Midas    Last:0.192   -

Midas

You know the most buy call issue for the last half a year is OCBC. But you can check the annual report of 2011 and 2012, you will find that OCBC have reduce their holding of Midas from 1.53% to 1.10%, why reduce when you issue a buy call???

S/N	Name Top 20 holder for Midas	12Mar2013 %holder	2012 Holder Rank	12Mar2012 %holder
1	DBS NOMINEES PTE LTD	7.61%	3	6.80%
2	CHEW HWA KWANG PARTRICK	6.68%	4	6.68%
3	CITIBANK NOMINEES SINGAPORE PTE LTD	6.10%	2	8.81%
4	BANK OF EAST ASIA NOMINEES PTE LTD	5.13%	5	5.09%
5	CHEN WEIPING	4.22%	10	1.59%
6	HSBC (SINGAPORE) NOMINEES PTE LTD	3.12%	1	9.33%
7	DBSN SERVICES PTE LTD	2.67%	9	1.69%
8	RAFFLES NOMINEES (PTE) LTD	2.21%	15	0.97%
9	UNITED OVERSEAS BANK NOMINEES PTE LTD	2.17%	7	2.06%
10	PHILLIP SECURITIES PTE LTD	2.07%	8	1.72%
11	SING INVESTMENTS & FINANCE NOMINEES (PTE) LTD	1.48%
12	HKSCC NOMINEES LIMITED	1.35%	6	2.95%
13	CIMB SECURITIES SINGAPORE PTE LTD	1.32%	12	1.29%
14	TOMMIE GOH THIAM POH	1.18%	13	1.18%
15	OCBC SECURITIES PRIVATE LTD	1.10%	11	1.53%
16	DBS VICKERS SECURITIES (S) PTE LTD	1.05%	17	0.72%
17	CITIBANK CONSUMER NOMINEES PTE LTD	1.01%	18	0.57%
18	UOB KAY HIAN PTE LTD	0.99%	16	0.90%
19	MAYBANK KIM ENG SECURITIES PTE LTD	0.91%	14	0.98%
20	BANK OF SINGAPORE NOMINEES PTE LTD	0.79%
	OCBC NOMINEES SINGAPORE PTE LTD		19	0.53%
	HONG LEONG FINANCE NOMINEES PTE LTD		20	0.53%
		53.16%		55.92%

EddieLeong      ( Date: 15-May-2013 21:34) Posted: The buy call really base on spectuate 2H major contracts win and china push on high speed rail. What if things don't work out the way it expected? Even if it win contract, the revenue may not able to recognised so fast. Something to think about!

 

Seems like you have miss out my reporting on the CSR financial statement. Which I have already highlight CSR profits of an associate is always positive, but why Midas showing is getting lesser and lesser and finally a loss is really questionable.

CSR	2010	2011	2012
	CNY('000)	CNY('000)	CNY('000)
Revenue	64,908,900	80,710,800	90,456,242
Cost of sales	-53,478,000	-65,305,500	-73,944,314
Share of (losses)/ profits of an associate	611,794	668,034	540,954
Net Income	3,249,970	4,743,240	4,852,220
Profit Margin	5.01%	5.88%	5.36%
EPS	0.2745	0.4006	0.3
Trade receivables	11,124,400	13,689,400	26,618,800

 

Midas	2010	2011	2012
	CNY('000)	CNY('000)	CNY('000)
Revenue	1,029,858	1,080,736	869,506
Cost of sales	-684,898	-718,786	-618,171
Share of (losses)/ profits of an associate	45,876	8,290	-5,732
Net Income	240,750	187,358	25,613
Profit Margin	23.38%	17.34%	2.95%
Property, plant and equipment	1,360,760	1,938,385	2,249,418
Inventories	190,151	478,443	700,783
Trade receivables	511,951	697,626	1,007,627
Bank Loan	678,280	1,093,000	1,471,850
Share capital for dual list in Hong Kong	1,087,495

