Author: sgwealthbuilder

Hi SG Wealth Builder,

My comments on your post: OCBC Bank’s 3Q16 results beat market estimates. I’m not sure why it shows “failed to leave comment” on your article post. Hence, I drop you the comment via this mail.

My comments: I’m curious on your statement stating that your target entry for OCBC stocks will be at $6.00. Current trade price for OCBC share is $8.43. Based on the liquidity of SGX market, the price could hardly fluctuate in between price gap of around $2.00++. Not to say it’s impossible, as anything is still possible to happen in the stock market.

My concern here is if we were to wait for that target price of $6.00, and assuming the market goes smooth for the year. Then we will be missing out the 1 year opportunity for the stocks if the price never achieve the target price of $6.00 within the year, isn’t it? Since based on analysis the stocks growth is strong and having potential of profit as well. This is just my personal opinion and it’s always my pleasure to share and learn more from your analysis. Hope you have a great day!

Best Regards,

William

I received the above email from one of my readers.

When Simon Israel took over as SingPost’s Chairman in May this year, investors must be wondering whether SingPost will turn the tide. The group recently announced a set of disappointing 2Q16 results that saw net profit plunging 27.9% due to “transformational investments”.

Mr Israel, who is also the Chairman of SingTel, has been tasked to review the corporate governance and appoint a new CEO for SingPost. SingTel is the major shareholder of SingPost and currently holds 22.85% stake in the national postal service provider.

There was a leadership crisis in SingPost earlier this year and SingTel intervened after the exit of almost all of the top management. Even Chairman-designate Professor Low Teck Seng declined the offer to chair SingPost’s board, claiming that the “role is too demanding”.

Judging by the recent financial results, Mr Israel certainly needs to accelerate the search for the new CEO so as to set strategic directions and lead the management team. Currently, Mr Mervyn Lim is the Covering Group Chief Executive Officer. Since the exodus of the previous management team, SingPost share price has declined steadily from $1.69 to a low of $1.37. The share price only starts to show sign of stability recently and currently hovers at $1.50.

Underpinned by strong performance from its wealth management and profit from life insurance, OCBC Bank delivered an excellent 3Q16 results that beat market estimates. The oldest bank in Singapore reported a net profit after tax of S$943 million for the third quarter of 2016. This was 5% above S$902 million a year ago and 6% above S$885 million the previous quarter.

A deeper review of OCBC’s financial results revealed more interesting insights. Net interest income of S$1.23 billion was 6% lower as compared to S$1.32 billion the year before, driven by lower loan volumes and net interest margin. As at 30 September 2016, customer loans were S$209 billion or 2% lower than the year before, led by a decline in trade-related lending to Greater China, which offset an increase in housing loans and other consumer loans.

Net interest income is the difference between the revenues derived from interest-bearing assets (customer loans) and the cost of servicing (interest-burdened) liabilities. Thus if the US Fed interest rates increased and induced the local banks to heighten the bank saving rates, OCBC may be negatively impacted because of the lower margin from net interest income. Also, the current slowing market results in lower loan volumes, leading to lower net interest income for OCBC.

All good things must come to an end. After 15 years of heading K1 Ventures, one of the largest listed venture capitalists, Steven Green unexpectedly announced his departure a couple of weeks ago. I am writing this article to pay tribute to one of the most talented investment wizards in Singapore.

K1 Ventures used to be a shipping company in the 1970s and adopted its current name in 2000 after a series of business consolidations. The company was looking at transforming its scope of activities to include a portfolio of technology and non-technology companies. At that point, Steven Green was the US Ambassador to Singapore and had an outstanding reputation for being a business leader. Subsequently, Steven Green was appointed to be CEO on 7 September 2001, just four days before the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

K1 Ventures Business Strategy

The fact that K1 Ventures’ board of directors looked to US Ambassador indicated that the company intended to seek opportunities in the United States. The terrorist attacks in 2001 certainly threw up a lot of bargain buy opportunities for K1 Ventures. Throughout the years, Steven led his team to make a series of notable acquisitions in USA – Helm Holding Corporation, McMoran Exploration, Knowledge Universe Holdings and Guggenheim Capital.

