ZKIZ Archives


內房股中的極品? 味皇


From


http://hk.myblog.yahoo.com/lgaim-foolman/article?mid=2531


(08年數字)市賬率     負債比率   流動比率

中國海外       3.9             67%              2.4

華潤置地       2.7             70%              3.22

世茂房地產   2.0             77%              1.45

碧桂園            2.1             62%             1.71

遠洋地產        1.7             89%             2.46

雅居樂            2.3             78%              2.03

瑞安房地產    1.1             49%              1.93

SOHO        1.4             30%              2.77

方興地產        1.3             96%              0.71

綠城中國        1.8            196%             1.72

合景泰富        1.4              71%             2.27

富力地產        2.6             138%            1.12

越秀投資        0.6              70%             1.36

嘉華國際        0.8              62%             2.53

中國奧園        0.5              31%             3.47

首創置業        1.2             162%            1.75

我不理解香港人為何如此偏愛地產股,可能同香港的環境有關...

以上一批內房股,以藍籌的中國海外估值最高,但其財政只是合格的水平,不見特別優秀,現在的股價是說,在相同財政能力的水平,中國海外的地皮升值能力會高過碧桂園的1倍,合景泰富的3倍,嘉華的4倍咁話,事實是不是如此?

按安全性排列,最強的的是:奧園,SOHO,瑞安

這是由於近期有悲情股東進貢,其實好多公司都有,但佢地好彩一時未趕的切用先咁有錢

按財政能力排列,最強的的是:SOHO,瑞安,奧園

除左安全性外,金錢的絕對量也要考慮,錢多先可以標到大地皮,SOHO有100億,瑞安都有34億,奧園14億

按估值排列,綜合又平又安全的的是:奧園,SOHO,瑞安

財政水平奧園同SOHO同級,但SOHO的估值為奧園的兩倍,如果買SOHO就是期待佢主席的能力是奧園的兩倍,而SOHO同瑞安比,財政財力都有 優勢,負債比率相差19%,當利率為9%,瑞安的盈利股東權益回報值要少1.7%,因此貴少少是應該的,以現價來看,買這3隻的人都食左聰明豆

負債高的公司,賺到錢優先是要還債,而唔係分比股東,好似有人認為邊間值8蚊咁,資產係有,但冇考慮到還債,其實賣完再還錢之後有少大截了

作為投資,這3隻是當然之選(08年的數字)

至於方興,綠城,富力,首創看來都有極高的破產機會,至少集資就肯定要了,碧桂園,世茂,雅居樂,瑞安,合景泰富,越秀都有集資壓力,因為流動比率比起負債比率不足,這都已經是上年的數字了,投資時想迥避其實好容易

但作為投機,最好的卻是首創

首創係官股,唔駛還本,只需還息,本金到期可以用新債券代替,銀行見佢冇錢還,收借據當還錢,又唔當不良貸款,至少唔會破到產,呢點得首創同越秀可以,而首創負債比率高,利息支出多,盈利基點低,市況反彈就會顯得增長特別高的假象

首創由低點已經反彈左5倍,而且是在安全情況下的,比起碧貴園等不安全的好得多

不過內房股仲唔止呢d,其實仲有隱藏的內房股,就好似地鐵咁,有人真係以為佢係鐵路公司?

果類隱藏內房股,估值低之餘,有d仲可以淨現金添,邊d?下回分解



內房 房股 股中 中的 極品 味皇
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=11450

[轉載]金磚極品牛排:巴菲特對「投資」的新定義 BILL

http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_3dbfb5400100y5yr.html

芒格和巴菲特往往幾句話就點出了問題的本質,一劍封喉,這是最吸引我的地方。

 

1.前幾年對"投資"定義的表述:Investing is often described as the process of laying out money now in the expectation of receiving more money in the future. 現在付出現金,未來收穫更多現金。

2.目前更深入一步:At Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA) we take a more demanding approach, defining investing as the transfer to others of purchasing power now with the reasoned expectation of receiving more purchasing power。現在付出現金的購買力,未來收穫更多的現金購買力。

 

由此產生以下邏輯後果:The riskiness of an investment is not measured by beta (a Wall Street term encompassing volatility and often used in measuring risk) but rather by the probability -- the reasoned probability -- of that investment causing its owner a loss of purchasing power over his contemplated holding period. 任何投資的風險不應由β值衡量,而應由持有期間是否跑輸通脹來衡量。

 

成功的投資意味著戰勝通脹。以此為標準看看以下投資標的的狀況:

第一種:固定收益投資:

Investments that are denominated in a given currency include money-market funds, bonds, mortgages, bank deposits, and other instruments. Most of these currency-based investments are thought of as "safe." In truth they are among the most dangerous of assets. Their beta may be zero, but their risk is huge.

