As we approach mid-year 2019

Since the last post, the STI did indeed fell further forming a trough by early June. By this week, the STI regained some of its lost territory, landing at 3214.85. Banks are still lagging as the fall out of the US-China trade war began to infiltrate into smaller economies. It is a situation that when giants fight, all the others feel the ripples. For the 1st quarter of 2019, the actual GDP growth of 1.2% fell short against the forecast of 1.9%. Economists are now downgrading Singapore’s yearly growth rate from 2.5% forecast in March 2019 to 2.1% for year 2019. Certainly, the banks stocks are not going to fare well when the state of the economy worsens. Just months ago, it was widely expected that the FED would continue to increase the interest rate well into 2020. This would help mop off the liquidity in the system, resulting in higher net interest margin (NIM) for the banks. Right now, more and more are expecting the FED to lower the interest rate in response to the slowdown due to the on-going trade war. This would inadvertently slacken the interest margin again. Banks, which have been increasing their deposit rates recently, in preparation for higher interest rates may find their efforts come to naught if they are not able to lend them out efficiently.

As mentioned in the last post, perhaps, it may worth not to take the dividends and to sell the stocks pre-dividend and then buy them later. The descent in May, indeed was more than selling the stocks pre-dividend and paying for the brokerages in both directions. To date, the bank stocks are still below their pre-dividend prices, but they could be up again possibly soon. In fact, for those who had bought around end May/early June should have gained a little bit by now.

Manufacturing stocks, like Venture Corporation, that were beaten down hard during the month of May have already seen their stock prices rising sharply in the last two weeks. In fact, their stock prices could have already gone above the pre-dividend prices. So those who have ridden through in May, especially those who were gutsy enough to swim against the tide to buy more during late May, should be sitting on some gains by now.    

In the last quarter, banks and REITs were both moving in the upwards direction. Recently, they find themselves on opposite poles. The bank stocks were weakening but REITs were gaining strength. Bank stocks were weakening for the reasons stated above, while the REIT prices climbed after several weak quarters due to widely expected interest rates hikes. As the interest rate hike cycle is expected to end by 2020, and now with the increasing possibility that interest rate is moving down again, REIT prices are now picking up again. More recently, the property developer stocks are also gaining favour just as REIT prices continue their climb. This optimism should hold as long as the interest rate is expected to be on downtrend. Personally, I think if the FED were to decrease the interest rate in this or the next FED meeting, it is likely to be a symbolic action in anticipation of weak economic numbers due to the fallout of the trade war. It is unlikely to mark the beginning of a downtrend interest rate cycle, at least not for now. The FED has been working hard for the past 10 years to remove excessive liquidities, such as tapering off bond purchases and followed by a series of interest rate hikes, without causing too much turbulences in the financial market. As of today, the interest rate still falls short of their long-term target of about 3% to 3.5%. Certainly, it is not going to give up that battle that easily. So, in this respect, the REITs maybe at their peak by now.           

At the first glance, shipping stocks like Yangzjiang (YZJ) appeared to be holding up well. In the month of May, it lost 20 cents. This, however, translates to a loss of more than 12%. In fact, in percentage terms, it lost more than Venture Corporation whose loss was about 8% for the same period. But still, it had gained 6% in the last two weeks. While the recovery from a loss territory is expected, the speed of price recovery appeared extremely sharp especially given the weakening US dollars due to the widely expected interest drop going forward.

Sector rotation is now at play.     

Disclaimer – The above points are based on the writer’s opinion. They do not serve as an advice or recommendation for readers to buy into or sell out of the mentioned securities. Everyone should do his homework before he buys or sells any securities. All investments carry risks.

Brennen has been investing in the stock market for 30 years. He trains occasionally and is a managing partner for BP Wealth Learning Centre. He is the instructor for two online courses on InvestingNote – Value Investing: The Essential Guide and Value Investing: The Ultimate Guide. He is also the author of the book – “Building Wealth Together Through Stocks” which is available in both soft and hardcopy.

I want to have a free ebook on “Ten golden rules of stock investment” NOW!

