Hong Kong Financial News

Hong Kong Financial News

What you need to know in order to out-beat the Hong Kong Stock Market

Hong Kong Financial News RSS Feed
 
 
 
 

Cathay Pacific (293) plans to end its fuel-hedging contracts

In an interview yesterday, Cathay Pacific chief executive Tony Tyler said the Company plans to spend cash to unwind all their fuel hedging contracts when their contracts are back to the break-even point (the point when the contracts are not making money or losing money and it should be at an oil price between $60-$80). The Company has experienced its first loss in 2008 since the Asian crisis, due to their failed fuel hedging strategy and the dramatic decrease in passengers (particularly in business class and first class).

From reading their annual result announcement,  I believe that their hedging strategy involves buying a call and selling a put (a zero cost or very low cost collar). The premium from selling of the put is to offset the cost of buying a call. Currently their puts are costing them billions of dollars. Unwinding the contracts at this moment doesn’t make sense as this would be very costly. When oil price goes back up to $60-$70 (assuming it will happen), then buying new puts to offset the currently shorted puts will be less expensive.

The management is basically taking a view that there will be a time shortly in the future that oil price will go back up to $60-$70 and then it may then go back down to below $50 (otherwise they would not close their the shorted puts).  But then what happens if oil never goes back up to $60? Then Cathay Pacific will continue to suffer losses till 2011! This is wishful thinking from Cathay’s management that they can end their hedging contracts very soon.

PCCW: Joseph Lau Luen-Hung speaks out

In today’s newspapers, billionaire Joseph Lau Luen-Hung, chairman of Chinese Estates, said that he is sick of a small group of people who are only very small shareholders and making a lot of noise on the privatisation. Also, he claimed that he knows who is fooling around behind the PCCW privatisation scandal, and that the motivation behind may not be business-related… it can be related to a fight for a wife, a girl friend, etc… Sounds very mysterious to me and a lot of the readers, but I suppose Richard Li should know what he is talking about!

Current Privatisation Offers in Hong Kong stocks

There are currently three companies that are seeking to be privatised by their major shareholders.

1. Shaw Brothers (80 HK): This has just been approved by minority shareholders. Current price is 13.20, and the offer price is 13.35 (1.1% premium)

2. Crocodile (122 HK): Current Price is 0.385 and the offer price is 0.40 (3.9% premium). Frankly I don’t see any problem for it to get all the necessary approval.

3. Nam Tai (2633 HK): Current Price is 1.42 and the offer price is 1.50 (5.6% premium).  David Webb has been urging shareholders to accept this bid (http://www.webb-site.com/articles/nteep2.htm), so I believe this again will pass without much problem.

I believe there should be more and more companies getting privatised because of their depressed share prices which went down a lot together with the general market. Investors should pay attention to this space and make some easy profits!

Peace Mark (304) may get relisted soon?

Peace Mark made a public announcement (http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/listconews/sehk/20090225/LTN20090225334.pdf) yesterday night, stating the required conditions imposed by the Hong Kong Exchange before shares of Peace Mark can resume trading again.

Does it mean that Peace Mark will resume trading soon? A few possible reasons came to my mind:

(i) The liquidator of Peace Mark may want to sell Peace Mark listed shell to recover more money?

(ii) Will Sincere Watch be listed under the Peace Mark shell? Currently, Sincere Watch is ring-fenced in the liquidation and is still operating as a business.

It seems like Peace Mark shares, although it is not tradable at the moment, may be worth something in the future, but probably it will not be worth a lot.

Privatisation of Crocodile (0122)

A well known local clothes retailer - Crocodile Garments Limited (0122) - has announced that the major shareholder (the Lam family in Lai Sun Group) will buy back all existing shares from independent shareholders at a price of HKD 0.40. Because of this news, Crocodile jumped 87% today to HKD 0.38.

The total amount for the buyback should be around HKD 119 million, and the offeror will finance the cash consideration through bank borrowings.

Personally, I believe the buy back makes sense for the major shareholder as the offered price, although it is already 90% more than the traded price before the announcement, is still 50% below the net asset value per share of Crocodile (even if there is significant writedown of their assets and real estate at the end of this financial year, the offered price should still be below the net asset value per share).

This buyback plan is scheduled to complete by 31 August 2009. What are the risks of this deal not getting completed?

1. Risk of independent shareholders not approving this buyback - I would think the chance of this is slim. (Even the PCCW privatisation got approved in their EGM!)

2. The major shareholders unable to procure enough funding - highly unlikely since the major shareholders are the people behind Lai Sun Group

3. Political risk - personally I believe since this is a relatively small company in terms of capitalization and is less high profile than PCCW, I would believe the chance of it getting criticized in the public is very less.

4. Delay in completing the transaction - To me it seems to be a quite straightforward deal without a lot of counterparties involved. So I believe the risk of this happening is minimal.

Please let me know if I have left out any major risk that needs to be addressed.

I would recommend buying this stock now below or at HKD 0.38. Then by the time this buyout is completed, you will earn a decent 5% return in less than one year.