假如按照β值衡量,貨幣基金債券和銀行存款等是安全的,但是(從通脹角度來看)它們是最危險的投資資產,

「被吹捧為無風險有報酬的債券投資,今天已成為無報酬有風險的投資。」

 

終極原因如下:

Governments determine the ultimate value of money, and systemic forces will sometimes cause them to gravitate to policies that produce inflation. From time to time such policies spin out of control. 政府自古擁有鈔票的定價權,通脹是人類無解的難題,固定收益投資注定成為受害者(This ugly result, moreover, will forever recur.)

 

第二種:博傻投資,有可能賠本,如何談得上戰勝通脹?

The second major category of investments involves assets that will never produce anything, but that are purchased in the buyer's hope that someone else -- who also knows that the assets will be forever unproductive -- will pay more for them in the future. Tulips, of all things, briefly became a favorite of such buyers in the 17th century. 17世紀鬱金香投機狂熱,目前黃金有重蹈覆轍的危險。

 

第三種:具有生產能力的資產:企業,農田和房產等,這是戰勝通脹最靠譜的選擇。

My own preference -- and you knew this was coming -- is our third category: investment in productive assets, whether businesses, farms, or real estate.

 

Whether the currency a century from now is based on gold, seashells, shark teeth, or a piece of paper (as today), people will be willing to exchange a couple of minutes of their daily labor for a Coca-Cola or some See's peanut brittle. In the future the U.S. population will move more goods, consume more food, and require more living space than it does now. People will forever exchange what they produce for what others produce. 人類的基本需求甚少改變

 

不僅不停地買入動能無限的企業,巴菲特和芒格還身體力行,每個人都生了大把孩子,呵呵,我不覺得

是偶然現象。

在格雷厄姆時代,政府和民眾的需求相對克制,通脹還不是生死攸關的課題,因此他對投資的定義相對保守,

只要不踩投資地雷就可保命。

時代今非昔比,投資人不僅要避免踩上地雷股,更要和通脹殊死搏鬥,現在看來巴菲特對投資的定義更加真實。

 

 

 

 

附巴菲特FORTUNE全文:

 

Warren Buffett: Why stocks beat gold and bonds

 

February 9, 2012: 5:00 AM ET

In an adaptation from his upcoming shareholder letter, the Oracle of Omaha explains why equities almost always beat the alternatives over time.

By

Warren Buffett

FORTUNE -- Investing is often described as the process of laying out money now in the expectation of receiving more money in the future. At Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA) we take a more demanding approach, defining investing as the transfer to others of purchasing power now with the reasoned expectation of receiving more purchasing power -- after taxes have been paid on nominal gains -- in the future. More succinctly, investing is forgoing consumption now in order to have the ability to consume more at a later date.

From our definition there flows an important corollary: The riskiness of an investment is not measured by beta (a Wall Street term encompassing volatility and often used in measuring risk) but rather by the probability -- the reasoned probability -- of that investment causing its owner a loss of purchasing power over his contemplated holding period. Assets can fluctuate greatly in price and not be risky as long as they are reasonably certain to deliver increased purchasing power over their holding period. And as we will see, a nonfluctuating asset can be laden with risk.

Investment possibilities are both many and varied. There are three major categories, however, and it's important to understand the characteristics of each. So let's survey the field.

Investments that are denominated in a given currency include money-market funds, bonds, mortgages, bank deposits, and other instruments. Most of these currency-based investments are thought of as "safe." In truth they are among the most dangerous of assets. Their beta may be zero, but their risk is huge.

Over the past century these instruments have destroyed the purchasing power of investors in many countries, even as these holders continued to receive timely payments of interest and principal. This ugly result, moreover, will forever recur. Governments determine the ultimate value of money, and systemic forces will sometimes cause them to gravitate to policies that produce inflation. From time to time such policies spin out of control.

Even in the U.S., where the wish for a stable currency is strong, the dollar has fallen a staggering 86% in value since 1965, when I took over management of Berkshire. It takes no less than $7 today to buy what $1 did at that time. Consequently, a tax-free institution would have needed 4.3% interest annually from bond investments over that period to simply maintain its purchasing power. Its managers would have been kidding themselves if they thought of any portion of that interest as "income."

