Saturday, September 10, 2011

曾淵滄教路: 股市大波動股民宜揀好股長揸

股市大波動股民宜揀好股長揸
股市在八月份出現了一輪急跌及反彈,但表現依然相當不穩定,反彈的力量主要來自大戶的決鬥中出現的挾淡倉行動,到淡倉補倉投降後就無以為繼,八月五日的裂口下跌及其後的連續急瀉已經使多數股民對股市失去信心,更有不少股民已經賣光手上的持貨,近一段日子,多隻在今年上半年呈強勢的股都在八月份出現洗倉式的下瀉,理由就是不少股民對前景心灰意冷,決定大手減持股票,該減持哪一些股票呢?他們第一個想到的就是仍有不少利潤的近年來的強勢股,在大戶帶頭拋空之後,小股民接二連三的跟,相反的一小部分在近年來反覆下跌的股,在股價跌得過賤過殘時又突然出現大反彈,似乎又是另一批大戶的決鬥,專殺沒實力的沽空客。

是陷阱也是機會
我認為目前的股市依然是非常的不穩定,小投資者、一般散戶相信已全部靠邊站,只剩下少量打算博博運氣的人在那裏希望能夠捕捉到近一段日子那種急升急跌的波幅,是的,如果你有高超的能力捕捉得到近日的波幅,的確可以發大財,近日走勢,每一日恒指的波幅都高達幾百點,或V形反彈,或倒V形下跌,一來一回,是陷阱也是機會。

傳統上,大型基金如新加坡的淡馬錫,應該是以長期投資為主要的策略,但是,近日股市的波動太激烈了,導致淡馬錫也搞短炒的行動,近兩個月就又賣又買內銀股,企圖賺差價。

不過你應該明白,基金經理動用的錢是他人的錢不是自己的錢,投機他人的錢壓力不大,因為賺了錢可以分巨額花紅,虧了錢大不了被炒魷魚,傷不到自己的老本,但是,如果你大筆投入自己的錢在如此波動的市場中,你一定要先問一問自己是不是能做到對股價升跌無動於衷,如果股價跌你會睡不着,那就當個旁觀者吧!

學巴菲特價值投資
或者,你可以立志學巴菲特當個價值投資者,目前不少大藍籌的股價都很低,PE低,盈利增長不錯,只要你不借錢,真金白銀的投入,選幾隻盈利不錯的大藍籌,學巴菲特那樣投資十年,或至少一兩年,股票買入之後送到註冊處註冊自己的名字,之後鎖入保險箱不聞不問,也不要去看股價,也許,一兩年後,你會有意外的驚喜。

如果你不知道該選哪一隻股,那就買盈富基金吧,一隻代表恒指成分股的股,副總理李克強訪問香港,打開了改良型的港股直通車的大門,第一趟直通車就是港股ETF,而恒指ETF的代表作就是盈富基金。


輯錄自 419期 Book B

Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: 東周刊
Publish date:08/09/11

重返現金為王的年代

重返現金為王的年代
財經評論 2011-09-10 13:31
美國經濟不爭氣,最近出爐的就業報告再傳噩耗,顯示了美國經濟仍毫無動力,二度衰退的陰霾揮之不去。

美國勞動市場疲軟不振,將影響收入和消費,對經濟復甦構成巨大阻力。經濟榮枯的關鍵在於信心,當每個人都認為衰退即將到來,消費者減少支出,企業停止招收員工,失業問題將加劇,最終形成惡性循環。

美國白宮在9月1日也表示,失業率會在很長時間內保持在較高水平,同時將2011年美國GDP增長預測從2.7%下調至1.7%,以及明年的增長預測從3.6%降低至2.6%。最新預測雖顯示美國經濟還不致於陷入衰退,但成長動力明顯降低。

美國政府還有何妙方來把經濟拉離懸崖?市場指望美國總統奧巴馬於9月8日在國會兩院的聯席會議上公佈最新刺激就業計劃,以及9月20-21日聯儲局議息會否有新計策公佈。

然而,奧巴馬的新計劃遭逢兩黨政治角力的阻礙,會有多大成效令人置疑。至於聯儲局還有多少張王牌可打?聯儲局能做的,可能是調整當前的資產組合結構,買入更長期限的資產,以壓低房貸和其他長期債券的利率;同時可能削減對銀行的超額準備金利率(目前為0.25%),以刺激放貸活動,惟市場最期待和可能性最大的,就是啟動新一輪國債收購,即所謂的QE3。這似乎已是迫不得已之下的選擇,以振興市場。然而觀乎前兩次的量化寬松政策,此舉很難對實體經濟產生刺激作用,無助於解決失業問題。

歐美國經濟疲弱不振,壞消息陸續有來,在這種不利情勢下,股市越跌越低,遍地便宜貨,令人見獵心喜,尋思進場抄底。一些專家認為這是趁低買進的良機,例如股神巴菲特在上月中接受電視節目採訪時表示:“我喜歡越跌越買。”據稱8月8日美股大跌時巴菲特買進股票的金額比今年任何一天都要多。

巴菲特的名言是““別人貪婪時你需要恐懼,但別人恐懼時你需要貪婪”。對巴菲特來說,貪婪的時刻已經到來。但對一般財力不夠雄厚的小投資者,在目前市況極度不明朗之下,有多少人敢敢心口寫個勇字,傚仿巴菲特大膽進場?

亂市博反彈或虧更多

如果看到遍地平貨而進場,一旦大戶進場沽貨“震倉”,小投資者可能輕易被震傷,短線操作是資金雄厚的大戶的強項,小投資者亂市中博反彈,可能虧得更多。

在熊市當道之際,何處可安身?現金為王(Cash is king)又被奉為金科玉律。市場仍未塵埃落定,最重要的是及早抽身,有貨快走,避免被套牢,保存子彈,以待他日“復仇”。手握現金則進可攻退可守,一旦股市重現好景將可伺機而動,否則若被套牢苦無現金,損失的將是令回酬最大化的機會成本。

美國銀行/美林公佈的8月份基金經理人調查顯示,8月基金經理人持有現金比重平均達5.2%,較前月的4.1%為高,淨比例30%的經理人加碼現金,兩項數據均創下2009年3月以來新高。同時仍加碼股票的經理人淨比例自前月的35%大減至2%,降幅創調查以來新高。這項調查反映了機構投資者都在退居場外,紛紛轉持現金,以待局勢明朗化。

擁抱現金成了王道,擁有充裕現金的企業也備受看好,投資者不必擔心這些公司無力還債,它們在經濟衰退時可以支撐得更久,以及隨時可動用現金買下便宜貨,令人津津樂道的一個例子,就是楊忠禮集團在1997年金融風暴時期購得吉隆坡金三角黃金地段的三項產業,包括包括萬豪酒店、升喜購物中心及樂天購物中心,這種機會在平時是可遇不可求的。

在美國,根據統計,美國企業於過去1年手持的現金數量大幅增加。截至6月底為止,道指30隻成份股中,24家持有的現金及短期投資多達2560億美元,較去年同期增加了18%。其中微軟公司持有高達520億美元現金,較去年同期增加了43%。

美國聯儲局則表示,美國企業的儲蓄現金在6月份達到1.9兆美元的歷來最高水平,比2009年首季揚升了36%。

美國企業坐擁巨資,主要是經過金融海嘯洗禮後,大幅瘦身,縮減成本,加上憂患意識增強,更注重積縠防饑,減少投資,手上預留更多現金以備不時之需。

在大馬,許多企業仍擁有充裕現金,例如雲頂集團、國油旗下公司及汽車股如東方實業、合順等等,這些“不差錢”的公司未必會在熊市中走高,但至少不會面對營運陷困的問題。

不過,企業或個人如果緊抱現金不放,將對整體經濟帶來衝擊,企業不肯投資和擴充,無法增加工作職位,人們把錢收起來,將影響市道,最終仍須靠當局帶頭做起,展示決心和魄力以重建市場信心,只有在人們重新看好前景之後,“現金”……這位當今王者才會退位,新的投資時代才會到來。()

Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: 星洲日報
Publish date:10/09/11

新航与华侨银行等 纷趁低价回购公司股票

过去数星期,不少蓝筹股公司借着股价被打压,纷纷回购股票,除了嘉德置地在本周二破天荒首次回购公司股票外,新航、华侨银行、新邮政以及和美投资(Ho Bee Investment)等这两天都纷纷以低价回购公司股票。

  新航在昨天发给新加坡交易所的公告中说,它前天在公开市场回购了31万6000股,最高的收购价为10.96元,最低收购价为10.82元,累计回购375万3000股或0.31%股权。根据条例,新航总共可允许回购5998万股股票。

  随着这次回购股票行动,它的库存股票(treasury share)数目为392万9000股。

  上市公司本身用现金从股市里回购回来的股票,存放起来就叫做库存股票。

  华侨银行昨天也以8.52元的价位回购了10万股。这使其累计回购的股票达到619万股,或0.185%股权。它的库存股票数目达到309万5000股。

  和美投资自上月底以1.32元的价格回购22万8000股后,昨天趁着股价走低再次出击。和美投资昨天以平均1.3447元的价位总共回购10万3000股,最高回购价1.35元,最低则为1.34元。该公司累计回购1647万4000股或2.25%股权。

  新加坡邮政也在两个星期内二度回购其股票。昨天它以1.035元至1.045元的价位总共回购了190万股股票。上月24日新邮政也以1.02元至1.03元的价格回购了133万股股票。

  这使该公司累计回购了3020万8000股或1.57%股权。

  一般上,公司会选择在股票价值过低或被低估的时候回购,这可以给股价带来支撑,并给市场以信心。

麦格理国际基建基金
也回购80万股

  除蓝筹股以外,一些基金也在近日回购股票,昨天麦格理国际基建基金(Macquarie International Infrastructure Fund)就以0.525元至0.53元之间的价格回购了80万股。

  低价股(penny stock)昨天也掀起回购风。CDW控股以8.4分的价格回购3万股;菱备基础控股(Ryobi Kiso)也以14.4分至15分的价格回购17万2000股。



Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: 联合早报
Publish date:10/09/11

Genting Hong Kong: Hidden value in US cruise business?(Macquarie)

Genting Hong Kong
Price 29 Jul 11 US$0.44
12-month target US$ 0.56
Upside/Downside % 28.7
Valuation US$ 0.56

Hidden value in US cruise business?
Event
􀂃 GENHK’s 50% subsidiary NCL is turning around sharply (EBITDA +33% in 1H11). Given NCL forms ~35% of GENHK’s earnings and valuation, and its imminent IPO, investors have been particularly interested in knowing the current state of the US cruise industry and NCL’s competitive positioning. In this note, we try to address the 10 key questions from investors by analysing and comparing the top three cruise operators in the world.

Impact
􀂃 How has the US cruise industry fared in the last 18 months amidst volatile macro environment?: The cruise industry has experienced rough waters over the last 18 months. We analyse the three key concerns:

⇒ High oil prices: Fuel constitutes 10–13% of cruise operators’ cost base. All three players have handled the rise by hedging and passing through costs.
Net yields have been maintained at ~US$170 in the last 18 months.

⇒ Geopolitical unrest in MENA: Demand from the Eastern Mediterranean market (which accounts for ~15-20% of global demand) has taken a hit, but this is more than offset by strong yield momentum in the Caribbean (~50% of global demand) and Northern Europe.

⇒ Volatile US economy: US customers form ~70% of total demand and remain cruise-friendly despite economic volatility, as suggested by ~105% occupancy rate across industry. Our economist expects a US GDP recovery in 2H11, which should help maintain / improve demand.

􀂃 What is NCL’s positioning vs top 2 players?: NCL is the 3rd largest cruise operator in North America after CCL and RCL, although on a smaller scale.

⇒ Small size and concentrated operation differentiate NCL from peers:
NCL’s small fleet size (11 ships vs 40-98 for top 2) limits downside from geopolitical risk and provides room to improve efficiency/profitability.

⇒ Profitability at par with peers: Margins and net yields are now at par with the top 2 players, driven by initiatives over the last 3 years.

Earnings and target price revision
􀂃 No change.

Price catalyst
􀂃 12-month price target: US$0.56 based on a Sum of Parts methodology.
􀂃 Catalyst: GENHK 2Q11 results on 29th August

Action and recommendation
􀂃 Peers trading at Jan 2009 low multiples; re-rating in sight: Given the volatile macro environment, CCL and RCL’s EV/ EBITDA multiples have derated to 7-9x vs 11-12x only seven months ago (fig 11&12). Consensus estimates suggest positive bias for cruise operators amidst undemanding valuations.

􀂃 NCL trading at 5x implied EV / EBITDA multiples: Our analysis suggests (Figure 13) hidden value in GENHK at current price given investors can own NCL at 5x vs 7-9x that its peers are trading at.

Question 1: Impact of volatile macro environment in the last 18 months?
The cruise industry has experienced rough waters over the last 18 months – high oil prices, geopolitical unrest in MENA region and a volatile US economy.

High oil prices – stabilising in last three months; operators have managed costs well
WTI touched a high in April (US$114/bbl) but has come down to US$95-96 levels in the last 3-4 months. All the top three cruise operators seem to have coped well with the steep rise since July 2010 until April 2011, as fuel costs remained between 11–15% of their total revenues.

Net yields (Revenues-Commissions-Onboard expenses/Total capacity days) are the true indicators of cruise liners’ profitability. Despite the rise in fuel cost from US$72 to U$114/bbl from Aug-10 to Apr-11, all the top three cruise operators have maintained/improved their net yields (Figure 2). Another key metric – net cruise cost per capacity day (Figure 3), has marginally increased for CCL and RCL since 1Q10, while for NCL it has gone down in the same period.

Cruise operators have managed the high fuel costs by hedging ~55% of their requirements and also passing through some of these increases to customers, as demand for cruises remains very strong (3Q11 bookings are almost 90% done, while 4Q11 bookings are almost 60% done).

MENA geopolitical unrest – demand from other regions making up for Eastern Mediterranean
Geopolitical unrest in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region has been a matter of concern over the past 9-12 months. We have analysed the composition of demand from each of these regions for the largest players CCL (CCL US, US$33.3, Not rated) and RCL (RCL US, US$30.6, Not rated).

􀂃 Operations impacted in Eastern Mediterranean and Asia: Our analysis suggests that because of the unrest, two regions are down significantly YoY: Asia and Eastern Mediterranean. While Asia is too small to be significant (only 2%), weak Eastern Mediterranean demand is surely hurting the cruise operators – falling prices are hitting their net yields in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Prices have weakened in markets like Greece, Syria and Turkey.

􀂃 Demand in other regions is more than making up for the loss in Eastern Mediterranean:
However, we are encouraged by the strong yield momentum in other pockets of demand, especially in the Caribbean (which accounts for ~50% of the total demand) and double-digit gains in Alaska and North Europe. RCL management expects net yields ex-Mediterranean to be up 6% YoY after the 2Q11 results. This should be more than sufficient to make up for the 4% decline it expects in the Mediterranean region.

􀂃 Capacity increases over the last 18 months have all been taken up: Despite the macro volatility, all the new capacity increases by the top 3 players have been taken up by customers. Occupancy rates have remained stable over the last 18 months between 103-105% levels.

Volatile US economic growth - Diversifying customer base plus expected recovery in 2H11
Economic growth prospects do impact demand for cruises from North America, given the large US customer base. North American passengers make up 76% of total demand, with 92% of those being US-based and the rest 8% from Canada and Puerto Rico.

However, the key thing to note is that the share of North American passengers has gone down drastically over the last 10 years from 91% to 76%, thus diversifying the demand base and insulating it more from US economic volatility.

􀂃 Our economist expects growth to recover in 2H11: Although GDP growth numbers for 1H11 have been disappointing, our US economist Rebecca Hiscock-Croft expects some economic improvement in 2H11, citing modest improvements in hiring, spending and easing inflationary pressures in key sectors like autos. Jobless claims also seem to be falling to below 400k levels for the first time since early April (398k in the week ended July 23rd vs 422k in the week ended July 16th).

Question 2: What EV / EBITDA multiples are the listed ones trading at?
Multiples have come off significantly in the last 7 months
The multiples for both CCL and RCL have come off significantly in the last 7 months. Both were trading close to 12x 1 year forward EV / EBITDA in January ’11 and are now trading at 7-9x. These are levels last seen in January 2009.

Macro volatility is the key reason behind the de-rating of the stocks
As we had explained earlier, high oil prices, geopolitical unrest in the MENA region and volatility in the US economy are key reasons behind the de-rating of these stocks. However, we believe the concerns are priced into the stock prices now and the cruise operators are coping well with the macro volatility. This is reflected in their strong net yields.

Question 3: What’s the implied value of NCL at current GENHK price?
Given the impending listing of NCL(Norwegian Cruise Line) in the US (the company recently re-filed for an IPO under the ticker NCLH US), investors are keen to know what’s the implied value of NCL via owning GENHK stock at current valuations.

Our analysis suggests that despite valuing GENHK’s Manila casino business at 12x (a ~30% discount to Macau peers), the NCL business is trading only at 5x 2012 EV / EBITDA. We believe the NCL IPO could go through at 8-10x multiples (current trading range of US listed cruise operators and median EV / EBITDA for the last 6 years) and thus there is hidden value in the stock.

Question 4: How is NCL placed in the US cruise industry?
NCL is the 3rd largest player in the US cruise industry, although the top 2 are much larger cruise operators. CCL (Carnival Cruise Line) and RCL (Royal Caribbean Cruise Line) comprise almost twothirds of the global cruise capacity. Out of the 200 odd ships operating in North America, CCL and RCL own 138 (as at the end of 2010).

While CCL has 98 ships under different brands (10 brands and 6 major operating companies on numerous continents), RCL has 40 ships in comparison to only 11 owned by NCL. In terms of berth capacity too, CCL is 7 times the capacity of NCL and RCL is 3 times.

