MSCI rebalancing

Cause of MSCI Msia Index rebalancing

so many sour grapes here

limit up!

special dividend

limit up!

Tariff wun impact. Cmsb doing cenent construction wert

agree think 2q wil be good. u all dun regret

Tun M and white hair man are kawan lah. If wanna kena, early on whitehair man kena liao.

But at high it is 4 leh

Errrrr which director u talking about? Isnt the CEO Azizan Jaafar? How he is related to BN's Teluk Intan Mah Siew Keong huh?

Errrrr Since when got to do with teluk intan?

RM1.2b contract LRT3 contract wins!

Actually 4Q15 results were good. This is of course after we exclude a one-off tax cost coming from a subsidiary in 2013. PBT was up considerably vs 3Q15 proving that the turnaround is sustainable.

This is ridiculous. Msia will never take side in an issue like this, what more it involves two super power countries.

Do you even have the figure of the number of bumi in the O&G sector? Else please do not post such ridiculous statements.

The report is dated 8 Jan 2016 before the runup FYI.

No1 wants to argue with ameteur like him. If he is here means he is monitoring the forum all along.

Where is that kcchongz!

Waiting and see u eat back ur words. Haha

>>blabbering leong

adui u wanna compare from the Tech and banking sectors izit? Tbh, it is unreasonable to compare other sectors. U wanna compare yield? Why AFG. Might as well u buy into REITS, even higher yields. Ohhh and btw, information for your tiny lil brain AFG has the highest foreign shareholding and loan growth is subdued too. Might be further downside risks to it.

when all dust settles, after the market normalises from the heavy selldown and stocks to trend upwards, do rmb what you wrote here and eat your words.

UR USING UOB TP AS THE BASE. NOW U R SAYING U VALUE UR OWN. THEN WHY U PUT 7.10 THERE AS CALCULATION? BTW, MOST TP DERIVED FROM ONE-YEAR FORWARD PE. NOT BASED ON TRAILING 4 QUARTERS. WHAT MORE, THEIR 4TH QUARTER IS NOT EVEN OUT.

As for the rest, seriously no time to argue with you la uncle. Go on and be a laughing stock. Thank you!

kcchonzzz,

Before you post such a long post on ur valuations. Please read properly lah
The PE ascribed is only 11x. 14.9x is the average valuation of its peer. Not VS la.

Me: Price = 7.10
EPS = 47.5,
PE =7.10/0.475 = 14.9
No?

That's why I ask you to READ PROPERLY. IT IS BASED ON 2016 P/E. NOT FY15 LA. FY15 ALREADY ENDED LAST WEEK.

he negative cash flow is due to the consolidation of its 43.9% owned VSIG. Its Msia operation is doing well. No one sees it like that please esp when it only owns VSIG at 43.9%.

Me:How does it change the cash flow of the group?

BY NOT VALUING USING CASH FLOW.

Me:Did I say anything abut VS share price dropping in the article???

YES U DID. SEE BELOW THE LAST SENTENCE.

Yes, I know, I don’t know about the future of VS like many do. And yes, my limited knowledge of VS is from the financial statements, a history. The past has no relevance. VS is going to get many big contracts from Keurig, the evolutionary cold drink makers, and new customers etc. This time is different. You already can see from its share price performance.


Seriously save yourself from this embarrassment la.

kcchonzzz,

Before you post such a long post on ur valuations. Please read properly la.

Based on the projected EPS of 47.5 sen for the financial year ending 31st July 2015, UOB KayHian accorded a P/E ratio of 14.9 for VS with a target price of RM7.10. Is this PE ratio a reasonable one?

The PE ascribed is only 11x. 14.9x is the average valuation of its peer. Not VS la.


Table 2 in the Appendix shows that VS has negative free cash flow for the last three years because of its high capital expenses. For the last four quarters, its cash flow has improved tremendously with a total free cash flow of RM15.4m. That FCF isn’t great at all as it is less than 1% of its revenue, and just 1.5% of the total capital invested in the business. Cash yield wise, it is only 1.4%, far below the interest rate one can get from the bank.

The negative cash flow is due to the consolidation of its 43.9% owned VSIG. Its Msia operation is doing well. No one sees it like that please esp when it only owns VSIG at 43.9%.

Investing is about the future

“I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past” Patrick Henry

Yes, I know, I don’t know about the future of VS like many do. And yes, my limited knowledge of VS is from the financial statements, a history. The past has no relevance. VS is going to get many big contracts from Keurig, the evolutionary cold drink makers, and new customers etc. This time is different. You already can see from its share price performance.

If you look at FBMKLCI as a whole, I believe you notice VS is not the only stock dropping so much. It drops in tandem with the index along with other stocks too.


With your limited knowledge on VS as well as valuation, best save your time and efforts on smtg else.

Dif from pmetal. This is not a commodity stock la.

some of Vs's COGS are already denominated in UsD.

And just so you know whn disposing based on EV, it also takes into consideration the stake you own in each subsidiary.

Why not look at VSIG when VS owns 44% in VSIG? Doesnt make sense Uncle

Post removed.Why?