For taxpaying investors like you and me, the picture has been far worse. During the same 47-year period, continuous rolling of U.S. Treasury bills produced 5.7% annually. That sounds satisfactory. But if an individual investor paid personal income taxes at a rate averaging 25%, this 5.7% return would have yielded nothing in the way of real income. This investor's visible income tax would have stripped him of 1.4 points of the stated yield, and the invisible inflation tax would have devoured the remaining 4.3 points. It's noteworthy that the implicit inflation "tax" was more than triple the explicit income tax that our investor probably thought of as his main burden. "In God We Trust" may be imprinted on our currency, but the hand that activates our government's printing press has been all too human.

High interest rates, of course, can compensate purchasers for the inflation risk they face with currency-based investments -- and indeed, rates in the early 1980s did that job nicely. Current rates, however, do not come close to offsetting the purchasing-power risk that investors assume. Right now bonds should come with a warning label.

 

Warren Buffett: Your pick for Businessperson of the Year

Under today's conditions, therefore, I do not like currency-based investments. Even so, Berkshire holds significant amounts of them, primarily of the short-term variety. At Berkshire the need for ample liquidity occupies center stage and will never be slighted, however inadequate rates may be. Accommodating this need, we primarily hold U.S. Treasury bills, the only investment that can be counted on for liquidity under the most chaotic of economic conditions. Our working level for liquidity is $20 billion; $10 billion is our absolute minimum.

Beyond the requirements that liquidity and regulators impose on us, we will purchase currency-related securities only if they offer the possibility of unusual gain -- either because a particular credit is mispriced, as can occur in periodic junk-bond debacles, or because rates rise to a level that offers the possibility of realizing substantial capital gains on high-grade bonds when rates fall. Though we've exploited both opportunities in the past -- and may do so again -- we are now 180 degrees removed from such prospects. Today, a wry comment that Wall Streeter Shelby Cullom Davis made long ago seems apt: "Bonds promoted as offering risk-free returns are now priced to deliver return-free risk."

The second major category of investments involves assets that will never produce anything, but that are purchased in the buyer's hope that someone else -- who also knows that the assets will be forever unproductive -- will pay more for them in the future. Tulips, of all things, briefly became a favorite of such buyers in the 17th century.

This type of investment requires an expanding pool of buyers, who, in turn, are enticed because they believe the buying pool will expand still further. Owners are not inspired by what the asset itself can produce -- it will remain lifeless forever -- but rather by the belief that others will desire it even more avidly in the future.

The major asset in this category is gold, currently a huge favorite of investors who fear almost all other assets, especially paper money (of whose value, as noted, they are right to be fearful). Gold, however, has two significant shortcomings, being neither of much use nor procreative. True, gold has some industrial and decorative utility, but the demand for these purposes is both limited and incapable of soaking up new production. Meanwhile, if you own one ounce of gold for an eternity, you will still own one ounce at its end.

What motivates most gold purchasers is their belief that the ranks of the fearful will grow. During the past decade that belief has proved correct. Beyond that, the rising price has on its own generated additional buying enthusiasm, attracting purchasers who see the rise as validating an investment thesis. As "bandwagon" investors join any party, they create their own truth -- for a while.

Over the past 15 years, both Internet stocks and houses have demonstrated the extraordinary excesses that can be created by combining an initially sensible thesis with well-publicized rising prices. In these bubbles, an army of originally skeptical investors succumbed to the "proof " delivered by the market, and the pool of buyers -- for a time -- expanded sufficiently to keep the bandwagon rolling. But bubbles blown large enough inevitably pop. And then the old proverb is confirmed once again: "What the wise man does in the beginning, the fool does in the end."

Today the world's gold stock is about 170,000 metric tons. If all of this gold were melded together, it would form a cube of about 68 feet per side. (Picture it fitting comfortably within a baseball infield.) At $1,750 per ounce -- gold's price as I write this -- its value would be about $9.6 trillion. Call this cube pile A.

Let's now create a pile B costing an equal amount. For that, we could buy all U.S. cropland (400 million acres with output of about $200 billion annually), plus 16 Exxon Mobils (the world's most profitable company, one earning more than $40 billion annually). After these purchases, we would have about $1 trillion left over for walking-around money (no sense feeling strapped after this buying binge). Can you imagine an investor with $9.6 trillion selecting pile A over pile B?

