Oops, sounds like you guys holding some of this counter huh? Enjoy the tumble...

What is hilarious is that I know a lot of people bought into the supposed good news that the theme park was going ahead without issues next year. So some of them bought in when it was 3.10+. What a lot of people forget is that a large section of the park has to be re-done because they were dedicated to Fox animatronic placements. The only thing more expensive then creating a new ride is having to take them down again and rebuild them for something else.

That is entirely different from TPCI giving Genting Bhd. a license to run a theme park. Yes, I am well aware of the Pokemon Festival. It has nothing to do with your so-called "Insider" information, because you have no such information.

There is zero news about TPCI (The Pokemon Company International) licensing out the IP to Genting Bhd. There hasn't even been preliminary meetings, stop spreading misinformation in a vain attempt to drive the price of a faltering counter up.

@winwinborn

G'Day, I've had a look at Latitud (as a Group) from an FA angle. Basically I skimmed through their previous audited, and published financial statements. On the surface, it seems like they are doing pretty cosily with their general finances, but there are some areas of concern, particularly cashflow wise.

First of all, let's get some of the things that look okay. They reduced their overall financing costs, significantly increased their cash reserves and also reduced their short/long term debt. Their performance from revenues took a 4% dip from 2012-2013. Which isn't that much a cause for alarm, because they were investing heavily into infrastructure in 2012 - based on their money outflows towards securities investments and plant capacity upgrades.

As I mentioned before, their cash outflow was pretty significant in 2012, with a cash deficit of -18 million. This looks a lot better in 2013, with their latest cash outflows at -5.9 million. Unfortunately, their inventory levels have also spiked since 2012, and they paid double the amount of taxes for transactions in 2013, compared with the previous year.

The next step for me was to find out how they mitigated a cash outflow issue in the span of only one year. Upon further inspection, what is happening is that they have an increase in payables to 9.3 million. This means that they are holding onto their cash longer before paying their suppliers, which counts as a cash inflow in their style of financial reporting. In addition to this, they had a 7.8 million reduction in trade receivables, which means that they had less credit customers this time around.

So their management managed to hold off paying off their suppliers for as long as possible, whilst being strict on collecting short term receipts, to discourage an increase in receivables.

It's a good thing that they are able to negotiate a longer payment interval with their suppliers, else I suspect their cash position would not look as good in 2013 as it currently does.

Cash management is the one issue here, but they seem to have the strategic foresight to restructure their cash in and outflows. If they can reduce their inventory levels further and also keep a check on their infrastructure investments, the group should find themselves in a much better position for 2014's report.

I'd certainly watch out for any headlines regarding the group's liquidity however.

@Carlsraj55: No problems, let me go a step further and give you a summary of IRIS from their latest statements.

Their inventories levels have nearly doubled over the past 3 years, could be due to the 70m they invested into their infrastructure, could signify a drop in expected sales, or it could be that they are stockpiling it to fulfill an expected major order. In addition to this, the amount that their contract customers owe them has nearly tripled. These are however, listed as current assets on the statement. I can only assume that these payables are done on certain terms (30D/60D), so it's not entirely readily available cash.

Speaking of their cash situation, IRIS has about 47% less of it in their bank compared with their 2012 levels. As for their debt structure, they've almost doubled their short-term borrowings. Their revenue has actually increased, but their operating expenses has increased fivefold. Which is a dramatic increase that immediately effected their profit after tax to 5.8m. Their profit after tax for the 2012 period was 73m. You can see where the concern is originating from.

Their cashflow statement says it all, their last reported levels was a -119m loss. The main culprits? I mentioned earlier that their inventory levels were doubled, well this doubling is also reflected as a cash outflow in the statement. But by far, the biggest culprit for their cash out-flow is their heavy investment into subsidiaries (related to the expansion of their infrastructure).

Cheers.

@Profitman: Great to be here, thank you for the welcome. You guys do a tremendous job here for the trading community. Yes, I actually missed out on the cash flow statement. Thank you for pointing that out. Liquidity is often overlooked, and it certainly shouldn't be.

@Carlsraj55: The problem with good news with big companies is that these organizations have their own PR systems that release periodic press releases. A lot of these press releases are just sucked up by an automated new aggregation system. For a better picture, I recommend asking the TCB guys here first about the charts. Also, check their statements - ignore the colourful front parts where it's all rosy, go to the back pages with all the legal hoopla and numbers. They are legally bound to report the less favourable things to shareholders.

@Sephiroth: Nice username, FF fan I see.

Not a Technical opinion, but I pulled up their financial reports for you. It looks like they are injecting a bit more capital into their organization, and also added more to their reserve holdings.

They've decreased their long-term loans, and increased their short-term ones. Their property, plant and asset value has decreased slightly, but their goodwill has seen a healthy boost. This tells us that the auditor saw it fit enough to upvalue the branding of the company. In addition they've cut their asset development costs almost by half in that time.

What may be concerning is that, although the company itself has seen an increase in revenue in the last 2 years, the actual group saw a pretty drastic drop in profits after tax last year. A big hit in Financial costs in 2013 is the result of this (2012: 209,000 ; 2013: 762,000). Financial costs itself is quite vague, but it's usually related to borrowing arrangements.

There's nothing really worrying here from a report perspective. It looks like they've managed to actually reduce some of their operation overheads. Though I am not sure why they were hit with such a drastic spike in Finance Costs last year, which affected the group's earnings.

Cheers