Showing posts with label IPO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label IPO. Show all posts

Sunday, July 16, 2017

NetLink NBN Trust (IPO)

Data source: IPO prospectus
Date: 2017/07/17

I have been reading on this prospectus (total 536 pages) over the last week and entire week end. Netlink is closely related to the industry I'm in, so naturally its IPO attracts my attention.

Given it is one of the largest IPO in the recent years, a lot of financial bloggers have written about their views on its list price of 0.81SGD.

I decided to post my blog only after today's IPO application is closed (at 12pm) so as not to affect anyone's own decision.

The corporate structure is very complicated in this IPO, there are many 'Trust's involved, it is important to understand which and when Trust word is referring to.

To be listed is Netlink NBN Trust (Trust), the underlying business is from Netlink Trust(NLT, another trust, or the original trust). There are two sets of financial statements in prospectus, the audited NLT group's 2015, 2016, 2017 FR; and unaudited pro forma Netlink NBN Trust (Trust)'s 2016, 2017FR. If this has not caused confusion, please refer further to the structure on pg 65.
As IPO subscribers, we are applying to the middle triangle(in dark color)'s units.

The idea of this complication model, is that NLT (the triangle at the bottom which is actual the original trust that owns the operational biz) is to use this method to be in QPDS(qualified project debt securities scheme), so that IRAS can agree to tax exemption on its interest return(further on this point later, NLT Notes) to Trust(the dark triangle, to be listed)

First thing first, who makes a bulk of money?
Answer: Singtel
In order to be listed, Netlink NBN Trust (Trust) is to acquire from Singtel's portion of NLT(bottom triangle) units with a consideration of SGD$1.8878b(pg 63 notes 1), of which $1.095b paid in cash, with remaining in Trusts(IPO, top triangle) Units: 24.99% (or 966m Units), which is to be held under Singtel Interactive (HoldCo, full subsidiary of Singtel).

I wasn't in Singapore when OpenNet(predecessor of NLT) was setup, so not clear what Singtel's original investment was. But quiet clearly to me, when compare two sets of FR in the prospectus, this action created an intangible asset(goodwill I assume) for Trust, at slight above $1b.

It means: Singtel sold its portion of NLT which is NAV at 0.8878b(1.8878-1) to Trust(IPO we are subscribing to) at $1.8878b, got a cash coffin of over $1b, and 966m Trust Units (at 0.81 per piece) in return.
That is what I call Investment. The goodwill created by this acquisition, will be carried on Trust BS, and amortized over 50years at ~$20m each year.

Trust mgr basically get a piece of business at a higher rate(from Singtel), and then float basically the same biz onto the security market at a lower rate (to NAV, whether due to market condition, other whatsoever reason), of course Trust mgr doesn't have to fork out that short fall(then who?)

Do you go IKEA to get a piece of furniture at 188 and sell it later below 188? Maybe yes, because that is your friend's money, and you get a commission cut from such transaction.

(where is customer's yacht)?

How does TRUST fund its DPU(read as attract its IPO investor)?
The projection is DPU at 5.43% and 5.73% in FY2018, FY2019.
As large CAPEX period is over, depreciation of PPE and amortization of licence/intangible assets etc are largely non-cash items, as long as NLT sets aside enough money for future growth ($211m CAPEX for 2018, 2019 projection) and working capital for daily operation, the remaining(majority) cash generated operationally can be funneled back to Trust, thus allow Trust to distribute all its income to Unit holders.

So much of the fanfare is on an non-SFRS number: EBITDA, a much likened figure of Telecom sector, projected at 240m, 150m for 2019, 2018 respectively, some of which will be the source for NLT to pay Trust.

Of IPO proceeds, $1.1b will be used by NLT to repay its external ST facility agreement, which carries 2.9(or 4+)% interest rate, since Trust is going to help NLT to repay all that ST facility, NLT in term owes 1.1b NLT Notes (pg 119) to Trust(at a rate of 10.5%), a whopping rate jump.

Why would NLT instead of using a ST facility which is at much lower rate, replacing it with NLT Notes to Trust at 10.5%, until 2037?

On the other hand, because IRAS' tax exemption is on the condition that the distribution from NLT to Trust, must be distributed to Trust Unit holders within 3(or 6)mths, thus means interest earned by Trust on NLT Notes, around $110m has to be distributed semi-annually. It is my understanding that this contributes to the 5.43% DPU projection in prospectus; in other words, the actual operationally generated cash for distribution (CAFD) from underlying business of NLT is much smaller.

Should a unit holder rely on DPU based on organic business growth, or based on return of one's own fund (Trust IPO to raise fund from unit holder, pass it to NLT, NLT to repay ST facility, NLT to issue NLT Notes to Trust so as to be QPDS, Trust get interest from NLT and other operating cash income, Trust to distribute cash to unit holder as DPU).

