Stocks

In a sign of how far the oil and gas sector has declined, systems integrator CSE Global’ share price crashed to six years low after the company announced a set of poor financial results for the quarter ended 30 September 2016. Profit after tax decreased by a whopping 52.7% year-on-year while revenue dropped 21.6% year-on-year.

I have previously covered on CSE global before in my blog. CSE Global operates in two business segments: process controls (74.0%) and communications and security (26.0%). The company used to be the electronics arm of Singapore Technologies (ST) but after a successful management buy-out in 1997, the company was listed in the Singapore Exchange in 1999. Following a string of acquisitions made over the last two decades, CSE Global has evolved into a technology giant with 30 offices across the world and generated more than 95% of its revenues outside Singapore market.

Currently, CSE derived more than half of its revenue from Americas and about one-third of its revenue from Asia-Pacific. In terms of business sector, CSE derived 76% of its revenue from the oil and gas sector. Therefore, even though CSE has diversified business segments spanning across oil and gas, infrastructure and mining, the ailing oil and gas sector continues to have a devastating effect on the company’s operating results.

One of Singapore venerable companies, Boustead Singapore, announced a set of horrifying 2Q17 results. Net profit for 2Q17 was 32% lower year-on-year, while 1H17 net profit was 30% lower year-on-year. The infrastructure-related engineering and geo-spatial services company was still making respectable level of profits but its recent performance decline reflects the depressing state of the oil and gas sector.

Strong balance sheet

Notwithstanding the challenging environment, Boustead Singapore managed to clock in an impressive operating net cash flow amounting $48.6 million, due to cash inflows from working capital. As a result, cash and cash equivalents increased $25.1 million to $296.7 million.

Current assets stood at $500 million while current liabilities was $231 million. The total borrowings are only $90.9 million. With such strong balance sheet, Boustead Singapore is poised to ride out the storm in the oil and gas sector. The Net Current Asset Value Per Share (NCAVPS) is about $0.32, while Net Asset Value (NAV) is $0.583.

Not surprisingly, the root cause of Boustead Singapore’s poor performance was the ailing oil and gas sector. Year-on-year, its energy-related engineering recorded a 73% decline in profit before tax, while its geo-spatial technology arm recorded a 17% decrease in profit before tax. Therefore, the increase of 27% by its real estate solutions had been offset by the other two division performances.

The recent Sheng Siong kidnap trial did not create a negative publicity for the supermarket operator. Instead, shares of the groceries retailer surprisingly stormed to a record high of $1.10 in October 2016. Listed in SGX mainboard only in 2011, Sheng Siong has risen from a penny stock to an established player with strong dividend track record. But in today’s challenging operating environment, is Sheng Siong’s dividend policy sustainable?

Sheng Siong had committed to pay out dividend of up to 90% of their net profits after tax. Note that this is a commitment made by management and the company is not legally obliged to fulfill this promise. Nonetheless, since 2011, company has consistently met this target and investors were rewarded for their continued support in this home-grown enterprise.

But should management review this dividend policy and reinvest some of the excess cash to grow the company? The total amount of dividends paid out had been between 2 to 4 cents and to be frank, the amount is nothing to shout about. Nonetheless, when Sheng Siong shares were trading at $0.30 to $0.40 in the early days of listing, the dividends looked attractive relative to the share price. But now that the share price has run up substantially, the amount may be less appealing for dividend investors.

With a slew of SGX listed companies being privatized recently, one wonders whether Straco Corp will be the next to be de-listed. The latest company to be delisted from the Singapore Exchange is Super Group, which is acquired by Dutch coffee firm JDE for a whopping $1.45 billion.

Will Straco Corp be de-listed?

Recently, Straco Corp purchased a total of 269,800 shares by way of on-market purchase for a total consideration of $206,000 in 3Q2016. These shares purchased were made out of the company’s capital and held as treasury shares. As of now, the company is holding 10 million treasury shares.

The key internal stakeholders, namely Straco Holding Pte Ltd, China Poly Group Corp and Straco (HK) Limited, hold about 75% of the company shares. Under such situation, the management may make an offer to minority shareholders in a bid to de-list the company. Thus, I am cautious about investing in Straco Corp. What if the offer is way below the price level at which I buy the shares? If this is to happen, I would have sustained losses in my investment.

Of course, all these are just speculative thoughts. But assuming Straco Corp made an offer of $0.80 per share to shareholders, the management only needs to splash out an estimated $103 million to exceed the 90 percent threshold to de-list the company, Based on the latest quarter report, Straco Corp currently holds about $160 million amount of hard cash.