Question 5: Given its smaller size vs peers, is it as competitive/profitable?
Has caught up with peers in the last 3 years
CCL and RCL had a significant lead in various profitability metrics that the cruise operators are judged on – key being net yield and EBITDA margins. (Net yield=Total revenues-Commissions- Onboard expenses/Total capacity days). As can be seen in Fig 14-15, the gap was stark until 2008, which is when NCL went through a restructuring and laid-up/sold ships that were inefficient or working on loss making routes.

While EBITDA margins for NCL have improved from 9-11% to 20% levels now, net yields are at par with the top 2 players at US$172 as the end of 2010.

1H11 results suggest “small size” and concentrated operations benefitting NCL vs peers
Given concentrated operations in the US and Europe, NCL has not been impacted by the geopolitical crisis as much as its peers and has had no impact from the Japan earthquake. The impact is visible in 1H 11 EBITDA growth vs last year. Also, post addition of the new ship “EPIC” in July ’10, capacity has improved by ~16%, which is also helping NCL further lower its costs and improve efficiency.

Question 6: What brought about this strong reversal in profitability?
Amidst declining operating efficiency and rising losses, NCL brought in a new CEO named Kevin Sheehan in November 2007 and adopted a 2 pronged approach to reverse the trend. NCL’s key problem area was operating expenses, which were much higher than the industry average (net cruise cost / capacity ~US$150 vs ~US$125 for the other 2 players).

1st approach: Downsized the business; Laid-up / sold / rented out inefficient ships
NCL had gradually built up its fleet from 2004 until 2007 in the bid to become a larger player. The expansion came at the cost of declining operating efficiencies as many ships were working on nonprofitable routes in addition to a few ships which were old and inefficient, thus losing money. The new CEO started with downsizing the business and concentrated on improving the occupancy rates. The result was evident starting 2009 when despite a decline in berth capacity, the occupancy rate touched a new high of 109% vs 105-106% in the immediate past.

2nd approach: Cut down costs; Improve operating efficiency
Commissions, onboard expenses and payroll make up 50% of total costs. NCL focused on bringing these 3 down as they were way above what the peers were doing until 2007.

While commissions / sales were brought down from 29.6% in 2006 to 25.1% in 2010, onboard expenses were cut significantly by 10% in the same period from 34.7% to 24.7%. Also, payroll expenses declined from 20.9% to 14.7% from 2006-2010.

Question 7: What about fuel cost? Isn’t it a large component for cruises?
Fuel cost is 10-13% of total cost base
While fuel costs do impact the profitability of these cruise operators, they do not constitute a very high percentage of their total cost base. Also, cruise operators manage the volatility by hedging ~50% of the fuel requirements and also passing on the price increase to customers in high demand environment.

Oil price expected to remain high
WTI is trading close to US$100/bbl currently and our Macquarie economist Meredith Somers expects it to remain high at US$106 in 2012 and US$109 in 2013. While cruise operators would be looking to continue hedging and passing fuel costs so as to manage the pressure, we believe it is prudent for the market to incorporate high fuel costs over the next 2 years.

Sensitivity of cruise operators’ earnings to fuel prices
As we mentioned earlier, fuel cost is only 10-13% of the total cost base of cruise operators. In addition to that, the cruise operators’ ability to pass through price increases to customers and tendency to hedge the fuel costs, the impact on earnings is not as drastic, in our view.

Question 8: How is NCL’s fleet doing? What about its new ship “EPIC”?
NCL has a fleet of 11 ships as of July 2011, with the latest entry being the Norwegian Epic in July 2010; this increased the overall berth capacity by ~16%.

Capacity expansion via the Norwegian Epic and two ships in 2013-14
􀂃 Norwegian Epic added 20% capacity in July 2010: The ship, with 4,100 berths, cost ~US$1.3bn and will have a five-year equity payback period, in our view (assuming a debt:equity ratio of 70:30). We believe the ship could add ~20% to the group’s EBITDA in 2011 (US$69m), which we think could grow further in the next five years on higher occupancy and ticket revenues.

􀂃 Two new 4,000 berth capacity ships to be delivered in 2013-14: In October 2010, NCL placed an order with Meyer Werft of Germany for two 4,000 berth capacity ships, one to be delivered in spring 2013 and the other a year later. NCL has already had seven ships built by Meyer Werft. The approximate cost of the two ships is ~US$1.7bn, for which the company says it has arranged financing from a bank syndicate.

Question 9: How’s the balance sheet position? Are they heavily geared?
Typically, balance sheets of cruise operators are heavily geared given that they raise 70-80% debt for funding the purchase of new ships. While NCL added a new US$1.3bn ship in July ’10, CCL and RCL have both also added new ships in 2011. This has raised the net debt levels for all 3 operators. However, given their slowing capacity additions and increasing EBITDA, we expect their leverage levels to come down significantly. We expect NCL’s net debt / EBITDA to come down to the industry level of 3-4x over the next 3 years.

Question 10: What about cyclicality in the cruise business?
More resilient than you think
The cruise industry, by function of representing an attractive price/value proposition for travellers, has held up better than other leisure alternatives, in our view. The North American cruise sector saw a robust 6.9% CAGR in passenger traffic over 1990-2009, aided by equal growth in the number of berths. The cruise industry rode out the economic storm in 2008 and 2009 with resilience, skill and success, growing by 5% each year.

There is demand… as long as there is supply..
Driven by various factors, demand remains very strong in the US cruise industry despite significant capacity additions in the past decade. We list out a few reasons:
􀂃 Young industry: Number of North American travellers has almost doubled in the last 10 years, indicating strong potential. According to the CLIA, 50m new North American passengers intend to take a cruise over the next three years.

􀂃 Increasing foreign passengers: From only 9% of total passengers in 2000, foreign passengers now constitute 24% of total passengers on North American cruises, implying more cruise vacationers from other parts of the world. Improving economies in other parts of the world could result in continued strong flow of foreign passengers into the US, we believe, thus boosting cruise passenger traffic.

􀂃 Diversified cruise product: Helped by extensive consumer research, cruises have added new destinations, new ship design concepts, new on-board/ on-shore activities, new themes and new cruise lengths to reflect the changing vacation patterns of today's market.

􀂃 New “close to home” ports boost passengers: The North American cruise market is strong across the 50 states of the US and in Canada. The addition of new "close to home" N.A. embarkation ports increases the likelihood of cruise vacationers, in our view.

􀂃 Catering to favourite destinations: The new ships cater to North American’s favourite destinations: 41% of capacity deployment is to the Caribbean and the Bahamas (including NCL’s Norwegian EPIC), followed by the Mediterranean, Europe, Alaska and Mexico.

􀂃 Increasing length of cruise days: The trend is towards taking longer cruises. The average number of cruise days rose from 6.1 in 1991 to 7.2 in 2009. Almost 50% of vacationers take a 6-8 days’ cruise, followed by 30% for 2-5 days, 19% for 9-17 days and 1% for 18+ days.


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: Macquarie Research
Publish date:02/08/11

Genting Hong Kong: Trading at trough valuations now (Macquarie)

Genting Hong Kong
Outperform
Price 15 Jun 11 US$0.35
12-month target US$ 0.56
Upside/Downside % 57.7
Valuation US$ 0.56

Trading at trough valuations now
Event
􀂃 GENHK is down 15% in the past month and is now trading at lows last seen in September 2010. Despite the robust growth in its casino and cruise businesses (+141% earnings growth in 2011), the stock is now at a large 40% discount to Macau and Singapore peers. At the current stock price, the high growth RWM casino business is available at only 4x 2011E EV/EBITDA. We reiterate Outperform with 58% potential upside to our US$0.56 target price.

Impact
􀂃 RWM (Resorts World Manila) on course to deliver US$223m EBITDA:
RWM, which is the monopoly private casino player in Philippines, is well on track to more than double its EBITDA in 2011 driven by increasing VIP and mass traffic as the property ramps up. 1Q11 GGR (gross gaming revenue) of US$1.5m/day should grow further once the new VIP Genting Club opens on
17 June and the new mass market hotel opens in 3Q11.

􀂃 RWM available at 4x 2011E EV/EBITDA ex-cruise business: (Please refer to Figure 1.) We value GENHK’s cruise businesses (Star and Norwegian Cruise Line) at 9x 2011E EV/ EBITDA (in line with listed US cruise operators), resulting in an implied valuation for RWM of only 4.3x. Given the immense growth so far and potential of the Philippine gaming market and RWM’s monopoly positioning, we believe the widening valuation gap between
GENHK and its Macau and Singapore peers is unwarranted.

􀂃 Cruise business also going strong: Norwegian Cruise Line (NCL) reported robust EBITDA growth of 39% YoY in 1Q11 and is set to touch a record
EBITDA level of US$503m in 2011, by our estimates (up from US$400m in 2010). The robust growth should be driven by the addition of Norwegian EPICto its fleet in 3Q10. NCL is also adding two new ships to its fleet by 2013.

􀂃 GENHK earnings set to grow by 141% YoY in 2011E: We expect the Star cruise business contribution to remain small (9% of GENHK earnings), with NCL (37%) and RWM (54%) as the key growth drivers.

Earnings and target price revision
􀂃 No change.

Price catalyst
􀂃 12-month price target: US$0.56 based on a Sum of Parts methodology.
􀂃 Catalyst: 1H11 results in July.

Action and recommendation
􀂃 Valuations have hit trough, could be too late for bottom fishing: We believe the stock now is in a low risk-high reward zone. On an adjusted
EV/EBITDA, GENHK is now at 9x vs 13-18x for Macau and Singapore gaming peers. 1H11 results due in July could be the short-term catalyst for the stock.

􀂃 Cheapest land casino play in the region currently: With RWM available at an implied valuation of 4x 2011 EV/EBITDA vs Macau and Singapore gaming peers at 13–18x, GENHK is the cheapest land casino play in the region.


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: Macquarie Research
Publish date:16/06/11

Genting Hong Kong: RWM: Rear view mirror analysis (Macq)

Genting Hong Kong
Outperform
Price 24 May 11 US$0.41
12-month target US$ 0.56
Upside/Downside % 36.6
Valuation US$ 0.56
RWM: Rear view mirror analysis
Event
􀂃 Post AGI’s 1Q11 results conference call held last Monday, investors have been sceptical on the street’s estimates for RWM (Resorts World Manila) given limited disclosures from management. We try to break down the 1Q11 result for RWM and run a scenario analysis. Our analysis indicates that RWM is on track to achieve our full year estimate of US$223m EBITDA and US$178m in PAT. Given its 50% stake in RWM, we believe GENHK at 9.8x 2011E adjusted EV/EBITDA provides the cheapest entry into the booming Philippine gaming market. Reiterate Outperform with 37% upside potential.

Impact
􀂃 On a normalised VIP hold rate, 1Q11 EBITDA was 24% of our 2011 estimate: Please refer to Fig 1 on page 2, in which we have done a detailed analysis of RWM’s 1Q11 P&L. On a normalised hold rate of 2.8%, it seems that RWM’s EBITDA would stand at US$53m for 1Q11 (24% of our 2011 estimate) and earnings at US$37m (21% of our 2011 estimate).

􀂃 Seasonal weakness and bad luck in 1Q cannot be overlooked; GGR still quite strong: Gross gaming revenue (GGR) per day was US$1.5m in 1Q11 despite the VIP hold rate being much lower than 2.8% as per management.

􀂃 Ensuing quarters can only get more strong, especially 2H11: The scheduled opening of Genting Club in June (for VIPs – an entire 3rd floor) and budget hotel in 3Q11 is expected to boost GGR/day to beyond US$2m levels (acc to management). If hold rates normalise at 2.8% levels, revenues and EBITDA should see significant improvement every quarter from here on, in our view.

􀂃 Zero competition until 2013: Belle Corp is due to open its private casino only in 2Q12 with a soft opening. Full fledged competition (with fully operating tables and slots) would occur only in 2013 by when we believe RWM would have garnered market share. The current size of the Philippine gaming market (~US$3.6bn) also provides room for more than 1 player in our view.

Earnings and target price revision
􀂃 No change.

Price catalyst
􀂃 12-month price target: US$0.56 based on a Sum of Parts methodology.
􀂃 Catalyst: 2Q11 numbers post opening of Genting Club

Action and recommendation
􀂃 GENHK with 141% YoY earnings growth in 2011E is the cheapest landcasino play currently: On an adj EV/EBITDA multiple, GENHK is at 9.8x 2011E and 8x 2012E (please refer to Fig 2 and 3), at almost a 50% discount to its Macau and Singapore peers. Given the strong growth we estimate even beyond 2011, we believe the stock is the cheapest way to play the booming Philippine gaming market versus AGI which has exposure to other segments (property/liquor). GENHK could also become a pure land-casino player in a few years post its stake sale in Norwegian Cruise Line (IPO due this year).


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: Macquarie Research
Publish date:25/05/11

胡立阳上海演讲实录:七八九是股市“鬼月”

胡立阳上海演讲实录:七八九是股市“鬼月”
2011年09月05日16:03腾讯财经[微博]
http://finance.qq.com/a/20110905/006325.htm

主持人:接下来就要有请重磅嘉宾胡立阳先生给我们带来精彩的演讲。他演讲的主题是全球债权危机下的A股投资策略。现在让我们用最热烈的掌声有请胡立阳先生为我们带精彩的演讲。

胡立阳:大家好。好象还没有睡醒的样子,我们这样子,我要仔细听一下,我们这边分,这边一半这边一半,我要都听到,让大家都醒过来。大家好。

听众:好。

胡立阳:我们的股票未来会不会更好!

听众:好!

胡立阳:今天很高兴来到这边,真的非常感谢腾讯,感谢益盟,当然你们也要真的感谢他们,给大家提供这么好的机会交流一下,让胡老师在这边给大家解释一下这个行情到底怎么回事,对你们一定有所帮助。

坦白说前几天大家被一个故事吓到了,因为美国的债信评等从三个A降到了两个A+,先杀再说,全世界的投资人都是一样的。胡老师在全球演讲,在拉丁美洲、在美国、回到了亚洲,全球的股市投资者都一样,犯下了惊人的错误,他们认为股市和经济挂在一起的。

其实股市跟经济不一定有关系的。大家都犯这个错误,而且一再犯。胡老师一直讲这样的一句话,人跌倒一次不可耻,但是一个人一直在一个地方跌倒就不行了。

你们知道吗?常常股市下跌的时候,是经济最好的时候,常常股市上涨的时候,是经济最坏的时候,我们不要讲,2008年的哪一天,9月14号,雷曼兄弟倒闭,每个人都说没有明天了,那时候胡先生提醒大家说,真的是机会来了,有几个人听得进去?因为美国的专家都说世界末日到了。我说你把股票卖掉,你的末日真的就到了。

你看我们股票什么时候到底的?十月底对不对。是不是雷曼兄弟倒闭,一个多月之后,A股都到底了?大家犯了一个严重的错误,经济不好,股市一定不好,经济好股市一定好。如果你照这个方法操作的话,我可以告诉你,你在股市下场会非常难看。

胡老师在2000年的时候,我一直觉得,大家称我为股市教父,可是我感觉自己没有进步。大家统统把股市上涨或者是下跌,归结为美国的经济上涨或者是下跌。

胡老师要帮大家发现这个大自然现象。我到了美国,我研究美国的纳斯达克的股市,因为我只研究新兴市场,我研究股市的规则性。股市一定有某种程度的规则性。我先研究美国的纳斯达克,再研究巴西的股市,墨西哥的股市,再回到亚洲,研究印度的股市,当然也研究我们中国的股市。我拿出了25年的资料,我拿电脑运算一下,第一年还看不出端倪,我研究了七年的时间,所以很多人不是说胡老师怎么不见了?怎么以前经常演讲的,现在一下子人间蒸发了。我花了整整七年的时间,我得到了所有的研究报告,我跟大家讲,我现在看黄金看石油,我一年前都可以预测到了,因为股市就像有春夏秋冬,有夏天我就知道秋天会来,有秋天,我就知道冬天会来。如果我能知道股市的脉动,这个大自然的现象,那投资股票就无往不利了是不是?当然胡老师自己不投资股票的。因为我二十年前回到亚洲的时候,我就决定我只能当老师,不能又当老师又操作股票。胡老师发现了很多股市的大自然现象,就是想提醒你们,千万不要听旁边人吓你,什么金融危机来了,也不要相信美国的债信评等降低了,不要相信这个,相信的话你在股市里面要永远沦为输家。

我下面要证明给你看。那时候预测美国的纳斯达克指数在什么地方,在正中央点,1200底部;石油胡老师准确预测,我都不在讲。我讲一个股市的大自然现象,就是股市在底部反弹的时候,有一个涨一倍卖压区。到了这个区域,就要休整半年到一年。短的话半年,长的话,要休息一到两年。

很多人不懂,统统赖皮,因为你不知道,你不知道股票是有春夏秋冬,就像古时候的人看到月亮,突然月食,月亮一半不见了,都说天狗在吃月亮,不知道这个道理。如果知道股市的春夏秋冬,就知道怎么操作了。

所以胡老师研究的时候,看到了A股的底部。当时我跟大家讲,这个股票一路涨上去大家都不要担心。我说不要自己吓自己,股市的春夏秋冬还没有走完,但是到了一个点位,就要小心了,因为有一个涨一倍的卖压区,我们拿1664乘以2,是不是三千多点?那个地方涨一倍卖压区,股市要休息一年到半年的,这个就是股市的大自然现象。因为股市涨得太快了,通常会跌一跤,通常会在涨一倍的地方跌跤。那时候我就讲了,涨一倍的时候要休息一下,股票也不能涨个不停对不对。你们过去听很多老师讲这个风险意识,好象是讲口号,谁不知道?老生长谈。但是我跟你讲,胡老师讲的风险意识都不是随便讲的。