Buy and hold? No, it should be sell and buy back later

Historically, the month of February is the when financial results of those companies whose Financial Year (FY) ends in December release their FY results. Then at around the 2nd half of April, it is when companies start holding annual general meetings (AGMs). And by the time when stocks go ex-dividend, it should be around early to mid-May. It is a long wait that takes about 2½ calendar months. This is almost 25% of the whole calendar year. For many people, it may be far too long. If nothing happens in between, well and good. We will get our dividends ultimately. As a whole, Singapore blue-chip companies pay very good dividends of around 3.5 to 5%, perhaps a bit higher than HK companies, and certainly much higher than many Japanese companies. With a relatively high yield, there is incentive to hold stocks for dividend. Certainly, this is one of the key reasons why we hold stocks for a long, long time. It is also coherent with Warren Buffet’s buy-and-hold strategy.

For those who have been dedicated followers of Warren Buffet (WB), the game plan is to buy an undervalue stock, hold the stock long enough in hope that the stock value surpasses its intrinsic value and, in the meantime, continue to wait for dividends year after year. Hopefully there is no need to sell the stock and that was why WB mentioned that one should have the conviction to hold a stock forever. There is nothing magical about this strategy. Especially in the American context, whereby the market capitalization of some companies are so huge that they are higher than the GDP of some small economies. As the world largest economy, it has sufficient power both politically and economically to influence how we do our business. Thus, if we invest correctly, for example to put money in the FAANG stocks, our wealth would have multiplied many times. Just 25 years ago, the Dow Jones was around 4,000. Today, it is 26,000. It has multiplied more than 6 times breaking new highs in countless number of times. So, buy-and-hold strategy should work in such a business environment. But can that be said of Singapore stocks? Twenty-five years ago, in 1994, our STI was at about 2,400. Today, it is at 3,200. It has risen only 30% over 25 years, and this is when many blue-chip companies, in particular the banks, were reporting record earnings. And, yet at this time, we are nowhere within the striking distance from the high of 3,875 in October 2007. Of course, different time frames will yield different comparison results but the stark difference in this comparison is good enough to show that buy-and-hold strategy may not work as well in Singapore as in the US.

For one, we are a driven economy. Stock prices, in particular, of those blue chips are especially sensitive to external news. The on-going trade war between the two world largest economies, the US and China, is a blatant example. In the first quarter of 2019, everything seemed to be moving in the right direction, the STI was floating around the level of 3,200. Then it started to move up as we draw nearer to book closure dates of most companies, peaking around end April 2019. The ascent in stock prices in the month of April is indeed pricing in the dividend distribution. By end April, stock prices have peaked and some have already started to fall. And by the time when the stocks go ex-dividend, the fall just before and just after a stock goes ex-dividend would more or less equal to the dividend distribution.

Now, the question is should one sell a dividend stock before the dividend distribution and buy it back later or should one simply hold it through the dividend distribution. Personally, I think many would go for the latter decision, ie. to take dividends. After all, dividend distribution is a certainty once declared. People like certainties. And that is why people are willing to place their money in fixed deposits (FDs) offering at 1-2% than to put their money in stocks providing them a return of somewhere between -5% and 20%, even though the odds is still higher than the FDs. Furthermore, taking dividend gives them their deserving rights to declare how much they have received in terms of dividends for the financial year.

But this may not necessary be the best way to take advantage of dividend distribution. It is like a game of majong (a chinese table tiles game). There is no one fixed way of winning the game. Just take OCBC as an example. On 1st April, the share price opened at $11.11, and closed on 30th April at $12.10. This price difference of $1 per share would have easily covered the dividend distribution of 23 cents per share and to pay for the brokerage plus all other charges for the sell and buy back executions. Of course, one has to be aware that it may not be worthwhile for a small trade lot of 100 shares due to the imposed minimum brokerage by brokerage houses. But, certainly, a quantity of 1000 shares would be sufficient to tip this balance. All this are within our predictions and that was why I mentioned in the last post on OCBC scrip dividend that the share price is likely to be high at the point of conversion as the date is near to book closure. Given this time when the trade-war, between the two largest economies that started in mid-2018, is beginning to bite into the real economy, shares prices are less likely to maintain its upward march or even remains unchanged after the dividend distribution. Certainly, the announcement of US tariff on the additional $200b worth of China’s goods on 10th May 2019 accelerated all that. And by now, many blue-chip stocks have already sunk to some extent, and probably more going forward, at least in the short term. In fact, the fall in the share price probably could equate to several times of the dividend distribution. By the end of trading day on 17th May 2019, OCBC shares closed at $11.15, even below the price when their financial results were announced on 22 February. Many other blue-chip stocks also exhibited the same price movements in the same period.

