ZKIZ Archives


朗力福(8037)購買傳銷業務? (再更新,未完)

(謝hongkwokkwok提供資料。)
(1)
2012年3月21日,朗力福集團(8037)與一位Buer Gude 先生訂立一份無法律約束力的諒解備忘錄,欲向其購買一家於「亞太地區從事由特定水果製成之健康飲品之製造及分銷,並於薩摩亞擁有該水果之長期購買權」的公司的全部股權。

照字面來看,只是一家公司和另外一個資源企業具有原料長期供應合約,另外他利用這些產品製造飲品,然後利用分銷商銷售,這並不如何特別。

它一不具原料生產的農地,只有供應合約,其實你不簽別人也不會供應給你,因為量太少根本做一單虧一單,哪有人理會呢。在製造上。也可能沒有自置廠房,只是租用,機器做的只是簡單的榨汁,然後加上適當的防腐和營養,然後入樽,也不是甚麼精密科技,價錢應該不貴,分銷權更只是依賴人,一沒人這些東西根本不值錢,所以這三句話可以概括地說這家公司值錢度有限,但出來的作價就貴得驚人。

據公告所述,「可能收購事項之代價預期不少於700,000,000 港元(視乎由獨立估值師進行之估值及
將與賣方協定之溢利保證而定),可由買方以現金、由本公司向賣方發行代價股份、可換股票據及/或承兌票據之綜合方式支付。」,可以見到這交易潛在利潤驚人,但這為何不合理呢? 我們不如慢慢細述這故事。

(2)
朗力福集團在1996年成立,主要從事銷售保健品,並於2003年在創業板上市。

據招股書稱,在上市前,創辦人兼前主席楊洪根據稱因缺乏外匯把企業由個人持有轉成由境外公司持有架構,以方便上市,故向中信國際資產管理借貸1,700萬,以作為過橋貸款之用,其後已全額償還。

同時,該借貸有附帶條件,需要向中信國際資產管理發行1,000萬的可換股債券,年息12%,換股價為上市價70%,條款頗為嚴苛刻,足見公司缺水的程度不低。最後中信國際資產管理在上市前行使並換取2,450萬股,相等於已發行股本4.9%,扣除付予其的232.5萬利息,成本約為31.33仙。

該公司上市幾年來算是風無浪,業務總算賺錢,但至2006年好像開始有些變化。

2006年,公司和由上市以來擔任合規顧問的群益亞洲終止合約,改由第一上海擔任,理由是「由於熟悉本集團業務之群益之高級職員相繼離任,而董事會認為,群益亞洲之服務未必能達到董事會之預期水平」,「第一上海則擁有對合規事項具備豐富經驗及熟悉中國業務之高級職員。」,但這兒是香港,是否應跟隨香港的規矩呢? 可能實際原因不是這樣簡單,亦可能和次月這單以現金收購廠房的交易有關。在此之後,公司業績開始快速倒退。

2007年,楊洪根辭任公司主席,並出售手持近半股權予鄭立新,其後接手的主席兼行政總裁姚峰也辭任,由鄭立新接手,合資格會計師一年內換了1次2次,原核數師德勤也因「除卻涉及核數工作之專業風險、核數費用金額及基於現有工作流量彼等可動用的內部資源的考慮」辭任,並由Non Big 4信永中和接手,事態很不尋常。

經過一輪高管走馬燈後,2009年,公司再換一次會計師,之後鄭立新辭任行政總裁,9月由楊洪根之子楊順峰接手

不到3個月,當時仍稱德泰大中華的首都創投(2324,再前稱中國北方企業投資基金,其後出現的名稱均同義)購入了3,767.5萬股,即約7.06%股權,據當日的CCASS顯示,那批股票由招商證券、國泰君安及南華金融售出,金利豐金融(1031,前錶準時,邁特科技、黃金集團)旗下金利豐證券持有。當日急升後,德泰大中華即減持1,141.5萬股至2,626萬股,即4.92%之不需披露水平。

踏入12月,楊洪根把剩餘的1.455億股權減持予多名賣方,這些賣方是誰?

從港交所資料可以看出,最少1.05億的是分3批3,500萬轉讓,除一位為德泰大中華外,其餘2位都和除德泰大中華有一點關係外,解釋如下:


(1)  歐陽啟初。 這名人兄根據Webb先生的資料,曾為馬斯葛(136)參龍國際(329,前金龍集團、如煙控股)的執行董事,但分別在2010年2011年離任。也曾為這項由威利國際(273,前怡南實業、首創、華匯控股,中聯控股、互聯控股)漢基控股(412,前合盈國際、東峻集團、大雄科技)的購買資產Found Macau的董事之—,亦為這個不停地交換的物業離開系統的買方之一。

(2) Eftpos Limited,根據股權披露資料,這公司由胡偉賢持有。除曾持有德泰大中華股權外。根據其他股權披露資料推測,他亦曾購入中國網絡教育(8055,前乾坤燭國際)凱順能源(8203,前歐美集團)的配售股權,兩者的配售代理均為金利豐金融(1031,前錶準時、邁特科技、黃金集團)附屬金利豐證券。其中後者近來和昊天能源(474,前永保時國際)簽訂合作意向書,後者正如前篇所述,其實也是和歐陽啟初出現過的股票有一些關係

其實到了這時候,這股已由某一班人馬控制了,其後鄭立新也陸續減持股票,並在下一年4月辭任。董事開始有變化其中兩位已在此文提及,不再談了。

至於另外一位岑志強先生,雖和他們沒有很大的關係,但根據Webb的發現,他任職的公司曾經是為他留意的這一間另一間公司做估值。其中鈞濠集團(115,前忠德石油)的兩位董事最終因為虛假收購被廉政公署控告詐騙,最終被定罪,但正在上訴,最終結果未定。

又過3日,公司補充公告稱,原來岑先生在2003年曾被領令破產,其後在2008年獲撤銷,Webb為何他能在破產期間還能擔任保柏國際的董事,並為多家上市公司簽訂估值報告覺得有趣。或許他根據公司條例156條,由法院許可保留董事之位。

又根據德泰大中華2010年的年報,其實以壇主為名的亞貝資本是由德泰大中華的丘忠航持有其權益。他為這次朗力福的配售代理之—。2010年4月,更授予德泰大中華行使價為35.5仙的50萬股、10年期的購股權,Webb認為,也真的沒有理由主要股東購股權,也不需要提供激勵的誘因。

自2010年7月起,公司搬至香港最高的摩天大廈環球貿易中心7602A,12月首都創投遷至鄰近的7601B。據朗力福2010年報稱,其實是首都創投租用物業,共同分擔一半的租金,但有7601B就有7601A,7602A應該就有7602B,所以我相信還有其他公司租用7601A及7602B的物業,但因為這些大廈保安嚴密,不能登門,我們就不知道了。

再岔開—筆,原來盧華威先生是朗力福前公司祕書,他擔任多家上市公司的公司祕書,過其中一間的博士蛙(1698)已被核數師指出其帳目有問題並辭任,所以大家見到他擔任上市公司祕書的時候,應該都是一個警號。在2010年底,公司更換核數師

在這段時候中間,首都創投不停增加朗力福的持股量,至2011年7月增至約23%,而丘忠航當時也持有朗力福至7%。2010年12月,朗力福也購入德泰5%股權以上,至2011年5月增至超過9%,其後威利國際又認購公司股權,才減至約5.91%,加上當時丘忠航持有約22%股權,Webb的則稱公司已觸發了全面要約,需要提出全購。其後朗力福公告稱,「董事會認為,本公司先前或現在均無須因《收購守則》就身為可能受要約公司而採取任何步驟,而本公司股份亦無須停牌。」。

丘忠航除了在首都創投的職務外,據Webb先生的資料,也是威利國際、民豐控股、中國天化工(362,前東君化工、大慶石化)及皇朝傢私(1198,前中意控股)的董事,在2011年8月和同另一位首都創投董事徐德強涉嫌在首都創投製造交易,以方便配售股份被調查,現時尚在內幕交易審裁處聆訊中,調查報告尚未則出爐。在其後,丘忠辭不斷辭任董事,又減持首都創投的股份,據CCASS資料可見,他持倉都頗分散,股權則逐步集中在民豐控股為主要股東的Hennabun持有之中南證券之手。

另外,首都創投於朗力福的持股,在Webb先生在2011年8月撰文後持續減少,但持股又是集中在同一堆人之手,稍後再詳談。

(待續)

資料來源
1. 疑似傳銷公司可能在創業板借殼上市
http://www.inv168.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=67211

2.翱騰投資
http://www.avantcapital.com.hk/management-team.html


3. 翱騰揸重現金有特殊目的
http://the-sun.on.cc/cnt/finance/20120326/00434_050.html


4. 祝振駒資料
http://webb-site.com/dbpub/positions.asp?p=58060&hide=N

http://www.sfc.hk/sfcprd/eng/pr/html/Indi_Cond.jsp?charset=MS950&ceref=ACQ095&applNo=0002


5.Capital VC and Longlife
http://webb-site.com/articles/cvclonglife.asp


6.德泰中華投資有限公司二零一一年四月十二日財政司司長向市場失當行為審裁處發出的通知
http://www.mmt.gov.hk/eng/rulings/SKIC.Ruling.12042011.pdf

7. 關於 NHT Global
http://www.nhtglobal.com.hk/ch/about_01.php


8. NHT GLOBAL項目資料
http://www.chinavalue.net/General/Blog/2007-5-30/10574.aspx


9. 調查地下傳銷:雷克瑟絲「套」你沒商量(圖)
http://news.sina.com.cn/s/2004-04-13/09373121816.shtml


10. 然健環球生死劫
http://www.uuubuy.com/html/dongtai/dianzishangwuyingxiao/2011/0401/22671.html


11. Natural Health Trends Corp. 2009年年報
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/912061/000143774911008593/nhtc_10k-123110.htm


12. Natural Health Trends Corp. 2010年年報
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/912061/000143774912002813/nht_10k-123111.htm


朗力 力福 8037 購買 傳銷 業務 更新 未完
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=32574

華仁醫療(648)出售銳康藥業(6108)股權予銳康藥業(8037)

