Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Ok Chad, that's fair. No problem.
All we are saying is (and I think I speak on behalf of others as well) that if people take a closer look at where those $15M in beef revenues came from then they will have a very hard time figuring it out.
These people are not going to buy the stock. Simple as that.
And I'm sure if we inform management about this then they know exactly what to do. Next time.
I don't know of any reporting company that itemizes to such a level of detail.
Chad, they need to give us all the numbers.
Because the shorts will be wading through them as well and provide "evidence" that SIAF is inflating its revenue numbers.
We are defenseless now.
I think the answer can be found in the Q3 filing.
In SJAP's case, BEEF revenue = total SJAP revenue. I think.
because BEEF revenue was $4.6M in Q3
1) There were 24,244 MT of organic fertilizer produced at a cost of RMB404.75/MT and sold at RMB947.82/MT generating revenue of RMB22.98 Million (US$3.64 Million).
2) During this Quarter, SJAP sold 5,802 MT of Live-stock feed at RMB662.22/MT with a production cost of RMB344.27/MT generating revenue of RMB3.84 million (US$0.61 Million).
3) There were 216 head of cattle sold at RMB11,996/head, generating RMB2.6 Million (US$0.41 Million) in revenue.
Total = $4.6M
So most of that $15M BEEF revenue in 2011 is organic fertilizer from SJAP.
I liked the clarity provided in the Q3 filings.
Not so much in the 10-K
They need to do a better job.
This was Q3. Can you check if this works out with the rest?
It depends on how much cash they have and how badly they want it.
This is from some other company. Here are some limiting factors.
"The Company Law of the PRC applicable to Chinese companies with foreign ownership provides that net income can be distributed as dividends only after:
a. Cumulative prior years’ losses have been recouped;
b. 10% of after tax income has been allocated to a statutory surplus reserve until the reserve amounts to 50% of the company’s registered capital;
c. 10% of after tax income has been allocated to a statutory common welfare fund, which is established for the purpose of providing employee facilities and other collective benefits to the company’s employees; and
d. Allocations have been made to the discretionary surplus reserve, if such a reserve is approved at the meeting of the equity owners."
"The Chinese Yuan (Renminbi) is not freely convertible into Dollars. The State Administration of Foreign Exchange (“SAFE”) administers foreign exchange dealings and requires that they be conducted though designated financial institutions."
"In addition, upon repatriation of earnings of our Chinese subsidiaries to the United States, those earnings may become subject to United States federal and state income taxes. We have not accrued any U.S. federal or state tax liability on the undistributed earnings of our foreign subsidiaries because those funds are intended to be indefinitely reinvested in our international operations. Accordingly, taxes imposed upon repatriation of those earnings to the U.S. may reduce the net worth of the Company."
I never shall underestimate the power play from shorts again.
jan, perhaps later.
I'm still waiting for ABAT and GURE to go private.
Then, I will buy a lot more SIAF shares.
I don't have the energy to post there now.
I will pass on beursduivel because I post too much already.
Not a problem because I have lots of time. But I'm not going to add another message board.
Before a attack is launched, there were a lot of preparations made by shorts.
Would love to know how some of you in Europe from other than Sweden heard about the stock.
I know. And I upgraded the stock because of it.
How to prevent a short attack.
Let me share my experience with you and see what can be done in case SIAF does become a victim of a short attack.
A. Before the attack
- Transparency is key. In the filings.
- Make sure you have strong shareholders who actually know a lot about the company. Because the worst thing that can happen is all of the institutions dumping your stock.
- A dividend, obviously.
- Have an emergency plan ready
B. After the attack
- Be proactive. Seek the help of the SEC. After all, the attack can only be succesful if market manipulation is involved. Meaning, a hedge fund will dump the stock on the very day that articles are published. That's illegal, and the SEC should be able to trace them. A lot of companies see the SEC as a burden. But when you are at war with the shorts, they are your friend. At least, they ought to be.
- Immediately increase the dividend. Perhaps make it quarterly.
- Immediately announce a share buyback program and actually DO the buying.
- Don't interact with the shorts but be responsive to the shareholders. Silence is deadly.
- Sue them.
- Again, transparency! Tell the shareholders as much as you can.
The good thing is, if anyone can do it, SIAF can. That much I know.
Surely you cant be safe but everything points that SIAF is not like most of the junks around here.
What's to stop the Jordan fund from completely buying out the company just prior to it becoming "cash rich"?
It's probably one or two marketmakers who are doing all the trading. I'm assuming they don't have to report anything (in the ordinary course of business).
But it's hard to tell from the level 2 quotes on OTC whether a market maker is active or not.
Not if you list on Nasdaq first. (Instead of Amex).
You will probably get 500k shorts for free. Because they must really like Nasdaq a lot
The problem is, if you have liquidity then the shorts will come. They like put options very much too.
There is always a risk of a short attack on Nasdaq. And when I look at the complexity of the company, and the opportunities for the shorts, then we are dead meat.
I mean, they don't even disclose the risk factors.
