Posted by belkg > 2015-01-21 17:35 | Report Abuse

Mr kc chong, tks f u write up.currently I do not own any mrcb wa,but hv 1 query what do. U think of our msia mkts?

Posted by kcchongnz > 2015-01-21 20:58 | Report Abuse

What do I think about the Malaysian market. I don't know lah. there are many people here who know better than I.


All I know is if a stock is cheap, I buy. Expensive, I sell.

Posted by paperplane > 2015-01-27 08:00 | Report Abuse

Hi kc, what do you consider high gearing ratio range. Isnt higher the better. Is multiply effect better.

Posted by CFTrader > 2015-01-28 11:54 | Report Abuse

Hi , kcchongz. Do you feel that Black Scholes theory do not quite "suitable" apply in M'sia market ?

Posted by kcchongnz > 2015-02-01 14:34 | Report Abuse

Posted by paperplane > Jan 27, 2015 08:00 AM | Report Abuse

Hi kc, what do you consider high gearing ratio range. Isnt higher the better. Is multiply effect better.


Yes, the higher the gearing, the better is the warrant as the higher the potential gain because of the leverage effect. The maximum loss remains the same as your initial outlay

Posted by kcchongnz > 2015-02-01 14:46 | Report Abuse

Posted by CFTrader > Jan 28, 2015 11:54 AM | Report Abuse
Hi , kcchongz. Do you feel that Black Scholes theory do not quite "suitable" apply in M'sia market ?

There are two basic kinds of theories; theory on physical matter and theory on finance and investment. Physical theory applies everywhere in the world, and finance and investment theories often do not apply anywhere in the world.

To me,Black-Scholes OPM is just a guide. One can't know the value of something without having a feel of something, can he?

Posted by Robert Love > 2015-02-04 21:22 | Report Abuse

I think you have made a fundamental error in all your analysis because you have made the mistake called "the flaw of averages".

E.g. with reference to your article on "Tien Wah Valuation", you assumed that a company can grow certain average rate of growth annually. But, it will never happen in reality!!!

e.g. 3%, 4%, -2%, -5%, 4%, 5%, 5% ---- Growth Path 1

e.g. 2%, 2%, 2%, 2%, 2%, 2%, 2% --- Growth Path 2

The average of the above 2 series = 2% per annum.

If one were to apply the above 2 different path of growth rates to derive valuation for Tien Wah, one would end up with 2 totally different valuation!!!

Welcome to the world of "Flaw of Averages"...

http://flawofaverages.com/

Hope the writer can go and read up on the book "The Flaw of Averages" :)

Posted by kcchongnz > 2015-02-05 12:03 | Report Abuse

While I welcome constructive criticism very much, but

1) What is the relevancy of the following comment on MRCB warrant?

2) What has your favorite Tien Wah to do with warrant and its valuation?

3) Which part of my valuation of Tien Wah used the assumption of average growth in the future like this:

3%, 4%, -2%, -5%, 4%, 5%, 5%

4)Which valuation of which stock did I used "average" future growth assumption?

5) Thanks for your great recommendation of your "flaw of averages". Looking at the title I thought do I really have to read the book to know what is the flaw of averages which seems like 1 2 3 to me.



Posted by Robert Love > Feb 4, 2015 09:22 PM | Report Abuse

I think you have made a fundamental error in all your analysis because you have made the mistake called "the flaw of averages".

E.g. with reference to your article on "Tien Wah Valuation", you assumed that a company can grow certain average rate of growth annually. But, it will never happen in reality!!!

e.g. 3%, 4%, -2%, -5%, 4%, 5%, 5% ---- Growth Path 1

e.g. 2%, 2%, 2%, 2%, 2%, 2%, 2% --- Growth Path 2

The average of the above 2 series = 2% per annum.

If one were to apply the above 2 different path of growth rates to derive valuation for Tien Wah, one would end up with 2 totally different valuation!!!

Welcome to the world of "Flaw of Averages"...

http://flawofaverages.com/

Hope the writer can go and read up on the book "The Flaw of Averages" :)