On 19 October 2016, SGX reported 1QFY2017 results. Notwithstanding the net profit amounted to $83 million, the overall performance was poor. This is not surprising given that the bourse operator is a proxy to Singapore economy, which has been sluggish for the whole of this year.

Key financial indicators

Revenue: $191 million, down 13% from a year earlier

Operating profit: $97 million, down 17%

Net profit: $83 million, down 16%

Earnings per share: 7.8 cents, down 16%

Interim dividend per share: 5 cents, unchanged

Revenue had been dragged by declines seen in the Equities and Fixed Income and Derivatives segments, both recording a drop of 9% and 22% respectively compared to 2016. The slowing global economic growth and the political uncertainties arising from Brexit resulted in lower trading volumes.

Strength of SGX

However, investors should not judge SGX’s strength on the basis of one quarter’s financial performance alone. The group’s balance sheet is actually very strong – no borrowings and cash-rich. In fact, its current asset amounted to $1.53 billion and total liabilities stood at only $951 million.

Expenses decreased 8% to $93.7 million ($102.3 million), as all expense items declined year-on-year. Total staff costs decreased $2.4 million or 6% to $39.6 million ($42.0 million). 

As Singapore business sentiments soured, retrenchments seem to be the buzzword nowadays.  This is certainly the case for Keppel Corporation, the world’s largest oil rig builder. The difference is that after letting go 8000 of its workforce for the first nine months of this year, Keppel Corporation will retrench even more staff.

The sheer magnitude of this “right-sizing” exercise illustrates the current state of the offshore and marine industry. The reduction in the workload resulted in the shrinking workforce needs and required Keppel Corp to be lean. In the 3QFY16 financial report, the CEO highlighted that the culling of workforce will continue due to the weak demand for oil rigs.

Wind of changes

The root cause of Keppel Corp’s decline is the collapse of the oil price since 2014. The CEO suggested that it could be a “long winter” for the oil rig giant but I see it differently. I don’t work in the oil and gas industry but the emergence of USA’s shale oil may be the ultimate game-changer for the industry.

The discovery of new drilling method in USA to produce oil from shale rocks created a huge capacity boom and this led to the current oversupply issue. Brent crude oil has even dropped below the support level of USD30 per barrel in 2016, making extraction of oil economically unviable.

On 17 October 2016, media conglomerate SPH finally dropped the bombshell. In a media release which highlighted the result of its business review, SPH announced that it will be “right-sizing” to reduce operating costs.

To put things into perspective, this is not the first time that the media company is downsizing. It had previously retrenched more than 100 staff in 2003. It is also no secret that SPH’s revenue has been decreasing at an alarming rate for the past 5 years.

Revenue for FY2012: $1.27 billion

Revenue for FY2013: $1.24 billion

Revenue for FY2014: $1.21 billion

Revenue for FY2015: $1.18 billion

Revenue for FY2016: $1.12 billion

Return on Equity (ROE) declined at an even worse rate, from a respectable 19.3% in FY2012 to a ridiculous 7.129% for FY2016. What exactly went wrong for SPH?

Make no mistake, the company is still making money. In fact, profit after tax for FY2016 was $306 million, a decrease of 17.4% compared to FY2015. The company is also giving out dividends as usual for FY2016.

But SPH investors must realize that it is not exactly business as usual for this media giant. The continuing decline in its business is not a cyclical problem, but really a structural issue that requires massive transformation in its business model.

Today, Yahoo Singapore publishes an article that SPH is expected to retrench about 10 percent of its staff. If the move is official, the retrenchment figure will be higher than the 111 staff it retrenched in 2003.

The sheer number of SPH staff expected to be laid off is frightening. This is because back in 2003, the business condition was difficult due to Iraq war and SARS outbreak. In today’s context, the market condition is not well either but we don’t have any global wars or major pandemic flu taking place.