我们来到香港,上证指数最高到3478点,那一天从3300涨到3400了,那一天疯狂大涨,结果休息了多久?两年。就上不去了,大家很慌,怎么回事,有些人开始东批评西批评,都不应该这么做的,怪是怪你们不知道这个股市的大自然现象,要怪的是自己不知道这个股市的大自然现象,你看胡老师在香港的时候,香港的记者问我,香港股市的底部我也猜中了,香港恒生指数我说把11500乘以2,答案是多少?两万三千点是不是?那时候恒生指数每天都涨,他们说我们恒生指数涨到三万点都不会停,我说没有关系,两万点不是关卡,两万三千点这个地方要有风险。他们都不相信,结果香港恒生指数涨到两万三,结果从两万四千多,跌到今天都没有回去,你看我早就在一年前提醒他们了。现在胡老师讲的每一件事情都在网站上。你们都可以看到胡老师怎么预测香港恒生指数。

那时候新加坡从1500点上来,我说大家不要害怕,我说三千点的时候要休息一下。你们知道吗?整理到今天了,已经一年多了,到了三千点,最高冲到三千二就下来了,碰到三千点这个点数就很难过。我跟他们说台北投资朋友,你们要谨慎,8400点,要休息一段时间。掉下来了之后休息了多少?休息了九个月。你们看到了没有,有谁做过这个研究?我花了七年的时间来研究这个现象。这个现象为什么重要呢?这个跟美国股市有关系。美国股市2009年3月9号这个时间,我很早之前就知道,涨到6469,我很久之前就提醒大家了,12900点,你们要小心再小心,因为美国的股市下来会牵动全球的股市下跌。那时候美国股市一直涨,涨到七千,涨到八千,涨到九千,一万点了,我说不要担心,你要担心12900点,这个是股市的风险,拉回来要一年半年,结果我在很多地方演讲,美国的投资朋友都笑,没有这个事情,这个股票是我们发明的,不是你讲的。你讲的那个我们怀疑。没有关系,他们不相信,信者恒信,不信者不信。结果到12900,很重要,我们再复习一下,12900,结果时间慢慢一天天过去了,两年过去了,终于在今年的5月2号,你知道道琼指数最高到多少点?我预测新加坡指数,香港指数,台北指数,上证指数,我们每一个都验证了,我们来看看华尔街指数,谁知道到多少点?12876点,胡老师预测12900,你们看不可思议,我说这个掉下来不是简单的,很多美国投资朋友不知道涨一个卖压区要休息,拼命买进。一路买进,那你一下子把钱用光了怎么办呢?美国的投资朋友一样,越套越多,他们没有听过胡老师演讲,他们不知道的,所以12900点真的是天险,现在他们有一些记者朋友相信了,他们打电话给我说,你真的神准。全球希望股市被你算光了。我说我不是担心美国股市,我担心上证指数,香港的恒生指数。因为美国股市会牵动全球股市。

我发现股市有一个规动性,到了满足点就有了初步的反弹,拉回15%会反弹,很多人计算了,12876,乘15%。真的反弹了。股市都一样,新加坡海峡股票指数,也反弹了。我们看到新加坡指数也反弹,恒生指数也反弹了。好的,我们出现这个现象很奇妙,他们说你这么有把握,我当然有把握。我一再跟大家讲,股市跟经济之间没有直接的关联,因为股市跌深了,经济再不好都会反弹。经济本来下跌的股市,只不过变成压垮骆驼的最后一根稻草。就像美国的股市,本来就要跌了,一个坏消息,一个利空它就掉下来了,将来股市不好的时候,哪怕小小一个利好,也会涨三百点五百点。

经济不是你能研究的,你问十个经济学博士,都不知道美国经济怎么样。我们知道什么?我们掌握自己的命运在自己的手上。我们要算出来究竟经济大自然的规律是什么。我们要算这个。我们一起来算,美国股市12876,乘以15%,是不是10900点,结果美国道琼指数跌到多少点呢?10850点左右就反弹了。完全按照我心中的预定在行进。

所以研究股市的大自然现象,远远比修行十个经济学博士还要重要,这就是股市的春夏秋冬。我们来讲讲美国股市,涨一倍卖压区,要休息一年半年。所以美国股市你今年年底都不要看到飞黄腾达、一飞冲天。我们上证指数休息了两年了,现在还在2500点左右。这个是股市的大自然现象,夏天很热,但是你要度过三四个月才会变成秋天凉爽,你不能说夏天很热,我只要一个月的夏天,对不起。它要有这么长的时间,急都急不来。这样讲懂了吧?好的,下面很多统计数据给你们,这个是我最近发现的统计数据。当美国股市大约三个月最糟糕的时候,亚洲股市会有气色,这个现象很奇怪,我现在还在加以验证,这个有待验证。就是美国股市在两个礼拜前,达到了12900点,从那时候算,亚洲股市会有翘翘板左右,亚洲股市就会在三个月之后,早睡早起,胡老师发明了很多名词。甚至在台北他们用涨停板,涨停板这个板字都是胡老师加上去的。不要跟股票谈恋爱,行情总在绝望中诞生,在编织美梦中结束。都是我在三十年前发明的。你们听到的很多名词,都是胡老师在二三十年前发明的。因为当时胡老师在华尔街写稿。

有一个名词叫早睡早起,美国股市到最糟糕的时候,再过三个月的时候,大家放弃的时候,亚洲股市就起来了。是不是该我们早起一次了?所以我们发现这个现象,从现在开始算三个月左右。胡老师再告诉你一个大自然现象,我前一阵子,那时候美国股市还没有跌的时候,大概现在是九月初,现在是六月的时候,当时台北股市每天在涨,我说很高兴,看到台北股市涨我很高兴,看到香港股市涨我也很高兴,但是我说要小心,七八九三个月的股市要小心。因为我研究全球股市的时候,全球股市在七月八月九月,尤其是七月八月的时候,是股市的鬼月,因为这段时间股市会放暑假。翻译成普通话就是放暑假行情。这两个月要小心。

当时大家听了说胡老师很幽默。可是总是没有抄笔记,我总是有根据来的。你看现在全球股市是不是在放暑假?华尔街跌,欧洲跌,台北跌,越南跌,没有一个例外的,都在放暑假。他们说你怎么这么厉害?胡老师从来不会更改自己的预测的。有放暑假,我们有一个年底行情,大概是从每年的十一月十二月开动。尤其是11月15号之后,这个行情都一样,从11月15号之后,一直到年底,甚至到明年一月份之后,股市最好的年份,十一月十二月一月这三个月。其中最主要在十一月。

如果你记忆不好,我帮你们回忆一下,我们不要看别的股市,我就告诉你们,我们来回忆一下,我们股市1664是从什么时候起来的?是不是2008年十一月初?11月12月都很好,我们股市下来的时候是哪个月份?2009年的8月初是不是?2009年8月4号这一天。哪一天清早,一开盘冲到三千多点。股票有规则性,很多人说胡老师你为什么这么厉害?不是我厉害,只是你们没有用功。胡老师用功了七年时间,发现了股市的大自然现象。我们投资股票没有100%的。现在行情可能还是在放暑假,我们讲的是全世界,不是单纯的讲A股,也许到十一月十二月这个时间会有一个行情。马上会有人问胡老师,因为今天时间有限,胡老师你曾经说过,上证指数在2571点买进,胡老师是不是讲过?2571点以下,上证指数进入了超卖区域,就是进入了可以捡便宜的区域。我们可以看看,也许有PPT的话,可以看一下,我一年前说的,我们看一下这个,这个是中国证券报的2010年6月5号,一年多了,胡老师预测是不会改变的,我绝对不会说看到今天美国行情不好,我们股票就不行,绝对不会。我们知道股市是春夏秋冬,股市的大自然现象,就要对自己有信心。

刚刚问你们股市行情会不会好?好。大家要有信心。为什么没有信心?因为你们不知道股票何去何从,你们不知道股市有春夏秋冬,你们当然没有信心。你们听完了胡老师的讲话,就有信心了。虽然有信心,但是你还是会说,为什么会得到这个数字,这个数字我不是乱算的。当指数从3478点跌落下来,跌15%就有满足点,台北的股市,香港的股市,几乎所有亚洲的股市,就出现拉回以后,出现整理盘,但是我们上证指数几乎是胡老师看到的唯一的还往下跌,拿3470点,乘0.85,这个就是满足点。当然皮球理论,弹得越高越快,跌得越快越升。这个到什么地方呢?这个底部是多少?1664加3470除以2,是不是2571。到了这个点绝对是买进的区域,你们将来再谢谢我。2571这个点以下的位置,跌得越深,越是捡便宜的位置。

我每做一件事都是有根据的。胡老师做了七年的研究,就是这样呈现给大家的。

有人问胡老师会反弹到什么地方呢?指数到了满足点会休息一下,下面跌深了,会满足了。2950,会休息一下,会在往上冲,又回到什么呢?涨一倍卖压区,还要接受磨炼,在什么地方呢?3000-4000点之间都是小心谨慎区域。这样讲听得懂听不懂?我可以告诉你们,现在你不买进,就像跳舞一样,现在不买进,不踩左脚,将来怎么踩右脚。现在你不买进,将来到三千点的时候,好象该买了,你一买进又跌了。人家是左右,你是右左,乱成一团。

我把答案讲给你们听了,你们应该知道怎么操作了。

我们还有多少时间?我们讲讲黄金好不好,很多人对黄金很有兴趣,胡老师那时候也是在上海,黄金上一千点的时候,有一位投资者问我,他说胡老师我手中有黄金,我今天很高兴,黄金今天上一千,那时候是2009年的9月份,我说在座的还有谁对黄金有兴趣,没有一个人有兴趣。我说任何一个商品期货,包括股价在内,股票也一样,股市也一样,达到一个重要的价位,没有人关注的话,老天会送你一个20%的礼物。还没有人注意。机会就来了,当你们有一天看到股票涨到50块,没有报纸报道,没有人注意,然后股票就会涨到60块。如果每个人都说这个股票好,涨到50块了。那这个涨价的几率就不会高了。如果到了60块大家还不注意,它会涨到72块,它以20%一跳。胡老师发现它有20%的间距。如果到了60块你还不注意,它会到72。当大家都注意的时候,这个游戏就终止了。

就像那时候全世界人都在炒股票,没有人注意黄金,然后黄金到了1200,然后黄金到了1440,结果黄金到了1400,发生了北欧的状况,全世界对于黄金都是利好,黄金从1440乘上1.2。答案是多少?1720块对不对?胡老师说黄金的满足点1720块,到了1720块,大家要小心了。这个地方可能是到满足点了,结果它又往上涨,你们知道往上涨是什么原因呢?它往上涨是因为大家担心美国要来个第三量化宽松政策,表示美元不会起来,因为钱太多了,拼命印钞票,利率不会增加,美元一定会摇摇欲坠。然后黄金就起来了。结果黄金从1720,最高涨到1900多。黄金八天涨了两百多块钱,黄金的走势每涨两百块过去平均需要五年,这一次只用了八天,这叫冲天炮的走势,大家要记得,股票也是一样,冲天炮怎么上就怎么下。我跟你说玩股票千万不要玩冲天炮的,除非你是幸运儿,永远你买到最低点卖在最高点。那你可以当我老师。冲天炮的图形是怎么上怎么下。这个是第一个,它又回到1700。我说什么时候可以买进呢?也许回到1720。但是1720以上涨得太快了,所以它涨到1720,真的上来了。

我要告诉你们了,下面仔细听,胡老师不认为黄金还有很大很大的上涨空间,因为大家期待的利好可能不会存在。很多人一厢情愿。胡老师认为美国经济好得很,我每天做功课,看美国的生产指数,我每天做图形。美国跌了四年的房地产,我打电话给各个地方的房地产商,我发现第一次美国的房地产不再跌了,我看美国经济好得很,大家说这个是怎么回事?我不想讲了,这个不在我的演讲范围内。美国的经济是连续剧,好象有点先苦后甘的味道,一开始楚楚可怜的,然后大放异彩。因为明年是选举年。我觉得有这个可能性,所以我就附带一提,这个不在我演讲范围内,我个人觉得美国的经济好得很,越来越好,慢慢的是渐入佳境,然后明年真的是大放异彩,这个是胡老师的看法,这个是我们的讲法。所以顺带一提,黄金的话,小心谨慎,如果再加四个字,如履薄冰。有可能这一波变成逃命波。到1916没有大突破的话,可能就会跌回来了。

然后进入最后一个话题了,有的人讲胡老师我真的不会买股票,我讲一下什么股票可以买,什么股票不可以买。我每次演讲完之后,投资朋友最喜欢问我一个问题,这个股票我四五个月之前买的,套牢了,什么时候解套,麻烦你看一下。我问他张先生你什么时候买的?你多少钱买的?30块买的。那现在怎么变成12呢?他问我什么时候解套,这个烫手山芋丢给我了。不好意思,胡老师最愿意回答股票什么时候解套。胡老师就以救投资者为乐,但是严重的问题来了,张先生给我的四个股票我一看,糟糕,我看到这个不能讲实话,我很想救他,但是我没有办法救他,这个股票我一看我怎么跟他讲呢?四只股票全部亡身了,走了,四只股票都死了,死了怎么能复活呢?我看了好难过,我又不能跟他讲,这个股票已经死了,已经死了很久了。因为他一直问我,什么时候可以复活,我不能跟他讲实话,我就跟他说,能不能考虑换股操作一下。他说:“换股操作我问你啊?”我说这个太过分了。很多人都有一样的行为,死的股票抱着当活的。当初他没有止损。旁边人说这个股票有什么问题?我说这个股票死了。他马上说这个股票是死的还是活的?我发现大家对股票是死的还是活的很有兴趣。今天我来到上海,我一定告诉你们,什么股票是死的什么股票是活的。我们人看死的还是活的,我们要看心电图。一条线就是没了。股票也是一样的。我们买股票也是要买活的。我可以告诉你,股票要生蹦活跳的。一定要买活的股票。不要买死的。股票的生命线是什么?我发现在巴西,他们的股票很喜欢跳森巴舞,他们股票是活的。要看十日平均线,十日平均线上升就是活的,下降就是死的。

我再跟你们讲一点,股票丧失生命力有三部曲,第一个连续大跌三天,第二个或者是五天中跌了四天,第三种情况,连续两天,两天大跌超过10%。这个股票已经没有生命力了。从来没有人这么讲。我在美国演讲的时候,很多人说胡老师我怎么没有早点认识你,我手上这个股票就是这样的。这个是股市的大凶,股票已经病入膏肓了。然后股票十日线往下,这个股票好像就开始这样子了,最后终止,这个股票结束了。

胡老师把答案告诉你了,不要再问我100块的股票到了12块,什么时候可以解套。就这样,好吗?

好的,你们马上会问胡老师,胡老师股市死了会不会复活呢?会的。

这个股票活的是怎么样的呢?大涨三天。快速,一天两天,超过10%。或者是五天里面涨三天。比如低迷的股票,突然心跳又来了,就倒过来看,然后十日移动平均线翻上去了,那就恭喜你了,你的股票又活过来了。

很多人跟我讲,我不喜欢炒短线,他说我喜欢炒长线的。巴菲特都说过炒波段。他说我做波段都赔钱。我们来看一个图形。这个是电子类股的图形,很经典,给大家稍微看一下,你们看一下就知道了,什么股票是死的,什么股票是活的,什么叫做波段行情。你们看一下,这个是电子类股,这家软件公司,跟我们益盟一样,都是鼎鼎有名的,做得非常好。我们先看左上角,如果你买的时候,你要先看类股,类股看十周线,个股看十日线。你们看这个已经没有生命现象了,这个跌下去整整跌了半年。我跟你讲半年内任何人买这个都是凶多吉少。你看这半年时间,这个中间有一个反弹,很多人喜欢去抢反弹,很多人说这个股票100块跌到80块了,可不可以买?要看它的回坡,这个是回光返照。买进去就被套在那里,然后再往跌,跌下去之后,你们不知道,在下滑的过程当中买股票,一买就赔。因为这个股票没有生命迹象。

看到了没有?这个十周移动平均线翻上了,更重要的是周线出现年三红,十周移动平均线开始翻上,个股看十日线。轴线出现年三红,然后往上翻,表示这个波段行情,什么叫波段行情呢?波段行情就是我做一波。做一波就是很久很久的意思。他从左边买的,他做了一波往下的波,这样讲听得懂听不懂?他说我不想炒短线,我看不起炒短线的,做股票就要长一点,这个摆长要看摆在什么地方。这两个条件吻合,出现几率的行情有五成。这个波段行情不是放一辈子的。

胡老师一向不赞成价值投资,胡老师不认为巴菲特的价值投资适用于亚洲。胡老师相信价格投资。胡老师认为一个股票会让你赚钱,它就有价值,不管它公司业绩怎么样,先摆到后面去,当一个公司,再好的公司,如果你买到它的高价位,它股票跌得一塌糊涂,就没有价值。巴菲特不在意这个东西。但是胡老师非常在意这个东西。因为胡老师知道你们不是巴菲特,巴菲的口袋很深,你们就一套资金,资金一套就没了,只能套一次。胡老师太了解你们了。所以很多人讲到,我要学巴菲特,你没有办法变成巴菲特,他可以买高盛跌一年也没有关系。现在涨起来他又赚钱了。你们只有一套资金。

我们看这边,这个拉回就是买的。这个拉回送你买一点,一直拉,一直到翻下,终于翻下来了,下面不用买了。留点钱给别人赚。大家可以看,这个从一月份开始,涨了一年多的时间,你们闭着眼睛都可以赚钱。回去看看益盟的软件。

胡老师把这么高贵的意见都告诉你了,意见胡老师告诉你季线月线,我告诉你这么多的线都比不上这一根线,十日线。这两根线一起看,真的是九成的或然率。我把这个秘密告诉你们了,出去不要跟太多的人讲。出去看看别人的股票跌得一塌糊涂,要说:“我跟你讲,这个股票好得很”,不要伤人家心,“总有一天会解套的”。真的,请你们相信。