For those who had sold their stocks before they go ex-dividend, they are having their last laugh. President Donald Trump had shot down some high-flying ducks for easy picks on the ground. While their compatriots are away as in the saying “Go away in May”, pre-dividend sellers are probably on look-out to buy back the stocks that they had sold. With the remainder, they can buy more stocks than what the dividends can provide to create a quasi-scrip dividend as I had mentioned in my last post on OCBC scrip dividend. And certainly, a sumptuous dinner to go along with it.

Disclaimer – The above points are based on the writer’s opinion. They do not serve as an advice or recommendation for readers to buy into or sell out of the mentioned securities. Everyone should do his homework before he buys or sells any securities. All investments carry risks.

Register me for the course “Make yourself a printed name card holder” for free.

Brennen has been investing in the stock market for 30 years. He trains occasionally and is a managing partner for BP Wealth Learning Centre. He is the instructor for two online courses on InvestingNote – Value Investing: The Essential Guide and Value Investing: The Ultimate Guide. He is also the author of the book – “Building Wealth Together Through Stocks” which is available in both soft and hardcopy.

OCBC Scrip dividend

Along with the other banks, OCBC has recently announced the FY 2018 results. The net profit improved 11% from S$4.05b to $4.49b. Apart from its subsidiary, Great Eastern’s disappointing results, I would say that OCBC did well for FY 2018. Along with the reasonably good results, OCBC is offering a dividend of 23 cents per share for H2 FY2018, representing a dividend payout of about 41% for the whole year. This is, however, lower than its peers like DBS and UOB. The dividend payout for DBS and UOB is 56% and 50% respectively.  (Click here for the performance numbers.)

Over the years, OCBC appeared to have a greater propensity to pay out scrip dividend compare to the other two banks. This is the 12th time that the bank proposed scrip dividend since the global financial crisis in 2009 . To incentivise the acceptance of scrip dividend, OCBC is offering  a 10% discount on the final weighted average price from 3 May to 6 May 2019 (inclusive).

The question to many investors is – what is the purpose of the bank distributing scrip dividend? And is scrip dividend good or bad for shareholders? To me, there is no absolute advantage or disadvantage in having scrip dividends. It depends on what the bank’s objective and what we wanted as a shareholder. The financial advantage of scrip dividend is not exactly apparent. After all, one can create a quasi-scrip dividend exercise by using the cash dividend to buy the bank’s shares in the open market. The brokerage and administrative fees are comparative small in terms of costs as they can be easily offset if we purchase the bank stock at prices lower than the stock’s conversion price. That said, it is still good to discuss about the characteristics of scrip dividend from the bank’s perspective as well as from shareholder’s perspective.

