Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-27 15:51 | Report Abuse

I welcome constructive comments

Posted by SarifahSelinder > 2019-09-27 19:31 | Report Abuse

Range is too big to be meaningful

Only the minimum does provide comfort

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-27 19:47 | Report Abuse

The big range is due to the wide range of discount rates used in the sensitivity analysis. If you demand lower rate of return in your investment, then the NPV of Hai duong cash flows become more attractive to you.

Posted by SarifahSelinder > 2019-09-27 20:20 | Report Abuse

Pendapat Sarifah must hv faith in the China banks the CPECC the JAKS own technical team the lawyers the other experts who all hv all the facts and figures tak kan short change themselves

Hv faith the system is working

8 years payback means 8 years payback

Mungkin or mesti kena watch Andy closely

Attend AGM every year to seek clarification where necessary

Andy shd adopt transparency is the best policy

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-27 20:27 | Report Abuse

My last two articles demonstrated that Jaks' current market price of RM0.75 is way below valuations derived using the payback or the DCF methods

Posted by SarifahSelinder > 2019-09-27 20:36 | Report Abuse

Yes JAKS kelihatan a good investment at current price mcm mana pun u slice it

The photos showing the progess the maths all have got rhe IB analysts cornered

These IB analysts have to rerate JAKS soon

Posted by SarifahSelinder > 2019-09-27 20:46 | Report Abuse

Have to rerate JAKS soon to b credible

Posted by SarifahSelinder > 2019-09-28 09:05 | Report Abuse

Have faith in the agreements signed

IB has mentioned n emphasized the more difficult n the more important of execution

Lihat la photos photos showing the progress made

Bukan main complex the IPP project but u lihat sendiri the execution

No one can dispute CPECC is simply just awesome the expert the specialist

Posted by kcchongnz > 2019-09-28 11:21 | Report Abuse

Just for discussion purpose,

1)In project financial appraisal, when estimating cash flows from total project cost through the payback period, it should not have included interest payment.

2) Hence annual repayment of loan must include interest payment, in accordance with an amortization table. This amount is very big for a 18 years payment. It is somewhere near 120m-130m a year if say interest rate is 6%-8%.

3)Cash flows should increase over the years but not sure why the jump in cash flows from RM197m to RM295m from year 19 to 25.

Posted by SarifahSelinder > 2019-09-28 12:15 | Report Abuse

More appropriately (and simply) in my view, what you should usually use is your targeted rate of return, which would naturally be at a premium to whatever the current risk-free rate of return is. This spares you from making a series of calculations and gets straight to the point.



Think not appropriate to use this rate

As Andy punya 8 yrs payback period is refering to the payback period of the IPP project jadi the more appropriate rate is the weighted average cost of funds of the co undertaking the project

For discussion only

Posted by SarifahSelinder > 2019-09-28 12:17 | Report Abuse

For clarification in.. your targeted rate of return... your in siapa? Refering to the co or refering to DK66 the investor in JAKS?

Posted by SarifahSelinder > 2019-09-28 12:29 | Report Abuse

kcchongnz Just for discussion purpose, 

1)In project financial appraisal, when estimating cash flows from total project cost through the payback period, it should not have included interest payment


Kan should b NET cash flow jadi is after deducting interest payment?

PAT is net of interest

Too many payback period definition??

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-28 17:23 | Report Abuse

Kcchongnz

I do not know for certain whether the interest cost has been taken into consideration in arriving at the 8 years payback period. However, if it is not, simulated using 6% interest rate, the actual payback period would be around 17 years and the implied IRR will be only 5%. Is that reasonable ?

The jump in cash flow from year 19 onward as the maximum loan tenure is 18 years

-------------------------------------
kcchongnz Just for discussion purpose,

1)In project financial appraisal, when estimating cash flows from total project cost through the payback period, it should not have included interest payment.

2) Hence annual repayment of loan must include interest payment, in accordance with an amortization table. This amount is very big for a 18 years payment. It is somewhere near 120m-130m a year if say interest rate is 6%-8%.

3)Cash flows should increase over the years but not sure why the jump in cash flows from RM197m to RM295m from year 19 to 25.
28/09/2019 11:21 AM

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-28 17:30 | Report Abuse

In my opinion, using the company's WACC is irrelevant at this point in time as the company has already decided to invest in the project.

I have used discount rates from 6% to 12% to cater for different investors' risk appetite. If you require an investment return of 12%, then the project is worth less to you compared to someone who only required 6% investment return.