所以你们回去打开软件看看这个股票是死的还是活的,最好把死的股票换成活的,所以换股操作很重要,这个阶段股票很不好做。当然前提你们要知道这个阶段股票怎么操作。胡老师不希望你们把大笔的资金拿出来买股票。我在亚洲绕了一圈了,大家都差不多,手中的股票都套牢了。

胡老师告诉你们怎么做,在套牢阶段,大家不要把资金都投进去。第一个,要谨记在心,不要摊平,要做一点工作,要换股操作。我可以告诉你们,我问很多人换股操作会不会?他说会的。股票涨的时候他会换股操作。一跌下来他就不会了。我可以告诉你,股票上涨的时候,我建议你不要换股操作。股票下跌的时候,你们真的要学会换股操作。买什么呢?买有生命迹象的。如果这个还不够,我再教你一招,什么叫好股什么叫烂股,胡老师教你,要背下来抄下来要记在脑海里面,你就观看那个股票,慢慢来,你要看着股票跟大盘比较,仔细听,大盘大跌它小跌,大盘小跌它不跌,大盘小涨它大涨,只要吻合这三个条件。这个顺口溜要倒背如流。我们在股市中做股票,这个十八般武艺不要都忘了。都吻合的话,这个股票就是好股票,把你过世的股票都换一换,你们不要看我讲笑话一样的,对你们真的是非常非常有帮助的,凭良心讲,投资股票真的要有两把刷子,很多人买股票一点概念都没有,什么时候该买,真的是乱成一团。

我以前在华尔街的时候有一位客户让我印象非常深刻,这位客户我常常打电话给他,因为我当时也是投资顾问,我们靠别人进进出出股票赚手续费。别人买卖股票你可以赚手续费。当时我在华尔街的时候我常常打电话给这位顾客,这位先生叫琼斯先生,他说你不要打电话给我,电话就挂掉。这个客人每次我叫他买股票,他说我不会买的,再见,挂掉。我明明以前看他买过股票的,他怎么不买呢?你知道吗?我真的很生气,我说琼斯先生你为什么不买股票?我给你推荐股票都涨这么多了。他说当你有一天活不下去的时候,我来给你雪中送炭,不要锦上添花。我说真的是老怪物。结果半年之后,美国股市都跌得一塌糊涂,我没有顾客了,我面包跟奶油都赚不到了。

我就打电话给琼斯,我说你没有骗我,当我活不下去的时候,你要伸手援助我。他说你们公司怎么样?我说我们公司也要挂掉了,他说这个股票我全买了,你们都卖不掉是吧?没有人要玩的股票,统统给我。然后我说谢谢琼斯先生,真的太感恩了,因为我没有收入了。他说我帮了你一个忙,你将来也要帮我一个忙。当你生意好的时候,要通知我,就是我该卖的时候。就这么一位客户,他赚进了我们全股票市场的钱,因为我没有一个顾客是这样的,股票不好的时候,“不要打电话来骚扰我”。股票好的时候“不要忘记我”。你看99%的人在股市都是输家。因为他们在这个气氛之下,不会买股票的,像现在这个气氛有点低迷,对不对,将来有一天到三千二、三千三又来了,大家又兴奋了,你又来买股票了,相信胡老师的话,你们学学那位琼斯先生。

我们今天很高兴来到上海,谢谢各位


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: 腾讯财经
Publish date:06/09/11

胡立阳:A股在2571点以下处于可长期买入区域

胡立阳:A股在2571点以下处于可长期买入区域
2011年09月06日21:12腾讯财经[微博]
http://finance.qq.com/a/20110906/006600.htm

腾讯财经讯 9月6日消息,有“亚洲股市教父”之称的胡立阳(微博)近日做客腾讯演播室,为投资者传授多年积累下的投资理念。胡立阳认为,国际原油价格在未来3至5个月,不会超过每桶90美元。他又预计,当A股处于2571点以下,就意味着进入了一个可以长期买进的区域。

胡立阳称,通过多年研究,他发现对于全球各个股市而言,从多头市场拉回整理,通常不应该超过15%。“我们把上证指数最高点3478乘以0.85,应该在2950点左右。当然,有时会跌破合理价位,如果这样的情况,把最低点加最高点再除以二。高点3478点,低点是1664,两者相加除以二,就是2571。”

胡立阳多次强调,股市像是一个大自然,有运行的轨道和规则性,甚至有“春夏秋冬”。“股市还有一个大自然现象,就是全球股市在7-9月,普遍表现不是很理想,我把它称为‘股市的放暑假行情’。一年之中,最好的月份落在11月、12月和1月份。”

油价方面,胡立阳称,以现在全球经济疲软不振的情况来看,油价不应该超过每桶90美元。“至少在未来3至5个月,石油不应该超过90元美元/桶。明年是美国的选举年,美国会想尽办法把油价控制在合理的价位,因为如果油价高涨,百姓叫苦连天,这对于选举没有什么好处。”

胡立阳认为,随着美国经济的日益复苏,第三轮量化宽松货币政策很可能不会实施。“这样的话,美元就会走强,这对黄金可能就是利空了。所以我认为,黄金还是稍微超涨了。”他认为,现在的金价可以用“如履薄冰”四个字来形容。“黄金涨得这么急这么快,它就需要时间来做一些回调。” (杨甜甜 发自上海)

以下为胡立阳访谈文字实录:
腾讯财经:胡老师您好,今天上午在会场上,当时主持人开玩笑地说,当时巴菲特来到上海,A股市场九连阳,罗杰斯来到上海,A股市场九连阳,今天,胡老师来到上海,A股市场也是九连阳。您怎样看到A股市场的短线走势呢?您认为A股有没有可能出现九连阳这样的一个情况呢?

胡立阳:首先和大家说“大家好”!我的看法可能比较不太一样,因为我不看那么短线。我要这么说,股市像是一个大自然,有运行的轨道和规则性,有春夏秋冬。抓到这个规则性,就对投资股票很有帮助。股市和经济在短线上并没有关联性,两者的互动性关联性往往不太一样。我过去7年,研究股市的规则和波动性,我尤其喜欢研究拉丁美洲的股市。A股上证指数已经跌进了一个可以长期买进的区域,这个点位我设置在2571点,在这个点以下,都是很好的买进区域。

只要大盘还在多头市场之间行进,现在符合这个条件,指数从最高点在2009年8月4日3478点,多头市场拉回整理,通常不应该超过15%,全球股市都差不多。我们把上证指数最高点3478乘以0.85,应该在2950点左右,就会止跌了。当然,有时会跌破合理价位,如果这样的情况,把最低点加最高点再除以二。高点3478点,是低挡是1664,除以二,就是2571.假如指数严重超跌,高点加低档,除以二,这个以下就是严重的超卖区域,也就是捡便宜的区域。所以,我不在乎短期的现象,建议大家把好机会,做好长期的布局。

股市还有一个大自然现象,就是全球股市在7-9月,普遍表现不是很理想,“股市的放暑假行情”。一年之中,最好的月份落在11月、12月和1月份。现在的行情有点低迷不振,不要太担心,原因不是经济不好,而是现在是8、9月份,不要气馁,到11、12月份,全球股市尤其是A股会让人喜出望外。在股市中,大家现在欠缺的不是资金,而是信心,信心来自统计数字。这些统计数字具有科学依据。

腾讯财经:您说A股指数在2571点以下就已经可以开始布局了,那具体来说,您看好哪些板块的发展呢?

胡立阳:据我长期观察,我发现投资朋友在股市中赔钱的最大原因就是先入为主地认为哪些板块表现一定好,一买进股票就死抱不放。我认为,不要和股票谈恋爱,不要一买进股票就死抱不放。因为买了股票后,就先入为主地认为那一个板块好。但我不这样认为。我认为股票是会说话的。

股市在说什么话呢?生命迹象就在一根移动平均线。对于个股而言,就是十日移动平均线。如果十日移动平均线是翻下的话,这表示这个个股块已经在慢慢消失生命力了,这是对个股而言。如果想看大的类股的话,则要看十周移动平均线,如果十周移动平均线翻上,这表示股市有生命力。所以,不要先入为主地认为哪个板块一定好,要先去看它的十周移动平均线。如果十周移动平均线翻下,那么这个类股没有看头。

腾讯财经:您说的“股市有生命、有周期,有一个大自然的周期”这个观点非常有意思,那么这个周期是否会随着重大的经济事件而改变呢?比如说,上个月,美债的评级被标普下调,欧债的危机又蔓延了,这些事件的发生,对于整个股市的周期会不会有影响呢?

胡立阳:经济和股市在短线上没有必然的联动性。假设股市本来就要跌了,那么有一点风吹草动,一点点利空消息,就会造成股市下跌,就像是压垮骆驼的最后一根稻草。“涨一倍卖压”:所有的股市从底部翻身出来,只要往上涨到接近一倍的区域,就会碰到一个很大的卖压区,那个地方就叫涨多了。

过去上证指数是从1664上来的,我们把1664乘以二,上证指数最高是3478点,在2009年8月4日,就一直掉下来。而且一旦掉下来,就要在下面休息,短的话,6个月,长的话,可以长达两年。这都是股市的大自然现象。所谓经济的利多、利空,只不过一时让股市的行进轨道脱轨了,但是过几天又会回来。

腾讯财经:这里有一个问题,怎么判断从底部开始上涨就一定会涨一倍呢?有没有可能这只是一个反弹呢?

胡立阳:这又是一个股市的大自然现象,经过长久的验证。股市从上面跌下来,当股票出现几个现象,说明涨多了要回调。一个股票如果连续大跌三天,或者5天中跌4天,或者跌两天,但是跌幅超过10%,这几个条件对股票非常非常不利,表示趋势有翻转向下的可能。再来看10日移动平均线,股票的生命线,前面几个条件,加上10日移动平均线慢慢向下,就说明股票的生命力在减弱,心跳慢慢停止了。

这样的话,当然是先卖一趟为优先。但很多人不懂这个道理,股票跌得越深,越是舍不得卖,而是相信股票一定会反弹。反弹的话,也有几个条件需要吻合:大涨三天;5个交易日涨4个交易日;或是两个交易日集涨超过10%,这都是股市要恢复生命力的先期迹象,加上10日移动平均线翻上,最好就是再看一个十周移动平均线,看是否翻上。这几个条件吻合了,表示股市回到了多头的轨道。

腾讯财经:聊完了股市,我们再来聊油价。油价是不是也想您说的一样,有这样一个大自然的周期呢?还是油价和经济事件发生之间的相关性要更加大一些?

胡立阳:有两个因素造成石油上涨或是下跌。第一是供需,第二就是炒作。现在全球资金实在是太多了,充沛到一个地步,成了资金泛滥。因为低利率,全世界的钱没有地方去,有的就流入了商品期货,包括石油在内。尤其是当国际间出现一些利空的信息,例如前阵子北非出现状况,资金就会炒作导致油价上涨。

如果纯粹撇开这一大部分的炒作不谈,仅以需求量而言的话,我觉得以现在全球经济这么疲软不振的情况来看,油价不应该超过每桶90美元。至少在未来3至5个月,石油不应该超过90元美元/桶。明年是美国的选举年,美国会想尽办法把油价控制在合理的价位,因为如果油价高涨,百姓叫苦连天,这对于选举没有什么好处。所以就油价而言,我并不是非常悲观。石油对美国将来经济的发展也是息息相关的。

腾讯财经:现在全球股市都笼罩在一片不确定性中,很多投资者会选择购买黄金,您怎么看待金价的走势呢?

胡立阳:黄金的走势也有它的大自然规律性。它是每隔20%一跳,例如,有一个利好消息,金价会从1000美元/盎司跳到1200美元/盎司,再从1200美元/盎司跳到1440美元/盎司。我当时看黄金,在1440美元/盎司的时候,北非出现了不稳定,以及欧洲债权危机,这几个全球的不稳定性对于黄金而言是利好的,于是金价又攀升到1720美元/盎司。后来,金价继续往上冲,因为大家期待美国会出现第三轮的量化宽松政策,低利率会令美元持续贬值,这对于黄金又是一个利好。

但是我认为,这样的期待有点牵强,因为量化宽松政策并没有实施。而且我个人的看法是,美国经济会越来越好,如果这样的话,美元就会走强,这对黄金可能就是利空了。所以我认为,黄金还是稍微超涨了。所以现在黄金又回到1800多美元/盎司,我觉得要非常非常小心谨慎。只能用“如履薄冰”四个字来形容。黄金涨得这么急这么快,它就需要时间来做一些回调。

腾讯财经:看到您在腾讯微博上最近与网友分享的一句话,说“聪明的人知道如何获得自己想要的,真正有智慧的人知道如何放弃自己不需要的东西,”您觉得对于一个投资者而言,怎样才是“聪明”和“有智慧”的投资者呢?

胡立阳:很多人过去在股市中真的是很不顺利,如果不客气地说,几乎九成的投资者在股市中都是亏损的,原因就是一个,因为他们根本就不知道自己是在做什么,他们在进场之前,对于股市一点概念都没有,对于买进的个股,总是想“买了再说”、“赚钱就好”,根本一点计划都没有。投资股票,我认为一年进出的次数不能超过3-5次,因为股票一年上下的趋势顶多不会超过三次。一个股票在下跌的趋势中,怎么可能赚钱?我建议大家在买股票之前,先做好功课,充分地发挥自己的智慧。

我在华尔街遇到几个投资高手,其中一位我称为“琼斯先生”,他在买股票之前,会问我一堆的问题,但很久又不下单,不买不卖。他的问题一问就是3-4个月,我等不急,问他怎么还不下单。琼斯先生就对我说:“钱在谁的口袋里,谁就是王。我不会轻易地把钱交给上市公司,而是要看准哪个公司好才会投资。”他说,人类都会犯一个很没有智慧的错误,说“我现在不想研究股票,因为我现在不买股票”;“我暂时还没有买股票,所以我不想看股票”,只有到他买进了股票,他才会研究股票。

但这是一个很严重的错误,你一买进了就是死多头了,你卖出了就成了死空头,人一进了股市,还说什么研究,就完全是在骗自己了,你会用100个理由来安慰自己手中的持股。中国有一句古话说“不识庐山真面目,只缘生在此山中”,这是宋朝的苏东坡先生说的。而我说:“不识股票真面目,只缘生在股票中”,我们真的要在进场之前做足功课,好好地研究,决定要投资了再买进。这段研究的时间,短的话至少要两三个礼拜到一个月,长的话,像琼斯先生一样,可以研究三至四个月


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: 腾讯财经
Publish date:06/09/11

Finding balance in volatile times

Finding balance in volatile times
What does the drama in the markets over the last few months mean for investors and how should they navigate the markets now that volatility looks here to stay
by Shrikant Bhat
04:45 AM Sep 10, 2011
August has been a historic month in a somewhat perverse way, having started with the spectre of a United States debt default as US law makers scrambled to raise the Federal debt limit at the eleventh hour. This was followed by the unprecedented downgrading of US Treasury debt - which had previously been thought to be "risk free", creating a pessimistic backdrop as equity markets plunged. Weaker-than-expected economic data, ongoing political and liquidity concerns arising from euro zone sovereign crisis issues and the fear of a hard landing in China, further shook the confidence of investors.

In a remarkable turnaround of fortunes, markets have dropped by over 20 per cent from the peak seen in the first quarter of the year, when markets were preoccupied with the likelihood of food price-led inflation. Such a dramatic price drop exceeding 20 per cent technically signals a bear market, and the downgrade of US and Global GDP by analysts have further dented investors' confidence. By the end of last month, investors were pinning hopes on the Chairman of the US Federal Reserve, Mr Ben Bernanke, to announce some quantitative easing measures during the US central bank's annual retreat at Jackson Hole, Wyoming, on Aug 26.

While he did not unleash a third round of bond buying, a measure commonly termed Quantitative Easing 3, markets seem to have taken comfort in Mr Bernanke's optimism on the recovery of the US economy and his readiness to use further "policy tools" to provide support to a persistently weak economy if needed. That night, US market rallied more than 1 per cent.



Stable prospects for economic growth

Although an economic slowdown seems imminent - Citi's analysts have revised the forecast for global GDP from 3.4 per cent to 3.1 per cent - we believe that the slowdown will not be severe enough to bring global growth down to below 2 per cent - a threshold associated with a recessionary scenario. In fact at 3.1 per cent, Citi analysts expect economic growth to be strong enough to support corporate earnings growth.

Historical data shows that companies have been able to grow corporate profits when global real GDP growth is greater than 2 per cent - the recession threshold. Although some markets are aggressively pricing in a recession, such an eventuality may not be realised.

Volatility here to stay

While we do not expect an outright recession, volatility will likely be the theme that dominates markets for the rest of this year. Economic data releases, updates on the euro zone debt crisis and potential inflationary pressures in the Asian economies will continue to drive market behaviour.

The recent sell-off in equity markets is the third-sharpest decline in stock prices since 1965, after the 1987 crash and the pullback due to the collapse of Lehman Brothers in 2008.

Citi's analysis of major equity markets over the last 40 years shows that stock prices tend to take one of two paths after prices fall 20 per cent. Stock prices either go into an extended bear market decline where prices fall a further 20 per cent, or they rebound and stock indices rally by 20 per cent over the next 12 months.

Citi analysts believe that a rebound in stock prices is the most likely outcome in the current market. They note that extended bear market declines occur almost exclusively around a corporate earnings recession where earnings per share fall by 10 per cent or more.

Their analysis suggests that the probability of a global profits collapse - like what we saw in 2007-2009 - is still low although it is a risk factor.

