼圖 國基
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=273841

研人幣入SDR國基會:會期未定

1 : GS(14)@2015-11-01 23:08:43

【本報訊】外界預期國際貨幣基金組織(IMF),正就人民幣獲納入為特別提款權(SDR)一籃子貨幣名單作最後準備,國基會執行理事會何時召開會議並通過提名,將成為人幣獲認授為國際儲備貨幣的「鳴槍」一刻,市場估計,理事會在本月中下旬召開。根據國基會官網顯示,該會傳訊部總監Gerry Rice日前在新聞發佈中,被問及11月理事會具體日期時,回應指「日子尚未定實」,但「同事們正就計劃中的11月份會議相關報告,作最後定稿(finalizing a repot)」。對於中方提出將人幣納入為一籃子貨幣要求、檢討工作等,他說目前按正常進度如期發展,有關議題亦將是11月份理事會會議上,經全體會員(188個成員國)的商討項目之一。



料11月中下旬召開

內地媒體《第一財經》引述消息說,國基會就人幣能否獲加入SDR而舉行的理事會,已由11月初推遲至11月較晚時候進行。報道亦引述駐華盛頓IMF總部的中國執行董事金中夏表示,目前有關評估工作仍在進行中,「但做出準確預測為時尚早」,國基會工作人員,將在最終報告內,就加人幣入SDR作出結論及建議。市場人士估計,國基會理事會一般在11月中至下旬舉行,一旦人幣獲准正式納入為SDR,意味其作為國際儲備貨幣地位獲得認可,相信會逐步帶動央行及主權基金,增持人幣及人幣資產,作為儲備組合的一部份。
SDR是國基會於1969年創立的國際儲備資產記賬單位,目前籃子貨幣內共有4種貨幣,包括美元、歐元、日圓及英鎊,籃子貨幣的檢討,每五年進行一次。





來源: http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/financeestate/art/20151101/19355508
研人 人幣 幣入 SDR 國基 會期 未定
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=293614

陳國基做「背後的男人」

1 : GS(14)@2017-07-07 02:28:17

【特寫】特首林鄭月娥除了有丈夫林兆波這位「背後的男人」支持外,她昨日出席首次行會,亦有多名「背後的男人」為她打點大小事務,包括特首辦主任陳國基、新聞處處長黃智祖、以及特首辦助理處長(傳媒)姚繼卓,其中陳國基更身兼多職,由檢查記者會場地到為林鄭見請願人士,全部親力親為。行會昨日召開首次會議,一如以往有市民在政總外請願,陳國基一直陪同林鄭左右。上周一度將5,000萬陰司紙掟向前特首梁振英,被警方帶走的示威者,昨日亦有在行會外請願,不過她行為相對溫和,未見再拋擲物件,只高聲追問林鄭何時就UGL事件控告梁振英。另一名每次到行會請願,也要求與梁合照的示威者,昨改為手持林鄭做頭版的報章向林鄭索取合照,林鄭則微笑答應。


80後女新聞官助打理fb


陳國基陪同林鄭見示威者後,又開始為林鄭與新行會成員大合照及見記者打點,其間更事先到現場視察環境,檢查「搭台」情況,可說事無大小均「跟到足」。另外,林鄭上任極力洗脫「CY2.0」形象,連日在facebook及Instagram更新影片和相片,更一改梁振英做法,容許網民留言,令面書至今已獲逾1.4萬人讚好。據知林鄭今次幕後功臣,為一名由政府新聞處調職至特首辦的「80後」女新聞主任鄭景禔,巧合的是這名新聞主任除與林鄭同姓,英文名也同樣叫Carrie。新聞處亦有借調出一名攝影師,專為林鄭的社交網站供相和拍片。■記者林俊謙




來源: http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20170705/20079616
國基 背後 男人
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=338237


ZKIZ Archives @ 2019