For the bank

  1. Generally, banks (or for that matter any public-listed companies) do not like to have too much volatility in their stock prices. Essentially, they want people with long-term views. By distributing dividends in the form of scrip, it helps, to a certain extent, make shareholders hold onto their stocks longer. For one, by providing scrip dividends that end up in odd-lots in the hands of shareholders. Thus, this makes it more difficult for holders to offload their stocks easily.
  2. By providing a discount to the on-going share price, the bank is, in effect, encouraging shareholders to take the scrip  dividend instead of cash. This helps the bank to preserve cash which can be very useful during times of need. Just base on the back-of-envelope calculation, with the dividend of 23 cents per share, it would cost the bank $979.1 million in cash for just this dividend distribution. Even though OCBC is able to meet the current Common Equity Tier 1 (CET-1) requirement, it still went ahead to offer scrip dividends. This may mean that the bank is forecasting uncertain times or it may be preserving a bigger war-chest of cash for some capital investment ahead. While attempting to preserve cash capital, it is, in effect, creating a larger share base. This will have a dilutive effect. It may work against shareholders especially when times turn for the worse. Fortunately, OCBC has been buying up their own shares in the open-market. The bank had been given the mandate in the last shareholders’ annual general meeting to buy up to 212 million (or 5% of the issued shares) in the open market. Certainly, as shareholders, we would be more comfortable with companies that are able to buy back their own shares compare those that are unable to.
  3. While the bank is dabbling in the stock market buying 200,000 shares each time, it is not possible to know whether the bank is gaining or losing out in this whole exercise. After all, their job is not to make a profit by buying shares in the open market. Based on the 5% buy-back mandate from the shareholders, the bank can buy up to 212 million shares. Given that OCBC makes a purchase of 200,000 shares each time, it would take more than 100 trading days to fulfill the whole order, and not including those purchasing shares under the employees’ option scheme. This translates to about 40% of the total number of trading days in a year. In some days, it may buy high and in some days it may buy low. Generally, the stock price during the conversion days tend to be very high as they are very near to the ex-dividend date. So, it means that the conversion stock price tends to be on the high side. So, even if  the bank gives a 10% discount over the conversion price, there still may a chance that the bank did not lose out buying from the open market as its average buying price can be much lower than the conversion price. As of today, the conversion price is yet to be determined. It will be the weighted average of the trading share price from 3 May 2019 to 6 May 2019 (Inclusive). Note that a cash dividend is a certainty for the bank. For scrip dividend, this is not certain as to how many shares will be ultimately distributed. With the sweeteners (discounts) for shareholders thrown in, it is yet to be known whether the bank gains or loses out compare to cash dividend. However, one thing if for sure. Less cash will be dispensed, but, at the expense of a larger share base.

Shareholders

  • As shareholders, scrip dividend can be an alternative to cash dividends if the shareholder does not need to the money at that time. The problem of going for scrip dividends it that we end up with odd lots. This can be a bit troublesome if we want to sell them in the future. Although lot size has been reduced from 1000 shares to 100 shares, stockholders are often forced to sell  the mother lots in order to amalgamate the sales due to the minimum brokerage charge.
  • As one may point out, there is no need to pay for brokerages and the other administrative fees when we accept scrip dividends in lieu of cash dividends. However, this often not a major issue. As it is, one can create a quasi-scrip dividend by buying the stock from the open market upon the receipt of dividends. The brokerage and all the related fees are relatively small, and can be easily offset if one is able to purchase at a lower trading price than the conversion price calculated by the bank.  
  • One point about scrip dividend is that we are able to practice what is known as power of compounding. Say we have 10,000 shares and the dividend rate is $0.23. Assuming a conversion rate of $11.50, we would be entitled 200 shares. The next time when OCBC declares scrip dividends, our share base would be based on 10,200 shares instead of 10,000 shares. As our stock accumulates, we are in effect, practicing the power of compounding. From that point of view, it is true. In essence, I am assuming that the future dividend distribution continues to be the same or higher. In investments, many unexpected things can happen. It is possible that the bank falls onto bad times and have to reduce the dividend rate. A decrease in the dividend rate can have a significant effect on the power of compounding.
  • Certainly, a discount in the conversion price of the scrip dividend is a plus factor to encourage shareholders to take up the scrip dividend. It provides an additional margin of safety. This stands as a cushion in a falling share price situation when the global economy or the business situation  for the company turns for the worse. It serves as a good alternative to getting cash dividends.

At the end of the day, there is no absolute advantage or disadvantage to either the bank or to the shareholders. It is more like a question of choice. As mentioned earlier, OCBC has the lowest payout ratio (41% compared to DBS’s 55% and UOB’s 50%.). Perhaps, it has been under pressure to bring up its dividend payout as well. Instead of increasing the dividend rate, it is probably doing so by increasing the share base so that the total payment ratio reaches the mid-40%.

Disclaimer – The above points are based on the writer’s opinion. They do not serve as an advice or recommendation for readers to buy into or sell out of the mentioned securities. Everyone should do his homework before he buys or sells any securities. All investments carry risks.