對倒換錢,http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/GEM/2014/1114/GLN20141114218_C.PDF
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/SEHK/2015/0226/LTN20150226689_C.pdf
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/SEHK/2016/0217/LTN20160217660_C.pdf
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/SEHK/2016/0406/LTN201604061508_C.pdf
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/SEHK/2016/0525/LTN20160525698_C.pdf
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/SEHK/2016/1202/LTN201612021802_C.pdf

華仁醫療(648,前祥華國際、軟庫發展、中國仁濟醫療)入股銳康醫藥後,逐步增加股權,後以換股收購,控制了超過60%股權,像極當年君陽金融 (0397,前合一集團、金寶國際集團、元開達利環保、星虹控股、康健醫療科技、香港體檢、中國保綠資產、君陽太陽能)購入絲路能源 (8250,前普思基因生物科技、確思醫藥、中國天然投資) 之套路,其後都是一路減持予其他股東或人頭,以出貨,今次確實高了一點,拿康健(3886)旗下的新銳醫藥(6108)散貨,對倒換錢,其後表現看來都是配售和減持之路了,大家都要小心。
華仁 醫療 648 出售 銳康 藥業 6108 股權 予銳 8037
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=226088

首都創投(2324,前德泰中華投資)專區(關係:華匯、0870、8037、8082)

1 : GS(14)@2011-05-18 21:59:23

(blank)
2 : GS(14)@2011-05-18 22:00:09

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20100928138_C.pdf

人力資源
於二零一零年六月三十日,本集團有2名僱員(不包括董事)。總員工成本(不包括董事酬金)約705,388港元(二零零九年:1,057,714港元)。彼等在本集團擔任文職、研究、業務發展及行政等職務。本集團薪酬政策符合現行市場慣例,並按個別僱員之表現及經驗而釐定其薪酬。

2 man band,開枱麻雀都唔夠,公司點聯誼?

greatsoup:
可以猜下枚

得兩丁友....咁份annual report 邊個去做....做會計入數都要有人做ga...outsource?..呢d公司上市黎做咩,

greatsoup
這間是21章,1個做基金經理,1個做會計,夠啦..
3 : GS(14)@2011-05-18 22:02:14

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... N201012011258_C.pdf

2324批股

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20110112573_C.pdf

2供1,每股0.3

見到金江大家識啦

自動波人:
金剛同忠楠,都係避一避好d
4 : GS(14)@2011-05-18 22:02:17

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20110222404_C.pdf
業績
5 : GS(14)@2011-05-18 22:02:32

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20110516472_C.pdf
看來投入最多是2324
6 : 拔刺者(4132)@2011-06-09 23:22:57

正興二世
7 : GS(14)@2011-06-11 09:39:43

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20110609698_C.pdf
華匯ed... 買一間就有又多四間入袋,徐先生今次死啦...

8037、8082他們都持有超過10%股權

870重組緊
8 : greatsoup38(830)@2011-07-10 17:59:17

http://www.mmt.gov.hk/eng/rulings/SKIC.Ruling.12042011.pdf
德泰中華投資有限公司
二零一一年四月十二日財政司司長根據《證券及期貨條例》(第571章)第252(2)條及附表9向市場失當行為審裁處發出的通知
9 : GS(14)@2011-08-14 20:06:36

http://webb-site.com/articles/cvclonglife.asp
Webb哥話丘忠航的持股在意義上已超過30%,觸發要約全面收購,但他無提出
10 : GS(14)@2011-08-14 20:06:48


11 : 200(9285)@2011-08-17 20:36:50

丘忠航涉持股超法規
股壇長毛踢爆 朗力福昨停牌
2011年08月17日

  (未有評分)
  瀏覽人次:1,600

  Facebook
  Twitter
  轉寄朋友

股壇長毛 David Webb近日又玩踢爆,今次對象是朗力福( 8037)、首都創投( 2324),關鍵人物則是首創大股東兼執董丘忠航。他質疑丘忠航透過私人投資,又藉朗力福及首都創投互相持股,共持朗力福和首都創投逾 30%權益,觸發全面收購而未提出,違反法規。 記者:周燕芬

受消息影響,朗力福昨停牌,稱待發佈股價敏感消息。首創收 0.31元,跌 1.6%。
David Webb列出 5大張紙,詳細道出丘忠航與朗力福和首都創投之間的關係。文章指出,首都創投早於 09年已入股朗力福,去年底朗力福亦開始於市場購入首都創投權益,有趣的事情於是開始出現。

建議證監會研全面收購
放大圖片

12345678910

按聯交所權益披露資料, Webb指, 7月底丘忠航透過首創已持朗力福 22.8%權益,加上丘忠航直接持有朗力福 7.99%權益,兩者直接共持有朗力福 30.79%權益,而早於 7月 25日更曾達 31.13%權益,他要求證監會決定丘忠航和首都創投對朗力福是否已觸及全面收購線,朗力福宜暫停買賣直至事件清晰。
而由於丘忠航直接持有首都創投 22.18%權益,朗力福則直接持有首都創投 8.92%,兩者合共持有首都創投達 31.1%,他質疑丘忠航和朗力福亦是一致行動人士。他建議證監會研究丘忠航和朗力福於首都創投是否一致行動人士,是否需要提出全面收購。由於事情或涉及兩間公司互相提全面收購,變成無意義之舉,他認為最後應由其中一家作出全面收購行動。
管理層獨立性受質疑

除股權上有密切關係外, Webb亦指出,朗力福主席張鴻,原來於 03年曾協助首都創投上市,張鴻當時為國泰君安銷售部副總裁。此外,朗力福獨立非執董陳慧殷來自首都創投持 30%權益的 CNI Bullion,任職銷售部董事,其獨立性亦受到質疑。
還有,去年 4月 9日,朗力福給予首都創投認購權,於未來 10年以每股 0.355元認購朗力福 50萬股,但卻沒有任何解釋。而兩間公司更可共用辦公室,去年 7月始一齊租用環球貿易中心( ICC) 76樓;並同時僱用鄭鄭會計師事務所,在在顯示兩間公司關係密切。

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/te ... 320&art_id=15531264

中南金融傑作也‧
12 : GS(14)@2011-08-17 21:02:27

CNI Bullion = 北方證券呀
13 : 200(9285)@2011-08-17 21:12:36

12樓提及
CNI Bullion = 北方證券呀=中國 北方金銀業


仲有一間金道貴金屬有限公司係fm104賣廣告‧
14 : GS(14)@2011-08-17 22:05:55

13樓提及
12樓提及
CNI Bullion = 北方證券呀=中國 北方金銀業


仲有一間金道貴金屬有限公司係fm104賣廣告‧


http://www.sfc.hk/sfcprd/eng/pr/ ... =AUE994&applNo=0001
呢間?
15 : 200(9285)@2011-08-17 22:09:07

http://24k.hk/
16 : GS(14)@2011-08-18 22:25:27

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20110817616_C.pdf
呢班人...


(6) 由於丘先生與本公司各自於二零一一年七月二十六日至二零一一年七月二十九日 期 間 進 行 之 一 連 串 交 易(而 丘 先 生 亦 未 就 此 遞 交 披 露 權 益 通 知),截 至 二 零
一 一 年 七 月 二 十 九 日,本 公 司 持 有 朗 力 福 已 發 行 股 本 之22.75%,而 丘 先 生 持
有 朗 力 福 已 發 行 股 本 之7.06%。
(7) 基 於 前 述 因 由,直 至 本 公 司 收 到 上 述 詢 問 後,本 公 司 方 才 察 覺 到 本 公 司 與 丘先 生 於 二 零 一 一 年 六 月 十 日 至 二 零 一 一 年 七 月 二 十 八 日 期 間 於 朗 力 福 已 發 行股 本 之 總 持 股 量 超 過30%。
(8) 雖 然 根 據《收 購 守 則》,本 公 司 被 假 定 為 與 丘 先 生 一 致 行 動,惟 因 本 公 司 相 信本 公 司 可 證 實,在 所 有 關 鍵 時 刻,本 公 司 與 丘 先 生 或 其 他 人 士 並 無 任 何 協 議
或 默 契(不 論 正 式 或 非 正 式)以 通 過 購 入 朗 力 福 之 表 決 權 而 合 作 取 得 或 鞏 固 對朗 力 福 之 控 制。
(9) 因 此,本 公 司 並 不 認 為 已 出 現 對 朗 力 福 股 份 提 出 全 面 要 約 的 任 何 責 任,而 本公 司 或 丘 先 生 均 無 意 對 朗 力 福 股 份 提 出 任 何 全 面 要 約。
17 : 200(9285)@2011-08-18 22:28:23

直 至 本 公 司 收 到 上 述 詢 問 後,本 公 司 方 才 察 覺 到

( 9 U P )
18 : GS(14)@2011-08-18 22:50:21

17樓提及
直 至 本 公 司 收 到 上 述 詢 問 後,本 公 司 方 才 察 覺 到

( 9 U P )


好似當人白痴,呢班高手玩野

8037
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... LN20110818008_C.pdf

丘 先 生 及 首 都 創 投 其 後 已 經 向 董 事 會 確 認:
1. 於 二 零 一 一 年 六 月 十 日 至 二 零 一 一 年 七 月 二 十 八 日 期 間 內,首 都 創 投 及 丘 先生於本公司之已發行股份的累積股權達30%以上,然而,首都創投及丘先生於二 零 一 一 年 八 月 十 二 日 後 方 察 覺 該 情 況;
2. 在所有關鍵時刻,根據《收購守則》的定義,丘先生與首都創投並非一致行動;及
3. 因 此,首 都 創 投 及 丘 先 生 均 認 為 上 述 股 權 並 無 產 生 就 本 公 司 普 通 股 提 出 強 制全 面 要 約 的 任 何 責 任,而 彼 等 均 無 意 就 此 提 出 任 何 全 面 要 約。
另 外 亦 謹 此 提 述 首 都 創 投 日 期 為 二 零 一 一 年 八 月 十 七 日 的 公 告。
19 : 200(9285)@2011-08-20 01:05:13