The required investment return also depends on the risk profile of the business. Power generation business is generally considered low risk.

-----------------------------------

As Andy punya 8 yrs payback period is refering to the payback period of the IPP project jadi the more appropriate rate is the weighted average cost of funds of the co undertaking the project

SarifahSelinder For clarification in.. your targeted rate of return... your in siapa? Refering to the co or refering to DK66 the investor in JAKS?

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-28 22:11 | Report Abuse

Note that the BOT contract grants only 25 years of operation. If you included the equity capital costs of say 10%, the payback period is even longer.

Considering the operational risks, it doesn't make business sense to invest in a project with less than 8 years to profit.

It was agreed and determined at the onset the project negotiation that the project will be financed by 75% debts. Moreover, the PPA allowed for adjustment for difference in implied interest rate and finalised interest rate upon achieving loan closure. This suggests that the payback period has imputed interest costs in its computation.

Posted by sosfinance > 2019-09-28 22:20 | Report Abuse

Loan period normally matches with free cash flow for repayment of interest and principal.

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-28 22:53 | Report Abuse

sosfinance, could you elaborate on your point ?

Posted by kcchongnz > 2019-09-28 23:19 | Report Abuse

I estimate the cash flow in this way.

Project cost 1870
Payback period 8
FCF 233.75

The project cost is provided by both the equity and debt holders. Hence the equity and debt holders will share this cash flow of USD234m a year.

Debt holders who have paid 1400m will be paid principle and interest payment of USD122m a year for 18 years, assuming interest rate at 6%. What is left for equity shareholders will be 234-122= USD112m.

Jaks portion = 30%*USD112m = USD33.6m

In RM = 33,6*4.2 = 141m

This is close to what I read someone mentioned what the director told him of RM100m to RM150m a year.

Assuming the above is close to actual, the cash flow is still substantial. The only remaining concern is, if this cash flows will be equally shared by all shareholders, and not squandered away.

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-28 23:41 | Report Abuse

Kcchongnz,

Your estimate of cash flow has an implied IRR of 5%. Management has guided an IRR of 12%

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 00:05 | Report Abuse

Kcchongnz,

In any case, what is your estimate of Jaks' power plant worth given your estimate of RM141m FCF ?

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 00:38 | Report Abuse

https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/jaks-eyes-break-even-vietnam-project-eight-years

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 09:27 | Report Abuse

Article paper "Payback Period and NPV: Their Different Cash Flows" by Kavous Ardalan

https://www.economics-finance.org/jefe/volume11-2/01.Payback%20Period%20and%20NPV%20Their%20Different%20Cash%20Flows.pdf

"However, in the Payback Period, there is no discounting involved and, therefore, the interest expense (after taxes) and dividend payments should be deducted from the operating cash flows when calculating the relevant cash flows for the Payback Period rule. " - Page 15

The above article found that it is the net cash flow after interest costs to be used in calculating payback period.

Therefore, the cash flow derived from dividing the project cost by the payback period has already netted off borrowing costs.

Posted by kcchongnz > 2019-09-29 10:22 | Report Abuse

Posted by DK66 > Sep 28, 2019 11:41 PM | Report Abuse
Kcchongnz,
Your estimate of cash flow has an implied IRR of 5%. Management has guided an IRR of 12%


Not sure how you calculate IRR.

For the project, based on all the numbers given by you, this is how I evaluate.

Initial layout 25% of USD1870m=468m spread over 4 years of construction
Cash inflows from my rough estimates above for 18 years = USD112m, subsequently USD234m, following your information that debts are paid off in 18 years.

How can the above IRR be just 5%? It is more like 18%, way above the 12% mentioned all this while.

If that is so, the rough estimate of the cash inflow is overstated, and hence even my rough estimate of RM141m cash inflow which was based on the payback period given is also overstated. The guidance of management of cash flow for Jaks of about RM100m seems close.

Well, I could be wrong.

Posted by kcchongnz > 2019-09-29 10:32 | Report Abuse

Payback period.

Initial outlay by JV = USD468m

Payback period = 8 years

Cash flow per year = 468/8 = USD58m

If we use USD 58m of cash inflow, you will find that the IRR for the equity shareholders of the JV is actually very close to 12%.

Posted by stockraider > 2019-09-29 11:10 |

Post removed.Why?

Posted by stockraider > 2019-09-29 11:13 | Report Abuse

In investment it is always better look forward on armada, if u keep looking back at the past u will be obviously missing great investing opportunity on armada loh...!!