Brennen has been investing in the stock market for 30 years. He trains occasionally and is a managing partner for BP Wealth Learning Centre. He is the instructor for two online courses on InvestingNote – Value Investing: The Essential Guide and Value Investing: The Ultimate Guide. He is also the author of the book – “Building Wealth Together Through Stocks” which is available in both soft and hardcopy.

350% in 7 trading days

Since the time when I mentioned about Y-Ventures last week, it had multiplied by 350%. It was about 7 trading days since it hit the bottom at 3.8 cents on 31 March and 1 April 2019. I had mentioned in the article that it probably worth a punt on the stock.

Given that it is a penny stock, the queue in the buy column at that time was very low at 10,000 to 20,000 shares. So, it meant that you could key to buy at a few bits lower than the trading price and, still,  somebody was willing to sell the stock to you. However, when one were to look at the the transaction volume, it was another story. It was comparatively huge, perhaps 1 to 2 million shares showing the market was full of spot sellers willing to short the stock for any ready buyer. For the past one year, the share price has been beaten down and was close to 5% of the peak value by end March/early April. This could be one of the best chance to buy the stock at fire-sale price. It can only happen when the market thinks that the company is on the brink of bankruptcy or is widely expecting a rights issue. The company was listed on the stock exchange fairly recently, of less than 2 years and the stock price has been affected by the fallen crypto-currency joint venture and the accounting fiasco that it experienced last year. 

With the quantity of shares issued at 200 million, it is possible to buy 0.1% of the company with only $8,000 at the share price of 4 cents. (The pre-IPO share quantity was 35 million from which about $7m was raised.) It means that at 4 cents, it is below the pre-IPO price valued at 5 cents. In effect, it is worth the risk to take the plunge. At most, if the company did go bust (touch wood), I would lost a few thousand dollars. The potential upside should be higher than the downside.

It would be good to execute the trade in small tranches, each time by buying 25 000 to 50,000 shares per trade. As we know, the best trades happen when nobody is looking at the stock. This is where custodian account becomes relevant. We need not pay a minimum brokerage of $25 to execute each trade. By doing so, it helps to cluster the buy price to around 4 cents. (I use the word ‘cluster’ because, very often, we do not know exactly know when is the lowest price. Sometimes when we feel that the purchase price is good, it still can drop further. So, to play it conservatively, we buy in smaller tranches once we believe that the share price has dropped to a level that one simply cannot refuse.)      

Fast forward a few days to today. The upside has been extremely sharp. The share price has advanced almost 400% from its bottom at 3.8 cents in a matter of 7 trading days! Perhaps, based on market psychology, it may still have legs going forward as it has started from a very low base. But the rate of increase should taper off as the share price increase. The purchase has been a pure luck as if one had struck a price in a 4-D. The timing was good. Certainly, it cannot be repeated or applied to other stocks easily. This can only happen, perhaps, once in a few years.

So, going forward, where will the stock price be? Well, your guess is just as good as mine. Right now, there is no fundamentals to provide us an idea of the share price, apart from making some wild guess, with some assumptions. That said, I have decided to sell one-third of my holdings. That provides me with some profit and the 2/3 of the quantity purchased at zero cost. With the change of management, hopefully, more good days lie ahead.  At today trading price at 14 to 15 cents, it is still below the IPO price of 22 cents in July 2017. If the new management proved to be good, the share price should advance in the long run.

 Disclaimer – The above pointers are based on the writer’s opinion. They do not serve as an advice or recommendation for readers to buy into or sell out of the mentioned security. Everyone should do his homework before he buys or sells any securities. All investments carry risks.

Brennen has been investing in the stock market for 30 years. He trains occasionally and is a managing partner for BP Wealth Learning Centre. He is the instructor for two online courses on InvestingNote – Value Investing: The Essential Guide and Value Investing: The Ultimate Guide. He is also the author of the book – “Building Wealth Together Through Stocks” which is available in both soft and hardcopy.



