Posts: 11
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
11-11-2014, 04:13 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-11-2014, 04:14 PM by eve.)
(11-11-2014, 04:06 PM)hongonn Wrote: (11-11-2014, 03:23 PM)jim_city Wrote: I do want them to succeed because of all the research I have done and I like the Management a lot.
Sometimes it is not because all the research you have done you have to own the company. For me most of the cases are after all the research i have done, i want to avoid the company.
Few years back i did a quick look on this co management, just to discover the management is like 1 big merry family husband & wife, son & daughter, uncle & wife's brother. It might have changed now i am not sure. But no way i will like the management.
Please elaborate on what's wrong with this? Since they would more likely to share the same heartbeat and would have strong vested interest for the firm to succeed?
Posts: 1,767
Threads: 14
Joined: Jan 2011
Reputation:
15
They tend to be inward focus that benefits themselves on the expense of employees or minority shareholders. There maybe dieheart employees who are closer to the inner circle. That's about it. I seen enough talented employees got sidelined and leave.
Posts: 11
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation:
0
(11-11-2014, 04:34 PM)corydorus Wrote: They tend to be inward focus that benefits themselves on the expense of employees or minority shareholders. There maybe dieheart employees who are closer to the inner circle. That's about it. I seen enough talented employees got sidelined and leave.
Thanks for sharing. Do you happen to have worked for Super? Just curious about your last statement.
Posts: 3,898
Threads: 84
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
78
11-11-2014, 05:33 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-11-2014, 05:35 PM by weijian.)
(11-11-2014, 03:14 PM)CityFarmer Wrote: (11-11-2014, 11:36 AM)valuebuddies Wrote: Separately, I think the "Super" brand is a bit old fashion, make me thought of Eng Wah cinema. Perhaps they should consider to re-brand it, change of name, change of logo, change to a fancier packaging and invest in media marketing.
The company has done a rebranding exercise year ago, with new logo, packaging and marketing effort.
(not vested)
IRCC, they increased the price or reduced the no. of sackets per packet steathily after the rebranding exercise. But i believe it cut its prices back to pre-branding levels soon afterwards.
Posts: 8,305
Threads: 496
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation:
60
(11-11-2014, 04:06 PM)hongonn Wrote: (11-11-2014, 03:23 PM)jim_city Wrote: I do want them to succeed because of all the research I have done and I like the Management a lot.
Sometimes it is not because all the research you have done you have to own the company. For me most of the cases are after all the research i have done, i want to avoid the company.
Few years back i did a quick look on this co management, just to discover the management is like 1 big merry family husband & wife, son & daughter, uncle & wife's brother. It might have changed now i am not sure. But no way i will like the management.
U forgotten Sam Goi... anyway I share your sentiment... The reason why Super attracted so much interests was due to a misconception that it is a defensive F&B counter plus the several one-offs that resulted in good CAGR over the years...
When i reviewed their annual reports over the years, the lack of supporting cashflows gave me the creepy feeling and hence i missed out on the entire merry go round.
GG
Posts: 80
Threads: 1
Joined: Nov 2014
Reputation:
1
12-11-2014, 06:12 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-11-2014, 06:41 AM by Stephen.)
(11-11-2014, 08:47 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: (11-11-2014, 04:06 PM)hongonn Wrote: (11-11-2014, 03:23 PM)jim_city Wrote: I do want them to succeed because of all the research I have done and I like the Management a lot.
Sometimes it is not because all the research you have done you have to own the company. For me most of the cases are after all the research i have done, i want to avoid the company.
Few years back i did a quick look on this co management, just to discover the management is like 1 big merry family husband & wife, son & daughter, uncle & wife's brother. It might have changed now i am not sure. But no way i will like the management.
U forgotten Sam Goi... anyway I share your sentiment... The reason why Super attracted so much interests was due to a misconception that it is a defensive F&B counter plus the several one-offs that resulted in good CAGR over the years...
When i reviewed their annual reports over the years, the lack of supporting cashflows gave me the creepy feeling and hence i missed out on the entire merry go round.
GG
Hi GG,
I disagree with you on" lack of supporting cashflows", maybe can you elaborate more.