1. Armada already undergo vast impairment & writedown to conservatively clean up their books.
It has brought down its high borrowing from Rm 16 billion to rm 10.4 billion and the trend u can see is obvious qtr reduction in borrowing loh....!!

2. Most importantly the latest qtr profit and revenue easily exceed yinson a rm 7 billion mkt cap company by about double, a great sign of sharp improvement trend loh...!!

3. As for sustainability armada has rm 20 billion order books another very positive sign for the company loh...!!

4.Bottom line, just focus on Armada's performance over the last two quarters you will see that it's on the upwards trends.
Orderbook remains steady at RM20.2b (FPO: RM19.1bn, OMS: RM1.1bn) another RM10.3bn worth of potential extension. This will sustain the group’s revenue for the next few years.

For Potential upside, please see mikekim comments earlier...
It will get even better in 2H2019 with 4 key upsides:

1) Claire US$285m compensation
2) Kraken ~US$280m partial/full write back
3) Kraken debt restructure to LT
4) Net profit growth

Hence. we can expect better result in next quarter.

5.Moving forward, Global FPSO Market is expected to grow USD+ 30 Billion by 2025.

Top Key Players:
BP, Petronas, Chevron, ExxonMobil, Shell, Petrobras, Bumi Armada Berhad, SBM Offshore, BW Offshore, MODEC, Bluewater Energy Services B.V., Aker Solutions ASA, Yinson Holdings Berhad, Teekay Corporation, among others.

Armada Value Proposition
1. A Top 5 FPSO operator in the world by fleet size. Operating presence in Asia, Africa and Europe. T&I and OSV (lossmaking) are complementary businesses.
2. Unlike OSV and T&I operations, FPSO’s contracts are more bankable, providing steady visibility (long-term charters, termination protection) with reasonable project IRRs.
3. FPSOs tender pipeline is strong. Winning a job is a catalyst.

Latest Valuation for Armada
Operations (MMYR) Details
- TGT1 (Vietnam) 835, NPV (6-year extension), 5.6% WACC
- D1 (India) - 50% 266 NPV (firm); 5.6% WACC
- C7 (India) - 50% 266 NPV (firm); 5.6% WACC
- Kraken - 100% 1,470 NPV (firm); 7.0% WACC
- Olombendo - 100% 4,831 NPV (firm); 5.8% WACC
- Madura (Indonesia) - 50% 385 NPV (firm); 5.8% WACC
- Malta FSU 609 NPV (firm); 5.8% WACC
- Kakinada – 30% 486 NPV (firm); 7.0% WACC

FPSO 9,146,000,000

It a very SOLID Company and we should be proud to be part of this success story...

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 11:16 | Report Abuse

Kcchongnz,

What you are calculating is equity IRR not Project IRR.

Please allow me some times to come back to you my observations on your computation in detail.

Thank you for your active contribution.

--------------------------------------
kcchongnz Payback period.

Initial outlay by JV = USD468m

Payback period = 8 years

Cash flow per year = 468/8 = USD58m

If we use USD 58m of cash inflow, you will find that the IRR for the equity shareholders of the JV is actually very close to 12%.

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 11:18 | Report Abuse

stockraider,

Armada ???????????

Posted by stockraider > 2019-09-29 11:19 | Report Abuse

Armada is a good alternative investment compare with jaks power plant loh.....!!

Posted by SarifahSelinder > 2019-09-29 13:10 | Report Abuse

Armada punya figures hv always looked "very very good n impressive" since share price nya 3.+ dulu till 0.3+ skrg!!

Rights issues coming for armada very soon

Posted by SarifahSelinder > 2019-09-29 13:14 | Report Abuse

DK take ur time

Buat kiraan guna the IPP JV co perspective then 30% 40% mungkin lebih senang to see

Posted by SarifahSelinder > 2019-09-29 13:24 | Report Abuse

Whatever...

Sarifah berjiwa IPP tetap unapologetic angkuh dan liar

Sarifah trust the China banks the CPECC the lawyers the JAKS Technical team the other experts n specialist

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 13:58 | Report Abuse

Kcchongnz,

I computed in detail your cash flow estimate and found that the project IRR is 7.03%.