Hong Kong Stock Exchange and the SFC – The latest laughing stock of the financial world

After asserting that the blackout rule would not change because of the sudden protest by a group of listed company directors three days before the rule was supposed to be implemented, the Hong Kong Stock Exchange has finally succumbed to the pressure of the ultra-wealthy company directors and politicians, and has backed down to make the new blackout plan more palatable to the wealthy company directors.

Under the new rule that will come effect on 1 April 2009, the black out period for insider dealing will be 60 days for annual report, and 30 days for quarterly or other interim reports.

This is just another blatant example of the government catering for the rich people. What’s going on with the SFC and the HKEx staying so firmly on their position and then bowing down to political pressure a few months later?

Further delay to PCCW (0008) privatisation

The privatisation has been delayed for one week as the Directions Hearing – a procedural hearing according to the announcement made by PCCW – has been postponed from 17 Feb 2009 to 24 Feb 2009. The most important court hearing – the High Court hearing to sanction the privatisation – scheduled originally for 24 Feb 2009, would now need to move further down the timetable. The chance of the privatisation being successfully completed seems to be lower as time progresses. Also, following Friday’s drop, the share price has dropped 17 cents today to HK$ 3.85.
There are just too many uncertainties to this privatisation: SFC’s investigation on the manipulation of the vote result in the shareholder meeting, the uproar of some minority shareholders, and the negative impression surrounding PCCW in most newspapers and magazines over the years since the dot-com bust: all have made Richard Li’s plan to privatise the company a harder feat than it originally seemed to be.

Uncertainties surrounding the PCCW buyout / privatisation

Below are the uncertainties surrounding the PCCW buyout / privatisation:

1) the High Court will need to approve the buyout. This is scheduled for 24 February 2009.

2) On whether the High Court will approve or not, this depends on whether the regulator, the SFC, has finished investigating the vote-rigging issue or not. The SFC can petition to the High Cour to veto the buyout if it discovers any evidence of vote-rigging in the shareholder meeting.

3) Will the SFC finish its investigation before 24 February? If not, will the High Court delay its ruling until the full SFC investigation is complete?

4) In an open forum last Sunday, some minority shareholders protested that the management has largely ignored the minority shareholders in the shareholder meeting. This theme of “majority shareholders bullying minority shareholders” has been a popular topic in the mass media lately. The voice of the minority shareholders is further amplified by some Legislative Council members who have decided to step up and try to stop this privatisation. There probably will be uproar if government approves the privatisation as originally planned on 24 February 2009.

For these 4 reasons, I believe that this privatisation will not get approved by end of February. It will take some time before the share price will rise near HKD 4.5 (the offer price). So my stock recommendation is Hold.

PCCW (0008) - privatisation passed

PCCW (0008) is the focus company among all HK-listed companies today:

The shareholders have approved the privatisation plan, despite the claim from David Webb that there is some vote-rigging involved (http://www.webb-site.com/articles/pccwrig.htm) in which David Webb claimed that hundreds of Fortis insurance sales agents received one lot (1000 shares) of PCCW recently and in return they would need to sign the proxy form to be in favour of the privatisation. With this privatisaion, shareholders will receive HKD 4.5 per share.

In the shareholder meeting, there were some minority shareholders who asked to delay the vote on privatisation until the investigation of vote-rigging is finished by the SFC. Not surprisingly, this was voted down.

On another front, the PCCW labour union (PCCW Employees General Union) has reported that PCCW will cut 5% of the workforce (600 people) and the rest of the employees will have their work week shortened from five / five and a half days to four days (and thus their pay is reduced).

Finally the privatisation saga has more or less come to an end. Personally, I believe this is a decent deal for the shareholders: most of the minority shareholders don’t mind approving this privatisation actually: a lot of them probably have held their shares since the dot com era (the peak split-adjusted share price was HK$ 131.75). The net asset value of PCCW is probably a lot higher than the amount paid for the privatisation; but at this time of the market, shareholders probably don’t mind exchange their shares for cash (and with a small premium to current share price too!)

A South China Morning Post article on accumulators

I came across an article on accumulators this past Saturday. It is quite informative; I’ve included it here for the benefits of our readers. Also, our reader can find our article on accumulators at this link: http://www.hkfinancialnews.com/?p=89.

Great for bankers, but a crazy deal for investors Why equity accumulators got dubbed ‘kill you later’

South China Morning Post

25 January 2009

In the second in a series of articles by Alan Alanson, the Road Warrior takes a sceptical look at a notorious banking product sold in the city.

One of the most infamous financial products peddled in Hong Kong of late is the equity accumulator. This is because pretty much everyone who bought one in the past 18 months has lost loads of money, earning it the apt nickname of “kill you later”.

The equity accumulator enables an investor to “accumulate” stocks at a discount to the market. If you were to purchase an accumulator today on China Mobile or ICBC stock, it would mean that you would start to purchase shares in these companies at about a 25 per cent discount to their trading price. If you were like me, when your banker pitched this product, you probably thought he was crazy to offer this deal. Turns out that you would be crazy to fall for it.