丘忠航辭任皇朝董事被研訊
2011年08月19日

  (未有評分)
  瀏覽人次:1,333

  Facebook
  Twitter
  轉寄朋友

【本報訊】首都創投( 2324)執行董事丘忠航被指涉及要對朗力福( 8037)提出全面收購後,又涉及市場失當行為而被研訊。皇朝傢俬( 1198)公佈,丘氏辭任獨立非執行董事,公告透露,市場失當行為審裁處已開始對丘氏研訊,以確定他有否從事首都創投前身,即德泰大中華的股份虛假交易和操縱證券市場等不當行為,但強調這純屬丘氏私事,與公司無關。丘氏事前也沒有向公司知會研訊一事。

朗力福復牌升近 9%

市場失當審裁處資料顯示,丘忠航於 2009年 1月 7日後,就討論德泰股份配售期間,曾於當年 1月 9日出售德泰股份,而當時出任主席的徐德強購入股份的交易,則被指涉嫌推高股價。
另外,首都創投公佈,公司與丘忠航方於今年 7月 25日分別持有 23.14%及 7.99%朗力福,合計逾 30%,兩者可能因被視為《收購守則》的「一致行動」人士,要提出全面收購一事,已獲證監會查詢跟進。不過首都創投及朗力福均強調,首都創投與丘氏並非一致行動,因此不會向朗力福提出全購。
首都創投及朗力福均指出,本月 12日證監致函詢問,才發覺首都創投及丘忠航按「一致行動」人士定義,在朗力福持股逾 30%,達全購觸發點。
但朗力福指出,首都創投及丘忠航在所有關鍵時刻並非一致行動,亦無提出全購責任,甚至毋須停牌。朗力福昨日復牌,股價扯高 8.7%,收報 0.25元。

出事了

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/te ... 320&art_id=15538145
20 : 拔刺者(4132)@2011-08-20 04:15:32

正式表示關注的那份
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20110819655_C.pdf

(何時能夠將通告的webb-site.com變為zkiz.com?湯兄smiley)
21 : GS(14)@2011-08-20 07:55:27

唔知啊,但呢單野前一排都出了,舊聞當新聞真是有點...
22 : 200(9285)@2011-08-20 21:10:24

丘忠航 及 歐陽啟初 大家也是中南系內人,佢地同主持人莊先生也有共同興趣
就係養馬了,兩位係澳門有隻配售馬叫北方勇士成績唔錯有5冠2亞算有馬運了‧
23 : GS(14)@2011-08-20 21:25:54

是咩,有無馬睇?
24 : 200(9285)@2011-08-20 21:29:59

23樓提及
是咩,有無馬睇?


http://www.mjc.mo/NEWMJCPAGE/blo ... 0&blog_type=2&lang=

ready for you .
25 : GS(14)@2011-08-20 21:34:05

唔識睇馬,但是好似唔太聽話...
26 : 200(9285)@2011-08-20 21:38:22

25樓提及
唔識睇馬,但是好似唔太聽話...


好馬來的,配售馬唔係隻隻好野特別是澳門‧
27 : 拔刺者(4132)@2011-08-20 21:40:14

26樓提及
25樓提及
唔識睇馬,但是好似唔太聽話...
好馬來的,配售馬唔係隻隻好野特別是澳門‧
昨晚贏了派3.3倍
28 : 200(9285)@2011-08-20 21:46:25

27樓提及
26樓提及
25樓提及
唔識睇馬,但是好似唔太聽話...
好馬來的,配售馬唔係隻隻好野特別是澳門‧
昨晚贏了派3.3倍


丘忠航無拉頭馬
29 : 拔刺者(4132)@2011-08-20 21:47:11

c+拉一樣啫
30 : 200(9285)@2011-09-15 20:59:04

推介垃圾
http://www.hkdailynews.com.hk/finance.php?id=181240
31 : GS(14)@2011-09-15 21:00:37

沉瀣一氣
32 : 200(9285)@2011-09-15 21:00:44

司徒明慧股票牌轉左公司

但佢仲有幫中國北方做野

http://www.sfc.hk/sfcprd/eng/pr/ ... =AXI117&applNo=0002

http://www.cni-gold.com/inner_blog_detail.php?id=121


咁奇怪既
33 : GS(14)@2011-09-15 21:02:15

查下間怡安又點,好平二十幾就得
34 : 200(9285)@2011-09-15 21:05:26

沉瀣一氣???
35 : GS(14)@2011-09-15 21:13:13

你見周老師同班人的guanxi好緊密就知啦
36 : GS(14)@2011-10-01 14:07:22

叫做賺錢的
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... N201109301071_C.pdf
展望未來,本集團預期美國及歐洲之經濟增長將放緩。市場避險情緒升溫可能引發更大的市場不確定性,發達國家發展中國家均難倖免。即便如此,美聯儲承諾再維持兩年之低利率,此對股本投資而言實屬有利。另一利好的一面是,中國政府於近期進一步收緊當前之宏觀政策的機會似乎減低。董事將採取審慎措施以管理本集團之投資組合。
37 : greatsoup38(830)@2011-10-22 10:43:42

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20111021126_C.pdf
邊個出假支票?

茲提述一宗最近由一名Chan Ping Yee先生 (「原告」) 在高等法院對本公司 (作為被
告) 提出的訴訟,訴訟編號為 HCA 1700/2011。訴訟理由涉及一張日期為二零一一
年五月一日,金額為39,000,000港元的未能承兌支票,原告聲稱該筆款項須向其支付
但在欲兌現該支票時遭拒兌。
本公司在徹底調查此事及就此充分諮詢過法律意見後,確信原告的索償毫無理據,
因為 (1) 所述的支票在該情況下,並不構成可執行之票據;及(2)根據匯票條例,
所述的支票在發出上述訴訟的傳訊令狀前已經註銷。

http://sdinotice.hkex.com.hk/di/ ... ee&src=MAIN&lang=ZH
同名同姓的人叫陳秉義,當年他就認購了這批8%債...

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... LN20060216035_C.pdf

這間Concept Capital 是否和德泰有關? 這筆錢剛好和他欠的錢差不多
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... LN20110621038_C.pdf
38 : greatsoup38(830)@2011-10-22 10:44:46

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... LN20101019002_C.pdf
原來佢都有同人一齊買了8351
39 : greatsoup38(830)@2011-10-22 10:45:01

http://sdinotice.hkex.com.hk/di/ ... ee&src=MAIN&lang=ZH
40 : GS(14)@2012-01-19 00:03:46

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20120118664_C.pdf
茲提述首都創投有限公司 (「本公司」) 分別於二零一一年八月十九日、十二月
十二日及十二月二十九日就市場失當行為審裁處對本公司兩名執行董事的查詢
所刊發的公告 (「該等公告」)。除另有界定或文意另有所指外,本公告所用詞
彙與該等公告所界定者具有相同涵義。
本公司董事會現就該查詢的進展提供進一步資料,實質聽證會將增加兩天,即二
零一二年一月十八日及一月二十日。
本公司在需要及適當時會作進一步公告。
41 : 摘星(6904)@2012-02-26 11:57:40

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20120224457_C.pdf

公告及通告 - [中期業績]

截至二零一一年十二月三十一日止六個月中期業績公布

截至二零一一年十二月三十一日止六個月(「本期間」),本集團錄得負數營業額
107,000,000港元(二零一零年:正數20,700,000港元)及本公司股權持有人應佔虧損
86,500,000港元(二零一零年:溢利40,500,000港元)。



本公司股權持有人應佔業績由
盈轉虧,主要由於全球投資環境不穩定。本期間之財務資產虧損淨額為111,100,000
港元,而去年同期則錄得溢利20,000,000港元。於本期間,本集團聯營公司中國北
方金銀業有限公司之表現保持理想,為本集團帶來應佔溢利30,900,000港元。
42 : traveller(1405)@2012-03-05 23:36:52

邱生又上場,佢都幾好搵
43 : 200(9285)@2012-03-15 21:13:02

中環在線:首都創投 大股東唔撈

中期業績見紅嘅首都創投( 2324),再有董事唔撈,繼舊年 11月非執行董事蕭少滔辭職之後,家就連大股東兼執行董事丘忠航都唔做董事。

人事變動頻頻

其實丘忠航同另一位董事徐德強,舊年 8月曾經因為涉嫌虛假交易、操控股價及操控證券市場三項控罪,被市場失當行為審裁處進行調查,自此之後,公司亦陸續開始出現人事變動,上星期一就重新委任咗劉大貝做董事會主席,邱恩明及張國裕就分別做執董同非執董。今次丘忠航退任,唔知係咪公司想洗底嘅先兆呢?

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/te ... 320&art_id=16154170
44 : GS(14)@2012-03-16 22:31:34

唉,華匯玩
45 : 200(9285)@2012-03-16 22:34:02

44樓提及
唉,華匯玩


丘忠航唔係華匯人嗎?
46 : GS(14)@2012-03-16 22:34:48

是啊,但有事
47 : 200(9285)@2012-03-16 22:39:44

46樓提及
是啊,但有事


莊先生炒q埋佢‧
48 : GS(14)@2012-03-16 22:40:15

遲D另有用途
49 : 200(9285)@2012-03-31 17:10:49

27樓提及
26樓提及
25樓提及
唔識睇馬,但是好似唔太聽話...
好馬來的,配售馬唔係隻隻好野特別是澳門‧
昨晚贏了派3.3倍


隻新馬琴晚贏了兩位也無出現‧
50 : 200(9285)@2012-04-14 13:57:33

入左的新馬也不要了‧
http://www.mjc.mo/race/info/hrs_info.php?brand_no=C204
51 : GS(14)@2012-04-14 19:34:11