18 installment of US$122m means a total interest payment of US$796m

I found that at 6% interest rate and equal annual installment of US$122m will only pay off the loan in 20 years. The total interest payment would be US$1042m

Unfortunately, when i tried to post workings here, it becomes unreadable;

Year Principal Interest Principal Total Cash Flow
(I) (P) (I+P) -468
-468
-468
-468
1 234 1,400 84 38 122 150
2 234 1,362 82 40 122 152
3 234 1,322 79 43 122 155
4 234 1,279 77 45 122 157
5 234 1,234 74 48 122 160
6 234 1,186 71 51 122 163
7 234 1,135 68 54 122 166
8 234 1,081 65 57 122 169
9 234 1,024 61 61 122 173
10 234 963 58 64 122 176
11 234 899 54 68 122 180
12 234 831 50 72 122 184
13 234 759 46 76 122 188
14 234 682 41 81 122 193
15 234 601 36 86 122 198
16 234 516 31 91 122 203
17 234 424 25 97 122 209
18 234 328 20 102 122 214
19 234 226 14 108 122 220
20 234 117 7 115 122 227
21 234 234
22 234 234
23 234 234
24 234 234
25 234 234
1042 1398 IRR 7.03%

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 14:10 | Report Abuse

Trying my best to make it readable
Year .......Principal .Int ..Principal Total ..Cash Flow
-----------------------(I) -----(P)--- (I+P)..(-468)
.........................................................(-468)
.........................................................(-468)
.........................................................(-468)
1 ....234 ....1,400 ....84 ....38 ....122 .......150
2 ....234 ....1,362 ....82 ....40 ....122 .......152
3 ....234.... 1,322 ....79 ....43 ....122 .......155
4 ....234 ....1,279 ....77 ....45 ....122 .......157
5 ....234 ....1,234 ....74 ....48 ....122 .......160
6 ....234 ....1,186 ....71 ....51 ....122 .......163
7 ....234 ....1,135 ....68 ....54 ....122 .......166
8 ....234 ....1,081 ....65 ....57 ....122 .......169
9 ....234 ....1,024 ....61 ....61 ....122 .......173
10 ...234 ....963 ......58 ....64 ....122 .......176
11 ...234 ....899 ......54 ....68 ....122 .......180
12 ...234 ....831 ......50 ....72 ....122 .......184
13 ...234 ....759 ......46 ....76 ....122 .......188
14 ...234 ....682 ......41 ....81.... 122 .......193
15 ...234 ....601 ......36 ....86 ....122 .......198
16... 234 ....516 ......31 ....91 ....122 .......203
17 ...234 ....424 ......25 ....97 ....122 .......209
18... 234 ....328 ......20 ....102 ...122....... 214
19 ...234 ....226 ......14 ....108 ...122 .......220
20 ...234 ....117 ......7 .....115 ...122 .......227
21 ...234 ...............................................234
22 ...234 ...............................................234
23 ...234 ...............................................234
24 ...234 ...............................................234
25 ...234 ...............................................234
.......................1042... 1398 ..........IRR 7.03%

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 14:14 | Report Abuse

Cash flow per year of US$58 is only about half of the annual distribution made by Mong Duong II. Doesn't seem reasonable.

-----------------------------------------
kcchongnz Payback period.

Initial outlay by JV = USD468m

Payback period = 8 years

Cash flow per year = 468/8 = USD58m

If we use USD 58m of cash inflow, you will find that the IRR for the equity shareholders of the JV is actually very close to 12%.
29/09/2019 10:32 AM

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 14:26 | Report Abuse

In any case, even if I changed the principal payment to yearly US$78m, the project IRR is still only 7.5%

Year .......Principal .Int ..Principal ..Cash Flow
-----------------------(I) -----(P)--- ..(-468)
...................................................(-468)
...................................................(-468)
...................................................(-468)
1 ....234 ....1,400 ....84 ....78 .... .......150
2 ....234 ..............79 ....78 ... ........155
3 ....234...............75 ....78 .... .......159
4 ....234 ..............70 ....78 .... .......164
5 ....234 ..............65 ....78 .... .......169
6 ....234 ..............61 ....78 .... .......173
7 ....234...............56 ....78 .... .......178
8 ....234 ..............51 ....78 .... .......183
9 ....234 ..............47 ....78 .... .......187
10 ...234 ..............42 ....78 .... .......192
11 ...234 ..............37 ....78 .... .......197
12 ...234 ..............33 ....78 .... .......201
13 ...234 ..............28 ....78 .... .......206
14 ...234 ..............23 ....78.... ........211
15 ...234 ..............18 ....78 .... .......216
16... 234 ..............14 ....78 .... .......220
17 ...234 ...............9 ... 78..... .......225
18... 234 ...............4 ... 78 ........... 230
19 ...234.........................................234
20 ...234 ........................................234
21 ...234 ........................................234
22 ...234 ........................................234
23 ...234 ........................................234
24 ...234 ........................................234
25 ...234 ........................................234
....................... 796... 1404 ......IRR 7.5%

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 14:27 | Report Abuse

I wish i3 can improve on tabulation writings

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 14:48 | Report Abuse

However, if the US$234 has already netted off the interest costs, the project IRR increase to 9.76%. Still below 12% but closer.