I really feel we should talk them out of this Nasdaq venture because there is too much risk. And we already have the liquidity.
Why would the number not be accurate?
There simply isn't a lot of short activity in the stock now because the company is "fresh". IMO.
If you type CBEH for instance, there are 1.6M short positions.
Traderfan, I think we have a lot of misunderstandings here now.
I don't think Solomon meant the shorts are responsible because they shorted the stock. Just shorts in general, and their activity.
I hope.
OTCBB does report short interest, here.
Scroll down and enter "SIAF"
http://www.otcbb.com/asp/OTCE_Short_Interest.asp
There are 17k+ shares short now, up 7k from two weeks earlier.
I don't understand any of this.
What 10M shares are we talking about? The ones on top of the 72M, where we are now?
Did he get them for free? Purchase them?
Isn't he supposed to file a Form4 or something?
I look at everything.
But basic value is my starting point.
If perfectly legit companies can actually drop to 10% of book value (and less) then that automatically means I can never, ever, again, invest in a stock and feel comfortable with a price/book = 1.
So I have decided this is it. Now or never.
I've picked my stocks and placed my bets.
But I look at every aspect.
Say NO to Nasdaq
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/...
CHINESE GOVERNMENT AGENCY LAUNCHES INQUIRY AGAINST THE NASDAQ
On January 8, 2012, The China LiaoNing Provincial Government Small and Medium Enterprises Bureau, a major provincial government regulatory agency in China, sent official letters to The United States Department of Commerce and The Office of the United States Trade Representative, expressing the agency's grave concerns regarding the racially-motivated discriminatory acts of NASDAQ against CleanTech and the resulting damage to CleanTech and China-U.S. business and trade relations.
RACIST REMARKS CAPTURED ON THE RECORD MADE BY MICHAEL EMEN, A MEMBER OF NASDAQ'S SENIOR MANAGEMENT :
As captured on the record of testimony made by Michael Emen, NASDAQ's Senior Vice President and Head of NASDAQ Listing Qualifications, NASDAQ delisted CleanTech under Michael Emen's self-described "broad discretionary authority," as he stated on the record, to "delist CleanTech…send a message to the world" against Chinese companies. NASDAQ and Michael Emen developed their prejudice and racial discrimination against the Chinese people, China based companies, acting outside NASDAQ's regulatory purview, as further evidenced by Michael Emen's racially biased statement captured on the record: "CleanTech' s disclosures may have satisfied the letter of our rules, but they certainly didn't satisfy their "spirit." NASDAQ and Michael Emen's "spirit" of racism against CleanTech and China based companies, rather than adhering to the rule of law, was evident when Michael Emen admitted on the record that CleanTech had complied with required NASDAQ disclosure rules. There is no "spirit of NASDAQ " as a NASDAQ listing standard that could be found anywhere, including the NASDAQ Code of Conduct.
NASDAQ'S LISTING APPEAL PROCESS WAS "FIXED" BY NASDAQ STAFF AGAINST CLEANTECH IN FURTHER EVIDENCE OF RACISM
AT LEAST ONE NASDAQ BOARD MEMBER STATED THAT HE HAD NEVER HEARD ABOUT A "CLEANTECH DELISTING" FOR REVIEW, A VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS
The Swedish ownership in SIAF is the result of a process that started when this guy, a corporate analyst, was scanning LOTS of different Chinese companies in order to find investment opportunities.
>> 1. Regarding the uplisting.
He will do the reverse split if needed. He just doesn't want to hit the stock now, for no reason. It'll be the Board's decision, not his. Besides, if you do a reverse split with the intent to uplist then the market won't punish you for it.
>> 2. Share structure.
I suppose they will be raising cash towards the end of the year, for capex in 2013. We don't know what the price will be then.
>> 3. Taxes.
Not everything is tax free. The restaurants and retailshops probably are not.
Strindberg posted a link on the YH message board
http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_S/threadview?m=ts&bn=139878&tid=386&mid=386&tof=1&frt=1
You can't listen to all of it because the file seems to be corrupt. After 65 minutes or so.
I agree that dilution is not the main issue. And I believe the growth story is really there.
There are more pressing issues, like
1) attracting institutional buyers
2) spinning off those subsidiaries
3) get that uplisting
The share price could triple in a matter of weeks/months, even now. If you take a look at the chart, that is a possibility.
The most important thing is that management should be aware of how their investor base feels about this. That awareness is there IMO.
So there really isn't a whole lot for us to do here except sit back and enjoy the ride.
At some point you have to think management knows what they are doing.
Of course I can't be sure about anything. But it seems plausible if we're at 72M shares now and management is projecting a weighed average of 70.5M for 2012, wouldn't you say?
Also keep in mind, that they have to issue stock and options to employees. Possibly, they will issue less shares BECAUSE the market imploded in mid 2011. My point is, we will come out of this better than we would have otherwise, provided fundamentals haven't changed in a negative way. And they haven't.
My other point is, people should relax. Because dilution simply isn't an issue. And it's not good to put pressure on Solomon this way. They know what they are doing.