Like Mr. Hui
52 : GS(14)@2012-05-03 00:35:26

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... N201205021788_C.pdf
買垃圾

收購事項
董事欣然宣佈,於二零一二年五月二日(交易時段後),本公司與賣方訂立買賣協
議,以收購Long Surplus之權益。本公司根據買賣協議應付之代價將以向賣方配發
及發行代價股份 (入賬列作繳足) 清償。發行代價股份須待聯交所上市委員會批准
代價股份上市及買賣後,方可作實。
根據買賣協議,本公司同意購買,而賣方亦同意出售Long Surplus之全部已發行股
本,代價為19,008,480港元,將以發行84,116,984股代價股份清償,代價股份相當
於本公司現有已發行股本約10.00%,另相當於經發行代價股份擴大之本公司已發
行股本約9.09%。
每股代價股份之發行價為0.226 港元,較股份於最後交易日期之收市價每股0.228
港元折讓約0.88%,另較股份於買賣協議日期前過去五個完整交易日之平均收市價
每股0.233港元折讓約3.00%。
..
(G) 本公司接獲且全權酌情信納由本公司所委聘之獨立專業估值師行對Go
Markets Pty Limited全部股本權益作出之估值報告指其於二零一二年四月三
十日之公平市值為不少於501,480,000港元;

...
有關LONG SURPLUS之資料
Long Surplus為一間投資控股公司,其持有247 Capital Limited之241,642股每股面值
1.00美元B類股份,相當於其全部已發行股本之3.98%。247 Capital Limited擁有Go
Markets Pty Limited之100%股本權益,該公司由二零零六年起於澳洲從事網上貿易
業務。Go Markets Pty Limited為「直通式處理」(Straight Through Processing)供應商,
專門為零售投資者提供網上外匯交易。董事已獲告知,Go Markets Pty Limited之客
戶基礎遍及全球超過120個國家,擁有逾16,000個各戶賬戶。Go Markets Pty Limited
於荷蘭亦設有歐洲支部。
據董事於作出一切合理查詢後所深知、盡悉及確信,且經Long Surplus確認,Long
Surplus及其最終實益擁有人均為獨立第三方,與本公司及本公司之關連人士概無關
連。
53 : GS(14)@2012-05-03 00:36:02

http://www.gomarketsaus.com/
54 : donaldleung0804(5940)@2012-05-09 10:43:15

小魚又推8082了!
55 : GS(14)@2012-05-09 21:26:36

正一垃圾粉皮
56 : 200(9285)@2012-05-23 23:20:19

證監會昨對首都創投(2324)及公司前董事丘忠航(圖)採取紀律行動,指兩者於去年6月增持朗力福(8037)至30.19%股權,觸發全面收購責任,但並無提出全面收購,違反《收購合併守則》。
證監向丘忠航施加冷淡對待令,禁止他直接或間接使用香港證券市場設施,為期18個月,由今日起至明年11月22日止,並公開譴責丘氏及首都創投在此事上的行為。
首都創投是一間根據聯交所《上市規則》第21章上市的投資公司,主要投資於中港上市及非上市公司,丘忠航在事發時是公司執行董事、大股東兼投資委員會成員。
證監指,在事發期間,丘氏管理兩個投資賬戶,一個屬於首都創投,另一個屬於他的個人投資,在買入朗力福股份時,他是唯一決策者。他聲稱,因計算錯誤才買入過多朗力福股份,雖然他知道需要把公司及個人於朗力福的合併持股量保持於30%以下,但無證據顯示他認真地實施有效的合規程序。丘忠航及首都創投均承認違反《收購守則》,並同意今次紀律處分行動。

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/financeestate/art/20120523/16360445
57 : GS(14)@2012-06-19 00:14:48

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20120618005_C.pdf
本公告乃由本公司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
條而作出。
首都創投有限公司(「本公司」)董事會(「董事會」)各董事(「董事」)謹此公佈,於
二零一二年六月十五日(交易時段後),本公司與一名獨立第三方(與本公司董事、最
高行政人員、主要股東及管理層股東或彼等各自之任何聯繫人士(定義見上市規則)
概無關連,且非與上述人士一致行動)(「獨立第三方」)訂立意向書(「意向書」)。意
向書乃有關獨立第三方認購佔本公司經擴大已發行股本不低於10%及不超過30%之新
股份,認購價有待商定(「認購事項」)
根據意向書條款,於認講事項完成時,獨立第三方及其一致行動人士將會持有本公司
經擴大發行股本不超過30%。除訂約方之保密條文外,意向書之所有其他條款均無法
律約束力。

58 : i3640(1387)@2012-07-08 16:38:50

1/復牌呢味野都可以夾份搞齊齊上?!
2/佢地系親戚檔?!

“根據託管協議,本公司之附屬公司Winning Point已於簽訂託管協議時支付不可退還誠意金2,500,000港元。”
06/07/2012   00901  萊福資本  有關金至尊珠寶控股有限公司復牌建議之託管協議之最新資料
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20120706622_C.pdf
“根據託管協議,本公司的附屬公司Huge Energy於簽訂託管協議時已支付不可退還的誠意金2,500,000港元”
06/07/2012   02324  首都創投  有關金至尊珠寶控股有限公司復牌建議的託管協議的最新情況
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20120706592_C.pdf
59 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-07-08 16:46:28

1. 可以,好多都是例如286

2. 都算是親戚,同一堆人
60 : kwuntl(19490)@2012-07-26 23:12:58

首都創投(HKSE:2324.HK - 新聞 - 公司資料)(前名德泰中華)大股東兼前執行董事丘忠航,以及集團執行董事徐德強,被市場失當行為審裁處裁定,違反《證券及期貨條例》有關虛假交易、操控價格及操控證券市場的罪名成立。

事發在2009年1月,首都創投於同月13日配售1.5015億股新股,配售價為0.045元,較當天停牌前收市價折讓18.2%。而於1月8日的收市價只有0.042元,股價大升原因是兩人的內幕交易所致。丘忠航於1月9日收市前20分鐘,把超過180萬股股份售予徐德強,每股介乎0.49至0.55元。(ir/a)


其實點解會係丘忠航同徐德強親自出手...? 唔搵人頭去做...?
61 : GS(14)@2012-07-27 09:56:43

60樓提及
首都創投(HKSE:2324.HK - 新聞 - 公司資料)(前名德泰中華)大股東兼前執行董事丘忠航,以及集團執行董事徐德強,被市場失當行為審裁處裁定,違反《證券及期貨條例》有關虛假交易、操控價格及操控證券市場的罪名成立。
事發在2009年1月,首都創投於同月13日配售1.5015億股新股,配售價為0.045元,較當天停牌前收市價折讓18.2%。而於1月8日的收市價只有0.042元,股價大升原因是兩人的內幕交易所致。丘忠航於1月9日收市前20分鐘,把超過180萬股股份售予徐德強,每股介乎0.49至0.55元。(ir/a)
其實點解會係丘忠航同徐德強親自出手...? 唔搵人頭去做...?


有人建議的,自己睇下份野啦
http://www.mmt.gov.hk/eng/reports/SKIC_Report_Part_I.pdf
62 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-22 14:27:09

求救入左 2324

小弟上2个星期和朋友食飯,我朋友帶左个肥仔一起到場,並說肥仔為新進財金精英.局上肥仔財金精英不斷推介隻2324.話短期内会有surprise。叫我唔好miss 左个幾会. $0.156左右買左成2球……吊,今日得反0.115….点好?
63 : GS(14)@2012-08-22 14:44:38

62樓提及
求救入左 2324
小弟上2个星期和朋友食飯,我朋友帶左个肥仔一起到場,並說肥仔為新進財金精英.局上肥仔財金精英不斷推介隻2324.話短期内会有surprise。叫我唔好miss 左个幾会. $0.156左右買左成2球……吊,今日得反0.115….点好?

斬,講完

呢個風報紙講幾百次,無句真
64 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-22 14:50:14

63樓提及
62樓提及
求救入左 2324
小弟上2个星期和朋友食飯,我朋友帶左个肥仔一起到場,並說肥仔為新進財金精英.局上肥仔財金精英不斷推介隻2324.話短期内会有surprise。叫我唔好miss 左个幾会. $0.156左右買左成2球……吊,今日得反0.115….点好?

斬,講完
呢個風報紙講幾百次,無句真



大股东要玩完?冇得等?
65 : GS(14)@2012-08-22 14:53:16

64樓提及
63樓提及
62樓提及
求救入左 2324
小弟上2个星期和朋友食飯,我朋友帶左个肥仔一起到場,並說肥仔為新進財金精英.局上肥仔財金精英不斷推介隻2324.話短期内会有surprise。叫我唔好miss 左个幾会. $0.156左右買左成2球……吊,今日得反0.115….点好?

斬,講完
呢個風報紙講幾百次,無句真

大股东要玩完?冇得等?

隻野向下炒的
66 : kwuntl(19490)@2012-08-22 15:12:22

我都有個朋友介紹我買呢隻...累我埋單輸左一千蚊...
金融界老X何其多...
67 : GS(14)@2012-08-22 16:08:57

66樓提及
我都有個朋友介紹我買呢隻...累我埋單輸左一千蚊...
金融界老X何其多...


我唔明點解仲有人輸在這隻股
68 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-23 10:19:54

67樓提及
66樓提及
我都有個朋友介紹我買呢隻...累我埋單輸左一千蚊...
金融界老X何其多...

我唔明點解仲有人輸在這隻股



曰日波幅成6-8%,成个赌场咁.....
69 : GS(14)@2012-08-23 10:20:36

68樓提及
67樓提及
66樓提及
我都有個朋友介紹我買呢隻...累我埋單輸左一千蚊...
金融界老X何其多...

我唔明點解仲有人輸在這隻股

曰日波幅成6-8%,成个赌场咁.....


直情是九死一生
70 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-23 10:25:28

69樓提及
68樓提及
67樓提及
66樓提及
我都有個朋友介紹我買呢隻...累我埋單輸左一千蚊...
金融界老X何其多...

我唔明點解仲有人輸在這隻股

曰日波幅成6-8%,成个赌场咁.....

直情是九死一生



今日斬左,輸左8个。
71 : GS(14)@2012-08-23 10:27:17

70樓提及
69樓提及
68樓提及
67樓提及
66樓提及
我都有個朋友介紹我買呢隻...累我埋單輸左一千蚊...
金融界老X何其多...

我唔明點解仲有人輸在這隻股

曰日波幅成6-8%,成个赌场咁.....

直情是九死一生

今日斬左,輸左8个。


希望唔好我烏雅口累你可版輸少D... 因為呢D 股實在太cheap
72 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-23 10:45:25

71樓提及
70樓提及
69樓提及
68樓提及
67樓提及
66樓提及
我都有個朋友介紹我買呢隻...累我埋單輸左一千蚊...
金融界老X何其多...