Year
..-468
..-468
..-468
..-468
1 234
2 234
3 234
4 234
5 234
6 234
7 234
8 234
9 234
10 234
11 234
12 234
13 234
14 234
15 234
16 234
17 234
18 234
19 234
20 234
21 234
22 234
23 234
24 234
25 234
IRR 9.76%

Posted by Sslee > 2019-09-29 15:27 | Report Abuse

Dear DK66.
For simple project payback period or IRR:
Project Cost: USD 1870 million.
8 years payback: Per year 1870/8= 233.73 million
233.75 million Payment for 25 years is about IRR of 12% for capital outlet of USD 1870 million.
From this simple basic then you have different model depend on loan and equity sum and disbursement timing. The yearly 233.75 million net off the agreed interest payment, loan principle payment and payment period to work out the full 25 years cash distribution for equity parts of the JV. From the 25 years distribution for equity you can work out the IRR for equity part and also NPV for equity part base on different discount rate.

Thank you

Posted by kcchongnz > 2019-09-29 16:04 | Report Abuse

Posted by DK66 > Sep 29, 2019 2:48 PM | Report Abuse
However, if the US$234 has already netted off the interest costs, the project IRR increase to 9.76%. Still below 12% but closer.

DK66, I agree with your cash flows estimation here, but not sure what you mean by your statement that it has netted off the interest cost.

My interpretation is that USD234m is the cash flows for the firm, the JV, and that belongs to both the equity and debt holders. But with that cash flows, and if it is constant, that won't give you an IRR of 12%, but just 9.8% as stated by you, which I agree. So it is likely the assumption was the cash flow is not constant at USD234, but increasing, say according to inflation or whatever, or simply the assumption of estimation the cash flow using payback period is incorrect.

To get the cash flows of the equity holders, you have to deduct the cash flows for the debt holders, which includes principle and interest payments, before you apportion it to both equity and debt holders. That is why I don't understand what you mean by "the US$234 has already netted off the interest costs", and that when you calculate the cash flows to Jaks in the article that you did not take this into consideration.

Another question is why did the management guided that the cash flow to the company was about RM100m only, which is substantially less than what is being estimated by you and me? is it because our estimation of cash flows based on assumption of the payback period was incorrect? Or the management deliberately hiding something? For example something not related to our "pay", but rather more on "kick".

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 16:24 | Report Abuse

What I mean is interest costs should be added back to get the net cash flow from operation.

eg. for year 1 (234+84), year 2 (234+79) etc

Year
.. -468
.. -468
.. -468
.. -468
1 318
2 313
3 309
4 304
5 299
6 295
7 290
8 285
9 281
10 276
11 271
12 267
13 262
14 257
15 252
16 248
17 243
18 238
19 234
20 234
21 234
22 234
23 234
24 234
25 234
IRR 12.09%

Note that interest rate affects the IRR calculation.

-----------------------------------------
DK66, I agree with your cash flows estimation here, but not sure what you mean by your statement that it has netted off the interest cost.

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 16:34 | Report Abuse

Let me put forward my arguments ..... please wait

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 17:07 | Report Abuse

Dear Sslee and Kcchongnz,

The centre of discussion revolves around whether interest costs have been netted off from the net cash flow used in calculating the 8 years payback period.

In my opinion, the US$233.7m represents net cash flow after netting off interest costs.

My arguments

1) 8 years payback period means the JV will take 8 years to recoup its initial investment of US$1870m (including borrowings) in CASH from operating the power plant. In another word, if the power plant halts operation after the 8th year, the JV doesn’t suffer any losses except time value of initial investment funds. To achieve break even in 8 years, the US$233.7m annual cash flow should not be utilized for interest payments. Otherwise, it will take 11 years to break even.

2) As I have demonstrated, if part of the US$233.7m is applied towards interest payments, the project IRR is just 7.5% which is far below the 12% IRR guided by management. The interest costs need to be added to the US$233.7m cash flow to arrive at 12% IRR.