Beyond the staggering valuation given the existing stock of gold, current prices make today's annual production of gold command about $160 billion. Buyers -- whether jewelry and industrial users, frightened individuals, or speculators -- must continually absorb this additional supply to merely maintain an equilibrium at present prices.

A century from now the 400 million acres of farmland will have produced staggering amounts of corn, wheat, cotton, and other crops -- and will continue to produce that valuable bounty, whatever the currency may be. Exxon Mobil (XOM) will probably have delivered trillions of dollars in dividends to its owners and will also hold assets worth many more trillions (and, remember, you get 16 Exxons). The 170,000 tons of gold will be unchanged in size and still incapable of producing anything. You can fondle the cube, but it will not respond.

Admittedly, when people a century from now are fearful, it's likely many will still rush to gold. I'm confident, however, that the $9.6 trillion current valuation of pile A will compound over the century at a rate far inferior to that achieved by pile B.

Our first two categories enjoy maximum popularity at peaks of fear: Terror over economic collapse drives individuals to currency-based assets, most particularly U.S. obligations, and fear of currency collapse fosters movement to sterile assets such as gold. We heard "cash is king" in late 2008, just when cash should have been deployed rather than held. Similarly, we heard "cash is trash" in the early 1980s just when fixed-dollar investments were at their most attractive level in memory. On those occasions, investors who required a supportive crowd paid dearly for that comfort.

My own preference -- and you knew this was coming -- is our third category: investment in productive assets, whether businesses, farms, or real estate. Ideally, these assets should have the ability in inflationary times to deliver output that will retain its purchasing-power value while requiring a minimum of new capital investment. Farms, real estate, and many businesses such as Coca-Cola (KO), IBM (IBM), and our own See's Candy meet that double-barreled test. Certain other companies -- think of our regulated utilities, for example -- fail it because inflation places heavy capital requirements on them. To earn more, their owners must invest more. Even so, these investments will remain superior to nonproductive or currency-based assets.

Whether the currency a century from now is based on gold, seashells, shark teeth, or a piece of paper (as today), people will be willing to exchange a couple of minutes of their daily labor for a Coca-Cola or some See's peanut brittle. In the future the U.S. population will move more goods, consume more food, and require more living space than it does now. People will forever exchange what they produce for what others produce.

Our country's businesses will continue to efficiently deliver goods and services wanted by our citizens. Metaphorically, these commercial "cows" will live for centuries and give ever greater quantities of "milk" to boot. Their value will be determined not by the medium of exchange but rather by their capacity to deliver milk. Proceeds from the sale of the milk will compound for the owners of the cows, just as they did during the 20th century when the Dow increased from 66 to 11,497 (and paid loads of dividends as well).

Berkshire's goal will be to increase its ownership of first-class businesses. Our first choice will be to own them in their entirety -- but we will also be owners by way of holding sizable amounts of marketable stocks. I believe that over any extended period of time this category of investing will prove to be the runaway winner among the three we've examined. More important, it will be by far the safest.


轉載 金磚 極品 牛排 巴菲特 巴菲 投資 的新 定義 BILL
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=31132

股東會花絮》養生鍋堪稱極品 五十元禮券成大宗 股東會紀念品發放家數、價值悄悄縮水

2012-6-25  TWM




股東會旺季即將邁入尾聲,今年最夯的股東會紀念品是什麼?公司大老闆又如何透過股東會,對自家小股東信心喊話?︽今周刊︾幫你網羅今年股東會的花絮。

撰文‧葉揚甲

「套句分析師最常用的話,今年領取股東會紀念品的情形還真是旺季不旺。」某股務代理機構內部人員私下表示,除經濟走下坡外,導致今年不若以往熱絡的最大因素,業者一致認為,還是深受證所稅影響。

零股換贈品 省錢抗通膨然而,日子再苦,還是得過。只是須先釐清,賺取資本利得與領取股東會贈品根本是兩回事,別攪和在一塊。「進場目的不同,操作方法自然會有所區別。」今年一口氣用零股敲進八百多檔股票的偉士牌(網路部落客)試圖解釋著。

在金融業擔任內勤的平凡上班族偉士牌,前幾年偶然在台北市華陰街某代發股東會贈品處,竟然發現有超過八成公司的贈品領取資格並無特殊限制;換句話說,就算只有一股,也能拿到贈品,非常物超所值。