>>>kcchongz

Hi professional, below is how I, as an amateur, value V.S as an enterprise. I hope you can show your professional way, not just talk.

Price 21/5/15 4.30
No of shares 186355
Market cap 801327
Total book value of debts 409791
Market value of Minority Interest 174881
Cash -123464
Other non-operating assets -11787
2014Enterprise value 1437103

EBIT2014 57963

EV/EBIT 24.8

By right I should use the trailing twelve months results which is much better. But as I am an amateur, I leave it to you, a professional, to show us.


Again, I have pointed out, VS only owns 44% stake in VSIG and the high level of debt, and the depressed items in CF all comes from VSIG. VSIG is listed in HK and its financials are publicly available.

So the question is: Does it makes any difference if they own 44% and not wholly own VSIG? OF COURSE! The analysis thereafter is misleading because they are all consolidated. Well, if the VS Ind management wants everything to look pretty, they can as well dispose their stake in VSIG and not conso, making all your analysis and arguments void. And also, their VSIG China operation does not involve in Keurig production.

I am sure their Msia operations generate postive FCF. It is VSIG that drags the items in CF and BS down. Again you must bear in mind that VS only owns 44% in VSIG. If there is case of disposal, any items in balance sheet or whatsoever is split according to the stake owned. There are always reasoning and origins behind every figures.

Well, I will only do full-fledged valuations if paid.

kcchongz>>>> Good that you talk about value. But did I value the company? Or was it RHB which value it?

“our TP is lifted to MYR4.50 (from MYR2.95), based on an unchanged recurring FY16 P/E of 10x”

Why based on 10X PE, why not 5, 15, 20, or 30? Is PE a good metric when V.S has so much debts?

At RM4.22, the present PE ratio is 14 and enterprise value is 21 times operating income. Is that cheap?


If those ratios are not valuation ratios, I do not know what to say really that you DID NOT TRY TO VALUE THE COMPANY?


So the question now is, how do you value the company. Please show us your valuation in details as you said others are wrong.


I have no time to spend on amateur like you seriously.All along, I am a silent reader of the forum, coming in occasionally to check on the market rumours. But stumbling across your misleading info, I cannot help but to comment on your methods.

But I have to say at current price, it is rather fully valued. I am at the stand where I disagree with your fact that it is a no-brainer investment at the beginning.

>>>kcchongnz

Nobody values a company like that as a whole, given that it has various subsidiaries attached to it.

To get to the value of equity in the company, you will have to subtract out the net debt of the combined companies and the estimated value of the portion of the equity in the subsidiary that does not belong to the parent company. Again, this estimate can be based upon the book value of minority interest or on the intrinsic value of the subsidiaries.

kcchongz:
PROFIT GROWTH FOR THE FIRST QUARTER FY15 (NOT 14) IS TRUE. IT WAS AN EXPLOSIVE GROWTH TOO. BUT I SELDOM RELY ON A QUARTERLY RESULT. I LOOK AT ANNUAL RESULTS. ITS 2ND QUARTER 15 WAS HALF THAT OF FIRST QUARTER. SO VERY DIFFICULT TO LOOK AT JUST A QUARTER RESULT.

It is a known fact that 1Q and 4Q of their fiscal year are the strongest quarter. 2Q and 3Q quarters are typically the weaker quarters due to seasonality of the orders. If you want a fair comparison, please analyse that quarter to the same quarter of the preceding year to get a better view.

>>>>paperplane2

What do u mean by view together? The fact is that they own 44% stake. If you say view together, there is no such thing as minority interest and no such thing as segmental breakdown. A fair valuation assuming disposal of the 44% stake will be taking into account the 44% Net Assets they own in there. not altogether.

>>>> NOBY

Uncle, http://www.bursamalaysia.com/market/listed-companies/company-announcements/1087293

This is the latest filing in Bursa on the shareholding which shows they hold 44% in VSIG.

Also the updated accounting rules is that one can conso even though with less than 50% stake due to management control it has. Please do check ur facts properly before this.

One must get certain facts right before starting on the calculations. VS Industry's financials are consolidated along with its 44%-owned subsidiary, VS International Group since FY13. VSIG has been loss making for quite a while and mind you, the high level of debt is actually at VSIG level. Hence, when consolidated, of course the cash flow and balance sheet are in depressed shape. It is NO ACCURATE to calculate the CF and items on Balance Sheet when it is consolidated judging from the fact that VS only owned 44% of VSIG. Please get the facts right before such posting.

KC Chong's article is clearly misleading. One must get certain facts right before starting on the calculations. VS Industry's financials are consolidated along with its 44%-owned subsidiary, VS International Group since FY13. VSIG has been loss making for quite a while and mind you, the high level of debt is actually at VSIG level. Hence, when consolidated, of course the cash flow and balance sheet are in depressed shape. It is NO ACCURATE to calculate the CF and items on Balance Sheet when it is consolidated judging from the fact that VS only owned 44% of VSIG. Please get the facts right before such posting.