From what i see, SUper does have consistent free cash flow for at least the past 4 years ( investing week only shows past 4 years 2010 - 2013 but i believe it has been happening way before that) and they are consisent with their dividends which is an indication of the quality of these cash flows and most importantly, taking care of minority shareholders.
I am vested so i will be biased for sure.
Yes, competition is intense, but kudos to the management that it is trying to find new markets and spending on research, like Cereal, botanical herb,nutritional oil power, expanding production, opening owl cafes, expanding into new markets , vietnam,myanmar( in the past), going into Food Ingredients years back (which has been their saving grace) .There have been hits or misses but thats expected when one tries.Most importantly, i see a management not resting on its laurels so i give credit to that.
I view SUper as a growth company as it is breaking new ground away from the coffee market , as it has been saturated.
SHort term pain( thailand unrest,incubation period), yes, but long term say 5 years i beg to differ.
Posts: 8,305
Threads: 496
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation:
60
From my impression, the cash generated is not up to what was reported in terms of accounting earnings plus several significant one-offs.
Please correct me if I m not wrong.
Make no mistake - Super is no F&N and let alone trying to match up 10% of Nestle.
Vested
Odd Lots
GG
(12-11-2014, 06:12 AM)Stephen Wrote: (11-11-2014, 08:47 PM)greengiraffe Wrote: (11-11-2014, 04:06 PM)hongonn Wrote: (11-11-2014, 03:23 PM)jim_city Wrote: I do want them to succeed because of all the research I have done and I like the Management a lot.
Sometimes it is not because all the research you have done you have to own the company. For me most of the cases are after all the research i have done, i want to avoid the company.
Few years back i did a quick look on this co management, just to discover the management is like 1 big merry family husband & wife, son & daughter, uncle & wife's brother. It might have changed now i am not sure. But no way i will like the management.
U forgotten Sam Goi... anyway I share your sentiment... The reason why Super attracted so much interests was due to a misconception that it is a defensive F&B counter plus the several one-offs that resulted in good CAGR over the years...
When i reviewed their annual reports over the years, the lack of supporting cashflows gave me the creepy feeling and hence i missed out on the entire merry go round.
GG
Hi GG,
I disagree with you on" lack of supporting cashflows", maybe can you elaborate more.
From what i see, SUper does have consistent free cash flow for at least the past 4 years ( investing week only shows past 4 years 2010 - 2013 but i believe it has been happening way before that) and they are consisent with their dividends which is an indication of the quality of these cash flows and most importantly, taking care of minority shareholders.
I am vested so i will be biased for sure.
Yes, competition is intense, but kudos to the management that it is trying to find new markets and spending on research, like Cereal, botanical herb,nutritional oil power, expanding production, opening owl cafes, expanding into new markets , vietnam,myanmar( in the past), going into Food Ingredients years back (which has been their saving grace) .There have been hits or misses but thats expected when one tries.Most importantly, i see a management not resting on its laurels so i give credit to that.
I view SUper as a growth company as it is breaking new ground away from the coffee market , as it has been saturated.
SHort term pain( thailand unrest,incubation period), yes, but long term say 5 years i beg to differ.
Posts: 21
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation:
1
[/quote]
Sometimes it is not because all the research you have done you have to own the company. For me most of the cases are after all the research i have done, i want to avoid the company.
[/quote]
I like the company but I would like it more if it was cheaper.
Posts: 3,474
Threads: 95
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation:
17
Ya lol. At times the more you know the more you are afraid (rightly or wrongly).
WB:-
1) Rule # 1, do not lose money.
2) Rule # 2, refer to # 1.
3) Not until you can manage your emotions, you can manage your money.
Truism of Investments.
A) Buying a security is buying RISK not Return
B) You can control RISK (to a certain level, hopefully only.) But definitely not the outcome of the Return.
NB:-
My signature is meant for psychoing myself. No offence to anyone. i am trying not to lose money unnecessary anymore.
Posts: 692
Threads: 1
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation:
7
(12-11-2014, 07:25 AM)greengiraffe Wrote: From my impression, the cash generated is not up to what was reported in terms of accounting earnings plus several significant one-offs.
Please correct me if I m not wrong.
Why correct you if you are not wrong
|