Nonetheless, given fiber is currently already 86% of residential market, and presumably the capex will dwindle down over the years when it reaches saturation, NLT will turn to a cash-cow type of business, with only large depreciation carried on BS, w/o actual cash outflow.

Few things still puzzle me:
- NLT recved $732m in grants for building the nationwide passive fiber infra(amortized at 29m by NLT over 25years). But upon completion of Trust acquisition, this deferred financial support grant will be derecognized at Trust group level. Why? what is the reason this obligation is no longer required?
- Given it is a high regulated market, will IMDA(SG gov) allow NLT(or thus Trust) to earn an abnormally high level of ROI? If not, how can Trust, who relies on NLT business, earn higher return? Without a higher underlying ROI, how does Trust improve DPU? It is further loaded with all the extra structure(thus mgmt fee, commissions, agent fees). Obviously, from another angle, IMDA won't let Trust be in the red, either.
(main revenue contributor, residential connection fee is $13.8/mth, it is revised from previous $15, IMDA review this every 3,5 years, only downtrend foreseeable)


Cut the crap, straight to the point
Whether $0.81 a piece is attractive? Will price go up or down? I have no clue, market price is influenced by many factors, I cannot predict the price movement, especially the short term ones. There are also over-allocation units, stabilization period, lockup commitment to 'stabilize' this big creature.


As I'm really new to such biz trust, my analysis could be error-prone, read with your own care. I myself learnt a lot during this study.

I'll apply some shares(with my own money), I want to keep 100 units to revisit it in 2019. It must be a good learning experience for myself.

Saturday, March 18, 2017

Kimly (1D0)



Draft: 3/18/2017
Data Source: Kimly Offer Document

It is rather difficult to get offer document (I don’t know why it is called prospectus for mainboard counter in SG, but is named as offer document for Catalist counter).
Popular counter is hard to get. 'kosong' for me.
 UOBKH earns 3% underwriting commission. Pg 30.

Pre-IPO: Issued and paid-up capital: $40,406,916 comprising 980,986,732 shares.
IPO: New shares to be issued: 173,800,000.
Post-IPO: Total shares:  1,154,786,732.
(IPO price, values Kimly at $288m)

========================================= 
Kimly business: operate drink stalls, lease food outlets to tenants, provide cleaning services with 26 years of experience.

Statistics:
64 food outlets, incl. 56 coffee shops, 3 industrial canteens, 5 food courts (in tertiary institutions), of which 121 self-managed stalls, and 1 central kitchen.
Dim Sum stalls
43
Mixed Vegetable Rice stalls
36
Seafood “Zi Char” stalls
29
Rice Garden stalls
10
Teochew Porridge stalls
2
Live Seafood restaurant
1

98% occupancy over 500 stalls, 5.8% market share (950 food courts at Sep 2015)

Mr. Lim Hee Liat, Exec Chairman, 42.42% of enlarged capital after IPO.
There is a contingent liability (aggregate dividend $11m) payable to then-existing shareholders within 5 business day after trading.

Growth strategy: establish more food outlets in Singapore.
Dividend policy: intend of no less than 50% of NP.

=========================================
Short term risks

  • Revenue pressure: Loss of bid of Ngee Ann Polytechnic food court, meaning reduce of business (only 5 food courts controlled by company, 20% loss), although compensated by an additional Tampines coffee shop mgmt. contract.

  • Service agreement cost: low threshold set for sharing of profit by exec directors, criteria on PBT starting from 15m, when actual PBT in FY2016 is already 25m

  • Cost pressure: tax increase, pre-IPO effective tax rate was 5%, much lower than SG’s statutory corporate income tax of 17%, FY2016 tax is 1.3m, if that is to be doubled, another outflow of 1~2m.

FY2014
FY2015
FY2016
@17%
3,607
4,005
4,349
Effective tax
1,160
1,067
1,365

(Pg A-34)

  • Cost pressure: 7m central office/kitchen renovation, of which 5m will be from IPO proceedings

  • Contingent liabilities: $11m dividends to be paid to existing shareholders
Two investment companies: Vanda 1 and ICH Gemini Asia Growth Fund converted its 6% convertible loans to shares (25,000,000) just before the list. (As the Company is in net cash position, such loan is unnecessary, it can only be considered a ‘favor’ to these two last-minute investors)

