| 
		
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 55 
	Threads: 8 
	Joined: Mar 2014
	
 Reputation: 
0 
	
	
		 (24-04-2014, 03:23 PM)cfa Wrote:  Hello GG,He said during coffee chat with SHs, Nan Fung would sell all their stake even if they chose to convert the balance ,because it didn't fit into their investment strategy for holding 3 or 4 %.
 I don't quite understand why he said NF got not mandate to invest outside HK and China when NF had already invested in PCRT and Forterra ? ( What he actually mean ?)
 He even said he asked NF if they wanted to sell their holding , he can get someone to buy over from NF , but NF instead chose to sell in open market.
 
CEO was correct to say NF would sell all but on the statement of getting someone to take over their stake was confusing.
	 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 137 
	Threads: 1 
	Joined: Nov 2010
	
 Reputation: 
7 
	
	
		 (28-04-2014, 10:17 PM)greengiraffe Wrote:  http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Form3Cos...eID=293947
 Very interesting... Nan Fung actually held off selling PCRT until 24 Apr 14, ie they are unpredictable in their unwinding.
 
 Anyway, PCRT is unlikely to perform till Nan Fung completes their unwinding.
 
 On the face of it, Nan Fung has Forterra as their pipeline vehicle and with PCRT eventually being folded into a bigger platform, there is really no need on their part to keep PCRT.
 
 Divested
 GG
 
Nan Fung left with 96.6 mil shares or 8.4%......
	 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 225 
	Threads: 1 
	Joined: Feb 2013
	
 Reputation: 
0 
	
	
		 (29-04-2014, 08:53 AM)gutman Wrote:   (28-04-2014, 10:17 PM)greengiraffe Wrote:  http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Form3Cos...eID=293947
 Very interesting... Nan Fung actually held off selling PCRT until 24 Apr 14, ie they are unpredictable in their unwinding.
 
 Anyway, PCRT is unlikely to perform till Nan Fung completes their unwinding.
 
 On the face of it, Nan Fung has Forterra as their pipeline vehicle and with PCRT eventually being folded into a bigger platform, there is really no need on their part to keep PCRT.
 
 Divested
 GG
 Nan Fung left with 96.6 mil shares or 8.4%......
 
Nan Fung refuse to sell cheap cheap    
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 232 
	Threads: 0 
	Joined: Apr 2013
	
 Reputation: 
3 
	
	
		 (29-04-2014, 11:08 AM)kayhian Wrote:   (29-04-2014, 08:53 AM)gutman Wrote:   (28-04-2014, 10:17 PM)greengiraffe Wrote:  http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Form3Cos...eID=293947
 Very interesting... Nan Fung actually held off selling PCRT until 24 Apr 14, ie they are unpredictable in their unwinding.
 
 Anyway, PCRT is unlikely to perform till Nan Fung completes their unwinding.
 
 On the face of it, Nan Fung has Forterra as their pipeline vehicle and with PCRT eventually being folded into a bigger platform, there is really no need on their part to keep PCRT.
 
 Divested
 GG
 Nan Fung left with 96.6 mil shares or 8.4%......
 Nan Fung refuse to sell cheap cheap
  PCRT's takeover has been totally eclisped by the CMA deal    
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 225 
	Threads: 1 
	Joined: Feb 2013
	
 Reputation: 
0 
	
	
		I am getting more and more bullish on PREHL. 
Despite no cash offer, CIMB sell call and NF selling, China malls will be prized jewels in the future.
 
Looking forward to potential dual-listing in HK    
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 232 
	Threads: 0 
	Joined: Apr 2013
	
 Reputation: 
3 
	
	
		 (30-04-2014, 10:50 AM)kayhian Wrote:  I am getting more and more bullish on PREHL.
 Despite no cash offer, CIMB sell call and NF selling, China malls will be prized jewels in the future.
 
 Looking forward to potential dual-listing in HK
  Pray what make you so bullish on a dual listing in Hong Kong? CMA tried to and it didn't quite take off?
	 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 225 
	Threads: 1 
	Joined: Feb 2013
	
 Reputation: 
0 
	
	
		 (30-04-2014, 11:07 AM)MINX Wrote:   (30-04-2014, 10:50 AM)kayhian Wrote:  I am getting more and more bullish on PREHL.Pray what make you so bullish on a dual listing in Hong Kong? CMA tried to and it didn't quite take off?
 Despite no cash offer, CIMB sell call and NF selling, China malls will be prized jewels in the future.
 
 Looking forward to potential dual-listing in HK
  
Interest article:
CMA: a victim of ill perceptions? 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 8,305 
	Threads: 496 
	Joined: Jul 2011
	
 Reputation: 
60 
	
		
		
		11-05-2014, 02:27 PM 
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2014, 02:27 PM by greengiraffe.)
		
	 
		http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/NoticeOf...ileID=4382
Jinhua Mall, Foshan worth RMB925m or S$185m
http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Announce...eID=295582 
Pg 4 - note 1 - Jinhua Mall, Foshan has a full quarter in operations with a nearly fully occupancy > 96%.
 
Total revenue recorded for the quarter $2.006m or annualised $8.024m.
 
Gross rental yield amounted to only 4.34% unleveraged. This is even before netting off operating expenses...
 
Wondering if this is the typical yield of Chinese malls? If indeed this is the case, then without substantial capital appreciation, mall investment based on rental yield alone appears to be high risks propositions...
 
Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong...
 
Divested 
GG
	 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 775 
	Threads: 5 
	Joined: Dec 2010
	
 Reputation: 
16 
	
		
		
		11-05-2014, 07:22 PM 
(This post was last modified: 11-05-2014, 07:42 PM by Contrarian.)
		
	 
		> Gross rental yield amounted to only 4.34% unleveraged. This is even before netting off operating expenses.
 Got malls ever pay-off loans?  Unleveraged loans... whole world developers mati...
 
 > Wondering if this is the typical yield of Chinese malls? If indeed this is the case, then without substantial capital appreciation, mall
 > investment based on rental yield alone appears to be high risks propositions...
 
 I agree.  And the cost of funds will be high with the credit crunch.  If the mall performs badly few quarters, the capital value will correct.
 
	
	
	
		
	Posts: 232 
	Threads: 0 
	Joined: Apr 2013
	
 Reputation: 
3 
	
	
		 (11-05-2014, 02:27 PM)greengiraffe Wrote:  http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/NoticeOf...ileID=4382
 Jinhua Mall, Foshan worth RMB925m or S$185m
 
 http://infopub.sgx.com/FileOpen/Announce...eID=295582
 
 Pg 4 - note 1 - Jinhua Mall, Foshan has a full quarter in operations with a nearly fully occupancy > 96%.
 
 Total revenue recorded for the quarter $2.006m or annualised $8.024m.
 
 Gross rental yield amounted to only 4.34% unleveraged. This is even before netting off operating expenses...
 
 Wondering if this is the typical yield of Chinese malls? If indeed this is the case, then without substantial capital appreciation, mall investment based on rental yield alone appears to be high risks propositions...
 
 Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong...
 
 Divested
 GG
 They just open not too long ago, I believe and hope the yield will improve substantially when the mall matures due to its favourable location. My 2 cents worth    |