Post Reply
401-420 of 799
dun worry lah....temasek holding is into this burger....give it time it will fly...hv some faith can or not? :P
From Cityspring website
http://www.cityspring.com.sg/relations/finance_info.php
CitySpring Summary Pro Forma Balance Sheet
As at 31 March 2006 ('000s)
Intangibles 133,100
Goodwill 294,476
Total assets 801,619
Total liabilities 400,310
Net assets 401,309
Wonder what is the Net Tangible Asset?
just wondering: if Citispring Px ever goes below 89c, the IPO price, is the management co. ever going to cough out any money to make up for the loss? So, head they win and tail you lose, as one forumer said earlier.
over $1m a day for the management co. is really too much. toto gives out only $300k twice per week.
Besides, since they are all the so-and-so, could easily gang up to drive the price up wat... before the -cut-off date every qtr, for huge return in terms of mgt fee.
Total returns, of course, include any capital gains. CitySpring's units were priced at 89 cents each for its IPO. The price soared 66 per cent on the first day, closing at $1.48. Seven weeks later, the price ended at $1.49 on March 30. This, coupled with a 4.5 per cent fall in the benchmark index over the period, meant the units were deemed to have outperformed the benchmark by 74.3 per cent, triggering the huge performance fee payout.
so in order cityspring to be profitable, the share price must go down very low????
|
Published May 16, 2007 
|
|
Is there value in CitySpring forecasts?
By CONRAD TAN
CITYSPRING Infrastructure Trust's managers have a lot to answer for.
At least two items in its results for the 48-day period since its Feb 12 listing are shocking, when compared to its projections at the time of its initial public offer: the management fee - an eye-watering $63.4 million - and the net loss of $56.1 million.
The projections were for management fees of $460,000 and a net loss of $2.7 million, after pro-rating the numbers in the prospectus, which were for the 59 days from Feb 1 to March 31.
Although the trust was set up on Jan 5, its operations started only on Feb 12, when it completed the acquisition of its first assets. The difference between the projections and the actual outcome is astounding.
The question on ordinary shareholders' minds is surely: What use are the projections then? CitySpring's management company, a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Temasek Holdings, said the projection for the management fee was derived by pro-rating the minimum annual base fee of $3.5 million and did not include performance fees. As it turned out, the actual fee paid consisted of $59.5 million in performance fees and a base fee of $900,000, plus goods and services tax.
While the prospectus contains standard (and justifiable) disclaimers that the projections are not guaranteed, such a wide discrepancy calls into question the value of making projections at all and risks turning the exercise into a farce.
Shareholders should now ask, do the profit projections for this full year, which ends next March, still hold?
CitySpring's topline revenue of $34.3 million for the period just reported was actually slightly above the projected $33.9 million. Other costs, for fuel and electricity, transportation and staff, were lower than, or not too far above, the projected figures.
Novelty
So it's hard to see why the trust should have posted such a massive loss, other than the enormous management fee. How this happened is to be found on pages 173-180 of the listing prospectus, which says a performance fee is payable after the end of each quarter if the total return on CitySpring units exceeds the total return on the MSCI Asia-Pacific ex-Japan Utilities Index. The performance fee is 20 per cent of the excess in total returns, less any deficit in preceding quarters.
Total returns, of course, include any capital gains. CitySpring's units were priced at 89 cents each for its IPO. The price soared 66 per cent on the first day, closing at $1.48. Seven weeks later, the price ended at $1.49 on March 30. This, coupled with a 4.5 per cent fall in the benchmark index over the period, meant the units were deemed to have outperformed the benchmark by 74.3 per cent, triggering the huge performance fee payout.
But how much of the price increase of an IPO on debut is ever due to the management's skill? Investors would have taken comfort in the fact that the trust has the full backing of Temasek, which now has a 28 per cent indirect stake in CitySpring and intends to remain its largest shareholder. Its novelty as the first infrastructure business trust to launch here would also have helped boost demand.
All this has saddled unitholders with a much larger loss than they could have expected. Or as one sore unitholder put it, the fund appeared to be bleeding more than $1 million a day, on average. From the same perspective, the management fee over the 48-day period was $1.3 million a day, almost all of which was a 'performance fee' based on how well the share price had done since IPO.
So another question from all this is whether the current fee structure is achieving its intended purpose. The performance fee is supposed to reward good stewardship of a fund, to ensure that its managers invest in projects that generate solid returns to unitholders. Gains that are likely to be largely the result of strong demand for a new issue should not be rewarded in such a disproportionate manner.
This incentive structure is not unique to CitySpring. Investors should be beware when buying into such IPOs that the fees they pay will not depend merely on the fund's bottomline performance, but on any capital gains.
Acquisitions
It is small comfort that CitySpring's managers have paid themselves most of the management fee through the issue of 40 million new units, rather than in cash. This has enlarged the original capital base by 8.9 per cent, from 450 million units to 490 million. While this means CitySpring still has enough cash to pursue future acquisitions, other unitholders will have found that their stake in CitySpring has been diluted, without them having any say in it.
|
What sort of company is this? Not making much and a big portion goes to management at the expense of shareholders. SGX should investigate the directors and managers.
fund mgrs pushing price performance up to rip another windfall for this coming quarter again?