========================================= 
Long term risks
  • Master lease agreement with LHL companies, 17 out of 64 food outlets are controlled by Exec chairman(interested person), which are not injected as non-current assets into listed entity, Company in turn lease these from Mr. Lim’s personal company on 4+4 years’ term, rental currently standing at 649k mthly. While there are measures in place to keep an unbiased image of transaction, it is nonetheless a weak point in corporate governance no matter what IFA(independent financial adviser) and IV(independent valuer) states in Offer document, in addition it creates a backdoor for future interest transfer out of the Company, causing a potential damage to the interests of public shareholders and minority shareholders, no matter how non-prejudicial it seems right now.
Pg A-57, total operating lease as lessee in 5-y is:
FY2014
FY2015
FY2016
34,443
38,579
67,533
Pg A-32, it is stated that Commitment with Related Parties in next 5-y (lease) is:
FY2014
FY2015
FY2016
4,619
3,102
31,161($6m/p.a.)
<does that mean 46% of the lease commitment of the Group from 2016 onward will be from Related Parties? which is not included inthe listed asset/entity>
  • Furthermore, Company is seeking a deemed approval from shareholders on this IPT(Interested Person Transaction) Mandate by IPO application, and will seek such approval in future general shareholder meetings.
  • The reason of not injecting such assets into the listed entity is unknown, my guess is: a) it could dis-proportionally increase Mr. Lim’s share in the listed company to the level void Catalist list criteria; or b) there is no price agreement on these assets in lieu of IPO shares from Mr. Lim and the rest of the entity owners.
Thus the listed entity comes with an asset light biz model, owns no coffee shops.
 (copyright:  联合早报)

Median size of new Catalist listings in 2015 is $160 million
Jumbo Group Ltd (SGX: 42R) listed in Nov 15, IPO $.25, $40m, first day $.34(highest $.395), CAGR 2012-2014 is 34.2%, serving 6000 customers, 1.4 tonnes of crabs daily

 ========================================= 
 Financials
 Profit & Loss
Revenue by Segment
 (It seems that Food retail revenue is always 50% of Sales of food, drink and tobacco, could be just an intentionally selected accounting % to balance Food retail segment from that of Outlet mgmt segment)

Balance Sheet
 

Cashflow
 ========================================= 
Plan
I'm willing to accumulate some Kimly shares if the first day price is below $0.xx, but it is very likely traders(consider strong SG coffee shop culture) are going to push it above my limit. Given the short term/long term risks listed above, I'll probably become a bystander on first day of its trading (2017/3/20).

Monday, March 6, 2017

Tat Seng Pkg(T12)

Draft: 3/6/2017 (Price: $0.52, market value: $81m)
Data source: IPO Prospectus, 2005 company announcement, 2016 unaudited FR,

Business: manufacture and sale of corrugated cardboards.
==================================
History
Then
2001, production capacity SG: 14,868 tonnes, CN: 20,895.
Controlled by Mr Low See Pong(45%) and Loh See Moon(15%)
IPO: 0.21/share, 39,300,000 shares(new), 157,200,000(total)
NAV: 24.5cents
EPS: 3.63cents
Inventory turnover: 115d, 107, 87 for FY1999, 2000,2001.

A family business started in 1960+, directors & key executives are all relatives.
300+ employees
$'000 1999 2000 2001
Turnover          20,610          27,776          33,505
PBT            3,329            3,789            5,097
16% 14% 15%
SG 79.70% 59.80% 52%
PRC 20.30% 40.20% 48%

Later
Acquired by PSC, Mr. Allan Yap in 2005.
79,820,000 ordinary shares of total S$16,961,750 (based on S$0.2125/share) and  is  arrived  at  on  a  willing  buyer  and  willing  seller  basis, at 7.61% discount at prevailing $0.23 price on Oct 2005. ~50.78% of the entire share capital.

Now
million 2006-12 2007-12 2008-12 2009-12 2010-12 2011-12 2012-12 2013-12 2014-12 2015-12 2016-12
Revenue 55 75 96 113 153 167 180 216 225 231 228
GP% 20.0% 17.2% 16.6% 21.8% 17.5% 15.4% 19.4% 20.3% 20.2% 21.1% 22.6%
OP 3 6 4 10 9 7 11 17 16 19 17
OP% 4.9% 8.2% 4.6% 9.0% 6.0% 4.2% 6.1% 8.1% 7.1% 8.2% 7.5%
NP 2 6 3 7 6 4 8 12 9 12 14
Operating CF 5 2 -4 5 10 2 9 11 11 33 24
CAPEX -1 -5 -2 -2 -7 -5 -10 -11 -9 -7 -9
FCF 4 -3 -6 4 3 -3 -1 2 26 15
EPS/share($) 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.06 0.08 0.09
NAV/share($) 0.3 0.33 0.34 0.36 0.37 0.42 0.46 0.51 0.6 0.66

==================================
Risks
Barrier to enter corrugated paper packaging is rather low.
Environmental pollution control: the production process causes storage and usage of hazardous substances.

