InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 7
Posts 1610
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 12/02/2012

Re: ValueInvestor01 post# 157023

Tuesday, 08/13/2019 11:07:55 AM

Tuesday, August 13, 2019 11:07:55 AM

Post# of 163718
I am perfectly aware of the spin-off strategy that they have been unsuccessful with for 4 years(?) and have no immediate solution to in the near term.

There should be valid arguments that the value is substantially below 340musd. The fact that they organized it in a separate company is not proof that the value is 340musd as far as everything is tightly connected to the SIAF crew. In fact Tri-way has such a terrible management that the way they messed up the dividend distribution was enough to get SIAF (mother company) kicked out of Merkur.


They have failed a PRE-IPO, they do not achieve any financing from banks (equity, bonds and traditional loans). How hard is it to get HK-financing from a gold mine 30 minutes away from Hong-kong??

Behind Tri-way are the same people who has failed in selling anything close to booked value for the last 8-10 years. I hope I will be proven wrong (hopefully by the company itself) but why is it different this time? You have to remember that back in the days everything was as promising as Tri-way is today, but the valuation was still terrible
(PE <1). They had dragon head status, SJAP and abattoir, the incredibly profitable eels etc etc. A spin-off strategy is not an evidence of any value unless it somehow can be converted to cash (IPO, asset sale) or a proof that somebody else puts cash into it at a value.


One is fairly obvious if you did your due diligence. In SIAF’s case, the opportunity falls under partial spinoffs category.

Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.