我唔明點解仲有人輸在這隻股

曰日波幅成6-8%,成个赌场咁.....

直情是九死一生

今日斬左,輸左8个。

希望唔好我烏雅口累你可版輸少D... 因為呢D 股實在太cheap


多谢你先啱,其实隻野有D咩事?点解突然插得咁利害?有故仔?
73 : GS(14)@2012-08-23 10:47:24

72樓提及
71樓提及
70樓提及
69樓提及
68樓提及
67樓提及
66樓提及
我都有個朋友介紹我買呢隻...累我埋單輸左一千蚊...
金融界老X何其多...

我唔明點解仲有人輸在這隻股

曰日波幅成6-8%,成个赌场咁.....

直情是九死一生

今日斬左,輸左8个。

希望唔好我烏雅口累你可版輸少D... 因為呢D 股實在太cheap

多谢你先啱,其实隻野有D咩事?点解突然插得咁利害?有故仔?

隻野個老細被人捉左內幕交易走左你咪唔是唔知吧,可能他要散貨找你做替死鬼
74 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-23 11:04:40

73樓提及
72樓提及
71樓提及
70樓提及
69樓提及
68樓提及
67樓提及
66樓提及
我都有個朋友介紹我買呢隻...累我埋單輸左一千蚊...
金融界老X何其多...

我唔明點解仲有人輸在這隻股

曰日波幅成6-8%,成个赌场咁.....

直情是九死一生

今日斬左,輸左8个。

希望唔好我烏雅口累你可版輸少D... 因為呢D 股實在太cheap

多谢你先啱,其实隻野有D咩事?点解突然插得咁利害?有故仔?

隻野個老細被人捉左內幕交易走左你咪唔是唔知吧,可能他要散貨找你做替死鬼


唔知......個朋友話会升爆.....吊.....
75 : GS(14)@2012-08-23 11:05:52

升爆都唔會話你聽啦
76 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-23 11:08:33

75樓提及
升爆都唔會話你聽啦


吊,班仆街老千幾時死呀...
77 : GS(14)@2012-08-23 11:09:23

76樓提及
75樓提及
升爆都唔會話你聽啦

吊,班仆街老千幾時死呀...


唔知呀,唔聽扮傻就得
78 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-23 11:11:25

77樓提及
76樓提及
75樓提及
升爆都唔會話你聽啦

吊,班仆街老千幾時死呀...

唔知呀,唔聽扮傻就得


Thank you~~~
79 : hopingu(1296)@2012-08-23 13:34:16

留意湯財的文, 未必可以發達(甚至阻大家發達), 但肯定可以輸少好多冤枉錢係ot 股身上~~

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/financeestate/art/20120823/16627593
投資一周:發達要賺窮人錢

首都創投(2324)的故事:上星期,一位線人打電話過來,說首都創投(2324)會炒起,那時的股價是0.16元。誰知過了兩天,不但不升,反而跌至0.14元。
我沒有買,但作為專業蠱惑仔,馬上致電線人,爆着粗說﹕「我買了50萬錢,家陣點算先(下略100字粗口)……」
他說﹕「好大沽壓,現在先放下去,會跌至0.12元以下,收齊貨先再踢返上來。」
我說﹕「你哋不是好乾嘅咩?邊個有貨掟你?」
他說﹕「有條友叫『 T君』,在高位買了幾百萬錢,猛咁沽貨。我梗係把股價質低,接齊貨,先至炒啦!」
「咁而家即係點?」
「 T君分開五日沽貨,沽清了,所以股價也已穩定下來。」他說﹕「家陣二三線咁旺,隻嘢又得一億市值咁多,我都要炒返轉,賺返點錢啦,如果唔係要隻殼來做乜?」
80 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-23 13:41:41

79樓提及
留意湯財的文, 未必可以發達(甚至阻大家發達), 但肯定可以輸少好多冤枉錢係ot 股身上~~
http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/financeestate/art/20120823/16627593
投資一周:發達要賺窮人錢
首都創投(2324)的故事:上星期,一位線人打電話過來,說首都創投(2324)會炒起,那時的股價是0.16元。誰知過了兩天,不但不升,反而跌至0.14元。
我沒有買,但作為專業蠱惑仔,馬上致電線人,爆着粗說﹕「我買了50萬錢,家陣點算先(下略100字粗口)……」
他說﹕「好大沽壓,現在先放下去,會跌至0.12元以下,收齊貨先再踢返上來。」
我說﹕「你哋不是好乾嘅咩?邊個有貨掟你?」
他說﹕「有條友叫『 T君』,在高位買了幾百萬錢,猛咁沽貨。我梗係把股價質低,接齊貨,先至炒啦!」
「咁而家即係點?」
「 T君分開五日沽貨,沽清了,所以股價也已穩定下來。」他說﹕「家陣二三線咁旺,隻嘢又得一億市值咁多,我都要炒返轉,賺返點錢啦,如果唔係要隻殼來做乜?」



......................................!!!
81 : GS(14)@2012-08-24 09:28:01

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20120823716_C.pdf
配售8,400萬股@11.3仙

配售之所得款項淨額約9,000,000港元。董事會擬視乎市況及投資機會而將所得款
項淨額用作投資及營運資金。
82 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-24 12:49:34

81樓提及
http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/SEHK/2012/0823/LTN20120823716_C.pdf
配售8,400萬股@11.3仙
配售之所得款項淨額約9,000,000港元。董事會擬視乎市況及投資機會而將所得款
項淨額用作投資及營運資金。



大股东係威利,邱中行比人踢走左.
83 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-08-24 12:53:12

是呀,無錯
84 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-24 12:56:01

83樓提及
是呀,無錯



邱中行仲有D咩?D fds 話佢好劲.
85 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-08-24 13:09:09

84樓提及
83樓提及
是呀,無錯

邱中行仲有D咩?D fds 話佢好劲.


他勁個鬼... 幾萬銀街數都畀唔起,個個都勁做唔到生意都是廢
86 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-24 13:16:08

85樓提及
84樓提及
83樓提及
是呀,無錯

邱中行仲有D咩?D fds 話佢好劲.

他勁個鬼... 幾萬銀街數都畀唔起,個個都勁做唔到生意都是廢



哈…幾萬銀街數都畀唔起,未同我差唔多。佢又做淫爱堂經理,吊完來係空心牛老官。
87 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-08-24 13:18:25

86樓提及
85樓提及
84樓提及
83樓提及
是呀,無錯

邱中行仲有D咩?D fds 話佢好劲.

他勁個鬼... 幾萬銀街數都畀唔起,個個都勁做唔到生意都是廢

哈…幾萬銀街數都畀唔起,未同我差唔多。佢又做淫爱堂經理,吊完來係空心牛老官。


唔作大個屎眼邊個信佢呀
88 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-24 13:24:09

87樓提及
86樓提及
85樓提及
84樓提及
83樓提及
是呀,無錯

邱中行仲有D咩?D fds 話佢好劲.

他勁個鬼... 幾萬銀街數都畀唔起,個個都勁做唔到生意都是廢

哈…幾萬銀街數都畀唔起,未同我差唔多。佢又做淫爱堂經理,吊完來係空心牛老官。

唔作大個屎眼邊個信佢呀


今次玩完鸟。
89 : oman(1154)@2012-08-24 13:33:01

STARMAN'S COLUMN - 江小魚
首創主席暗助「保釣」  
(2012年08月24日)

所謂港澳「保釣勇士」到釣魚台「宣示主權」,原來整隊人能夠成行,都要拜民間累捐超過七位數字之助,收了錢,怎可以不出海?這些錢,等同「戲金」?
日本右翼分子也到尖閣諸島插上太陽旗。其實,若不帶著所謂有點盲目的民族主義角度,客觀而言,這群島嶼,西方人稱之為Pinnacle Islands,日文譯之為尖閣諸島(Senkaku)。
中華人民共和國叫作釣魚島,在台灣的中華民國,則稱之為釣魚台。不少香港人叫「釣魚台」,可能政治不正確,因北京方面是叫「釣魚島」。
很多中國人都以為,中日關係「卡」在歷史問題,至今仍爭拗不斷。不過,這款想法似乎頗有問題,也反映持此論點的有關蛋頭專家不學無術。
早在1972年日中兩國建交,在「歷史問題」上──即二戰當中的中日戰爭問題的處理上,中日兩國已達成共識;日本侵略了中國,給中國政府和中國人民帶來巨大傷害和災難,日本對此進行由衷反省。
這一共識實現了中日兩國的邦交正常化,它意味著兩國從政治和外交意義上已就歷史問題達成了共識。否則,中日根本無法建立邦交,時任中共總理周恩來亦不可能同意並簽字,因這無法給國民合理交代。
周恩來總理在40年前實現中日邦交正常化的邏輯很清楚。歷史是客觀存在的,誰也改變不了,今天中日兩國人民其實面對的關鍵不在歷史本身,而是在於對歷史的認識。「歷史認識問題」即我們如何認識當年發生的歷史事件,這才是主要關鍵點。日本人,和中國人差異有多大?大家可能敢認而不敢講,正因有差異,看同一件事,自然有不同觀點。
中共「十八大」快將召開,所謂保釣不過是政治姿態的目光轉移;其實日本都幾無癮,你中國內部要「講數」,就搵著日本來搞,日本國內輿論對此清楚不過。
個人最討厭香港某些媒體,狗吠甚麼「中日必將一戰」!香港人好想打仗咩?到時股、樓「冧」到七彩呀!到時戰情稍見嚴峻,全國糧食供作軍需,無多餘可輸港,餓死你班友呀!中日必將一戰,知唔知自己講乜呀!
某周刊報道今次所謂「保釣」,提及一位暗地補給糧水的台灣猛人、中國國民黨中常委劉大貝,其現任職首都創投(2324)主席;我曾和他在「福臨門」吃過一次晚飯,當然只講股票不談政治。
我當時在想,他在中台兩邊均「吃得開」,現又坐正首都創投主席,難免幻想,該股未來究竟有何大龍鳳搞作?
90 : Alfred Ho(32091)@2012-08-24 13:36:02