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

TTJ Holdings(K1Q)

Draft: 2/20/2017, price $0.38, S$135m.

Data source: Prospectus 2010, Listed Apr 2010, Issue price 0.20/share.

Updated 2/25/2017,
Data source: 2016 AR

Company profile(2010):
- Structural steel specialist strong in SG and Middle East. Production capacity of 42k tonnes/pa.
- Dormitory biz hosting 5700 people.
Chairman & CEO: Mr. Teo Hock Chwee, founded company in 1981<TTJDE>. Age 60(2016).
91% business from SG in 2009. 67% staff are foreign workers(236 work permit holders in two dormitories).

Risk factors:
Business nature: on a project basis and non-recurring, it is critical to continuously secure new projects.
Steel price fluctuation US$582~1160 per tonne in 2006-2010. (US$681, Feb 2017)


Max Production capacity (tonnes) Utilization
2007 19000 57%
2008 24000 65.80%
2009 35000 56.70%

<Pg 69 B/S>
$’000 Audited 31-Jul-09
Property, Plant and Equipment                            24,074

Investment Property                            18,697

Total Non-Current Assets 
         42,771
Inventories                                 600

Trade and Other Receivables                            49,419

Other Assets                                 475

Cash and Cash Equivalents                              5,875

Total Current Assets 
         56,369
Total Assets 
         99,140

  

Equity   

Share Capital                              2,000

Retained Earnings                            29,941

Other Reserve                               (318)

Minority Interest                                   11

Total Equity 
         31,634 32%

  

Deferred Tax Liabilities                                 768

Finance Leases                              1,549

Other Financial Liabilities                            15,045

Total Non-Current Liabilities 
         17,362
Income Tax Payable                              2,899

Trade and Other Payables                            21,730

Finance Leases                                 802

Other Financial Liabilities                            24,540

Other Liabilities                                 173

Total Current Liabilities 
         50,144
Total Liabilities 
         67,506 68%
Total Equity and Liabilities 
         99,140 100%

When it was first listed, gearing ratio is high, current ratio is low. Who would think of this underdog in an industry that sounds so dull?

But its shareholder is handsomely rewarded if so holds the IPO pieces till now. TTJ Holdings enjoyed the magic power of capital market to grow its revenue from 60+m revenue to 130+m.
Then:

200720082009

Revenue64.565.4138

Gross Profit15.414.823

PBT10.68.415.8

PATMI9.26.613

Net CF from Operating3.94.413.5

EPS(cents/ 350m shares)2.61.93.8

NAV(cents)

14.8










IPO 20100.2(cents)




70(million)

Now:
in millions2007-072008-072009-072010-072011-072012-072013-072014-072015-072016-07
Revenue138709714312713594137
GP Margin17%26%29%21%22%28%29%29%
OP1811191717252030
OP Margin13%16%20%12%13%19%21%22%
Operating CF141724518293135
Capex-18-1-2-3-1-2-1-1
FCF-51622217283035
NAV0.090.180.250.260.320.350.36
EPS0.050.020.040.040.060.040.07
Dividend0.010.010.010.08
Payout Ratio %15.852.63296.9

With the today's price of 0.38 cents, without counting the dividends, it offered its shareholder an annualized return of 10~11% for the past 6.5~7 years since it went public (even though the price was offered at 1.5PB that time, only 1PB today),while STI index was 2900~3030 in Apr 2010 it is still around that range today.

Operation wise, it did much better than its competitor Yongnam Holdings(AXB). Yongnam holding has 300m+ revenue a year, with GM of sub-ten %.

It is a win-win for its founder/owner and its shareholders.
真的是丑小鸭变小天鹅。
History from 1970s, <Pg 84>
TTJ Civil Engineering closed shop in 2002 due to unable to meet its liabilities obligations, renamed to FRC Civil Engineering.

===============================
 Prospects
 Business mainly in Singapore, overseas venture(UAE) doesn't seem work well, with SG gov's continuous infrastructure investment, and company's S1 steel contractor grading, the market demand is promising.
<Permits> Pg 237
===============================
2016 Chairman msg:
careful selection of projects, sustain profit margin and bottom line growth. 姜是老的辣。
Public sector demand: S$16~20b/p.a.
Top 3 customers, 75m out of 137m,50+%
Administrative cost: 25.8m/500+employees(2010 data), 40~50k/pax, which means TTJ can hardly achieve cost adv. over local player in other market(this seems proven by little overseas success so far). It means the major revenue driver will still be construction in SG which company has established track records.
PPE: ~35-40m.
TTJ Green Energy incorporated.

===============================
Initialed a position. Vested, not because my investment, but TTJ built the sky bridges of the place that I'm currently staying.