Thus, even though the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) announced two days ago that Singapore is not experiencing recession at the moment, my concern is that the state of our economy is even more dreadful than what many people might have thought.

Bad economy and headwinds aside, SPH’s poor performance can be attributed to its management’s failure to transform the media giant into a digital power-house. The bulk of its average daily circulation is still in printed copies and its online subscriptions form a small percentage of its daily circulation. This is a worrying trend as Singaporeans lifestyle has changed and apparently, SPH is unable to keep up with the change.

Currently trading at $3.73, SIA Engineering Company (SIAEC) shares have not reached the 5-year low of $3.35. But it does not mean that the company is doing fantastic either. SIAEC shares had been sliding from a record level of $5.29 since 2013 and many investors wonder whether it would be worth investing in SIAEC shares now.

For 1Q16, SIAEC announced profits amounting to $199.8 million as compared to $41.7 million in 2015. The explosive increase was due to $141.6 million gain from the divestment of its 10% stake in Hong Kong Aero Engine Services Ltd (“HAESL”) to Rolls-Royce Overseas Holdings Limited (“RROH”) and Hong Kong Aircraft Engineering Company Limited (“HAECO”).

In addition, the Group received a special dividend of $36.4 million from HAESL following the divestment of HAESL’s 20% stake in Singapore Aero Engine Services Limited (“SAESL”) to Rolls-Royce Singapore Pte Ltd (“RRS”), bringing the overall gain from the divestment to $178.0 million.

SIAEC financial performance

Apart from the one-off divestment, there are few bright spots for SIAEC. Revenue has declined for the past two years and for 1Q16, SIAEC registered a decline of revenue to $271.6 million from $277.3 million in 2015. Some analysts predicted in the news lately that lower passenger traffic for SIA would have serious impact on SIAEC’s business.

Sometimes, life is stranger than fiction. The recent implosion of Swiber junk bond brings back memories of Lehman Brothers Minibond saga in 2008. About 10,000 retail investors in Singapore lost their investments totaling more than $500 million in products linked to Lehman Brothers. The similarity between the hellfire from Swiber Bond and Lehman Brothers Minibond is that DBS was one of the financial institutions distributing these high risk investment products.

In the world of investing, there are many factors why things can go wrong. Even government can sometimes make dubious investment decisions. The most infamous example is the fiasco concerning eight town councils run by People’s Action Party (PAP) which had $16 million invested in the various Lehman Brothers-linked products. Many analysts were shocked and disturbed that town councils had invested in such structured product using tax payer’s fund. After all, the mandate of town council is different from sovereign wealth funds like Temasek Holding.

Lehman Brothers Minibond Saga

Notwithstanding the loss suffered by PAP town councils, the collapse of Lehman Brothers triggered one of the most intriguing financial hellfire in Singapore. Investors who had bought High Notes 5 from DBS Bank were shell-shocked to learn that they could get nothing from the forced sale of the underlying collateral.

On 18 July 2016, OCBC announced the merger of its two banking subsidiaries in China – OCBC Bank (China) Limited and Wing Hang Bank (China) Limited) – to become OCBC Wing Hang Bank (China) Limited (“OCBC Wing Hang China”). After acquiring Wing Hang Bank in 2014, OCBC wasted no time in building its investment moat in China.

OCBC in China

China is a strategic core market for OCBC, given its sheer market size. OCBC Bank first established its presence in China in 1925 with the opening of its Xiamen branch and incorporated OCBC Bank (China) Limited, headquartered in Shanghai, on 1 August 2007. Thus, the merger of its Hong Kong Wing Hang Bank with the China’s unit makes sense because of the synergy in value.

Headquartered in Shanghai, the unified platform allows OCBC to be well-positioned to serve its clients better in the Greater China. OCBC Wing Hang China has 32 branches and subbranches span 14 major cities across both Northern and Southern China – Shanghai, Beijing, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, Zhuhai, Foshan, Huizhou, Xiamen, Tianjin, Chengdu, Chongqing, Qingdao, Shaoxing and Suzhou.