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.

On 3 August 2016, K1 Ventures announced another capital reduction of $0.075 in cash for each ordinary share in the capital of the company. This represents another round of mini-windfall for K1 Ventures investors. The capital reduction was announced at a time when its parent company, Keppel Corp is struggling under the current oil price crisis climate.

K1 Ventures is the investment arm of Keppel Corp specializing in business acquisitions. It invests primarily in the US market and has held stakes in transportation leasing company (Helm Holding), energy (Freeport McMoran Exploration), education (Knowledge Universal Holding, KUH) and financial (Guggenheim). As a venture capitalist, its business model is to acquire companies and turn them around to sell for profits.

Helm by Chairman and CEO Steven Jay Green, K1 Ventures’ management has an incredible investment track record. Over the years, the company has divested many assets and consistently delivered huge dividends for shareholders. In fact, since 2005, K1 Ventures announced dividends and capital reductions to reward shareholders.

For the uninitiated, capital reduction basically means reducing the capital of the company and return to shareholders. However, unlike dividends, capital reduction will result in the reduction of the company’s Net Asset Value (NAV) from $207,732,000 to $175,248,000.

In my previous article, I wrote about Straco Corp‘s company profile and its acquisition of Singapore Flyer back in 2014. This blog post will analyse Straco Corp’s latest financial performance.

On 10 August 2016, Straco Corp reported a 5.2% decline in Group revenue to $27.86 million for the second quarter ended 30 June 2016 compared to 2Q2015. The decline in revenue was due to lower number of visitors for its two aquariums in China. Interestingly, Singapore Flyer reported higher revenue for 2Q2016 on improved ticket yield. Cumulatively, the Group revenue for 1H2016 decreased marginally by 0.5%. Even though there was increased revenue at Singapore Flyer, this was offset by declines at the China aquariums.

Based on the latest earning report, the slow down in China definitely has an impact on Straco Corp’s earning. Below is the 5 year trend of the company’s revenue.

Dividends per share have been increasing for the last four years. However, there are signs that the growth in dividends has reached a plateau. During the quarter, the company paid out dividends of $21.48 million for the financial year ended 31 December 2015. As at 30 June 2016, the Group’s cash and cash equivalent balance amounted to $124.69 million.

On 5 August 2016, ISOTeam announced that it has clinched 13 new private and public sector contracts worth $20.11 million. The listed company is a specialist in the eco-conscious Repairs and Redecoration (“R&R”), Addition and Alteration (“A&A”) and complementary niche services.

ISOTeam contracts

This is a winning streak for ISOTeam as the company has a reputation for securing contracts because of its excellent track record in project delivery and early adopter of green technologies for its projects. As Singapore drives environmental sustainability in the building and construction industry, companies like ISOTeam will continue to thrive and grow.

ISOTeam has also started to build new capabilities in the renewable energy sector. In early 2016, it has installed Grid-Tied Solar Photovoltaic Systems on roofs of 33 blocks at Tampines estate worth approximately $1.8 million. Recently, it has won a $0.20 million contract to install Emergency Fuel Cell Operating Power Systems as back-up power generators for lifts of a number of HDB blocks at Punggol. Wealth builders should note this green initiative because it is likely that this may be implemented in more public housing in Singapore, indicating a potential huge untapped market to penetrate.

Of course, Singapore market is too small and is saturated with many players.

In one of my previous articles, I wrote about the fate of Underwater World Singapore. In response to my article, a reader mentioned about Straco Corp and this prompted me to research on the company.

Listed on SGX mainboard since 2004, Straco Corp was found by local entrepreneur, Wu Hsioh Kwang who is the Vice-President (Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce), Vice-Chairman of Tourism & Leisure, Chinese Business Group (Singapore Business Federation) and Vice Chairman of the 4th Standing Committee of Chinese Association of Enterprises with Foreign Investment (China).

Not much else is known about Mr Wu except that he spent 30 years doing tourism-related business in China. In fact, he has two very successful aquariums in China, one is the Shanghai Ocean Aquarium, while the other is Underwater World Xiamen. What prompted Mr Wu to see the potential and subsequently invested in Singapore Flyer is a mystery.

When Straco Corp splashed out $140 million for the Singapore Flyer back in 2014, the iconic attraction was in a bad shape. The company that ran the flyer was facing financial problems and Straco stepped in to buy over the asset. By then, the number of visitors had declined due to stiff competition from other attractions and tenants were having poor businesses.