89樓提及
STARMAN'S COLUMN - 江小魚
首創主席暗助「保釣」
(2012年08月24日)
所謂港澳「保釣勇士」到釣魚台「宣示主權」,原來整隊人能夠成行,都要拜民間累捐超過七位數字之助,收了錢,怎可以不出海?這些錢,等同「戲金」?
日本右翼分子也到尖閣諸島插上太陽旗。其實,若不帶著所謂有點盲目的民族主義角度,客觀而言,這群島嶼,西方人稱之為Pinnacle Islands,日文譯之為尖閣諸島(Senkaku)。
中華人民共和國叫作釣魚島,在台灣的中華民國,則稱之為釣魚台。不少香港人叫「釣魚台」,可能政治不正確,因北京方面是叫「釣魚島」。
很多中國人都以為,中日關係「卡」在歷史問題,至今仍爭拗不斷。不過,這款想法似乎頗有問題,也反映持此論點的有關蛋頭專家不學無術。
早在1972年日中兩國建交,在「歷史問題」上──即二戰當中的中日戰爭問題的處理上,中日兩國已達成共識;日本侵略了中國,給中國政府和中國人民帶來巨大傷害和災難,日本對此進行由衷反省。
這一共識實現了中日兩國的邦交正常化,它意味著兩國從政治和外交意義上已就歷史問題達成了共識。否則,中日根本無法建立邦交,時任中共總理周恩來亦不可能同意並簽字,因這無法給國民合理交代。
周恩來總理在40年前實現中日邦交正常化的邏輯很清楚。歷史是客觀存在的,誰也改變不了,今天中日兩國人民其實面對的關鍵不在歷史本身,而是在於對歷史的認識。「歷史認識問題」即我們如何認識當年發生的歷史事件,這才是主要關鍵點。日本人,和中國人差異有多大?大家可能敢認而不敢講,正因有差異,看同一件事,自然有不同觀點。
中共「十八大」快將召開,所謂保釣不過是政治姿態的目光轉移;其實日本都幾無癮,你中國內部要「講數」,就搵著日本來搞,日本國內輿論對此清楚不過。
個人最討厭香港某些媒體,狗吠甚麼「中日必將一戰」!香港人好想打仗咩?到時股、樓「冧」到七彩呀!到時戰情稍見嚴峻,全國糧食供作軍需,無多餘可輸港,餓死你班友呀!中日必將一戰,知唔知自己講乜呀!
某周刊報道今次所謂「保釣」,提及一位暗地補給糧水的台灣猛人、中國國民黨中常委劉大貝,其現任職首都創投(2324)主席;我曾和他在「福臨門」吃過一次晚飯,當然只講股票不談政治。
我當時在想,他在中台兩邊均「吃得開」,現又坐正首都創投主席,難免幻想,該股未來究竟有何大龍鳳搞作?






劉大貝係中南人????
91 : GS(14)@2012-08-24 23:08:12

他話是就是啦,打手
92 : kwuntl(19490)@2012-09-12 17:53:21

呢隻係咪想向下炒...?
93 : GS(14)@2012-09-12 22:29:54

92樓提及
呢隻係咪想向下炒...?



94 : GS(14)@2012-09-28 00:32:30

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20120927639_C.pdf
炒股蝕死左,無錢

業務回顧及前景
於回顧年度內,經濟問題不僅局限於歐洲及北美地區,中國及其他發展中國家亦
出現增長倒退,情況令人憂慮。現時令人擔心的是新興國家的強大經濟體系亦將
陷入西方經濟發展放緩的困局。全球投資氣氛因此變得更加脆弱。由於投資環
境正在不斷惡化,本集團按公平值計入損益之財務資產錄得虧損約153,100,000港
元。除上文所述之上市投資外,可供出售投資– Quidam Assets Limited之估值亦受
到市場不確定因素之不利影響。Quidam Assets Limited投資之公允值變動虧損約
15,000,000港元已經於本年度確認。
在低息環境下,貴金屬已經成為對抗通脹之熱門投資產品,導致年內金銀交易活
動頻仍,本集團聯營公司中國北方金銀業有限公司因而表現出色,本集團分佔其
溢利高達49,100,000港元,部分彌補本集團股本投資平平之表現。
除現有業務外,於二零一二年五月,本集團收購Go Markets Pty Limited投資,其
作為「直通式處理」(Straight Through Processing)供應商,專門為零售投資者提供網
上外匯交易。收購代價為數約19,000,000港元,以本公司配發及發行約84,100,000
股股份予賣方的方式支付。
儘管投資環境自去年底起重大改變,本集團為加強資本及股東基礎、提升本集團
競爭力及參與具有較高發展潛力之項目,本公司於年內進行配售。本公司於二零
一一年八月成功按每股0.3港元配售約250,000,000股股份,配售所得款項總額約
75,000,000港元。
展望將來,本集團預期全球經濟增長將持續放緩。市場避險情緒升溫可能引發更
大的市場不確定性和波動,發達國家和發展中國家均難倖免。然而,二零一二年
九月已經宣佈第三期量化寬鬆。聯邦儲備局推出每月四百億美元、不設屆滿日期
的新債券購買計劃,以購買機構的按揭擔保證券,並繼續維持超低利率政策最少
至二零一五年中,其對股本投資而言實屬有利。另一利好的一面是,中國政府於
短期內進一步收緊當前之宏觀政策的機會似乎減低。董事將採取審慎措施以管理
本集團之投資組合。
95 : wilyty(1376)@2012-09-28 08:36:49

BIG C is really amazing
96 : david395(4434)@2012-09-29 10:21:40

瞬間賺幾球

首都創投極具爆升潛力

黃嘉俊

中國北方證券集團有限公司副總裁

Leo@cnigroup.com.hk



‧劉本身曾任國民黨中常委,在台灣的人脈網絡強大,絕對勝任兆豐票券董事長的身份。

‧首都創投現時的估值極度低廉,每股資產淨值為0.7元,折讓高達八成半。



現時在市場上,大折讓的股分有很多,但要捉摸到一隻會大幅抽升的,是有一定的困難。如筆者早前提及的首都創投(02324),雖然股價未有大炒作,但以現市值計,其實是偏低。加上近日台灣有報章報道,首都創投現主席劉大貝已被內定委任為台灣「兆豐票券」的董事長,劉本身曾任國民黨中常委,在台灣的人脈網絡強大,絕對勝任兆豐票券董事長的身分。



奕黧}始注意,若劉大貝在兆豐上任董事長後,其香港旗艦首都創投的前景應有一定憧憬,而筆者最近留意到多左「唉-bank」牌掛入,不知道是不是「唉-bank」或「專業投資者」消息突別靈通入十球博中獎,還是對公司前中短線都有信心。



首都創投現時的估值極度低廉,現價不夠0.1元,每股資產淨值為0.7元,折讓高達八成半。現時市值僅1億,連主板淨殼價都未達到,因此股價要翻兩番也不是難事。加上,技術指標(14)RSI約為12.2,已呈非常超賣,近日該股成交開始活躍,建議收集後,耐心等侯爆發,以其超落後走勢,以及近期市場瘋炒落後股分而言,大幅向下風險不高。加上首都創投日日波幅都有7至8%,升一格就有錢落袋。
97 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-09-29 10:36:11

我想笑,最新報告話得番4毛都唔夠
98 : GS(14)@2012-10-10 00:57:42

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20121009377_C.pdf
執行董事及董事會主席之辭任
首都創投有限公司 (「本公司」) 董事會 (「董事會」) 宣布,劉大貝博士 (「劉博
士」) 已辭任本公司執行董事、董事會主席及投資委員會主席,由二零一二年十月九
日起生效。
劉博士辭任之原因是最近獲台灣官方財政部委任為兆豐票券金融股份有限公司董事
長,根據台灣當局的規定,未經特別許可,不得兼任其他公司的董事職務。劉博士
確認彼與董事會並無爭議,且概無有關其辭任的其他事宜須促請股東注意。
首席顧問之委任
董事會欣然宣布,由二零一二年十月九日起,劉博士已獲委任為本公司首席顧問 「( 首
席顧問」) ,就本公司的策略規劃及整體發展出謀獻策。首席顧問並不是董事會成員。
授權代表之變更
董事會亦宣布,由二零一二年十月九日起,劉博士不再擔任本公司按聯交所證券上
市規則第3.05條的要求而設的授權代表 (「授權代表」),執行董事及投資委員會成員
孔凡鵬先生已獲委接任授權代表之職務。
董事會謹藉此機會向劉博士於任內對本公司所作出之寶貴貢獻由衷致謝,又歡迎劉
博士及孔先生出任本公司的新職務。
99 : Vincemgm12(32446)@2012-10-10 08:59:48

2324会唔会是885的走勢翻板呢?尋底中!
100 : GS(14)@2012-10-10 21:54:14

99樓提及
2324会唔会是885的走勢翻板呢?尋底中!