例如,偉士牌認為今年最划算之一的紀念品||大同吹風機,就是他以一股不到十元(大同股價今年多數時間位於十元之下)的投入成本換得,類似的好康還真的不少。因此與其擔心通膨,不如讓錢做更有效的運用。「時機歹歹,尤其需要這類省錢小撇步。」偉士牌分享他的心得。

今年股東會贈送紀念品的公司達四六六家,與去年四九二家相比,在數量上略遜一籌;若再看得仔細點,還會發現贈品價值其實都悄悄地「縮水」。今年有董監改選,並傳出經營權之爭的中石化,贈送市價五百元左右的養生鍋,就堪稱今年眾多紀念品中的「極品」。

對於這種恰逢董監改選年,有兩派爭奪經營權的公司,偉士牌認為,拿到好贈品的機率很高。令他印象深刻的例子是二○一○年時的黑松,不同陣營加開臨時股東會 都有送紀念品,等於那年小股東就從黑松領取兩次紀念品,「兩派人馬相爭,股東或可坐收漁翁之利。」但要注意是否須逾千股才具資格。

這次四百多家公司的紀念品中,有超過八十家公司發放超商禮券。有趣的是,贈送禮券金額一百元的公司,竟同時包含股價逾二五○元的聯發科及股價不到三元的天 瀚;兩檔股票價格天差地別、紀念品卻等值,讓IC設計龍頭「發哥」的股東頗感無奈,所幸,還有每股現金股利九元可以期待。

此外,有更多公司僅發放全家禮券五十元,連買一杯全家五十五元「特大熱拿(鐵)」都還要補差額,「只能說禮券雖稱實用,但真的滿失望的。」若是請紀念品代 領達人換的話更慘,因為代領費用一般行情為三十元,扣完實領二十元,連一杯便利商店的「小熱美(式)」咖啡都買不到。

根據股務代理業者透露,其實不僅證所稅牽涉到人頭戶問題,股東會紀念品也存在灰色地帶。傳聞就有獨自一人使用兩百多個人頭戶,如此一來,即便只是領取五十元禮券,最後可多達一萬元;就算是實體贈品,轉賣同樣是一筆很補的零用金。

經營者信心喊話待檢驗

另外,像米、麵條,或偉詮電別出心裁的雲林莿桐蒜頭,牙膏、洗碗精或香皂組等,這類民生必需品不無小補;而生技類公司像葡萄王、合一及中天都送上自家產品,給股東身體進補。

比較有意思的聯電,繼去年送出兔子造形的毛毯後,今年亦發放拉拉熊側背包延續可愛路線,股東詢問度頗高。至於同集團的公司傾向於發放一樣的紀念品,譬如潤泰集團皆是短襯衫,東元集團則是摩斯漢堡兌換券。

事實上,公司發放贈品的原意,是藉以提高股東出席股東會的意願,換成股東的角度而言,若排除為紀念品而買零股目的,股東最在意的事情,終究是表彰公司競爭 力的股價表現,絕非紀念品三、五十元的差別。因此,一年一度小股東能直接與大老闆面對面的股東會,絕對是檢視公司經營階層最好的機會。

明基友達集團董事長李焜耀在今年友達股東會,因大幅虧損而對股東直言「不好意思」,他隨後表示面板當前是好買點;而甘願穿拖鞋涉水趕赴股東會場的宏達電董 事長王雪紅,雖然三十五分鐘即結束議程,但她在宏達電十五周年慶時,允諾以個人身分加碼公司股票,且會是「令大家驚訝的數字」。此舉意義與用公司現金買回 庫藏股截然不同。

大同集團董事長林蔚山則在股東會時,矢言公司股價要在年底前或明年初站回十元票面價值,但依目前六.三三元計算,大同股價還必須漲六成。

董事長當然可以在股東會上信心喊話,但假使目標在可見的未來無法達成,不管面板買點是否浮現?王雪紅是否加碼?大同是否會在半年內漲六成?甚或其他經營者的允諾,其實都是小股東後續追蹤的重點。

一家不懂檢討失敗,又總是拋出達不到目標的公司,對投資人來說,最後大概真的只剩下領取紀念品的價值吧!