OCBC share price dropped from a high of $9.00 to $8.35 upon the release of poor 2Q16 results. Second quarter earnings fell a whopping 15% year-on-year due to lower insurance income from subsidiary Great Eastern Holding (GEH).

For OCBC, the insurance segment, driven by GEH, represents one of the most profitable income sources. Operating profits from insurance segment was $120 million, the third highest among OCBC’s business segments. The earning contributions from GEH fell 66% due to the absence of a $105 million gain from the sale of an asset in 2Q15. However, GEH’s underlying insurance business actually performed well in this quarter, with new sales increased by 23%, led by growth across distribution channels in Singapore and Malaysia. Due to the unrealized mark-to-market losses in GEH’s equity and bond investments, profit from GEH’s life insurance recorded a dismal 19% drop.

Apart from insurance segment, OCBC also witnessed poor performance in its “bread and butter” segment – corporate loans. Like all commercial banks, OCBC derived its major income from loans made to corporates and public sector. For second quarter, net interest income declined 2% to $1.26 billion from $1.28 billion a year ago. Customer loan balances decreased 2% due to lower trade loans and reduced offshore borrowings from Chinese customers.

Many Singaporeans may recognize “Tiger Balm” as the world leading brand for topical analgesics. Some may even know that the Haw Par Corp, a company listed in SGX, is the owner of this renowned healthcare brand.

However, not many people know that Underwater World Singapore (UWS) was owned by Haw Par Corp.

1) Haw Par and Underwater World Singapore

When Haw Par sealed the fate of Underwater World Singapore (UWS) on 26 June 2016, many Singaporeans were taken by surprise. Being a forgotten icon of Singapore tourist attraction, many of us have overlooked the fact that UWS has being around for 25 years already. Within this period of time, the landscape has changed and not surprising, there are stiff competition from new and existing attractions.

UWS holds special memories for me because this is one of the local attractions that my wife and I visited when we were dating. That was more than 7 years ago. The week before UWS closed shop, my family visited UWS for the very last time.

We were surprised that the place remained largely the same and there were not many notable upgrades for the facilities. In fact, the new S.E.A Aquarium of Resort World Sentosa would appear to be more refreshing to tourists than the UWS.

In a month when DBS and SMRT hog the limelight, OCBC Bank quietly increased its multi-billion dollars stake in Great Eastern Holding. On 1st July 2016, OCBC made a filing in SGX to declare that it bought 611,800 shares of Great Eastern at $20.59 per share, effectively increasing its share in the insurer to 87.73% from 87.60%. OCBC’s multi-billion dollar stake in Great Eastern is actually one of its “hidden treasures”.

Great Eastern is the oldest life insurance group in Singapore and Malaysia, with over $60 billion in assets and 4.7 million policyholders. Being a subsidiary of OCBC, the life insurance group’s partnership is formidable. This is because Great Eastern’s life insurance products can be distributed through OCBC’s banking network. This type of partnership creates synergy and allows both companies to gain better customer’s insights and investment needs.

Being the pioneer in bancassurance in 1992, OCBC is the only Singapore bank to have substantial stake in a life insurance company. UOB’s bancassurance partner is Prudential, while DBS’ bancassurance partner is Manulife. The fact that Great Eastern is a subsidiary of OCBC gives the bank the competitive edge because the business interests will have to be aligned. In fact, several OCBC’s management actually sit in Great Eastern ‘s board of directors.

For first quarterly results of 2016, Raffles Medical Group (RMG) had a stable growth. Profits for the period increased 1% to $15.2 million year-on-year. Revenue actually grew by 23.0% from $95.0 million in Q1 2015 to $116.9 million in Q1 2016. The increase in revenue was driven by higher business volume arising increased patient load.

During this period, the management of RMG did not manage to rein in lease expenses and staff costs. This has resulted in higher revenue being offset by higher expenses. However, the Group’s net cash position increased from $53.8 million as at 31 December 2015 to $78.4 million as at 31 March 2016. This was due to strong operating cash flows generated from increased business operations.

Apart from having a strong cash-flow, RMG has a strong balance sheet as well. Current assets grew from $170 million as at 31 December 2015 to $216 million as at 31 March 2016. Correspondingly, the total liabilities also increased from $192 million to $226 million. The increased liabilities was due to increased payable arising from acquisition of subsidiaries during the financial year 2015.

The long-term debt is manageable, currently at only $20.8 million. Given RMG’s cash pile of $110 million, the non-current loans and borrowings are not a concern for the company.