Hyflux: Some financial questions

I chanced upon the article on “Hyflux story so far” in BT Weekend, 23-24 March 2019. Given that it had listed the debts raised in the past years, I decided to compile them into a timeline in hope to have a better picture of Hyflux’s current predicament. What really puzzled me was the perpetual raised in 2016. It was stated that the perpetual of $500m was raised to redeem the two tranches of perpetuals raised for institutional and accredited investors. The first was $300m perpetual @5.75% raised in January 2014 and the second was $175m perpetual @4.8% raised in July 2014.

Just purely from a financial management point of view, why was Hyflux willing to raise perpetual at 6% to redeem perpetuals at lower coupon rates. After all, the 4.8% and the 5.75% perpetuals were hardly 2-year and 3-year old respectively when they were redeemed. Why was Hyflux so anxious to redeem those perpetual bonds when the perpetuals were still so recent by any standard.

Without any consideration of the administrative costs involved, the $175m @4.8% and the $300m @5.75% would translate to $8.4 million and $17.25 million annually. Adding these two coupon cost together, it would cost Hyflux $25.65 million annually. Why would Hyflux wanted to raise $500 million @6% just to redeem the two earlier perpetuals. The $500m @6% would have cost Hyflux $30 million annually compare to paying the coupons of two earlier bonds that cost $25.65 million annually. Why did Hyflux willing pay additional fund of $4.35 million per year to new perpetual holders instead of just staying status quo to continue to serve the two institutional perpetual bonds. After all, the bonds are still very new especially when they are also of perpetual status. Are there some non-financial reasons that investors do not know? Wouldn’t the additional $4.35 million very crucial for Hyflux in view that they had been suffering negative cash flows for at least 5 years before Year 2016?

In fact, from financial management point-of-view Hyflux should redeem the $400 million preference shares @6% as by Call Date in April 2018, the coupon would be stepped up to 8%. Based on calculations, the $400 million perpetual coupons would have increased by $8m from $24m to $32m. So, wouldn’t it be more crucial to clear (or redeem) the higher coupon rate first?

All these make no sense to me.

Disclaimer – The above pointers are based on the writer’s opinion. They do not serve as an advice or recommendation for readers to buy into or sell out of the mentioned securities. Everyone should do his homework before he buys or sells any securities. All investments carry risks.

Brennen has been investing in the stock market for 30 years. He trains occasionally and is a managing partner for BP Wealth Learning Centre. He is the instructor for two online courses on InvestingNote – Value Investing: The Essential Guide and Value Investing: The Ultimate Guide. He is also the author of the book – “Building Wealth Together Through Stocks” which is available in both soft and hardcopy.



Who are the winners and losers in the Hyflux saga?

By now, we all know that unsecured bond holders, preference shareholders and ordinary shareholders have to once again take a deep, deep haircut following Hyflux’s re-structuring plan. The proposal (see table below) is still subject to final approval through townhall meetings in the coming weeks.

Just a bit more than 2 years ago, many investors were jumping into the $300m perpetual bond issue band-wagon that was dangling at a whopping 6%. Compare this to the meagre bank deposit interest rate of 1% or less, it was like a god-send. The perpetual bonds were so over-subscribed that it has to be upsized to $500m. Still, I believe, it was oversubscribed such that the company had to carry out an allocation exercise for the subscribers. And, by May 2018, the $400m 6% CPS issued in 2011 would have stepped-up to 8% if no redemption was made. The redemption did not take place and the 8% coupon was not delivered either. In fact, no coupons were made in 2018 as Hyflux applied to seek court-protection to carry out debt-restructuring exercise following its ever-choking cash flow problem under the pile of debts.

For the last few years, Hyflux has been pinning on the hope to sell its loss-making Tuaspring desalination and power plant in order to pay down its pile of debts. But the hope became more and more remote in each passing day. It was mentioned previously that there was an interested local buyer but it appeared that Hyflux was not exactly keen. And by today, it has been established that Hyflux would be selling the company lock, stock and barrel to a consortium between Salim Group and Medco Group, SM International Pte Ltd.