股東會 股東 花絮 養生 堪稱 極品 十元 禮券 大宗 紀念 發放 家數 價值 悄悄 縮水
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=34676

挖掘極品的地方超市



2015-09-28  TWM


日本小型超市「福島屋」堅持不發傳單、不降價出售,憑著貨架上的精緻地方物產,就抓住許多忠實客戶,年營業額高達13億台幣。

日本的小型地方超市非常多,且形態各異,有一家成立三十五年,迄今也只有五間店鋪的「福島屋」,堅持不發傳單、不隨意降價出售,其店內商品雖不如普通超市 齊全,但創辦人福島徹憑著開發極品商品、活用主婦軍團與構築地方網絡三項經營策略,創造了三十餘年未曾虧損的佳績,年營業額達到五十億日圓(約合十三億新 台幣),擁有許多忠誠顧客。

福島屋的起家店在青梅市,是個充滿懷舊氛圍的地方,從東京都心搭電車過去,還要約莫一個半小時才能抵達,但現今在東京市中心的「六本木Hills」大樓開設了一家分店,逛一逛可以發現,福島屋的坪數小、商品少,但十分精挑細選。

福島徹自己堪稱「極品獵人」,連續二十年,每年都會花上一、兩百天,在日本各地探索好東西,他重於開發「沒人知道」的地方特別物產,富有現場主義精神,寧 願自己到鄉下地方超市或道之驛尋訪,而不是等著廠商上門推薦,之後更會直接向生產者進貨,此類產地直送的商品,占了福島屋貨架八成之多。

值得注意的是,福島屋著重精緻化商品,但並非如百貨地下街的JASONS Market一樣販售進口高級品,它的極品指的是日本當地物產,如北海道猿拂村的漬秋鮭、青森縣的有機米、福島縣的生醬油等;台灣有豐富的農漁產品,若有 超市願當伯樂發掘,也能成為貨架上的精緻商品。

若問誰是顧客中的專家,絕對非主婦莫屬,福島徹深諳此理,於是他邀請在地的主婦們一同開發自有品牌,甚至參與製作賣場看板,由顧客角度來打造商場。

此外,「主婦軍團」對採購商品有一定的決定權,每個月都舉辦二十次以上的料理教室,增加居民交流,這樣也就不必發傳單、打價格戰。

雖然福島屋僅有五家分店,但福島徹結合全國的中小製造商與中小型超市為聯合網絡,目標是與大型超市差異化,中小製造商也能提供原創商品給中小型超市,創造了通路的共同利益。

多年來,由福島徹指導改革的店鋪超過三十家,他建議超市減少「沒有吸引力」的一般商品,只上架最精選品項,成功讓長年赤字的超市轉虧為盈。

如果福島屋到台灣開店,消費者可能會覺得它的品項太少,但反向思考,其實精挑細選商品是一種進步的商業模式,未來台灣消費者也會不斷進化,超市若能擷取一些福島屋的經營概念,創造差異化競爭力,台灣的超市面貌也會愈來愈精采。

徐重仁,全聯福利中心總裁,財團法人商業發展研究院董事長,日本早稻田大學商學研究所流通經濟科碩士,高雄第一科技大學管理學名譽博士,曾任統一超商總經理、台灣連鎖加盟協會理事長。

撰文 / 徐重仁


挖掘 極品 地方 超市
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=162892

極品模驚世現真身

1 : GS(14)@2012-07-14 18:44:49

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/entertainment/art/20120714/16511836
極品 模驚 驚世 世現 真身
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=280240

【美圖晒晒】爆乳網店老闆娘 網民讚極品!

1 : GS(14)@2016-04-15 16:29:58

日前網友在台大討論區「批踢踢」(PTT)發貼,介紹一名激索的網拍老闆娘,發貼還附上多張美照。照片中的正妹擁有媲美女星的容貌、模特兒的身材、空姐的氣質、以及鄰家姐姐的唯美清新,其他網友看了以後狂讚「100分」、「超正der」、「這是不同境界的美麗」、「真美氣質也不錯」、「極品」、「勻稱」。據悉,網拍老闆娘叫Stephanie Teh,今年25歲,實踐大學服裝設計學系畢業,目前在經營網拍服飾,擁有曼妙身材的她,也經常自己擔任模特兒拍攝美照,並將照片貼在個人IG上。台灣《蘋果日報》





來源: http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/international/art/20160415/19572489
美圖 曬曬 爆乳 網店 老闆娘 老闆 網民 極品
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=299340