I second that too. Just look at the volume. Someone is manipulating this counter. Perhaps the big boys are making plans to dump out their shares? Just my thoughts.
too dangerous to enter positions for CS now... "Manipulators at large now"... Look at the trend for the past few days despite negative news and one should understand.
wow...CS cheonging siah....anyone contra ? thk worth a SHORT ??!??! hee...
See their investment strategy : Also tikam tikam, kena eat up 50% in Thailand. You trust your investment in this counter. Zhi Zee Bao Chong (in Chinese) !!!
This news is interesting : Just received !
SINGAPORE, May 16 (Reuters) - Singapore state investor Temasek Holdings [TEM.UL] said on Wednesday it has set up a S$500 million ($330 million) trust to fund education, healthcare and disaster relief in Asia.
The new foundation could help improve Temasek's image in markets where it is expanding aggressively.
The state investor -- headed by Ho Ching, the wife of Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong -- has increasingly come under attack in Asia over its investment strategy.
A Temasek-led, $3.8 billion bet on Thai telecoms firm Shin Corp. (SHIN.BK: Quote, Profile , Research) sparked a prolonged political crisis in Bangkok, and has almost halved in value.
Temasek said the trust also aimed to promote better governance and government regulation.
Temasek has bought stakes in several financial institutions across Asia, including banks in China, South Korea, Pakistan and Indonesia.
Emerging Asia has become a big focus for Temasek, which manages about $80 billion in assets, as it tries to boost investment returns.
Its largest financial holdings include an 11.55 percent stake in Standard Chartered Bank (STAN.L: Quote, Profile , Research), according to its website.
Temasek said in a statement this month that its Fullerton Financial unit owns 5.88 percent of China Construction Bank (0939.HK: Quote, Profile , Research), 4.64 percent of Bank of China (601988.SS: Quote, Profile , Research) (3988.HK: Quote, Profile , Research), 9.62 percent of South Korea's Hana Financial Holdings (086790.KS: Quote, Profile , Research), and 7.78 percent of India's ICICI Bank (ICBK.BO: Quote, Profile , Research).
CitySpring Infrastructure
May 15 close: $1.32
MORGAN STANLEY, May 15
QUICK comment: We reiterate our 'equal-weight-V' rating on CitySpring Infrastructure Trust and $1.50 price target following the release of FY07 earnings. We believe Temasek intends CitySpring to be its key platform for targeting infrastructure growth by acquisition. We have factored in a 30 per cent premium over DDM model valuation to account for acquisition potential.
What's new: CitySpring reported FY07 earnings that were slightly ahead of expectation on an operating level, but there was no announcement of a new acquisition. City Gas reported profit before tax of $2.1 million, in line with our expectation.
SingSpring reported profit before tax of $11.8 million, higher than our expectation of $4.0 million, primarily due to $3.8 million of negative goodwill and $3.4 million of fair value gains on derivatives.
CitySpring also announced a distribution of 0.78 cent per security, which was in line with projections at the time of listing.
What we liked: Group revenue was higher than company projections; group operating expenses were lower than our expectation; and retained guidance for FY08 distribution of six cents from the existing assets.
What we didn't like: No new deal announcement, potentially not meeting market expectations.
Implications: As there was no announcement of a new acquisition, we expect the stock may be a little weaker. However, we believe that the acquisition premium should be retained, given the importance of CitySpring to Temasek and positive comments by the management on deal pipeline. Should the stock fall further, there may be a buying opportunity for investors.
Valuation: The stock is yielding 4.3 per cent, in line with Singapore Reits and other infrastructure trusts.
EQUAL WEIGHT
I sold that on the very first day of trade.....only start trade at the afternoon session. The PE is 126 years to make 686M. WOW.....
dude what does minor shareholder have to lose? The stock can go to 0 cents and it's not as painful for those BBs that invested heavily in this. Minor shareholder can afford to wait till the sheeps jump over the rainbow. lol...
If it goes to 0 cents just treat it like a donation to the government. I feel happy
When is their AGM,? me going to bring a group of 'ah pek' kakie to kow pai, KELONG.
It dun make sense to peg Management fee with stock price, of which sometimes is possible to control by the fund manager. How to play this type of share, price go-up die mgt fee get big-cut. Price go-down also die loose money.
Conclusion, minor shareholder guaranteed loss money if you bot this counter. 'SHORT' the buger until it below 0.90 cents, teach them a lesson
gosh....all in RED but this CS joker is in GREEN!!! wow...u never know a dog will has its day :))))
SHORT?? hee...
Despite the fees issues, there still quite strong "support" for this counter. Was tempted to short it thru CFD, but on second thoughts, chickened out. Not as brave as nickyng... Mostly long positions taken by supporters... Contra also a bit risky..
how can management mis estimate the management fees? greatest con indeed.
6 cents dividend? Not very attractive yield as compared to REITs yield and the current pricing..