For the people who don't know this, Chinese people have a habit of not taking loans or taking on debt. They are very stubborn. So this has been a very positive development.
Now, if you ask me where I do see potential problems, I see problems with a NASDAQ listing. I really feel we should go for Amex. Or a listing in Sweden.
And I see problems if there is too much pressure on Solomon. Too much pressure results in fraud.
Changing from $85M to $80M capital expenditure is hardly like turning an oil tanker 180 degrees. Maybe 10 degrees.
Problem is the market is not valuing any of the above
Doesn't this mean that there will be no dilution?
How do you square that with the estimated $66M "internal funds =-- $10M more than income -- used for cap ex?
I simply don't see the necessity to project $85M in development when you can foresee generating $80M from income, loans, grants, and credit from suppliers.
I think people need to relax a bit about the level of dilution.
1) It's only 17% when earnings from operations is growing 200%
2) YHGG hasn't issued a single share for 5 years and it's getting them nowhere? Trading at 5% of book value now.
3) Some of the shares, if not most, are probably stock or option incentives for employees.
4) We are already at 72M and the weighed average will be 70.5M for 2012. Meaning, there will hardly be any dilution going forward.
5) I think it provides management with some flexibility. When you're living on the edge, with cash close to zero, there is an added benefit. Because this way you won't have to maintain a buffer of say $10M.
6) You never know what the share price will be, like 6 months from now. Management has to plan ahead 1 to 2 years.
What it is NOT, dilution, is confirmation by mangement that the stock is fairly priced. Come on people... you know that.
In the 10-K it says they expect to produce 500MT in 2012 and 800MT in 2013 from the first fish farm. I don't think they will be adding tanks to achieve that.
1 tank equals 25MT/Year.
There is a lot of information about the first fish farm in this video at the bottom.
http://www.sinoagrofood.com/?q=content/investor-relations
The fish farm has a capacity of 500MT. But they can ramp it up to 1000MT or even 2000MT depending on the circumstances. I think 2000MT is a theoretical number.
You can correct me if I misinterpreted any of it.
Wrt to optimizing capacity, I think a lot is dependent on experience and timing.
All I know is if they haven't taken at least a 50% stake in fish farm #1 by the end of Q1 then I'm starting to get a bit worried.
I have a respectable position in SIAF now. So if it goes up then I can live with it. I will not be selling this one (or trade it) until we get to $20
We can't put all of our money on SIAF so I don't see the problem. As long as we keep the number of posts limited. I just don't feel like sending private messages because I feel we should be sharing.
I had SCEI on my list of risky stocks for over a year until I dug a little deeper.
I noticed that some of the people I know (who do a lot of DD) were invested in the stock so I increased my efforts.
The class action lawsuit against the company resulting from the short attack was dismissed by the judge. What this tells you basically is that there is no evidence of fraud. There was a 2nd amendment and this is probably why the company never announced it. But it was on the law firm's website.
They are increasing capacity from 1.1M MT to 2.9M MT this year so the growth story is there.
The business model is really simple and I think the stock will do well with the crowd.
SCEI had its cash and assets verified by an independent third-party but I already owned the stock by then.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sino-clean-energy-inc-announces-133000256.html
I think they are in a sweet spot with rising oil prices.
And I like my stocks with a P/E of 1
The company is learning and making all the right moves, IMO.
It's one of my favorites now.
A lot of the stocks I own already took off but fell back in recent weeks for some reason, including SIAF.
Not to worry, It'll come.
I thought the issue was shorts, not the fact that they're in the China sector.
Well, I'm a stubborn type of guy.
I don't listen to anyone but myself when it comes to making investment decisions.
But I will give you my list if you are interested. I have published it before on ABAT message board. And like I said back then, my opinion is not going to affect the market.
So here are the overall scores which are comprised of many important items (risk, valuation, trend, stability, margins, growth rate, priority and adaptability).
I currently own the top 6.
SIAF 9.2
CCCL 8.8
SCEI 8.8
ABAT 8.6
GURE 8.5
CBEH 8.3
CSGH 8.1
SKBI 8.1
YHGG 8.1
CEAI 8.1
YONG 7.9
ALTI 7.9
CAGC 7.8
DEER 7.8
Everything I have done over the past year is in there. So there is not a lot more to discuss.
Oh, It's you, from Belgium ?
I like you, but I don't know about communicating privately. I usually don't do that.
in regard to CCCL there is, I think, also a particular concern about the economy and real estate investments in China.
Also there was an offer by an American investor group to take the co. private, along with management, which management did not seriously consider. That may have raised eyebrows about how close management wanted anyone to get to looking at their books.
Then why is CCCL trading at a forward P/E of 1?
It's not a reverse merger
It was not attacked by shorts
There are no lawsuits against the company
And they are growing with good margins.
You can come up with all sorts of theories but when you have done as much research as I have, there is only one conclusion:
If you are Chinese, you're fooked.
Basically what happens is, that institutions want nothing to do with you. Everyone is looking to protect their reputation.