Stay diversified and focused on long-term goals

In times like these, the best investment strategy is to have a good asset allocation instead of sitting on the sidelines, as the latter could cause investors to miss out on potential gains as the market recovers. As the cliche goes, it is about the time in the market and not the timing of the market that matters.

A study by Brinson, Singer and Beebower in 2000 showed that market timing only constitutes 2 per cent of the improvements in portfolio return. Instead, proper asset allocation constitutes 91 per cent of positive return. In the most recent analysis published by Fidelity, one of the key findings was that investors who held on to their investments since 2008, with a continuous asset allocation strategy that included stocks, saw an average increase of 50 per cent in the net worth of their portfolios.

Therefore we encourage investors to stay balanced; diversify their portfolio and invest according to their risk profile and long- term objectives. It is natural for markets to correct and one should not derail from long term goals by panic selling at the first sign of volatility.



Consider Regular Investing

To complement the asset allocation strategy, investors can also consider adopting a regular investing strategy. This means investors allocate a fixed monthly commitment (from as low as a hundred dollars) into an investment such as a unit trust.

By investing fixed amounts over regular intervals, investors have the opportunity to buy more units when prices are low and fewer units when prices are high. This helps to reduce the average cost in a fluctuating market and can potentially give better returns than a lump sum investment.



Look For Value and Yield

Another strategy is to look out for value opportunities and yield. Investors can focus their core portfolio on yield, for instance, by investing in Asian's local-currency bonds, which would do well when inflationary pressures fall. Investors looking at equities should look to stocks that have a higher dividend payout as they tend to outperform companies with low dividend payout.



Review Portfolio Regularly

Lastly, do remember to review the investment portfolio regularly, at least twice annually and in volatile times, quarterly, to determine if there are any changes to the investment rationale given the market movements.

Taking such a step would allow investors to identify and avoid investment pitfalls and make the most of potential investment opportunities, to enhance their returns.



Shrikant Bhat is head of wealth management at Citibank Singapore Limited.


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: TODAYonline
Publish date:10/09/11

Buffett-backed BYD sees decline in capex to 2012

Buffett-backed BYD sees decline in capex to 2012
09:14 PM Sep 09, 2011
SHENZHEN - BYD said on Friday that it expects a steady decline in capital expenditure through to 2012 as the Warren Buffett-backed Chinese battery and car maker focuses on internal restructuring instead of expansion.

After 2012 the company should return to its growth track, with auto sales expected to rise 20-30 per cent per year between 2013 and 2015, chairman Wang Chuanfu said at a shareholder meeting.

"In the past we put too much focus on the number of car dealers rather than their quality," Mr Wang said.

"We had 2,000, 3,000 dealers; it was certainly a mistake," he said, adding that the company had been restructuring its sales team and focusing on improving the quality of its cars.

Weak auto and handset sales knocked the company's first-half net profit down 89 per cent to 275 million yuan (S$52.7 million). It sold 220,131 vehicles in the first six months, down 23.37 per cent.

BYD's vehicle capacity would reach almost 900,000 this year, Mr Wang said.

Mr Wang said capital expenditure would reach 8-9 billion yuan this year and 5-6 billion yuan in 2012, versus more than 10 billion yuan last year.

BYD had been a star after an investment of US$230 million (S$281.7 million) from Mr Buffet in 2009. Its F3 sedan was China's best-selling car in 2009 and 2010, but it has been unable to build on its initial success.

A lack of competitive new models has made it particularly vulnerable after the government stripped away tax incentives for small cars at the end of last year.

Plunging sales, a failure to deliver on its promised green car plan, and delays in the US launch of its e6 electric sedan have led some to question the wisdom of Mr Buffet's investment in the company.

Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway paid about US$230 million in 2009 for 225 million shares, a 9.6 per cent stake in the company. The stake was worth as much as US$2.47 billion in October 2009 when the share price peaked at HK$85.50 (S$13.44).

BYD's shares closed up 1.16 per cent to HK$15.74 on Friday. REUTERS


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: TODAYonline
Publish date:10/09/11

Record mall deals in Malaysia

Record mall deals in Malaysia
By Vasantha Ganesan
bt@nsrp.com.my
2011/09/10


Kuala Lumpur: The country's fascination with shopping malls have turned these properties into highly sought-after assets.
So far this year, the number of deals involving malls or retail assets has reached a record and there is a possibility that more could be announced this year, industry experts say.

At least nine deals valued at over RM2 billion have been reported in the first nine months of the year, stretching from the northern state of Penang to Johor in the south and from the west of Klang Valley to the eastern state of Pahang.

Improved consumer spending and liberalisation of the market has helped spur interest in retail assets.

As the global economic recovery continues to be shaky, Malaysia has turned to domestic demand to boost its economy, chief economist at Bank Islam Azrul Azwar Ahmad Tajudin said.

"Malaysian consumers have proven to be rather resilient even during times of crisis. During the 2009 recession, the economy contracted by 1.7 per cent but private consumption was still in positive territory," he added.

In year 2000, private consumption or consumer spending accounted for 43.8 per cent of the gross domestic product (GDP) while in 2010 the number surged to 53.3 per cent of GDP.

Azrul reckons private consumption will grow further to 54 per cent in 2011 and 54.6 per cent in 2012.

Malaysia Retailers Association has projected retail sales to grow 6 per cent this year, probably faster than the broader economic expansion seen at 5-6 per cent.

CB Richard Ellis (CBRE) Malaysia's managing director Allan Soo expects a few more deals this year.

"REITs (real estate investment trusts) tend to look for both yield accretion and steady income streams. Retail assets here have a great accretion opportunity at the moment.

"Passing yields at acquisitions are mostly at 7 per cent but for trophy assets this may be pressured down to below 6 per cent. The pressure on yields results in higher valuations, so on a per sq ft basis, malls are now seeing better valuation than about five years ago," Soo said.

At the same time, higher valuations have triggered previously less willing owners to part with their assets.

Another major factor was Malaysia's decision to scrap a rule that required foreign investors to have a 30 per cent Bumiputera partner.

In addition, the Securities Commission's endorsement of REITs as an investment alternative have also helped.

In January this year, CapitaMalls Malaysia Trusts (CMMT) said it would be buying The Gurney Plaza extension in Penang for RM215 million and in June it announced that it would be buying East Coast Mall for RM310 million.

In May, ARA Asia Dragon Fund won the bid for three shopping complexes - Klang Parade in Selangor, Ipoh Parade in Perak and Seremban Parade in Negri Sembilan. It paid some RM450 million to TMW Asia Property Fund, which had bought the malls for RM340 million in 2005.

Meanwhile, Adzman Shah Mohd Ariffin, founder of Hektar Property Services Sdn Bhd agreed that for some owners, a sale is actually part of their exit strategy to cash out.

"At the same time, foreign purchasers have found that the land/ownership law is more straightforward and properties in Malaysia are still cheaper than in other countries although at lower returns at times," he said.

This week, we also received news that Bandar Raya Developments Bhd (BRDB)'s major shareholder Ambang Sehati Sdn Bhd, controlled by its chairman Datuk Mohamed Moiz Jabir Mohamed Ali Moiz, had offered to buy three retail assets belonging to BRDB.

The properties are The Bangsar Shopping Centre (BSC), CapSquare Retail Centre in Kuala Lumpur, and Permas Jusco Mall in Johor.

BRDB is believed to have received many offers for its trophy asset - BSC.

Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: /www.btimes.com.my
Publish date:10/09/11

China Shipyards Awaiting better visibility (DBSV)

China Shipyards
Awaiting better visibility
• Short-term BDI rebound not sustainable
• Order flow to remain slow in months ahead
• Greater pressure for price cuts and deferments
• China yards are inexpensive but lack catalysts in the near term

BDI rebound unlikely to be sustained. The BDI had rebounded c. 500 points to 1782 since mid-Aug, a YTD high. The strong rebound was driven by Capesize demand for iron ore and coal shipments from Brazil and Australia to China. This is widely expected to be a short-term seasonal rebound. The longer-term outlook for shipping remains bleak with huge influx of new supply of vessels in the next 2 years.

Slow order flow ahead. While we could see the restoration of contract negotiation and finalisation of some new orders after the summer lull, order momentum will likely remain slow as the deteriorating global economy may stall shipowners’ capex plans in the near term. Newbuild prices are likely to remain suppressed with excess capacity at Korean and Chinese yards.

Greater pressure for price cuts and deferments. Recent news of a shipping company refuses to honor charter contracts from 3rd party shipowners and is not making any payments in an attempt to terminate the high priced charter contracts is a negative sign for both the shipping and shipbuilding sectors. Shipping companies appear to be pessimistic on the outlook and shipbuilders would be under greater pressure to cut prices and defer vessel deliveries.

No rush to buy. China shipyards are inexpensive, trading close to our TPs, which are based on average valuations between Aug 08 to Jul 10, reflecting the majority of sector headwinds and economic uncertainties, in our view. However, we see no rush to take positions in shipbuilding stocks until US/Europe concerns subside. During the last financial crisis in 2008, shipbuilders struggled at trough levels for 3-6 months and another 6-9 months to recover to mean valuations. Maintain Fully Valued on Cosco and Hold on Yangzijiang and JES.

Shipbuilding industry update
Shipbuilding sector is in a prolonged downturn. A meaningful turnaround is expected beyond 2013 when the bulk of the current orderbook is delivered, shipping demand/supply balance is closer to equilibrium and smaller yards are phased out in the next wave of consolidation.

1) Rebound in freight rates is seasonal.
Recent freight rate rebound is mainly seasonal and we maintain our bearish medium-term view on the shipping market.
BDI had risen from 1,300 points to 1,782 points on Sept 8. The YTD high comes after a retreat to 1744 on Sept 7. The rebound of c.500 points since mid-Aug was driven by Capesize demand for iron ore and coal shipments from Brazil and Australia to China. This is widely expected to be a short-term seasonal rebound. The longer-term outlook for shipping remains gloomy with huge influx of new supply of vessels in the next 2 years.

CCFI index rose 1.4% since early Aug. 3Q is usually a seasonally stronger quarter for container liners as traders build up inventories for 4Q festive seasons. China Containerized Freight Index (CCFI) inched up by 1.4% in a month. In particular, rates on the long routes from China to East Coastal and South America rose 3.2% / 5.6%. Again, this is not unexpected. In fact, the freight rate increases could have been stronger or taken off earlier if not for the global economic uncertainty.

2) Order flow to remain slow.
While we could see the restoration of contract negotiation and finalisation of some new orders after the summer holiday, order momentum will likely remain slow as the deteriorating global economy may stallshipowners’ capex plans in the near term.

Orders slowed in Aug. Following the weaker than expected shipping market and global economic uncertainties, newbuild orders halved in Jul’11 compared to the month before. It has declined another 14% m-o-m to 1.4m cgt in Aug, which is not surprising as Jul-Aug is a relatively quiet period with many of
shipowners on summer holidays.

In the first eight months of 2011 (8M11), global newbuild orders declined 49% y-o-y to 46.8m dwt. However, the decline is smaller at 19% in terms of CGT to 21.2m CGT and in dollar terms, it fell only by a marginal 3% y-o-y. This is because recent orders were mainly for the high value-add, larger and more sophisticated vessels that required substantially more work. The weaker than expected contract flow was attributable to the sharp drop in bulker and tanker orders. New orders by CGT were led by containerships accounting for 38%, followed by bulk carriers at 21%, LNG carriers 15%, tankers 6% and 20% for other vessels.

Notes: Compensated Gross Tonnage (CGT) is an indicator of the amount of work that is necessary to build a given ship and is calculated by multiplying the tonnage of a ship by a coefficient, which is determined according to type and size of a particular ship.

Expect newbuild orders to drop 30% y-o-y in 2011. We expect order flow to remain slow at the current pace of 1-1.4m cgt/month in the next 2-3 months amid recession fears. During the financial crisis in 2008, orders plunged to 0.6-0.7m cgt for two months. As a result, newbuild orders for 2011 may decline c.30% y-o-y to 27m cgt.

Larger and more complex vessels. Demand for more complex and larger vessels, in particular containerships and LNG carriers, are on a rising trend.

Containership orders amounted to 8m cgt or 1.55m TEU in the first eight months of 2011, surging 500-600% y-o-y, and surpassed FY10 orders by 99-129%. Based on number of vessels, 65% of the orders were for large size vessels >8k TEU and >80% were placed with Korean yards.

LNG tankers. Demand for LNG tankers surged dramatically on expectation of increasing demand for LNG for power generation especially post Japan’s nuclear plant incident. 8M11 new orders for LNG carriers increased more than 7-fold to 3.4m CGT or 6.6m cu.m.

Dry bulk slows. Dry bulk orders plunged 72% y-o-y in 8M11 to 4.3m cgt. Panamax (60-100k dwt) was the most popular vessel type, accounting for 40% of 8M11 orders in dwt, followed by capesize (>100k dwt) 32%, handymax (40-60k dwt) 21% and handysize (10-40k dwt) 7%.

3) Keen competition suppresses newbuild prices.
Declining book-to-bill ratio to <2x in both Korea and China indicate keener competition among the shipyards amid slower order flow. This will continue to exert downward pressure on newbuild prices and margins for the next few quarters. Any price increase would be cost push in our view.

Korean yards still hungry for orders. Korean yards’ orderbook has dwindled to c. 2x book-to-bill, below their comfort zone of 3x. This has spurred fears of capacity underutilization in the medium term. As a result, Korean yards are adopting an aggressive pricing strategy to fill orderbooks.

China has many small yards and excess capacity. In China, post crisis orders are largely secured by top 20% of shipyards. This means that orderbook for the remaining 80% of China yards are at the risk of running low. While there are no official statistics, taking the cue from <2x book-to-bill ratio for the top Chinese yards listed on SGX, the smaller yards are probably only c.1 year covered.

Orders to flow to Korean and top Chinese yards. The structural shift in demand towards complex vessel types will channel most of the orders to yards with existing technical expertise, which are obviously the leading Korean yards and a handful of top China yards. While China is behind Korea in terms of technical expertise and efficiency, China yards’ most powerful weapon against Korean yards is the Chinese government’s strong financing support.

For instance, Yangzijiang has clinched large size containership orders, a segment that was long dominated by Korea yards, from Seaspan and Peter Dohle. The availability of financing was one of the key factors that led to the order wins, in addition to Yangzijiang’s proven track record and newly developed costefficient design of 10k TEU containership.

Keen competition compressing newbuild prices. Newbuild prices have stayed at low levels over the past 1-year. In fact, containership prices have dipped slightly over the past 3 months, from US$20.0k/teu in Jun to US$19.8k/teu currently. This means margins for newbuild orders are set to trend down in anticipation of an inflationary environment as deliveries are expected to take place from 2013 onwards. As discussed earlier, major yards are still hungry for orders. Pricing power lies with shipowners given the keen competition among the shipyards. We expect the trend to continue for the next one year until the global economy recovers and industry consolidation accelerates in China. In the worst-case scenario, shipyards could even take orders at losses just to fill up yard capacity.

Recent industry / company news
China Cosco defaults on charter contracts. It was reported on newswires that China’s largest shipping company, China Cosco (1919.HK – the shipping arm of Cosco Group listed in HK) is refusing to honor charter contract from 3rd party shipowners and is not making payments. The reason was not because it is in any
financial difficulty but rather due to the sharp plunge in rates. China Cosco has signed contracts for these vessels at US$50k/day, 2-3x current levels. In an attempt to “force” shipowners to agree to terminate the high priced charter contracts, China Cosco is withholding payments for a number of these vessels.

Our reading on this incident is that:
1) Shipping companies are concerned with future freight rates and profitability.
2) There could be more pressure on shipyards for price cuts or delays in vessel deliveries.

Cosco in talks with Sinopec again for a semi-submersible? According to Upstream dated Aug 26, China’s Sinopec is firming up plans to build a deep-water semi-submersible drilling rig as it readies itself for an exploration and development drive and may start approaching yards soon. The company has reportedly listed Shanghai Waigaoqiao Shipbuilding (SWS) and CIMC Raffles as two potential contenders, though Cosco Shipyard could also be included. Sinopec aims to tender the engineering, procurement and construction contract for the unit next year, with an award expected towards late 2012. Hence, we do not expect any near term impact of this news on Cosco.

JES’s CFO has stepped down. JES announced on Sept 5 that the new CFO, Ms Tan Soh Ling has resigned after 5-months on the job. The official reason provided is that she is leaving to pursue personal interest. Ms Tan was the second CFO after JES’s listing in end 2007. Two resignations of CFOs in a year is not a good sign especially for S-chips. It usually triggers fears of corporate governance. JES’s auditor is BDO LLP. We downgraded the stock to HOLD with TP of S$0.20 at the end of Aug.

Yangzijiang pours more money into microfinance. Yangzijiang announced on Sept 5 that it has invested another RMB94.5m in the microfinance business with the
acquisition of a 31.5% equity interest in Wuxi Runyuan Technology Microfinance Co. Ltd (“Wuxi Runyuan”), a licensed company to provide microcredit to small and medium technology enterprises. While the amount is small, continuous investment into such non-core businesses will not be seen as favourable by investors. Since 2009, Yangzijiang has invested a total of RMB907.5m into microfinance / venture capital businesses.

Valuation
No hurry to invest in this sector. Currently, the China shipyards are inexpensive, trading close to our TPs, which are based on average valuations between Aug 08 to Jul 10. During the last financial crisis in 2008, shipbuilders struggled at trough levels for 3-6 months and another 6-9 months to recover to mean valuations. In the near term, cyclical stocks are very vulnerable to bad news on the macro front, and this could pull their valuations down. Maintain Fully Valued on Cosco and Holds on Yangzijiang and JES. Current valuations are fair pending better clarity on global economic.