3) Article paper "Payback Period and NPV: Their Different Cash Flows" by Kavous Ardalan

https://www.economics-finance.org/jefe/volume11-2/01.Payback%20Period%...

"However, in the Payback Period, there is no discounting involved and, therefore, the interest expense (after taxes) and dividend payments should be deducted from the operating cash flows when calculating the relevant cash flows for the Payback Period rule. " - Page 15

This article found that it is the net cash flow after interest costs to be used in calculating payback period.

Thank You

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 17:13 | Report Abuse

I can only guess that the RM100m provided by the management actually refers to cash distribution instead of FCF or profit. This is roughly in line with distribution made by Mong Duong II.

----------------------------
Another question is why did the management guided that the cash flow to the company was about RM100m only, which is substantially less than what is being estimated by you and me? is it because our estimation of cash flows based on assumption of the payback period was incorrect? Or the management deliberately hiding something? For example something not related to our "pay", but rather more on "kick".

Posted by kcchongnz > 2019-09-29 17:27 | Report Abuse

Posted by DK66 > Sep 29, 2019 5:12 PM | Report Abuse
I can only guess that the RM100m provided by the management actually refers to cash distribution instead of FCF or profit.

I have to say this is a very wild guess.

Posted by kcchongnz > 2019-09-29 17:39 | Report Abuse

Even when we estimate cash flows from payback period is a guess. Cash flows should be given and then we compute payback period, and not the other way.

Anyway, this is the first time I estimate cash flow by using payback period. There are two ways to do it; either from the equity or the firm (equity + debt) way.

Firm way is cost of project USD1870m
Cash flows for the whole firm = 1870/8 = USD234m
This estimation is free of any capital structure. How is the project funded and how much interest and principle repayment, we don't know. However the future cash flow is distributed depends on your decision on the capital structure. How much goes to the equity shareholder and the debt holder is hence depended on the funding structure, the interest rate etc.

The bottom-line is, USD234m, the cash inflow for the whole firm has to be divided between the equity shareholders and debt holders depending on the capital structure. Hence it is strange that you add the interest cost to the cash flow of the firm.

The equity way is what I have shown before.

Posted by DK66 > 2019-09-29 17:45 | Report Abuse

Jaks management has not openly made any profit forecast in public nor given any estimates to the investment bankers or analysts.

The management told the shareholders during 2018 AGM that the profit will be more than RM100m, but during the 2019 AGM, it became RM80m-100m. I really don't know what to say.

Posted by valuelurker > 2019-09-29 17:59 | Report Abuse

Management said in AGM 2019 that its RM80-100mil..?

And here in this post, you say its RM197-263mil (previously it was RM300-500mil lol)

That's why its dangerous to give stupid people who are nerds (no, nerds are not sharp theyre dumb people who read a lot but are really slow and never quite get it) the internet, they read a little and think they know how its done

No, I do not have access to management, neither am I related to JAKS in anyway whatsoever

1. A long time ago, I mentioned the construction 'profits' are not real, they are merely accounting profits

2. I shared articles / links on the payback period and IRR from Jaks management

3. I mentioned profits attributable to Jaks was RM80-100mil a long time ago

And still this donkey66 doesnt wanna believe

Make sure you dont delete this article. A

nd make sure you hold your stock, in fact better keep adding and sialang since by your calculations, NPV per share is worth min RM2.93

Sometimes, you have to lose money to learn the one truth:

Youre pro or youre a noob, thats life

Posted by kcchongnz > 2019-09-29 18:10 | Report Abuse

Posted by DK66 > Sep 29, 2019 12:05 AM | Report Abuse
Kcchongnz,
In any case, what is your estimate of Jaks' power plant worth given your estimate of RM141m FCF ?

Jaks' worth in this power plant per share basis, in my opinion, is definitely worth a lot more than its 75 sen per share, no matter how we slice it. If you are investing in Jaks based on this assumption, I don't think you should worry about it. There is a big margin of safety.

However, when we invest in Jaks, bear in mind we are not investing in the power plant, but the whole of Jaks; its other businesses, its management especially. In this respect, I think may be good to be in it, but if one sailang on it, it is another matter. This is just my opinion.

Good luck.

Posted by kcchongnz > 2019-09-29 18:13 | Report Abuse

In any case, please continue to share your knowledge. Your sharing has been sincere. Good to get feedback, especially those different from yours to give you another side of view. This will curb some of the cognitive bias one may have.