In the Pearl River Delta region in China, one of the country’s main hubs of economic growth, OCBC Wing Hang China has 13 branches and sub-branches, largest among the Singapore banks.

Since my previous review in May 2016, Sheng Siong shares had an explosive form. The supermarket operator’s share price surged from $0.89 to the $1.00 support level. This is an impressive run and effectively, Sheng Siong had shed the “penny stock” tag.

Once again, Sheng Siong delivered a quarterly performance that are within expectations. Revenue continued to grow, recording an increase of 5.5% at $188.8 million compared to 2015. The addition of three new stores had contributed to the net growth in revenue.

Sheng Siong Competitive Edge

Besides store expansion, Sheng Siong’s growth was supported by higher margins. Gross margin increased to 26.1% in 2Q2016 compared with 25.2% in 2Q2015 mainly because of suppliers’ rebates and reduction in input cost derived mainly from bulk handling, which was facilitated by continuous improvements from the central warehouse at Mandai.

Profits for the period was $15.2 million, an increase of 11.3% compared to 2015. Cash flow from operating activities remained healthy at $26.5 million for current quarter but cash and cash equivalents decreased by $75.0 million to $50.8 million. The big drop was due to payment of final dividend for FY2015.

On the basis of the latest financial report, the management of Sheng Siong continues to demonstrate prudent management and operating efficiency.

On 29 August 2016, OSIM ended one of the most incredible fairytales in the corporate world and was de-listed from the SGX market. OSIM’s turn-around story reflected the resilient and determination of founder, Ron Sim in coming back from adverse conditions. After all, successful turn-around cases are so rare in Singapore.

One of the most admirable traits of Ron Sim is his business acumen and never-say-die mentality. In 2009, he made the difficult decision of writing off OSIM investment in US retailer, Brookstone, after it registered a loss of almost $100 million the previous year. Many investors lost faith in the management abilities and at the lowest point, many dumped the stock, sending it crashing to $0.05 per share.

Instead of viewing the whole episode negatively, Ron deemed it an “enriching” experience because of the lesson learned on the US market. Not many business leaders can overcome the sort of setback that Ron Sim encountered. At that point of time, with the onset of the Great Financial Crisis, it certainly seemed like the massage armchair company was doomed.

But what he managed to achieve the following years was simply unbelievable. Following the Great Financial Crisis, he correctly predicted that the money to follow would be the Chinese market.

The recent announcement of the prospect of a 4th telecommunication player entering the market has caused SingTel, Starhub and M1 shares to fall.  Whilst it is too premature to make a judgement on the impact to the three telecommunication players, SingTel should be the least affected. Most investors are probably unaware of SingTel’s investment moats

Unlike the rest of the existing players, SingTel differentiates itself from the rest of the league by positioning itself as a regional player with more than 610 million in Asia Pacific and Africa. In Singapore, it holds the number 1 market share with 4.1 million mobile customers. Granted that the new entrant will eat into SingTel’s market share in Singapore, it should be noted that the major bulk of SingTel’s earnings are derived from overseas. In addition, SingTel has a very diversified revenue base. Hence, the risk is very much mitigated for this giant.

In its 100% owned Australia unit, Optus, SingTel has the number 2 market share with 9.3 million mobile customers. SingTel also holds the number 1 market share in India, Thailand and Indonesia. Both Optus and Indonesia’s Telkomsel are SingTel’s champion income drivers. For first quarter 2016, Optus’ EBITDA grew 0.7% to A$645 million while Telkomsel’s EBITDA was $325.6 million.

Singapore’s Sim Wong Hoo, was famous for building Creative Technology (CT) from scratch. In the 80s and 90s, the SoundBlaster audio cards produced by CT was selling like hotcakes and propelled Sim from a struggling entrepreneur to Singapore’s youngest billionaire.