Sector inflexion points. These would be clearer signs that the global economy will not tip into a recession, improved shipping outlook, M&As and bankruptcy of small yards. We believe the China shipbuilding should undergo an industry consolidation to phase out the inefficient small yards. The industry would be bottoming when small yards go belly up and thus resolve the key issue of excess capacity. Recovery of the shipping market (tracked by BDI and CCFI) and global economy would add strength to the recovery of the shipbuilding sector, which we believe will take another year or two.


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: DBS Vickers Research
Publish date:09/09/11

Friday, September 9, 2011

Assif Shameen: Can Buffett keep on working his magic?

WARREN BUFFET, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, may be a legendary investor, but over the years, he has made some big investing mistakes. As recently as three years ago, he lost billions betting on oil giant ConocoPhillips by buying its stock just months before it peaked. Indeed, if you are a follower of Buffett, you might recall that the folksy billionaire only got out of Conoco in the aftermath of the global financial crisis. At the time, he was busy fielding calls from the CEOs of General Electric, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo and others, who were offering him entry as shareholder at bargain-basement prices. On Aug 25, Buffett invested US$5 billion ($6 billion) in the beleaguered Bank of America.

The Oracle of Omaha’s detractors says Berkshire is so big and cash-rich that in recent years, he has often almost always had the opportunity to extricate himself from a problematic investment by holding on to it until the tide turns — something he was unwilling to do with Conoco because of the size of the bet and the deteriorating conditions at the time.

Though Buffett booked US$3.5 billion in profit for his stake in Chinese oil giant PetroChina (it was almost an eight-bagger for him), the billionaire’s investment track record in Asia is rather patchy. Take his bet on South Korea’s steel giant Posco. My back-of-the-envelope calculations show that that investment is barely above water at the closing price on Aug 25.

Buffett is also a shareholder in BYD Automobile Co, the Shenzhen–based Chinese carmaker that has ambitions of selling electric cars to the world. BYD is not your run-of-the-mill car company. It has all the ingredients of a soap opera. A rags-to-riches owner — Wang Chuan Fu — who had big dreams, a legendary billionaire American investor who came calling and believed in his dream and millions of stock-market punters who chased BYD’s stock so high that Wang was catapulted from nowhere to China’s richest man in the Forbes billionaire list last year.

THE BYD SOAP OPERA
For those of you who haven’t followed BYD’s long-running saga, here’s a quick recap. The carmaker got its real momentum through a host of incentives from Beijing to make rechargeable batteries and it later went into the manufacturing of petrol-powered cars just as China’s passenger-car market was about to explode. The idea was to make a ton of money in traditional cars and use that cash to help fund the production and marketing of electric cars. Nice plan, but it has turned into a nightmare.

Berkshire bought a 9.9% stake in BYD for HK$8 a share in September 2008, just four days after Lehman Brothers collapsed. The deal was classic Buffett — buying an undervalued firm at the bottom of the market. By late 2009, BYD had surged to HK$86 — turning the investment into a $2.5 billion paper profit.

On Aug 23, BYD announced that profits plunged 89% in the first half of the year. It went on to warn that profits for the first three quarters could drop up to 85% from a year earlier. Over the past week or so, BYD shares fell more than 24%, touching a new 2½-year low of HK$14.62 on Aug 24. It is quite clear that investors, other than Wang and Buffett of course, have lost confidence in its carefully crafted story. Berkshire’s $2.5 billion paper profit, by the way, is now down to just $235 million.

What’s going on? BYD’s real problem is that it just can’t make decent cars. The ones that it makes are, in the words of one US trade official, “blatant copycat versions” of Japanese, South Korean and US marques. It’s not that mainland Chinese are no longer buying cars. They are. Indeed, China is still the world’s largest passenger-car market, although this year, sales are likely to grow just 2%. The problem is that Chinese car buyers today are far more sophisticated than the ones who were queuing up to buy automobiles three years ago, when Beijing was offering huge incentives to both car buyers and manufacturers in an attempt to keep the Chinese economy humming along in the aftermath of global financial crisis.

Scott Laprise, CLSA’s China auto analyst in Beijing, told me recently that Chinese buyers are very selective. “You can’t just sell them anything that moves on four wheels.” Laprise says BYD needs to refresh its ageing F3/F6 line-up or sales will just keep on plunging.

BYD is also facing a cash crunch. In June, it raised US$220 million through a secondary A-share offering in Shenzhen at a huge discount. Analysts estimate that the firm may need to raise up to US$2 billion or more in equity and debt over the next two years to complete its expansion plans, retire short-term debt and strengthen its balance sheet.

HOW BUFFET CAN COME OUT A WINNER
Here’s where Buffett might come in. Sure, it would have been nice for him to sell BYD at HK$86 a share and book $2.5 billion in profit, but there is no point crying over spilt milk. If he wants to extricate himself and really believes in the future of electric cars, he might be able to do a Houdini trick here. He or his partner Charlie Munger might want to call Wang and say they are willing to put up a billion or two in new equity. Wang is so desperate for cash and things are so dire that he’d do a deal at a discount steeper than Bank of America’s CEO agreed to recently or the CEOs of Goldman Sachs and GE agreed to in 2009.

And while he and Munger are at it, they might want to tell Wang to stick to his own designs instead of trying to copy Toyota, Nissan, Hyundai or Ford. Maybe improving designs at BYD would cost another billion more but the expense will more than pay for itself over time. With the money he stands to make from the Bank of America deal and others like it in the current downturn, rescuing BYD from the brink and protecting his own reputation might be pocket change. Make no mistake, BYD’s turnaround won’t be a piece of cake and indeed could take years, but if Buffett cares about his legacy in Asia and China, he had better be prepared to slog it out.



Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: www.theedgesingapore.com
Publish date:30/08/11

Tuan Sing: Hanging on to value (KE)

Tuan Sing Holdings
BUY
Price $0.29
Target $0.48
52‐week high (S$) 0.420
52‐week low (S$) 0.205
Hanging on to value

Event
The downside risks in the office sector have heightened in view of waning business sentiments and ample new office supply; the potential redevelopment of Tuan Sing’s office could be delayed. Management’s priority seems to be on the upcoming launches of the four private residential projects in their pipeline. We adjust our key assumptions for its office and residential portfolio and lower our target price from $0.58 to $0.48. Maintain BUY on valuation grounds.

Our View
 With the negative market sentiments weighing on the office sector, management is a little more cautious than before. Chances of a redevelopment of Tuan Sing’s prime office buildings are now hanging on the thread, supported by our view that the incremental value from redeveloping the old buildings is thinning (from $0.11/share to $0.08/share) as we lower our prime Grade A rental assumptions from the already conservative $9.70psf to $9.10psf.

 Management’s priority is to work on the launches of its four private residential projects in the pipeline. Based on our channel checks, only two out of 32 units of cluster houses at Mont Timah have been sold since the project’s completion in March due to the huge quantum of each unit ($5.7m‐$6.9m) and restriction on foreign buyers.

 However, the demand for its 3 residential projects at Seletar Road, Cluny Park Road (near upcoming Botanic Garden MRT station), and the new site at Upper Serangoon Road (near Potong Pasir MRT station) are likely to be strong due to their good locations.

Action & Recommendation
The stock trades at its 10‐year historical P/B average of 0.6x, lower than the 2nd‐tier property sector average P/B of 0.7x. We ascribe a 30% conglomerate discount to our SOTP estimate $0.68/share (prev. $0.74). Maintain BUY on valuation grounds.


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: Kim Eng Research
Publish date:09/09/11

Rise in bookings fails to lift freight rates

Business Times - 09 Sep 2011


Rise in bookings fails to lift freight rates

(LONDON) An increase in supertanker bookings for shipping Middle East crude oil to Asia, the world's busiest route for supertankers, failed to lift freight rates due to a glut of ships, Marex Spectron Pte said in an e-mailed report.

Eleven very large crude carriers, each able to haul two million barrels of crude oil on the benchmark voyage, were hired on Wednesday, compared with a typical daily rate of four, even as charter rates dropped 0.7 per cent to 45.35 industry-standard Worldscale points, according to the Baltic Exchange in London.

'There are less than 20 September cargoes to go and 70 ships available,' said Marex. 'With this kind of supply-and-demand ratio, it's pretty easy to conclude that rates will not be going anywhere.'

Worldscale points are a percentage of a nominal rate, or flat rate, for more than 320,000 specific routes. Flat rates for every voyage, quoted in US dollars a tonne, are revised annually by the Worldscale Association in London to reflect changing fuel costs, port tariffs and exchange rates\. \-- Bloomberg



Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: www.businesstimes.com.sg
Publish date:09/09/11

It makes sense for Suntec Reit to divest Chijmes

Business Times - 09 Sep 2011


It makes sense for Suntec Reit to divest Chijmes

By KALPANA RASHIWALA

BT WEEKEND recently reported that Suntec Real Estate Investment Trust has appointed a property agent to handle an expression of interest exercise for the sale of Chijmes, an iconic conservation development at Victoria Street that houses within it two national monuments.

Whether Suntec actually sells the asset will depend on whether it can make a nice profit from it. The asset was valued at $134 million at the end of last year, higher than the $128 million Suntec paid for it in late 2005.

Back then, Suntec spoke about potential for asset enhancement, synergy with the Reit's Suntec City Mall and Park Mall, and scope for 'organic growth' within the portfolio.

But five to six years on, Suntec could have found it challenging to do all these. After all, there are a lot of restrictions unique to a conservation property. Chijmes Hall (the former CHIJ chapel) and Caldwell House are gazetted national monuments. Suntec would have found it requires a lot of effort on this property, and the returns may not be commensurate.

Back in 2005, Suntec was hungry for assets. It had just bought Park Mall opposite Dhoby Ghaut MRT Station from Wing Tai for $230 million, while another deal to buy 11 properties from City Developments for $788 million was in the midst of coming apart.

Today, Suntec has a much bigger office portfolio, having acquired one-third stakes in One Raffles Quay and Marina Bay Financial Centre (the latter at $1.496 billion late last year). Last month, the trust raised its effective stake in Suntec Singapore International Convention & Exhibition Centre to 60.8 per cent.

Chijmes, a somewhat dated retail and entertainment development, seems less and less important in Suntec Reit's portfolio. Suntec may not find it worth its while to devote more resources to spruce up the asset, which certainly needs some rejuvenation. But there could be other parties that may find Chijmes appealing.

Despite the current weaker property investment climate among institutional investors such as property funds against the backdrop of global economic uncertainty, there is no dearth of private wealth and sovereign wealth funds (SWF) looking for a place to park their monies, especially in a relatively safer place such as Singapore. Raffles Hotel, diagonally opposite Chijmes, belongs to one such SWF, Qatari Diar.

Who knows, Chijmes could find a new lease of life if part of the space is transformed into a luxury boutique hotel in a charming historic building, taking after the Raffles Hotel on one side and the future luxury hotel coming up on levels two to four of Capitol Building and Stamford House, on the other side. And both are also conserved properties.

More facilities may need to be incorporated and, of course, the permission of the authorities, including the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), would have to be secured first.

Some well-heeled educational institutions may also find value in buying Chijmes with the intention of using it as a campus - again assuming URA approves such use for the site. This would return the grounds to their original use and would go well with the presence of Singapore Management University and National Library nearby.

And who knows, a church may end up holding weekend services at the old chapel on the former convent grounds with multimedia link-up to the classrooms.

The prospects for extracting greater value from a historic property such as Chijmes may appeal to many investors. But perhaps Suntec Reit may have set its sights on new acquisitions in the segments of the property market where it has been more successful. The cash and other resources released through the sale of Chijmes could also come in handy against a weakening global economic climate.



Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: www.businesstimes.com.sg
Publish date:09/09/11

CMT: Track record suggests worst case unlikely (Nomura)

CapitaMall Trust
Rating Up from Reduce Neutral
Target price Increased from 1.79 SGD 1.96
Closing price September 2, 2011 SGD 1.89
Potential upside +3.7%

Track record suggests worst case unlikely

TP raised to SGD1.96; upgraded to NEUTRAL from Reduce
Action: Track record suggests worst-case scenario unlikely
We have upgraded CMT to NEUTRAL from Reduce, following in a change in valuation methodology that also takes into account the historical average trading yield spread. While we estimate potential downside risk of 25.2-27.1% to our base-case DPU forecasts in a worst-case scenario, we note that the occupancy assumptions used in our stress test are very conservative compared to the portfolio’s track record, considering portfolio occupancy held up very well even during the financial crisis, not to mention that our numbers suggest that the market has already priced in a 40% probability of a worst-case scenario.

Catalyst: Recap risk present but minimal at this point
In the event of a 20% write-down in portfolio valuation, our numbers suggest the company might need to raise fresh equity of SGD307mn to keep leverage within the 45% comfort limit, translating into a potential dilution of 5.1% at the current price. Nonetheless, considering CMT’s portfolio valuation, on a comparable basis, was raised just 4.2% on average from its 2009 trough, a 20% write-down (and by extension recapitalisation risk) appears unjustified at this point.

Valuation: TP raised to SGD1.96; upgrade to NEUTRAL
Our NAV remains largely unchanged at SGD1.81 (from SGD1.79) despite a 25bps increase in cap rates on account of higher passing rental assumptions following the 1H11 performance. Nonetheless, we have raised our target price to SGD1.96 (from SGD1.79) due to a change in valuation methodology to take into account the historical yield spread of 330bps.


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: Nomura's equity research
Publish date:07/09/11

K-REIT: Worst case yet to be priced in (Nomura)

K-REIT Asia
Rating Down from Buy Neutral
Target price Reduced from 1.76 SGD 1.23
Closing price September 2, 2011 SGD 1.16
Potential upside +6%
Worst case yet to be priced in

TP cut to SGD1.23; downgrade to NEUTRAL from Buy
Action: Downgrading to NEUTRAL; worst case yet to be priced in We are downgrading our rating to NEUTRAL from Buy, principally on account of 1) our more cautious view of the outlook for the SG office market, and 2) a change in valuation methodology that takes into account the historical trading yield spread of the stock. While the stock trades at a 24% discount to our revised NAV, the FY12F yield spread of 412bps (vs. historical average 530bps, CCT’s 454bps, SUN’s 541bps) appears low, even after taking into account its portfolio of International Grade-A office assets. Also, from a historical average yield spread perspective, it appears the worst-case scenario has yet to be priced in at the current valuation.

Catalyst: 3Q11 could provide positive catalyst, but recap risk present
We believe KREIT’s 3Q11 results could outperform the consensus (Bloomberg median) FY11F DPU forecast of SGD0.075 (vs. our forecast of SGD0.077), which could provide the stock with a near-term catalyst. On the downside, however, our stress test suggests that should the portfolio value of its assets be written down by 20%, KREIT might need to raise about SGD116mn in fresh equity to keep leverage within its comfort limit of 45%—a potential dilution of near 7.3% at the current price.

Valuation: TP cut to SGD1.23
We have cut our NAV estimate by 13.6% to SGD1.52 (from SGD1.76), principally to reflect a lower office reversion rental projection and a 50bps increase in our office cap rate assumptions. Consequent to a change in valuation methodology to take into account the historical trading yield spread, we have cut our target price by 30.1% to SGD1.23 (from SGD1.76).


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: Nomura's equity research
Publish date:07/09/11

Starhill Global REIT: Fairly priced for now (Nomura)

Starhill Global REIT
Rating Down from Buy Neutral
Target price Reduced from 0.75 SGD 0.68
Closing price September 2, 2011 SGD 0.63
Potential upside +7.9%

Fairly priced for now
TP cut to SGD0.68; downgrade to NEUTRAL from Buy
Action: Fairly priced for now; vacancy risk higher for Orchard office
We downgrade SGREIT to NEUTRAL from Buy, on account of a lower NAV estimate following more cautious office rental projections and property valuations. At 0.9x NAV (in line with sector average) and an FY12F yield spread of 525bps over the SG 10Y GB (vs the historical average of 490bps), the stock is probably fairly priced at this point, in our view, though vacancy risk for SGREIT’s office assets in Orchard could be higher in a worst case scenario, considering committed occupancy at Wisma Atria office fell to a trough of 77.5% during the last financial crisis.

Catalyst: Potential sale of 313 @ Somerset – transaction benchmark
We expect 3Q11 results to provide clearer direction in terms of portfolio performance and DPU could potentially outperform the consensus (Bloomberg median) FY11F forecast of SGD0.042 (vs. our forecast of SGD0.043). The proposed sale of a 25% stake in 313 @ Somerset, valuing the asset at SGD4,150psf, could also serve as a transaction benchmark for SGREIT’s retail assets’ valuation in Orchard.

Valuation: TP cut to SGD0.68; downgrade to NEUTRAL
Our NAV estimate is cut by 5.3% to SGD0.71 (previously SGD0.75) on account of a lower office reversion rental projection and a 50bps increase in our cap rate assumptions. In addition, our revised valuation methodology has also taken into account the historical average trading yield spread of 490bps over the SG 10Y GB. Consequently our target price is cut 9.3% to SGD0.68 (previously SGD0.75).


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: Nomura's equity research
Publish date:07/09/11

Ascendas REIT: Most defensive (Nomura)

Ascendas REIT
Rating Up from Reduce Neutral
Target price Increased from 1.88 SGD 2.09
Closing price September 2, 2011 SGD 2.11
Potential downside -0.9%

Most defensive
TP raised to SGD2.09; upgrade to NEUTRAL from Reduce
Action: Most defensive REIT with lowest worst-case downside
AREIT is the most defensive REIT in our coverage with a potential downside of just 10.9-15.1% to our base-case FY13-14F DPU forecasts in the worst-case scenario. In addition, the stock has already priced in a probability of 70% of the worst case, on our estimates, which appears conservative. We raise our base-case FY12F and FY13F DPU forecasts by 4.6% and 0.7%, respectively, on account of better-than-expected portfolio performance during 1QFY12 and to reflect announced acquisitions yet to be factored in our forecasts.