Buying stocks at a discount to the market sounds pretty good, but there is a little more to it. The first catch is that an accumulator is not a one-off transaction. It generally lasts 12 months and you have to commit at least US$1 million, with which you accumulate the stock regularly.

The next catch is that once you enter the accumulator, the price you pay for the stock is fixed. So the price you pay on the first day is the same as what you pay on the last day. If the traded price of the stock on day one is HK$100, you will pay something like HK$75. But if the price on the last day, or any other day over that one year, is HK$80, you will still pay HK$75 and only be getting a 6 per cent discount, not 25 per cent.

And of course, as everyone who bought this product last year now knows, if the stock price falls below HK$75, you end up paying more for the stock than it is worth.

There is another catch. If the stock price happens to rise more than about 4 or 5 per cent, the accumulator contract is over. The bank returns your money and you stop accumulating stocks at a discount. So although you take the risk of any fall in the stock price, no matter how great, the bank does not take the risk of any rise in the stock price. The bank takes the risk of only a 4 or 5 per cent rise and so limits its risk. The investor’s risk is unlimited; the bank’s is fixed.

Although you need to commit US$1 million, or HK$7.8 million, to be able to buy this product, to make our illustration simpler to follow let us assume the entry point is HK$1 million. So you commit your HK$1 million, say, to a China Mobile accumulator contract at a 25 per cent discount and the contract will be terminated if China Mobile rises 4 per cent.

We assume the stock is priced HK$100 the day you buy the accumulator. This would make your discounted purchase price, or strike price, HK$75. Since your HK$1 million is spread out over a year, you invest about HK$83,333 a month. So you buy about 1,111 shares every month at the strike price.

Now, three things can happen: the stock could rise, fall or stay relatively flat. With the accumulator, it is only in the last scenario that the investor really wins.

If the stock falls, the outcome is clear. If it falls by exactly 25 per cent, the return on your investment from then on is zero. If it falls more than 25 per cent (slips below HK$75), you begin to lose money.

If in the first month the stock begins to drop and the average price for the month is HK$90, your profit for the month will be about HK$16,700. If it continues to fall by HK$10 a month for the next two months, your profit will be HK$5,600 for the next month and then a loss of HK$5,600 for the third month.

If it drops to HK$60 in the fourth month and stays around there for the rest of the contract, you will lose about HK$16,700 a month until your 12 months are up, leaving you down for the year by something like HK$133,000.

The actual numbers would be slightly different as the stock purchases would be made only on trading days, and that varies from month to month, but you get the picture.

Now, if the stock stays basically flat for the 12 months, the potential profit is huge. If it stays at around HK$100, the investor stands to make about HK$330,000. But how often does any stock stay flat for more than a week, let alone a year?

The third scenario is that the stock rises. If it rises more than 4 per cent, the contract is over. If the stock price happens to be slightly less than the HK$104 threshold for a month before it rises to the point that the contract is terminated, the investor would make about HK$32,000 for the month (buying the 1,111 shares at a discount of HK$29). Now, that does not sound too bad. The investor makes HK$32,000, gets all his capital back after one month and is free to buy another accumulator.

But that return is 3.2 per cent, as the investor had to commit HK$1 million to make this HK$32,000. In committing that HK$1 million, the investor assumed the risk that the stock could fall by any amount and he would still bear all the losses.

And once again, bear in mind that the upside is limited and the downside is unlimited.

You might make a whole lot of money if the market stays flat for 12 months. But it is more likely you will make a small amount if the market rises, or lose a whole lot if it falls.

There is an even riskier version of the accumulator out there. Some banks refer to it as a leveraged accumulator. In this product, everything is the same except the initial discount that you get is substantially larger, about 35 per cent rather than 25. But if the stock falls below the discounted price, you must buy double the amount of stock you would buy if the stock price was above the discounted price.

This version has the same fixed upside, but doubles the downside.

And if that is not scary enough, there is one last twist, something that seemed so generous last year but turned into a nightmare. Some private banks offering this product are prepared to do the trade for their clients without an upfront payment. So long as your account has 30 per cent of the accumulator cost, you can enter the accumulator without having to come up with the other 70 per cent. So if your bank balance is US$1 million, you can enter a US$3.33 million accumulator. This is great when the market is rising, as you multiply your profits. But if the market falls, you multiply your losses.

In the scenario above, where the share price falls and you end up losing HK$133,000, this would be a 13.3 per cent loss if the initial investment was HK$1 million. But if the initial investment was only HK$300,000, the HK$133,000 loss represents a 44 per cent loss. So you have not doubled, but tripled your losses!

Combine the leveraged accumulator with a 30 per cent investment amount and it is not hard to see how you could end up owing the bank money. Plenty of people took this risk last year and plenty of private banks made money selling this product to their (now substantially poorer) customers.

So weigh your risks and returns properly before you get into this one.

Click Here For The Wall Street Journal Online

 

eToro

 

 

March 2010
M T W T F S S
« Jan    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Archives

Recent Posts

Categories

Blogroll

Pages