So, who are the real losers in this whole saga? Although it is said in the media that Chairman and CEO, Olivier Lum, will lose all her shares in the company, she is probably not the ultimate loser. After all, she has got back her dues as a CEO and receive many years of dividends. Hyflux had established that cash dividends received by the chairman in the period between 2007 and 2017 was $58m (TODAYonline, 24 Feb 2019). Apart from the dividends, she had also been rewarded with an annual remuneration of between $750k to $1m as an executive. So, over the years, she has gotten back her dues. Perhaps the ones that suffered losses are the minority stakeholders. Many of them are working-class employees and retirees, who can only dream of earning a fraction of that $58m in their lifetime. None of these stakeholders got back what they had invested. The 6% promised yield was simply too mouth-watering compared to deposit interest rate of 1% or less at that time. The general belief for investing in the company was that it was producing a critical resource and would not likely be a let-down. Unfortunately, it failed. Many probably had lost their life-savings. Let’s ask ourselves, if a company were to pay 6% coupon faithfully, in how many years’ time will an investor get back what he had invested? It is 16.6 years not taking into account the value of money. So, base on this fact, none of the investors got back what they had invested as even the 2011 6% CPS issued by the company was less than 10 years. With the current state of affairs, there is really not much these investors can do. There is only so much money on the table for distribution and it falls so far short of the owed amount. Paying more for one group of people would mean less for another group. Certainly, the promised yield should not be the only criterion to get into the investment. (See the free beta-mode course for evaluating engineering companies.) In fact, investors should be well-aware that the higher promise return signifies that the higher possibility of losing their capital. Unfortunately, the high promised yield appeals very much to retirees as a source of passive income.     

In effect, the situation for the 2011 6% CPS was so near-yet-so-far. I was one of them. I had invested $5,000 and, all this while, the trading price has been above par. It was well and good until the last point when the issuer was to decide to redeem the preference share or to let the debt stepped up to 8%. Frankly speaking, I felt ripped off. Unfortunately, the nature of being perpetual gives the right to the issuer not to redeem the bond. What is the purpose of the step-up clause to 8% when it cannot deliver? Then, there are those who rushed to subscribe the 2016 $300m perpetual bond which was later up-sized to $500m. They enjoyed only one coupon distribution in 2017 to date. To a certain extent, it was with luck that I give this tranche a miss because I noticed that fundamentals were deteriorating badly, and the share price was descending fast. But still, if the proposal were to be accepted, I would have lost about 50% of what I invested for the 2011 tranche, not taking into account the value of money. Furthermore, the share distribution will make all the perpetual bond holders end up with odd lots, making it very difficult to buy or sell. Actually, for the perpetual bondholders, there is no way out other than waiting the bond issuer to redeem the bonds. Alternatively, they can sell in the open market, but during such critical times, the market is definitely trading at a deep discount. So, all-in-all, it has been a painful lesson for this group of investors.    

For equity holders, the picture is no better. For many years since 2011, the share price has been falling to reflect the increasing risk. At that time when it was suspended in May 2018, it was probably about 10% the price level of 2011. Unless one, can short the stock with extremely good timing, it is unlikely that one can really gain significantly by trading in Hyflux shares.

The real winner is certainly the SM Investment, a consortium formed from two Indonesian groups, Salim and Medco. They managed to buy opportunistically on the cheap, well below the projects’ book value. Going forward, it would be very dependent on how efficient the consortium is to operate as a group together with the Indonesia operations. Hopefully, they are able to reap sufficient economies of scale to operate efficiently and effectively. This, however, will take time as there are needs to make operational changes once the acquisition is confirmed.

(Lead me to a free beta-mode course on looking at engineering companies.)

Disclaimer – The above pointers are based on the writer’s opinion. They do not serve as an advice or recommendation for readers to buy into or sell out of the mentioned stock when the suspension is lifted. Everyone should do their homework before they buy or sell any securities. All investments carry risks.

Brennen has been investing in the stock market for 30 years. He trains occasionally and is a managing partner for BP Wealth Learning Centre. He is the instructor for two online courses on InvestingNote – Value Investing: The Essential Guide and Value Investing: The Ultimate Guide. He is also the author of the book – “Building Wealth Together Through Stocks” which is available in both soft and hardcopy.