Catalyst: 2QFY12 could outperform consensus expectation
We expect the 2QFY12 results to provide a clearer direction in terms of portfolio performance. On the upside, we see 2QFY12 DPU potentially outperforming the consensus (Bloomberg median) FY12F forecast of SGD0.13 (our forecast: SGD0.137). On the downside, however, negative sentiments on the SG office market could spill over to AREIT’s portfolio of business and science park assets, should the macro outlook worsen.

Valuation: TP raised to SGD2.09; upgrade to Neutral
Our NAV estimate remains largely unchanged at SGD1.89 (previously SGD1.88) despite a 25bps increase in cap rates on account of higher passing rental assumptions following the 1Q results. Nonetheless, our PT is raised to SGD2.09 (previously SGD1.88) on account of a change in valuation methodology to also take into account the historical average trading yield spread of 440bps (currently 491bps) over the SG 10Y GB. Upgrade from Reduce to Neutral.


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: Nomura's equity research
Publish date:07/09/11

Suntec REIT : Recap risk: present but minimal at this point (Nomura)

Suntec REIT
Recap risk: present but minimal at this point
TP cut to SGD1.64, BUY rating maintained
Rating Remains Buy
Target price Reduced from 1.89 SGD 1.64
Closing price September 2, 2011 SGD 1.36
Potential upside +20.6%

Action: Risk-reward favourable despite more cautious office outlook
While we have adopted a more cautious stance on the SG office market, we believe the risk-reward proposition for SUN remains favourable at the current level. The stock is trading at a 24% discount to NAV and FY12F ield spread of 542bps (vs. historical average 480bps) over the SG 10Y GB. Our estimates suggest the current share price has already factored in a probability of 30% for the worst-case scenario, which appears conservative. We raise our FY11F DPU by 3.2%, principally on account of a better-than-expected 1H11 portfolio performance, but cut our FY13F DPU by 4% to reflect lower reversion rental assumptions.

Catalyst: Recapitalisation risk present but minimal at this point
If portfolio value were to be written down by 20%, SUN may need to raise SGD281mn in fresh equity to keep leverage within the comfort limit of 45%. While this could imply potential 9.3% dilution at the current price, we see little urgency for the manager to do so at this point because 1) on a comparable basis, SUN’s portfolio valuation was raised by just 3.1% from its 2009 trough and 2) the stock is trading at a 24% discount to NAV.

Valuation: TP cut to SGD1.64; reiterate BUY
We cut our NAV by 5.3% to SGD1.79 (previously SGD1.89) to reflect a lower office reversion rental projection and a 50bps increase in cap rate assumptions. In addition, our revised target price also takes into account the historical trading yield spread of 480bps (currently 541bps). As a result, we have cut our target price 13.2% to SGD1.64 (previously SGD1.89). We reiterate our BUY rating.

Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: Nomura's equity research
Publish date:07/09/11

CCT: Risk-reward favourable (Nomura)

CapitaCommercial Trust
Rating Remains Buy
Target price Reduced from 1.81 SGD 1.47
Closing price September 2, 2011 SGD 1.21
Potential upside +21.5%

Risk-reward favourable
TP cut to SGD1.47, but reiterate BUY
Action: Favourable risk-reward; 70% chance of worst case priced in
Despite lowering our expectations for the SG office market, the riskreward remains favourable at the current valuation for CCT in our view, trading at 0.76x NAV and 452bps (vs. historical average of 400bps) over the SG 10Y GB. On our numbers, CCT has already priced in a probability of 70% for the worst-case scenario, which appears conservative. We have raised our FY11F DPU by 4.2% on account of better-than-expected 1H11 portfolio performance but have cut our FY12-13F DPU by 1.3-3.8% to reflect lower reversion rental assumptions.

Catalyst: 3QFY11 results likely to outperform
We expect CCT’s 3QFY11 results to provide a clearer direction in terms of portfolio performance. On the upside, we believe 3QFY11 DPU could potentially beat the consensus forecast (Bloomberg median = SGD0.073, vs. our forecast of SGD0.074). That said, negative sentiments on the macro outlook may continue to weigh on near-term stock performance, particularly with regard to vacancy risk at RCT and 6BR.

Valuation: TP cut to SGD1.47; maintain Buy
We have cut our NAV estimate by 11.6% to SGD1.60 (from SGD1.81) on account of a lower office reversion rental projection and a 50bps increase in our cap rate assumptions. In addition, our revised valuation methodology has also taken into account the historical average trading yield spread of 400bps (currently 454bps) over the SG 10Y GB. As a result, we have cut our target price by 18.8% to SGD1.47 (from SGD1.81). We reiterate our BUY rating.


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: Nomura's equity research
Publish date:07/09/11

S-REIT: Stress-testing DPUs: worst-case downside risk (Nomura)

Singapore REITs
Stress-testing DPUs: worst-case downside risk
More cautious on SG office but risk-reward remains favourable for CCT, SUN

Action: risk-reward remains favourable for CCT, SUN
While REITs have outperformed the broader market year to date, covered REITs still provide a relatively attractive proposition with weighted average potential upside of 8.3% and an FY12F yield of 6.1%. Stock selection remains key and we see risk-reward still favourable for CCT and SUN despite a more cautious Singapore (SG) office market outlook, as the market appears to have already priced in an average 50% of probability of the worst-case scenario.

Catalyst: 3Q11 results to provide clearer direction
We believe the upcoming 3Q11 results season could provide a clearer direction in terms of portfolio performance. In addition, covered REITs appear to have priced in an average worst-case probability of 36%, which seems overly conservative at this point. On the other hand, it appears that the market remains relatively complacent on KREIT and CDLHT, which could suggest potential downside risk to the share prices.

Risk: recapitalisation risk minimal at this point
At this point, we believe recapitalisation risk is minimal with a 10% writedown in portfolio values translating into a leverage ratio of 29.2-44.7% for covered REITs, still within the comfort limit of 45%. That said, should the write-down be a more drastic 20%, our numbers suggest SUN, KREIT and CMT may need to raise SGD116-307mn in fresh equity to keep leverage within 45%, implying potential dilution of 5.1-9.3% at current prices.

Valuation: methodology now considers trading yield spreads
We had previously pegged our TPs to NAVs, but we now revise our valuation methodology to take into account the historical trading yield spread over the SG 10Y Government Bond (GB). Our TPs are cut by an average of 5.9%, after taking into account a 50bps increase in office cap rates. Ascendas (AREIT), CapitaMall Trust (CMT), and CDL Hospitality Trust (CDLHT) upgrade to Neutral from Reduce; KREIT and Starhill Global REIT (SGREIT): downgrade to Neutral from Buy.

Executive summary
While S-REITs are often deemed defensive, the cautious mood among investors raises the question of downside risks to dividend per unit (DPU) forecasts. Our stress test suggests potential downside of 22% to base-case DPU forecasts among covered REITs in the worst-case scenario. While we have adopted a more cautious stance on the office market, the risk-reward equation remains favourable for CapitaCommercial Trust (CCT) and Suntec REIT (SUN) at current levels, in our view.

Year to date, the REITs sector on the whole has held up better than the broader market – the FSTREI index is down 6.3% year-to-date, compared to the 11.9% decline in the broader FSSTI index. At current unit prices, covered REITs are not excessively cheap with weighted average potential upside of just 8.3% to our revised target prices.

Nonetheless, we believe the weighted average FY12F yield of 6.1% (an implied yield spread of 452bps over the SG 10Y GB yield, vs. an historical average of 392bps) provides a relatively attractive proposition to investors in current market volatility from a total return perspective. The key question then comes down to: how defensible is this 6.1% yield?

Indeed, as shown from the sharp correction of 10.8% between 21 July and 11 August in the FSTREI index (almost similar to the 10.9% pullback in the broader FSSTI index), REITs are not immune to market concerns and the top investors’ concern regarding the REITs is whether DPU assumptions have been stress-tested and what could be the worst-case scenario. It is primarily to address this concern that we have rolled out our worst-case DPU forecasts for covered REITs in this report.

In the worst case: FY12-13F DPU cut 22% on average
Our worst-case DPU forecasts are derived by examining the four key moving parts of a REIT’s distribution: 1) reversion rents; 2) portfolio occupancy; 3) cost of debt; and 4) dilution (recapitalisation) risk. We principally draw references from the last financial crisis and the trough levels reached in our analysis. Assuming: 1) reversion rents would fall back to 2009 troughs; 2) a rolling net retention of 50% on forward lease expiries; and 3) maturing debts to be refinanced at a cost of 4.5%, our worst-case scenario analysis suggests our base-case FY12-13F DPU forecasts could be cut by 9.1-35.4%, with AREIT and KREIT being the most resilient (potential downside of 9.1-15.1%) and CDLHT being the most risky (potential downside of 35.1-35.4%).

Using the individual implied FY12F DPU yield spread over the SG 10Y GB as a reference, we estimate that current unit prices of covered REITs have priced in an average 36% of probability of the worst-case scenario, with CCT and AREIT pricing in the most (70%) while KREIT and CDLHT pricing in the least (0% and 15% respectively).

Recapitalisation risk minimal for now but SUN, KREIT and CMT may be pushing comfort limit
Recapitalisation risk for covered REITs appears minimal at this point. While capital values across the office, retail, industrial and hotel sectors have rebounded an average 23.6% from their trough levels, the change in portfolio values of REITs under coverage, on a comparable basis, has been more modest at just 5.2% on average from their trough levels in 2009. According to our sensitivity analysis, a 10% write-down in asset values will increase the leverage ratio of covered REITs to 29.2-44.7%, within the comfort limit of 45% (note that the industry generally takes levels below 45% as the comfort zone).

However, should the write-down be a more pronounced 20%, our estimates suggest SUN, KREIT and CMT may need to raise SGD281mn, SGD116mn and SGD307mn in new equity, respectively, to keep the leverage ratio within 45%, which, if assuming new units were to be issued at current prices, would increase the respective unit base by 9.3%, 7.3% and 5.1%.

More cautious on office; base-case FY12F DPU cut 2.3% for office REITs
We have lowered our expectations for the Singapore office market, considering the slower global economic outlook and more cautious hiring in the financial services sector. We now project Singapore’s average prime Grade-A office rent to appreciate 15.8% from SGD9.35psfpm at end-2010 to SGD10.82psfpm by end-2013F (previously 37.3% to SGD12.84psfpm). We have also revised our in-place rental assumptions following the latest results.

Cap rates: raise 50bps for office and 25bps for the rest
Our more cautious stance on Singapore’s office market has also prompted us to cut our estimates for office properties’ values in our NAV calculation via an increase of 50bps in cap rates. We also raise our cap rates for other asset classes by 25bps to reflect an overall higher risk premium. Consequently, our estimates for industrial, office, retail and hotel property values are lowered by about 2%, 12%, 5% and 2%, respectively.

Revised valuation methodology takes into account historical trading yield spread = average 5.9% cut in TPs
We had previously pegged our target prices to our NAV estimates for the covered REITs. However, considering the REITs are also seen by the market as high-yielding instruments, we believe target prices that also take into account trading yields may be more meaningful. CCT, for instance, has historically traded at 0.68x book on average but 4%ppt above the SG 10Y GB. In essence, while the NAV represents the intrinsic value of the REIT in the longer run, the forward DPU yield outlook may have a bigger influence in immediate 12-month stock performance and may determine the discount to NAV at which the stock trades at, in our view.

As such, we change our valuation methodology to derive our target prices by taking the average of: 1) NAV and 2) fair values, based on historical yield spreads over the current SG 10Y GB, which resulted in an average cut of 5.9% to our target prices.

Stock selection is key; CCT, SUN remain BUYs; AREIT, CMT, CDLHT upgraded, KREIT, SGREIT downgraded
The REITs have outperformed the broader market year to date and covered REITs now offer weighted average potential upside of just 8.3%, based on our revised price targets. Nonetheless, we believe the weighted average FY12F yield of 6.1% still provides an attractive proposition to investors on a total return basis, especially in current market volatility. The key remains stock selection, in our view.

Despite a more cautious rental projection and property valuation for office assets, resulting in our cuts in target prices of 13.2-18.8%, CCT and SUN remain attractively valued at current prices, in our view. The stocks are trading at 0.76x our revised NAV estimates and offer an FY12F yield of 6.1% and 7%, respectively, or 452bps (vs. historical average 400bps) and 542bps (vs. historical average 480bps) over the current SG 10Y GB. On our numbers, CCT and SUN have already priced in probability of 70% and 30%, respectively, of the worst-case scenario, which we believe is conservative at this point. While SUN may need to raise fresh capital in the event of a 20% write-down in its portfolio value, we believe there is less urgency at this point, considering:1) on a comparable basis, SUN’s portfolio valuation is raised by just 3.1% from its 2009 trough, and 2) the 24% discount to NAV that the stock is trading at. We maintain our BUY ratings on both stocks.

We upgrade AREIT, CMT and CDLHT from Reduce to Neutral. AREIT is the most defensive REIT in our coverage, with potential downside of just 10.9-15.1% to our basecase FY12-13F DPU forecasts in the worst-case scenario. KREIT, although has potential downside of 9.1-13.2%, has not priced in any downside, whereas AREIT has already priced in probability of 70% of the worst-case scenario on our numbers, which appears conservative. The only reason why we have not upgraded the stock to a Buy rating is valuation. The stock is already trading at 1.1x NAV (vs. the sector average 0.9x) although the FY12F yield spread of 492bps over the SG 10Y GB (vs. historical average 440bps) suggests limited downside to current prices.

In the case of CMT, while we estimate potential downside of 25.2-27.1% to our basecase DPU forecasts in the worst-case scenario, we note the occupancy assumptions used in our stress test are very conservative compared to the portfolio’s track record, considering the portfolio’s occupancy held up very well even during the financial crisis, not to mention our numbers suggest that the market has already priced in 40% probability of the worst case. Similar to AREIT, CMT’s valuation on a NAV basis is not cheap at 1.0x NAV although the FY12F yield spread of 382bps over the SG 10Y GB (vs. historical average 330bps) suggests limited downside at current levels.

For CDLHT, it is a combination of: 1) price correction bringing valuation more in line with fundamentals (the stock was down 12.7% in August, vs. a 5.4% correction in the FSTREI index during the same period) and 2) higher valuation following better-than-expected RevPAR performance in 1H2011. Notwithstanding the upgrade, we believe the market’s complacency on the stock remains. CDLHT’s base-case FY12-13F DPU forecasts are likely to see most potential downside of 35.1-35.4% in the worst-case scenario, on our numbers, and it appears the market has priced in probability of just 15% of the scenario.

We downgrade KREIT and SGREIT from Buy to Neutral. For KREIT, our reason for the downgrade is a combination of a more cautious view on the SG office market and a change in valuation methodology to take into account the historical trading yield spread of the stock. While the stock trades at 0.76x NAV, the FY12F yield spread of 412bps (vs. historical average of 530bps, CCT’s 452bps, and SUN’s 542bps) appears low even after taking into account its portfolio of international Grade-A assets.

In the case of SGREIT, it is more on account of a lower NAV estimate following more cautious office rental projection and property valuation. At 0.9x NAV (in line with the sector’s average) and with an FY12F yield spread of 525bps over the SG 10Y GB (vs. historical average of 490bps), the stock is probably fairly priced at this point although vacancy risk for SGREIT’s office assets in Orchard could also be higher in a worst-case scenario, compared to assets in the CBD Core, in our view. Committed occupancy at Wisma Atria office fell to a trough of 77.5% during the last financial crisis, for instance.

REITs’ average rents vs. market rents: what could reversion rents be in the worst case?
Industrial properties: rebound in AREIT’s portfolio reversion rents more subdued compared to that in the market
Based on the latest 2Q11 data from Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL) and URA, hi-tech industrial rents, multi-user factory rents and multi-user warehouse rents were up 3.0% qq, 4.5% q-q and 8.4% q-q, respectively, in 2Q11 and are now 35.3%, 26.5% and 30.4%, respectively, above their trough levels in 2H09.

On the other hand, the rebound in reversion rents of AREIT’s portfolio appears to have been more subdued. By 2Q11, the average reversion rent at AREIT’s business and science park properties was up 24.8% from its trough, while the average reversion rent at the hi-tech industrial properties was up 30.5% from the trough, compared to the 35.3% rebound in the market. Similarly, by 2Q11, the average reversion rent at AREIT’s light industrial properties was 19.4% higher than its trough, compared to the 26.5% rebound in the market. The only exception appears to be the logistic property portfolio – average reversion rent in 2Q11 was 41.7% higher than its trough (although we believe this was property specific), compared to the market’s 30.4% rebound.

For our worst-case scenario analysis, we assume the last trough reversion rents for the different segments in AREIT’s portfolio – i.e. SGD2.80psfpm for business and science parks, SGD2.20psfpm for hi-tech industrial properties, SGD1.30psfpm for light industrial properties and SGD1.00psfpm for logistic properties.

Office properties: negative reversion still working through portfolios, average rents close to market trough
Based on JLL’s 2Q11 data, Prime Grade-A office rents climbed 1.5% q-q to SGD10.15psfpm during the quarter, translating into a 31% rebound from its 1Q10 trough of SGD7.75psfpm.

However, negative reversion is still working through the office property portfolios of CCT, SUN, KREIT and SGREIT. The average office rent in 2Q11 for CCT, KREIT and SGREIT declined 0.9% q-q, 5.7% q-q and 3.5% q-q to SGD8.12psfpm, SGD6.60psfpm and SGD8.20psfpm, respectively, notwithstanding a 1.5% q-q rise in the 2Q11 average office rent for SUN to SGD6.70psfpm.

Considering the average office rents for CCT, SUN, KREIT and SGREIT have corrected 12.7%, 1.5%, 5.7% and 12.8%, respectively, from their peak and are now close to the market’s 1Q10 trough level of SGD7.75psfpm, it appears the average office rents in these portfolios could hover around current levels if the average market/reversion rent were to fall back to its trough in the worst-case scenario.