885? 淨是得一隻?
101 : greatsoup38(830)@2012-10-19 00:54:25

http://orientaldaily.on.cc/cnt/finance/20121018/00202_038.html
首都創投(02324)執行董事孔凡鵬,遭富強證券入稟追討227萬元孖展證券戶口欠款。富強證券在入稟狀指出,孔氏於二○一○三月開設案中戶口,截至去年二月底戶口虧絀超過500萬元,同年九月,富強證券變賣戶口所有股票、證券抵債,現追討227萬元尾數。
102 : GS(14)@2013-01-05 12:17:04

http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/ ... TN20130104006_C.pdf
10合1,2供1,65仙,金江包銷,都幾例牌
103 : amazingrick(36737)@2013-02-22 22:55:11

一股賺3毫,點睇?雖然都幾假
104 : greatsoup38(830)@2013-02-23 10:36:08

103樓提及
一股賺3毫,點睇?雖然都幾假


唔使睇,是0.3仙,不是0.3元,你睇錯左
105 : amazingrick(36737)@2013-02-23 11:47:58

104樓提及
103樓提及
一股賺3毫,點睇?雖然都幾假


唔使睇,是0.3仙,不是0.3元,你睇錯左


唔怪之得!
106 : alb(35614)@2013-03-12 11:09:14

又炒起,印象中4月供股

(greatsoup: 已修改,有pdf 字尾至好貼)
107 : greatsoup38(830)@2013-03-12 21:56:11

106樓提及
又炒起,印象中4月供股


他們成日都是咁玩好悶
108 : alb(35614)@2013-03-14 08:14:24

睇下大C點講



實戰理論 - 沈振盈 2013年3月13日

實戰理論:大市22800有支持 - 沈振盈

港股上個禮拜挾完後,昨日已走了樣,恒指下破23000關口,一些炒兩會概念的板塊,跌幅更加驚人。筆者一早已提醒大家,市場可能是炒錯市,擔心會議完結前,已有資金提早散貨套現。一眾太陽能、基建、鐵路等股份,跌幅動輒5%至6%。內地股市亦疲弱,滬綜指已連跌四日,走勢也頗駭人。相信大市短期內仍會反覆,但估計22600至22800應有支持。

首都創投(2324)昨日宣佈,向六名承配人配售金額總值2,000萬元的可換股債券,年利息10厘,換股價0.1元,較上日收市價0.075元溢價約33.33%。昨日消息公佈後,股價進一步上升,收報0.087元,仍低於此可換股債券的行使價約13%。

指數股揀港交所平保
股價走勢方面,自12月於0.055元水平出現小型雙底後,開始建立起大型橫行區,於0.067元水平見支持,並間中出現急升回吐,但仍然守穩橫行區上。今次以0.1元行使價發CB,起碼可作參考,就是承配人的買貨成本在0.1元之上。

技術上,昨日上破2月中高位0.077元,出現了技術突破,若能企穩0.1元之上,此乃1月初之高位,先上望0.15元,止蝕位0.078元。

若以資產淨值計,根據早前公佈的業績報告,截至2012年12月底計,為0.3783元,現價的折讓頗大。截至2012年12月底止6個月未經審核的盈利為296萬元,開始轉虧為盈,每股盈利0.3仙。以前景及NAV的折讓計,首都創投皆具吸納價值。

回說大市,由於技術上出現短暫的調整訊號,指數股可等多一、兩天才趁低吸納。若指數能回落至100日線,便可落注買貨,首選為港交所(388)及平保(2318)。
109 : GS(14)@2013-03-14 10:04:14

大輸一年到晚推2324啦
110 : GS(14)@2013-05-25 13:01:03

273賣晒2324
111 : alb(35614)@2013-05-25 15:55:31

110樓提及
273賣晒2324


脫離關係?
112 : greatsoup38(830)@2013-05-25 15:56:20

111樓提及
110樓提及
273賣晒2324


脫離關係?


遲早咪一齊番,都是班老千搞來搞去
113 : lemonwongwong(33038)@2013-06-11 00:30:29

2324有咩背景?
114 : greatsoup38(830)@2013-06-11 00:31:25

113樓提及
2324有咩背景?


華匯康健澳門
115 : lemonwongwong(33038)@2013-06-11 00:32:03

哦。。。。有澳門份。。。
116 : greatsoup38(830)@2013-07-30 00:12:47

無人供股
117 : GS(14)@2013-10-01 12:24:38

2324
虧損降95%,至600萬,1億可變現資產
118 : supermandavid(42431)@2013-10-13 18:28:05

117樓提及
2324
虧損降95%,至600萬,1億可變現資產


大C,我發現E隻股票的在9月尾時中國金融公司有4.92%的股份,然後10月頭又去左另一個證券商度(完整7百萬股),你說係埋有野搞緊啊?
119 : greatsoup38(830)@2013-10-13 18:33:06

118樓提及
117樓提及
2324
虧損降95%,至600萬,1億可變現資產


大C,我發現E隻股票的在9月尾時中國金融公司有4.92%的股份,然後10月頭又去左另一個證券商度(完整7百萬股),你說係埋有野搞緊啊?


唔好搞呢d股啦,呢d股好難玩的....是從福財轉左去中金,中金轉去銀河的,即是又是班同夥,唔好中計啦

咁樣轉來轉去都是要你以為有背景,無視就得啦,又唔是好多錢

點解你地咁執迷不悟仲要去搞垃圾股,明知呃人呃錢還要花心機,無你咁好氣
120 : VA(33206)@2013-11-04 21:59:25

殼股潮越炒越勁,近排連啲「創仔」都炒到癲晒,勝曉嵐上個禮拜聽到,創仔殼最低入場費已要兩個億先有得傾,點解咁好價?皆因大sell side、buy side都想趕喺10月1日新例前搞掂。除咗創仔,而家殼潮仲蔓延到較冷門嘅「21仔」(即係21章公司,如周顯早前報稱自己買咗嘅首都創投(2324)就係21仔)。點解會蔓延到呢啲公司?因為而家多咗資產管理公司搵融資渠道,好似東方、長城呢啲大型資產管理公司,都話搵殼。事實上,21仔吃香唔係未試過,好似國開國際(1062),早兩年被國家開發銀行旗下專責資產管理嘅國開金融用每股0.4元收購咗,1062上周五收市報0.68元,較佢NAV 0.353元有近倍溢價,反映中資金融機構係有一定優勢。再睇番資料,目前市面上得25間21仔,因上市格要求甚高,所以近年再冇新嘅21仔登場,咁仲有咁多中資金融機構要嚟香港上市嘅話,就一定要借殼上,睇怕呢25間21仔短期都會癲埋一份。

http://www.sharpdaily.hk/supplem ... aRice-21%E4%BB%94/2
121 : GS(14)@2013-12-06 16:51:25

每手1萬股變5,000股
122 : greatsoup38(830)@2013-12-29 22:57:13

8100 出售2324 cb
123 : GS(14)@2014-01-16 00:54:35

盈喜
124 : GS(14)@2014-01-28 00:14:35

1供4,4送1紅股,認購價均是25仙
125 : 投機仁(34693)@2014-01-29 00:32:03

又係年年向南的垃圾
126 : greatsoup38(830)@2014-01-29 00:41:10

不知所謂
127 : greatsoup38(830)@2014-01-31 19:44:05

2324
128 : greatsoup38(830)@2014-01-31 19:45:10

又轉番人wor?
129 : 200(9285)@2014-02-04 21:14:57

丘忠航活躍返d了
http://www.cni-gold.com/inner_trend_detail.php?id=10789

2014-01-20

作者 : Marketing

點擊 : 266人次
活動:友聯勵進社30周年聯歡晚宴暨名譽社長就職典禮

時間:2014年1月17日(星期五)

地點:香港會議展覽中心四樓君爵廳

主禮嘉賓:香港特區立法局議員張華峰太平紳士及香港金銀業貿易場理事長張德熙先生

嘉賓:香港金銀業貿易場董事會成員、友聯勵進社成員、中國北方金融集團主席丘忠航先生及中國北方金融集團有限公司代表


中國北方金銀業有限公司於業內名聲超卓,備受業內人士推崇,中國北方金融集團主席丘忠航先生更獲委任為香港金銀業貿易場友聯勵進社第十五屆(2013-2015年度)名譽社長。


為隆重其事,金銀業貿易場設宴於香港會議展覽中心,舉行友聯勵進社30周年聯歡晚宴暨名譽社長就職典禮。

勵進社於1947年組織成立,友聯社翌年成立,1984年兩社合併,正式名為「友聯勵進社」。簡稱「友勵社」,以聯絡同業感情、團結互助、增進同人福利及發展體育為宗旨。多年來舉辦不少節目,包括旅行、就職聯歡會、體育活動等,在公益事務方面亦不遺餘力,現有社員數百人。
130 : GS(14)@2014-02-04 23:29:26

呢排可能個冷淡對待令就取消?
131 : 200(9285)@2014-02-17 21:04:29

greatsoup130樓提及
呢排可能個冷淡對待令就取消?


可能係,條撚人遲d唔知會不會出返山,佢檔野好似無租icc 搬左去中環‧
132 : GS(14)@2014-02-17 23:29:50

200131樓提及
greatsoup130樓提及
呢排可能個冷淡對待令就取消?


可能係,條撚人遲d唔知會不會出返山,佢檔野好似無租icc 搬左去中環‧


現在邊度開左?
133 : 200(9285)@2014-02-18 18:50:30

greatsoup132樓提及
200131樓提及
greatsoup130樓提及
呢排可能個冷淡對待令就取消?


可能係,條撚人遲d唔知會不會出返山,佢檔野好似無租icc 搬左去中環‧


現在邊度開左?


香港皇后大道中16號新世界大廈2304室.
134 : greatsoup38(830)@2014-02-18 22:34:49

200133樓提及
greatsoup132樓提及
200131樓提及
greatsoup130樓提及
呢排可能個冷淡對待令就取消?


可能係,條撚人遲d唔知會不會出返山,佢檔野好似無租icc 搬左去中環‧


現在邊度開左?


香港皇后大道中16號新世界大廈2304室.


同叔老巢啊
135 : 200(9285)@2014-02-27 19:42:25

8037 有無專區呀?
136 : greatsoup38(830)@2014-03-01 12:26:05

2324

盈利急增27.6倍,至8,600萬,輕債
137 : Louis(1212)@2014-05-27 22:51:41

首都創投(02324.HK)供股僅獲54.07%認購
2014年4月17日  05:48:02 a.m. HKT, AAFN

首都創投(02324.HK)公布供股結果,接獲涉及合共3.7億股有效接納及申請,佔供股總數54.07%,包銷商已促使獨立第三方認購餘下3.14億股供股股份。建議已成為無條件,供股股份預期本月22日(星期二)開始買賣。(de/d)


阿思達克財經新聞

份額持有人的大傾銷:
http://sdinotice.hkex.com.hk/di/ ... 4&src=MAIN&lang=ZH&

有何意見?smiley
138 : greatsoup38(830)@2014-05-28 01:10:27

佢地好有默契
139 : newtonau(41980)@2014-06-13 10:39:52

什麼意思?現價$0.19,資產值$0.7115。為何要出呢份野?

[url][/url]
140 : chungonluk(36574)@2014-06-14 15:42:24

2324 之前在0.6停過一段時間, 以前每前跌左都會升番去0.6, 依家出緊黃金交叉唔知有冇機會??
141 : greatsoup38(830)@2014-06-14 20:12:02

chungonluk140樓提及
2324 之前在0.6停過一段時間, 以前每前跌左都會升番去0.6, 依家出緊黃金交叉唔知有冇機會??