【美圖晒晒】索爆混血女模 網民讚極品

1 : GS(14)@2016-08-09 07:10:39

有台灣網友在台大討論區「批踢踢實業坊」表特板貼文,並分享多張美女圖。照片中一名擁露驕人身材的美女,展露燦爛笑容,溶化無數宅男。有網民估計美女身材達F Cup,其他網友熱議,紛紛大讚美女「極品」、「好猛…」、「真的很兇」、「這脾氣,應該很多鄉民會求門想教她做人做事的道理」、「有像許維恩」、「天菜啊!」有眼尖的網友認出美女是名混血兒,名叫羿蒨,同時也是一名模特兒。羿蒨不時在Instagram貼出美照。可惜網上亦有多張羿蒨與男友甜蜜旅遊的照片,加上得知羿蒨平時駕駛豪車,讓無數網民既心碎又「葡萄」。綜合報道





來源: http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/international/art/20160808/19727613
美圖 曬曬 索爆 混血 女模 網民 極品
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=304962

【美圖晒晒】極品級索女唔孤寒fb盡騷迫爆身材

1 : GS(14)@2016-12-09 00:03:36

網上最近熱傳一輯照片,相中台灣女生不僅擁有天使般的美麗面孔,更有一副魔鬼般的驕人身材,因而被網民稱為極品正妹。女生其實名叫張凱玲,今年20歲的她就讀台北文化大學大眾傳播系2年級,有着34、25、34的好身材,曾參加「大學生來了沒」正妹專題,被網民封為「極品女神」,有小許瑋甯、小鍾麗緹等封號。張凱玲從不吝惜分享好身材,經常在fb及IG貼出長腿、騷胸美照,當中還包括不少運動期間拍的相,相信她身材是曾付出過不少汗水才有今日的成績。台灣《蘋果日報》/facebook/Instagram




來源: http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/international/art/20161208/19858999
美圖 曬曬 極品 級索 索女 女唔 孤寒 fb 盡騷 騷迫 迫爆 身材
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=318734

【美圖晒晒】噴血身材+長髮大眼極品索女引哄動

1 : GS(14)@2017-01-12 08:08:21

近日有網民在台大討論區「批踢踢」(PTT)表特版貼出數張長髮大眼美女照,旋即造成哄動。未幾,有網民即時再貼正妹其他照片,除了長髮、大眼妹,還有幾張騷出誘人身材的照片。有人即時喊道:「有像深田恭子」、「長髮大眼...咦?我根本沒在看她眼睛」、「求神」、「有傳送門嗎?」、「大的不只是眼睛而已」。多人更希望能找出索妹的真正身份。被許多網友大讚為「極品」等級後,原來正妹名字叫小婉,目前從事行銷工作。估計由於網民反應太熱烈,小婉在其Instagram表示已要求PPT刪帖,再留言「感謝各位的青睞......我用IG紀錄我的生活,想要跟大家分享一些訊息,像是好吃的餐廳、甜點、好玩的地方等,或是闡述內心一些想法,發發牢騷什麼的。希望來這邊的朋友們可以保持你們的禮貌,我會由衷感謝。祝大家新的一年平安快樂。」台灣《蘋果日報》/Instagram/「批踢踢」




來源: http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/international/art/20170112/19894589
美圖 曬曬 噴血 身材 長髮 大眼 極品 索女 女引 哄動
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=322300

股票掌故 | 香港股票資訊 | 神州股票資訊 | 台股資訊 | 博客好文 | 文庫舊文 | 香港股票資訊 | 第一財經 | 微信公眾號 | Webb哥點將錄 | 港股專區 | 股海挪亞方舟 | 動漫遊戲音樂 | 好歌 | 動漫綜合 | RealBlog | 測試 | 強國 | 潮流潮物 [Fashion board] | 龍鳳大茶樓 | 文章保管庫 | 財經人物 | 智慧 | 世界之大,無奇不有 | 創業 | 股壇維基研發區 | 英文 | 財經書籍 | 期權期指輪天地 | 郊遊遠足 | 站務 | 飲食 | 國際經濟 | 上市公司新聞 | 美股專區 | 書藉及文章分享區 | 娛樂廣場 | 波馬風雲 | 政治民生區 | 財經專業機構 | 識飲色食 | 即市討論區 | 股票專業討論區 | 全球政治經濟社會區 | 建築 | I.T. | 馬後砲膠區之圖表 | 打工仔 | 蘋果專欄 | 雨傘革命 | Louis 先生投資時事分享區 | 地產 |
ZKIZ Archives @ 2019