Having an independent director Mr Lim Yoke Hean who is the Chief Executive Officer of Pheim Asset Management and yet nothing is done to boost shareholders value when they have the expertise within the board to guide them how to boost shareholders value.
Fund managers are famous for manipulation of the market and yet nothing has happened here or something has happened here at the disadvantage of minority share holders.
Instead of supporting the minority shareholders for shareholders value Mr Lim Yoke Hean was supporting the management for their inaction.Even if the company wants to do expansion it is not difficult to boost the share price when the cash pile is almost 75% of NTA.
Tell them to step down if they cannot help the minority shareholders whose interest they suppose to represent.
In the annual report 2013, the company said it decided to repay 37.5 m rmb of bank borrowings because of higher interest rates. That makes sense but how come they borrowed $ in the first place when they were supposed to have >400m rmb cash. ?
This is something the shareholders hv been asking for ,its nonsense to borrow and pay higher interest rate when u hv so much cash being idle.Its an unnecessary loan.Dun know what is the rationale
At least they hv taken a first step.Why not pay all ?Still hv some loan that bears higher interest rate.What for the loan when there is so much of cash lying idle and not supporting shareholders value by doing share buyback
Now the company has brought back the share buyback mandate which was missing in the last AGM don't know for wht reason they did not ask for it the last AGM as though they were not bothered about the share price or prefer to be low so that they can quietly through their proxies accumulate them.It means for every 3c purchase they get 22c which is the NTA of the company.Like for every $30,000 spent they get $210,000 in net worth if they take it private later.
They know the retail investors are weak and will not be able to push the price on their own.
The independent directors can defend the management instead of fighting for the retail investors.
One of the independent directors is from a fund management company(Pheim) .He should know very well the price of the shares is ridiculous and yet he is defending the management which has huge pile of cash to buy back shares to bring it back to a more reasonable price but not doing so.
This time we should demand not only have the share buyback mandate for show to keep the retail investors quiet but they should do much buyback to bring the share price to a more reasonable level or delist as they are not interested in share price and give us back our money.
They have been having share buyback mandates for few years in a row and when the price of shares went ridiculously low they only did a token 100,000 shares buyback for just $3000 when they hv a cash pile of over $80 million dollars idling.
Even if they use just $1million dollar to do buy back the shares the market will get the signal and the price will go back to a more reasonable level than the ridiculous level now.If they do nothing than they are entertaining those who want to see the price down.What is the hidden agenda?
Made profit for most of the listed years did not pay dividend at least do share buyback
Shareholders hv to suffer low share price and no dividends.
But the directors including the independent directors get handsome payout and this year their compensation raised from $85000 to $95000
why should they get a raise of $10,000 for doing a bad job for the retail investors.
Hope the independent director Low Wai Cheong who promised more share buyback after the blackout in 2012 AGM but nothing that sort happened,will get the management to do it with the share buy back mandate that will be reinstated for the coming AGM.
We also hope Mr Leong Chan Teik from NextInsight will attend the AGM 3 years in a row fighting for the rights of the retail investors by asking some damning questions to the management and keep the pressure on.Thanks to Mr Leong Chan Teik.Hope u will again attend the AGM this year.We can see a small progress in China Fibretech for the coming AGM but we should demand for a more robust progress and not a token eyewash like buying back 100,000 shares for $3000 in 2012.
We don't need excuses that the cash hoard is for expansion. U can always raise the capital by rights issue and placement when the share price has picked up.Its a unlimited source of finance.It make no sense and reflects badly on the company and management to hv the value of the shares ridiculously low
We don't need bullshit excuses anymore from the management and the Independent directors who supposed to speak for the retail investors instead speaking for the management.If u cannot do the job step down not step down when things get beyond control like in Foreland.The directors and the management are seem to be very thick skin not listening to wht that shareholders wanted in the last 2 AGMs.This time should not let them off.
China Fibretech: Dr Pu Weidong has appeared as the company's No. 7 largest shareholder with 5.46 million shares with a current market value of S$147,000. He did not figure in the 2012 annual report.
Dr Pu once was an investment analyst with UOB Kay Hian in Singapore, and then joined Sinomem Technology as Vice President for Corporate Planning, Strategic Investment and Investor Relations.
He currently is CEO of Sinopipe Holdings, an S-chip whose trading has been suspended since April 2012 for accounting irregularities.
Another new shareholder is Ramesh Chandiramani, who runs Forte Capital and has taken significant stakes in various small-cap companies.
He is No.8 largest shareholder in the 2013 annual report of China Fibretech with 5.001 million shares. His name did not appear in the 2012 annual report.
Good sign that China Fibretech had setteled RMB 37.5milloion out of 50million owed so interest cost will be substantially reduced.
Good sign that seasoned investors like Dr Pu Weidong who has invested on selected potential stocks have chosen China Fibretech. He is a ex investment analyst with UOB Kay Hian ,ex-Vice President in Sinomen for Investor Relations,Strategic Investment and which was taken over by the boss.
Now Dr Pu Wei Dong has become the CEO of Sinopipe Holding after it got suspended.
I believe Dr Pu Wei Dong has world of an experience in stock picks although he got burnt by sinopipe,so I believe China Fibretech has great potential.Besides as a CEO I believe he is based in China and understands the situation there better.
Besides Forte Capital too has taken significant stake in China Fibretech
Another good sign is the Share Buyback is back in the agenda for the EGM
HOPEFULLY THIS TIME THE SHARE BUYBACK MANDATE IS NOT JUST AN EYEWASH AND A DUMMY ONE LIKE BEFORE WHERE ONLY ONCE A VERY INSIGNIFICANT AMOUT OF SHARES WERE BOUGHT BACK.
DURING THE AGM RETAIL INVESTORS SHOULD INSIST THAT THE SHARE BUYBACK MANDATE SHOULD NOT JUST BE A DUMMY ONE INSTEAD SHOULD BE ACTIVELY USED BY THE MANAGEMENT TO BRING BACK THE SHARE PRICE TO A MORE REASONABLE ONE REFLECTING THE FUNDAMENTALS OF THE COMPANY AND NOT RIDICULOUSLY SUCH A LOW PRICE WHILE THE DIRECTORS GET A FEE RISE FOR DOING A BAD JOB.
At least Chinafibretech minority shareholders are in a better position compared to another super low price to NAV and Net net cash schip:-> Changtian Plastics & Chemical.
There is no share buyback mandate or strong
minority shareholders.
Changtian Plastics is currently priced at S$0.04 (25 April 2014) versus a net net cash per share of only S$0.286 per share or NAV per share of S$0.316.
The Singaporean lead independent director is supportive of management and great at going through the motions when questioned by small shareholders at AGMs.
But there is never any action or next step for change.
The three independent directors are paid S$180K a year for director fees.
Changtian has a ton of cash as at 31 Dec 2013 of RMB987.8m (cash & bank balances + deposits) which is worth about S$198.5m (with no debt and only S$5m of total liabilities!)versus current market cap of S$26.4m.
Most of this cash has been sitting idle for the past 3-4 years. There has never been a buyback mandate since it's 2007 ipo. The last dividend paid was about S$0.01/share back in 2010.
Over the past 3 or 4 AGMs shareholders has always asked why a share mandate isn't tabled as part of the AGM resolutions. The lead independent director's response is
that managements needs the cash to either expand current business or diversify into a different business.
The current identified "new business" has been
halted due to issues with the land consent for building
a new factory for it's maiden entry to Nylon 6 chips manufacturing.
