Replies to post #91965 on Sino Agro Food Inc (fka SIAF)

[emptyone]

Carog, you are exactly right, change and shareholder activism is what is needed. I could care less about dividends, it won't help the share price and actually as RD said growth companies typically have better uses of cash than dividends. I see no active involvement by our board, no insider buys (with a couple exceptions), broken promises, lack of transparency, little regard for shareholder value. If you want change you must become involved, simple as that, you can't be an absentee owner. Same as owning a store, turning it over to a manager, never showing up or supervising the manager and being surprised by the results. Get involved or don't complain, I'm getting involved.

[slyestjester]

"Why dont you that complain put together your own dividend policy and let the board analyze it given the fundamentals of the company and we can see what you come up with."

Carog--Unless the five year plan was a piece of fluff that he never intended to carry out, Solomon thought five years ago when SIAF was in it's true infancy, when they held almost nothing but the dairy, that he could manage 8% of earnings as a dividend. It's ridiculous to think that the company is incapable of that now no matter how many moving parts. I don't care if SIAF is a growth company, 8% is nothing and providing it would mean that they were at least belatedly keeping their word. First they said the 8% could not be provided over the last five years because of depressed Chinese equity prices, but the expectation was that when the five year plan was completed, they would return to the original dividend plan. In the meantime most shareholders remained loyal to the company under the most exigent circumstances when the price seemed to do nothing but go down. Some people like me invested large sums of money in this company years ago on the dividend expectation as I knew I would be reaching retirement age. To see now that the company is not providing what it promised when it clearly has that capability is shameful. I have no other way to put it. It seems SIAF is taking advantage of the fact that there are many new shareholders to whom that promise was never made directly, but I'd like to remind the company that there are many long-timers here still who remember what was said.

With all due respect, I think you are cheerleading when you conclude that the lateness of the dividend announcement means that there were forces pro and con a substantial dividend. This is exactly how myths are born, and we don't need that here. There has been enough of that already. There is uncertainty about the reason for the lateness of the PR, but it's not good to project into that vacuum an understanding that is favorable to our interests as fact. There are any number of reasons why it might have been late: 1) Solomon was traveling 2) Everyone forgot 3) No one particularly cares about observing timelines 4) EC was unavailable to consult 5) they were debating a 1% or 2% payout, etc. The history of this company is that over-believing is destructive to one's health.

[snow]

I think one thing will matter when it comes to the pps going forward is Solomon's supervoting shares. Those shares may prevent SIAF from achieving a normal rating on OSE. I suspect Solomon does not really comprehend that the shareholders in general are the owners of the company. He only owns a small part of the company himself.

When the published dividend policy consists of some sensible observations I suspect the reason is that Solomon does not accept what would be most conducive to getting a highest possible pps. The problem in this context is that he has a different agenda from the rest of the shareholders and he is in a positition where it is up to him which choices are made. He knows that shareholders have been very useful to him by providing the money he needed to move the company forward. I think he wants shareholders to be rewarded for this, for instance by distributing a dividend of 8 % of net profits.

It may be sensible to pay such a modest dividend if ROE is very high. But let us assume that ROE is only 10 % and there are still some investment opportunities Solomon would like to se realized. Would he be willing to pay for instance 50 % of net profits in cash dividends? I think he would not and that this would be far to generous toward shareholders. The reason could be that he does not understand that all the shareholders are the owners of the company. As long as Solomon controls SIAF the shares should trade at a discount I think since his agenda is not to maximize the profits of shareholders.