In March 2000, CT’s shares was even trading at record high of $58. Now, the share price is languishing at $1.00. Has Creative Technologies won the battle but lost the war?

As a Singaporean engineer, obviously I hope Sim can do well and make Singapore world-famous again. His SoundBlaster audio cards had put Singapore on the global map and proved to the rest of the world that Singapore is capable of creating world-class innovative engineering products as well.

But it is pity that IT is a very fast-paced and ruthless industry. The rapid evolution in the technology development led to cheaper, more powerful and better integrated computer audio systems than CT’s SoundBlaster. This gradually marked the start of the decline for Creative Technology.

In 2006, Sim Wong Hoo made Singapore world-famous again by winning a legal dispute against Apple, which agreed to compensate Creative Technology $100 million over patent infringement. Back then, Apple’s CEO Steve Jobs claimed in a press release that “Creative is [This is a premium article.

On 12 August 2016, luxury watch retailer, The Hour Glass, delivered a set of poor financial results for 1Q2017. Year-on-year, revenue dropped a whopping 7% to $149 million and profits after tax declined 23% to $8.3 million for the first quarter of FY2017. At the back of many investors’ mind should be the question of whether is it worthwhile to invest in The Hour Glass now?

To be fair to the management, The Hour Glass has one of the strongest balance sheets for a listed SGX stock. The current assets amounted to $426 million, while cash and cash equivalents stood at $80.6 million. The current assets could more than offset the current and long term liabilities easily.

The Net Current Asset Value Per Share (NCAVPS) was $0.568 per share. This means that if The Hour Glass is to be liquidated, this will be the amount of tangible value per share after paying off the short term and long term debts. Net Asset Value (NAV) per ordinary share was $0.63.

For The Hour Glass, my estimation for the intrinsic value of each share is $0.66. This is because the Group holds a substantial amount of investment properties valued at $64 million according to the latest financial statement.

Fresh from the stock split exercise in May 2016, Raffles Medical shares power ahead amid the sluggish stock market condition. On 26 July 2016, the healthcare provider announced another set of solid performance.

Financial Performance

Revenue for second quarter surged 19.8% to $119 million as compared to last year. However, increased in staff costs led to profits of $16.1 million after tax, a marginal increase of only 0.7% as compared to 2015.  The rate of increase for staff costs was higher than the growth in revenue because of more specialist consultants and staff as well as increased staff arising from acquisitions in 2015.

Raffles Medical continued to have strong cash position, with net cash increased from $53.8 million as at 31 December 2015 to S$92.8 million as at 30 June 2016. This was attributed mainly to strong operating cash flows generated by the Group from its increased business operations. Net cash from operating activities was $23.8 million in 2Q16. Cash and cash equivalents increased by $13.0 million from $110.6 million as at 31 March 2016 to S$123.6 million as at 30 June 2016.

Notwithstanding the good performance, Raffles Medical has announced interim dividend of $0.005 per share, to be paid out today.

In one of my previous articles on Singapore Exchange’s minimum trading price (MTP) rule, I questioned whether the MTP framework will actually serve its intent of preventing market manipulations. Following that article, SGX recently proposed changes that will allow stocks with larger market capitalization to avoid the fate of being included in the watch list.

The MTP rule was implemented under SGX’s ex-CEO, Magnus Bocker’s era. Bocker’s tenure in SGX is generally viewed by many as negative because of the many unpopular changes he tried to implement. MTP was one of them, the other being the scrapping of the 90-minute lunch break to allow continuous trading.

Background of MTP

To his credit, Bocker did help to diversify SGX’s revenue stream through the expansion of derivative product offerings. However, he overlooked the importance of continuing to build the capital market portfolio for SGX. In addition, under his leadership, retail investors’ activities waned substantially. Of course it is not fair to put the entire blame on him for the lackluster market participation as economic climate plays a large part as well. But then again, as CEO, he did not implement any note-worthy initiatives to attract retail investors either.

It also did not help that many retail investors lost a lot of money after dabbling in Blumont, LionGold and Asiasons Capital.