講d野都無邏輯
142 : GS(14)@2014-09-28 08:53:54

虧損增10倍,至7,260萬,8,200萬現金
143 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-01-16 01:10:26

盈喜
144 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-02-27 01:33:46

盈利急增60%,至1.3億,5.5億可變現資產
145 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-03-16 01:25:57

5合1,1供7,每股25仙
146 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-03-16 01:26:53

5合1,1供7,每股25仙
147 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-03-16 01:26:55

5合1,1供7,每股25仙
148 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-03-16 01:29:04

5合1後,1供7,每股25仙
149 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-03-16 14:05:59

test
150 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-03-17 10:28:43

adf
151 : abbychau(1)@2015-03-17 20:46:22

asdfasdf
152 : abbychau(1)@2015-03-17 20:46:37

asdfasdf
153 : Banana Republic(1499)@2015-03-21 09:52:24

供极都有,正!
154 : GS(14)@2015-03-25 01:12:23

恐怖啦
155 : jj1984(29252)@2015-05-12 13:01:19

真經典,1拆5,再5合1.....呢間21章公司永無翻身之日
156 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-05-13 01:33:41

唔好玩
157 : GS(14)@2015-06-25 00:33:43

改做9月年結
158 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-07-16 01:07:30

盈喜
159 : GS(14)@2015-07-21 01:27:32

供股不足額
160 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-09-02 01:13:08

盈利增14倍,至10.8億,輕債
161 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-09-28 23:08:53

http://webb-site.com/articles/sinceresmart.asp
Hao Wen, Capital VC and Unity
24th September 2015

Browsing through documents for a much longer forthcoming story, we came across two highly questionable acquisitions that link together 3 listed companies: Hao Wen Holdings Ltd (Hao Wen, 8019) and two Chapter 21 investment companies, Capital VC Ltd (Capital VC, 2324) and Unity Investments Holdings Ltd (Unity, 0913) that we have warned investors about in the past.

On 1-Sep-2014, Hao Wen Holdings Ltd (Hao Wen, 8019) announced the acquisition of 22.5% of Sincere Smart International Ltd (Sincere Smart, BVI), which owns 100% of Ideal Surplus Inc Ltd, a HK company which, according to Hao Wen, is "principally engaged in the provision of cloud platforms application and solutions". The "About us" page of its web site seems to confirm this, but if you click on the English "Home" button then you get a whole different experience - some sort of online Chinese betting platform. The vendor was a Mr Wang Zewei (Wang Zewei) and the deal completed on 8-Oct-2014.

The cash purchase price of HK$69m for 22.5% implies a valuation for 100% of HK$306.7m, compared with net profit from 7-Jan-2013 to 31-Mar-2014 of $3.4m and net assets of $2.9m, so this was a rich valuation indeed. Hao Wen was "principally engaged in the sale of biodegradable products and raw materials and the manufacture and sale of biomass fuel". You can see the synergy, can't you? No?

There was no mention of who owned the other 77.5% of Sincere Smart, so we dug, and found that in the 6 months to 31-Dec-2014, Capital VC bought an unspecified stake in Sincere Smart for HK$42.7m, see note 13 of the interim results. The open offer circular of Capital VC dated 24-Jun-2015, p53, discloses that the stake is 14.00%. So like Hao Wen, Capital VC had paid a price which implies a $305m valuation on Sincere Smart. The next page shows that in the 9 months to 31-Dec-2014, Sincere Smart lost HK$0.2m and ended with net assets of HK$2.7m. This is not what you would call a growth company.

But there was a third player. Note 12 of the 2014 annual report of Unity shows that it spent HK$90m on 29.5% of Sincere Smart, again a valuation of HK$305.1m. So the 3 companies, Hao Wen, Capital VC and Unity had altogether spent HK$201.7m on a 66% stake. However, on 5-Feb-2015, Unity agreed to sell its stake to "a third party" for HK$92m, of which $2m had been paid (see note 33) and $90m was due by 2-Oct-2015. That's rather convenient, because it avoids having to do an impairment test on the investment for the 2014 audit.

Capital VC has deferred its year end from 30-Jun-2015 to 30-Sep-2015, so it won't have to deal with that problem just yet.

The connection between Hao Wen and Unity goes further though.

Another investment made by Unity in 2014 was a 29.9% stake in Peak Zone Group Ltd (Peak Zone, BVI) for HK$90m, valuing the whole at $301m. Peak Zone is "engaged in the provision of integrated application." Note 17(iii) of the Unity 2014 annual report says Peak Zone made a profit of HK$0.392m and had net assets of HK3.092m, so this appears to be another vastly overpriced investment. Again, it was convenient that on 27-Feb-2015, after the year end and before the accounts were audited, Unity agreed to sell its stake to "a third party" for HK$108m, of which just $2m had been received and the rest was due by 31-Dec-2015. That raises the valuation of Peak Zone even further, to HK$361.2m. As Peak Zone was under contract for sale, no impairment test was applied.

By amazing coincidence, the 2014 annual results of Hao Wen include a footnote that on 6-Feb-2015, after the year end, it agreed to buy 5.4% of Peak Zone from an "independent third party" for HK$19.2m (implying a valuation of $355.6m), and the transaction was completed on 16-Feb-2015.

Webb-site Reports urges the SFC's corporate misconduct team to investigate these transactions.
162 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-09-28 23:19:42

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
163 : GS(14)@2015-10-16 00:59:23

不知所云
164 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-11-10 01:31:20

1 for 1 bonus shares
165 : greatsoup38(830)@2015-12-17 01:48:45

盈利增2.6倍,至2.5億,11.2億可變現資產
166 : GS(14)@2016-04-16 00:20:06

盈警
167 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-05-11 02:45:00

轉虧1.8億,現金1.8億
168 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-07-03 15:08:55

虧損降45%,至3,800萬,986持有745、802、1027、1063、1225、2324、8021、8193、8195
169 : GS(14)@2016-10-15 04:01:23

盈警
170 : GS(14)@2016-10-29 13:50:28

8100 買 8086、8018、1019、6161、6836、8081、2324、
171 : greatsoup38(830)@2016-11-12 14:10:22

5合1,又1供3@20仙
172 : GS(14)@2017-01-01 16:58:14

轉虧2.1億元,輕債
173 : GS(14)@2017-03-20 02:02:03

無人供
174 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-05-25 07:52:58

虧損增75%,至2,100萬,輕債
175 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-05-25 07:53:35

持有8021、1389、8193、802、8226、275
176 : greatsoup38(830)@2017-07-21 04:38:18

8100持2324
177 : GS(14)@2017-10-10 17:40:19

本公司董事會(「董事會」)謹此通知本公司股東(「股東」)及有意投資者,根據本
集團截至二零一七年九月三十日止年度(「本年度」)之未經審核管理賬目及董事
會目前可獲得的資料而作出的初步評估,比對本公司二零一五年╱一六年年報所
載截至二零一六年九月三十日止年度錄得的經審核淨虧損,預期本集團於本年度
將錄得淨虧損的明顯增加。本年度本集團業績之預期變動主要由於本集團上市投
資於本年度的淨虧損較之截至二零一六年九月三十日止年度者增加。
178 : GS(14)@2018-01-01 21:15:41

轉虧4,000萬,8億可變現資產
179 : GS(14)@2018-02-04 14:34:31

根據一般授權配售新股份
於二零一八年二月二日(交易時段後),本公司與配售代理訂立配售協議,據此,
配售代理已同意按盡力基準,向不少於六名獨立承配人配售最多550,000,000股
新股份,每股配售股份價格為0.050港元。
180 : GS(14)@2018-02-05 04:07:19

Webb曰:
The Enigma Network investment company is blowing the general mandate, issuing 19.96% new shares at $0.05, not mentioning the 84.9% discount to Net Asset Value of $0.3308 at 31-Dec-2017. The board claims the issue is in the interests of the Company and the Shareholders as a whole. The placing agent, Infast Brokerage, is 95% owned by GCPS (8193), another Enigma member. 3 minutes eariler, Capital VC announced a grant of 275m options at $0.058 to unnamed persons. Thats another potential 10% enlargement of the share base at an 82.5% discount to NAV. We call on the SFC to direct the Stock Exchange to reject the listing application for all the new shares.

「謎之網絡」投資公司正在衝破一般授權限制,以5仙發行19.96%股權,並無提及發行價較在2017年12月31日淨值33.08仙折讓84.9%。董事局指出發行「對公司及股東有利」。配售代理進匯證券是由另一間「謎之網絡」成員漢華專業服務(8193)持有95%。3分鐘前,首都創投授出2.75億購股權,行使價5.8仙予一些未披露名稱人士。這是另一個折讓82.5%發行10%潛在擴大股本的可能性。我們已經通知證監會和聯交所聯絡,以否決發行新股的申請。
181 : GS(14)@2018-03-21 18:15:57

首都創投有限公司(「本公司」)董事會(「董事會」)察覺本公司股份之價格最近有
所上升。董事會謹此宣佈本公司正協商簽訂有關投資於區塊鏈行業公司(「該投資」)
之意向書(「意向書」)。倘本公司簽訂意向書及╱或具約束力之協議,本公司將於
適當時候根據上市規則之所有適用規定作出進一步公告。
182 : GS(14)@2018-04-13 07:33:29

盈警
183 : greatsoup38(830)@2018-06-01 18:42:31

虧,5.4億可變現資產
184 : GS(14)@2018-10-14 12:43:28

董事會謹此通知股東及潛在投資者,根據本集團截至二零一八年九月三十日止
年度之未經審核管理賬目及董事會目前可獲得的資料而作出的初步評估,比對
截至二零一七年九月三十日止年度所錄得者,預期本集團於截至二零一八年九
月三十日止年度的未經審核綜合淨虧損將大幅減少。
185 : GS(14)@2019-05-24 08:39:05

無野好講
首都 創投 2324 前德 德泰 中華 投資 專區 關係 華匯 匯、 0870 8037 8082
PermaLink: https://articles.zkiz.com/?id=274356

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