Retail properties: REITs’ average retail rents largely flat through the last crisis
Based on JLL’s 2Q11 data, prime and suburban Grade-A retail rents were up 0.8% q-q and 1.4% q-q, respectively, during the quarter. In comparison, the average rent of CMT’s retail portfolio was up 0.8% q-q in 2Q11 while the average retail rents of SUN and SGREIT were flat q-q during the quarter.

The average rents in the retail portfolios of the three REITs were relatively flat through the last financial crisis – SGD10.90-11.40psfpm for CMT, SGD11.10-11.80psfpm for SUN and SGD17.30-18.90psfpm for SGREIT during 1Q08-2Q09. For our worst-case scenario analysis, we assume the last trough rents for the different retail properties in CMT, SUN and SGREIT for reversion, which range from SGD7psfpm (Park Mall; 2Q11: SGD7.50psfpm on average) to SGD28.30psfpm (Wisma Atria; 2Q11: SGD30psfpm on average).

Hotel properties: RevPAR rebound in CDLHT’s portfolio in line with market’s
According to Singapore Tourism Board’s (STB) latest data, the average RevPAR of upscale hotels (roughly 4-star proxy) was up 4% q-q to SGD235 in 2Q11, or 61% higher than the trough of SGD146 in 2Q09 at the end of the financial crisis. CDLHT’s SG hotel portfolio saw a similar rebound, up 5.1% q-q in 2Q11 and 53% from its trough in 2Q09. For our worst-case scenario analysis, we assume the average RevPAR of CDLHT’s SG hotels would fall back to its trough of SGD134.

What is the downside risk to portfolio occupancy in the worst-case scenario?
AREIT: overall vacancy risk limited by STB portfolio
While AREIT’s STB (Single Tenant Buildings) portfolio was fully occupied through the financial crisis, the MTB (Multi Tenant Buildings) portfolio’s occupancy reached a low of 90.5% in 3QCY10 but has since recovered to 92.5% by end-June 2011.

As of end-June 2011, AREIT’s STB portfolio and MTB portfolio face an average lease expiry of 3.5% and 12.1%, respectively, each year over the next three fiscal years. Assuming a worst-case rolling 50% net retention rate, we project the STB occupancy will fall to 98.2% and MTB occupancy to fall to 86.5% in our stress test.

CCT: vacancy risk remains at 6BR, RCT
Committed occupancy at Capital Tower (CT) and HSBC Building remained very much 100% through the financial crisis on account of long-term leases while committed occupancy at Six Battery Road (6BR) and Raffles City Tower (RCT) fell to a low of 90.4% and 97.7%, respectively, by 2Q11 on account of several tenant relocations.

Based on forward lease expiry profiles at the end of June 2011, with the exception of HSBC Building (which is entirely leased to HSBC till 2019), CT, 6BR, One George Street (OGS; acquired only in 3Q08) and RCT face an average lease expiry of 17.2%, 16.7%, 24.5% and 24.6%, respectively, each year over the next three fiscal years. Assuming a worst-case rolling 50% net retention rate, we project the respective occupancy to fall to 91.4%, 82.1%, 87.7% and 85.4% in our stress test. Note the downside risk of income from OGS is capped by the yield protection in place till 3Q13.

SUN: vacancy risk more significant for Suntec City assets
In terms of SUN’s office portfolio, with the exception of One Raffles Quay (ORQ) which remained fully occupied through the financial crisis, committed occupancy at Suntec City Towers and Park Mall office reached a low of 92.5% and 96.1% before recovering to 99.5% and 100%, respectively, by the end of 2Q11.

In terms of SUN’s retail portfolio, with the exception of Park Mall retail which remained essentially fully occupied through the financial crisis, committed occupancy at Suntec City Mall, and Chijmes reached a low of 96.4% and 90% before recovering to 97.1% and 100%, respectively, by June 2011.

Based on forward lease expiry profiles at the beginning of 2011, with the exception of Marina Bay Financial Centre Phase 1 (MBFC I; acquired in 4Q10) where there is minimal lease expiries over the next three fiscal years, SUN’s office portfolio faces an average lease expiry that ranges from 4.1% (ORQ) to 25.1% (Park Mall) each year over the next three fiscal years while its retail portfolio faces an average lease expiry that ranges from 27% (Suntec City Mall) to 33.9% (Park Mall, Chijmes) each year over the same period. Assuming a worst-case rolling 50% net retention rate, we project the occupancy rate of the office portfolio at between 87.5% (Suntec City Towers, Park Mall office) and 98% (ORQ) while the occupancy rate of the retail portfolio at 82.6% (Chijmes) to 84.4% (Suntec City Mall) in our stress test.

KREIT: vacancy risk at PT, BJT
During the financial crisis, with the exception of ORQ, committed occupancy at Prudential Tower (PT) and Bugis Junction Tower (BJT) reached a low of 87.7% and 91.5% before recovering to 97.6% and 100%, respectively, by 2Q11. Based on forward lease expiry profiles as of the beginning of the year, with the exception of MBFC I (and ORQ which was discussed under SUN), PT and BJT face an average lease expiry of 29.5% and 29.4%, respectively, each year over the next three fiscal years.

CMT: limited expansion in vacancy even during financial crisis
Committed occupancy at Tampines Mall (TM), Junction 8 (J8), Bugis Junction (BJ) and Raffles City Shopping Centre (RCSC) remained essentially full throughout the financial crisis while committed occupancy at Funan, IMM retail and Plaza Singapura (PS) saw a marginal dip to 98.6%, 97.9% and 97.4%, respectively. All seven malls were essentially fully occupied by end-2Q11.

Based on forward lease expiry profile as of the beginning of this year, the average annual lease expiry for the seven malls ranges from 23.6% (RCSC) to 33.2% (BJ) over the next three fiscal years.

Assuming a worst-case rolling 50% net retention rate, we project an average occupancy rate of between 83.4% (BJ) and 88.2% (RCSC) in our stress test (although based on the portfolio’s track record as seen in the financial crisis, we believe the worst-case scenario adopted in our stress test is very conservative).

SGREIT: higher vacancy risk at Wisma Atria; Toshin lease likely to be renewed in 2013F
In terms of SGREIT’s SG office portfolio, committed occupancy at Wisma Atria and Ngee Ann City fell to a low of 77.5% and 93.6% before recovering to 90.3% and 96.6%, respectively, by end-2Q11.

In terms of its SG retail portfolio, committed occupancy at Wisma Atria and Ngee Ann City fell to 95% and 98.8% during the financial crisis before recovering to 97.7% and 99.7%, respectively, by end-2Q11.

Based on forward lease expiry profile at end-2Q11, SGREIT’s SG office portfolio faces an average annual lease expiry of 23.1-26.4% over the next three fiscal years while its SG retail portfolio faces an average annual lease expiry of 26.9-31.6% over the same period. However, the main lease expiry at Ngee Ann City retail is the Toshin master lease due in 2013, which, considering the rent is below market and the asset’s prime location, we believe it will likely be renewed. For the remaining of the report, we assume the lease would be renewed at the current rent.

Assuming a worst-case rolling 50% net retention rate, we project an average occupancy rate of 77.1-85.1% for its SG office portfolio and 83.9-98.9% (98.9% for Ngee Ann City retail) for its SG retail portfolio in our stress test.

Cost of debt: what if refinancing cost spikes again?
Based on debt expiry profiles of the covered REITs as of end-June 2011, there is a total of SGD4.8bn worth of borrowings due for refinancing in the next three years, or about 40% of the covered REITs’ total existing borrowings of SGD12bn.

The covered REITs’ average cost of debt ranged from 2.6% (CDLHT, KREIT) to 3.6% (AREIT, CCT, CMT) as of 2Q11. As seen during the depth of the last financial crisis, the all-in interest margin could be as much as 375bps for a three-year secured loan of SGD725mn (plus a small tranche of SGD100mn seven-year loan) even for REITs, such as SUN, with a strong credit profile. Therefore in our worst-case scenario analysis, we assume the maturing debts over the next three years would be refinanced at a cost of 4.5%. This brings the average cost of debt for covered REITs to between 2.7% (KREIT, which has minimal debt maturity over the next three years) and 4.5% (CDLHT, which will be rolling over all of its debts over the next three years) in our stress test.

Recapitalisation – who are at risk?
From the overall market’s perspective, the values of industrial and office assets appear to have performed the best since the last downturn. According to URA and JLL 2Q11 data, Industrial property values were up 44% from trough levels, following a 21-24% peak-to-trough correction, while prime Grade-A office values were up 38% from the trough levels, following a 41% peak-to-trough correction.

The rebound in retail and hotel capital values, on the other hand, was more modest. Prime retail property values were up 3% from the trough levels, following an 11% peakto- trough correction, similar to performance of hotel assets (using CDLHT’s portfolio as a proxy) – up 3% from trough levels, following a 9% peak-to-trough correction. Suburban retail assets performed better, with capital values up 11% from trough levels, following a 9% peak-to-trough correction.

While capital values in the overall market have appreciated by as much as 44% from trough levels, revaluation gains booked by REITs under our coverage have been more modest in comparison. Portfolio values of REITs under coverage generally saw their last trough in 2009. Since then, on a comparable basis, REITs’ portfolio values have appreciated an average 5.2%, with KREIT’s office portfolio value leading the gains, up 9.9% from its trough level while on the other hand AREIT’s light industrial property portfolio’s current value is actually 0.5% lower than its 2009 level.

As such, in the event the property market heads towards its previous trough, we believe the potential write-down of REITs’ portfolio values is more likely to be in the order of 5- 10%, instead of 38% in prime Grade-A office values, since the REITs’ portfolio values have not been marked up as aggressively in the first place.

Assuming a 10% write-off in asset values, if the property market were to head towards its previous trough, the aggregate leverage of REITs under our coverage could increase to 29.2-44.7%, from 26.3-40.3% as of end-June. While technically this suggests there is no immediate risk of re-capitalisation for covered REITs since leverage appears to be kept within the comfort limit of 45% even in the event of a 10% write-off in asset values, SUN, KREIT and CMT appear to be pushing the comfort limit with worst-case leverage of between 43.6% and 44.7%.

However, should the write-down be a more pronounced 20%, our estimates suggest SUN, KREIT and CMT may need to raise SGD281mn, SGD116mn and SGD307mn in new equity, respectively to keep, leverage within 45%, which, if assuming new units were to be issued at current prices, would increase the respective unit base by 9.3%, 7.3% and 5.1%.

Worst-case scenario: potential 9-35% cut in DPU forecasts;
AREIT most defensive, CDLHT most risky
Combining our discussions above on the potential worst-case scenario in terms of reversion rents, occupancy, cost of debt and recapitalisation risk for the individual portfolios of covered REITs, we present our worst-case DPU forecasts over FY12-13F (FY13-14F for AREIT) in the tables below.

In summary, in our worst-case scenario,
• AREIT’s FY13-14F DPU could be cut by 10.9-15.1% from our base-case forecasts,
• CCT’s FY12-13F DPU could be cut by 13.5-18.7% from our base-case forecasts,
• SUN’s FY12-13F DPU could be cut by 29.5-32% from our base-case forecasts,
• KREIT’s FY12-13F DPU could be cut by 9.1-13.2% from our base-case forecasts,
• CMT’s FY12-13F DPU could be cut by 25.2-27.1% from our base-case forecasts,
• SGREIT’s FY12-13F DPU could be cut by 18.6-20.5% from our base-case forecasts,
• CDLHT’s FY12-13F DPU could be cut by 35.1-35.4% from our base-case forecasts.

It is no surprise that CDLHT’s DPU has the most downside risk in the worst-case scenario, considering that over 60% of its projected income is subject to volatile room revenues (essentially daily leases) and all of its existing debts are maturing over the next three fiscal years. The impact on the SUN and CMT also appears to be significant, considering leases expiring at their retail properties and debt maturities, although we reiterate that considering CMT’s malls’ performance during the financial crisis, our worstcase scenario occupancy assumptions are very conservative.

On the other hand, it should also not be surprising that AREIT’s DPU appears to have minimal downside risk, considering minimal lease expiries and (relatively low) debt maturities over the next three fiscal years. KREIT’s DPU is surprisingly resilient, despite being geared to the SG office market, on account of minimal leases expiring at ORQ and MBFC I (combined 59% representation of KREIT’s overall portfolio) and minimal debt maturing over the next three fiscal years.

Stock selection is key; CCT, SUN remain Buys; AREIT, CMT, CDLHT upgraded, KREIT, SGREIT downgraded
The REITs have outperformed the broader market year to date and covered REITs now offer weighted average potential upside of just 8.3% based on our revised price targets. Nonetheless, we believe the weighted average FY12F yield of 6.1% still provides an attractive proposition to investors on a total return basis, especially in current market volatility. The key remains stock selection, in our view.

Despite a more cautious rental projection and property valuation for office assets, resulting in cuts in target prices of 13.2-18.8%, CCT and SUN remain attractively valued at current prices, in our view. The stocks are trading at 0.76x our revised NAV estimates and offer FY12F yield of 6.1% and 7% respectively, or 452bps (vs. historical average 400bps) and 542bps (vs. historical average 480bps) over the current SG 10Y GB. On our numbers, CCT and SUN have already priced in probability of 70% and 30%, respectively, of the worst-case scenario, which we believe is conservative at this point. While SUN may need to raise fresh capital in the event of a 20% write-down in its portfolio value, we believe there is less urgency at this point, considering: 1) on a comparable basis, SUN’s portfolio valuation was raised by just 3.1% from its 2009 trough, and 2) the 24% discount to NAV that the stock is trading at. We maintain our BUY ratings on both stocks.

We upgrade AREIT, CMT and CDLHT from Reduce to Neutral. AREIT is the most defensive REIT in our coverage, with potential downside of just 10.9-15.1% to our basecase FY12-13F DPU forecasts in the worst-case scenario. In addition, the stock has already priced in probability of 70% of the worst-case scenario on our numbers, which appears conservative. The only reason why we have not upgraded the stock to a Buy rating is valuation. The stock is already trading at 1.1x NAV (vs. the sector’s average 0.9x) although the FY12F yield spread of 492bps over the SG 10Y GB (vs. historical average 440bps) suggests limited potential downside to current prices.

In the case of CMT, while we estimate potential downside of 25.2-27.1% to our basecase DPU forecasts in the worst-case scenario, we note the occupancy assumptions used in our stress test are very conservative compared to the portfolio’s track record, considering the portfolio occupancy held up very well even during the financial crisis, not to mention our numbers suggest the market has already priced in 40% probability of the worst case. Similar to AREIT, CMT’s valuation on a NAV basis is not cheap at 1.0x NAV although the FY12F yield spread of 382bps over the SG 10Y GB (vs. historical average 330bps) suggests limited downside at current levels.

For CDLHT, it is a combination of: 1) price correction bringing valuation more in line with fundamentals (the stock was down 12.7% in August, vs. a 5.4% correction in the FSTREI index during the same period) and 2) higher valuation following better-than-expected RevPAR performance in 1H2011. Notwithstanding the upgrade, we believe the market’s complacency on the stock remains. CDLHT’s base-case FY12-13F DPU forecasts are likely to see the most potential downside of 35.1-35.4% in the worst-case scenario on our numbers and it appears the market has priced in probability of just 15% of the scenario.

We downgrade KREIT and SGREIT from Buy to Neutral. For KREIT, our reason for the downgrade is a combination of a more cautious view on the SG office market and a change in valuation methodology to take into account the historical trading yield spread of the stock. While the stock trades at 0.76x NAV, the FY12F yield spread of 412bps (vs. historical average of 530bps, CCT’s, and SUN’s 542bps appears low even after taking into account its portfolio of international Grade-A assets.

In the case of SGREIT, it is more on account of a lower NAV estimate following more cautious office rental projection and property valuation. At 0.9x NAV (in line with the sector’s average) and with an FY12F yield spread of 525bps over the SG 10Y GB (vs. historical average of 490bps), the stock is probably fairly priced at this point although vacancy risk for SGREIT’s office assets in Orchard could also be higher in a worst-case scenario, compared to assets in the CBD Core, in our view. Committed occupancy at Wisma Atria office fell to a trough of 77.5% during the last financial crisis, for instance.


Source/转贴/Extract/Excerpts: Nomura's equity research
Publish date:07/09/11
Warren E. Buffett(沃伦•巴菲特)
Be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful
别人贪婪时我恐惧, 别人恐惧时我贪婪
投资只需学好两门课: 一,是如何给企业估值,二,是如何看待股市波动
吉姆·罗杰斯(Jim Rogers)
“错过时机”胜于“搞错对象”:不会全军覆没!”
做自己熟悉的事,等到发现大好机会才投钱下去

乔治·索罗斯(George Soros)

“犯错误并没有什么好羞耻的,只有知错不改才是耻辱。”

如果操作过量,即使对市场判断正确,仍会一败涂地。

李驰(中国巴菲特)
高估期间, 卖对, 不卖也对, 买是错的。
低估期间, 买对, 不买也是对, 卖是错的。

Tan Teng Boo


There’s no such thing as defensive stocks.Every stock can be defensive depending on what price you pay for it and what value you get,
冷眼(冯时能)投资概念
“买股票就是买公司的股份,买股份就是与陌生人合股做生意”。
合股做生意,则公司股份的业绩高于一切,而股票的价值决定于盈利。
价值是本,价格是末,故公司比股市重要百倍。
曹仁超-香港股神/港股明灯
1.有智慧,不如趁势
2.止损不止盈
成功者所以成功,是因为不怕失败!失败者所以失败,是失败后不再尝试!
曾淵滄-散户明灯
每逢灾难就是机会,而是在灾难发生时贱价买股票,然后放在一边,耐性地等灾难结束
  • Selected Indexes 52 week range

  • Margin of Safety

    Investment Clock

    World's First Interactive Investment Clock