Peter_Pan      ( Date: 15-May-2013 21:13) Posted: Is there any way to read midas' jv company's financial report? Loss sharing with it is another drag also. Not very transparent... cheongsl      ( Date: 15-May-2013 20:16) Posted: Have take a look at Q1 2013 Financial statement, the situation have get worst. The inventories have increased. Based on first quarter revenue, it take almost 1 year for them to clear off the inventor. Inventories $787,675.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Inventories/ Revenue 3.9 Quarter Trade and other receiver have also increase quite significantly. At current level, it already more then 1year. Trade and other receiver $1,076,080.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Receiver/Revenue 5.3 Quarter Isn't current asset suppose to clear within one year, anything above one year should be classified as bad debt?? or even reclassified under long term asset as account receivable. For the Payable portion it also increase, but taking the ratio is slightly more then 1/2 years. Trade and other payable $411,070.0 Cost of sales $151,318.0 Payable/Cost of sales 2.7 Quarter Why did they pay their supplier within 2.7 quarter, but get the payment from their customer within more then 5.3quarter? Why did they buyin their goods and fabricate and keep it in their storage for nearly 1year?? What does this means, they buy the material and fabricates until money receive is 5.3+3.9 = 9.2quarters = 2.3years. They get the material and pay the supplier within 2.7quarter = 0.7years. Thus money did not comein within 1.6years??????? Based on the cash flow statement and financial statement, which we can deduce that 76.8% of the revenue does not translate into payment. Change in inventories & Trade receiver $155,345.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Change in I & TR / Revenue 76.8% Change in Trade and other payable $43,936.0 Cost of sales $151,318.0 Change in T & OP/Cost of sales 29.0% But they only retain 29% of the payment to their supplier??

 

The buy call really base on spectuate 2H major contracts win and china push on high speed rail. What if things don't work out the way it expected? Even if it win contract, the revenue may not able to recognised so fast.

Something to think about!

 

http://www.csrgc.com.cn/manager/uploadfiles/1367024505846.pdf

The JV company is one of the subsidiary under CSR, what the subsidiary do is to manufacture MRT train. The financial report is never transparent but only show the overall CSR performance. Even in 2012 full year report, can only see the revenue of the subsidiary but not the profit.

This is china company, under government. There will not be any transparent. Wahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!

Peter_Pan      ( Date: 15-May-2013 21:13) Posted: Is there any way to read midas' jv company's financial report? Loss sharing with it is another drag also. Not very transparent... cheongsl      ( Date: 15-May-2013 20:16) Posted: Have take a look at Q1 2013 Financial statement, the situation have get worst. The inventories have increased. Based on first quarter revenue, it take almost 1 year for them to clear off the inventor. Inventories $787,675.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Inventories/ Revenue 3.9 Quarter Trade and other receiver have also increase quite significantly. At current level, it already more then 1year. Trade and other receiver $1,076,080.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Receiver/Revenue 5.3 Quarter Isn't current asset suppose to clear within one year, anything above one year should be classified as bad debt?? or even reclassified under long term asset as account receivable. For the Payable portion it also increase, but taking the ratio is slightly more then 1/2 years. Trade and other payable $411,070.0 Cost of sales $151,318.0 Payable/Cost of sales 2.7 Quarter Why did they pay their supplier within 2.7 quarter, but get the payment from their customer within more then 5.3quarter? Why did they buyin their goods and fabricate and keep it in their storage for nearly 1year?? What does this means, they buy the material and fabricates until money receive is 5.3+3.9 = 9.2quarters = 2.3years. They get the material and pay the supplier within 2.7quarter = 0.7years. Thus money did not comein within 1.6years??????? Based on the cash flow statement and financial statement, which we can deduce that 76.8% of the revenue does not translate into payment. Change in inventories & Trade receiver $155,345.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Change in I & TR / Revenue 76.8% Change in Trade and other payable $43,936.0 Cost of sales $151,318.0 Change in T & OP/Cost of sales 29.0% But they only retain 29% of the payment to their supplier??

 

Agreed. Hope Midas'  share of loss from its associated company Nanjing SR Puzhen Rail Transport Co., Ltd  would not persist...

Peter_Pan      ( Date: 15-May-2013 21:13) Posted: Is there any way to read midas' jv company's financial report? Loss sharing with it is another drag also. Not very transparent... cheongsl      ( Date: 15-May-2013 20:16) Posted: Have take a look at Q1 2013 Financial statement, the situation have get worst. The inventories have increased. Based on first quarter revenue, it take almost 1 year for them to clear off the inventor. Inventories $787,675.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Inventories/ Revenue 3.9 Quarter Trade and other receiver have also increase quite significantly. At current level, it already more then 1year. Trade and other receiver $1,076,080.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Receiver/Revenue 5.3 Quarter Isn't current asset suppose to clear within one year, anything above one year should be classified as bad debt?? or even reclassified under long term asset as account receivable. For the Payable portion it also increase, but taking the ratio is slightly more then 1/2 years. Trade and other payable $411,070.0 Cost of sales $151,318.0 Payable/Cost of sales 2.7 Quarter Why did they pay their supplier within 2.7 quarter, but get the payment from their customer within more then 5.3quarter? Why did they buyin their goods and fabricate and keep it in their storage for nearly 1year?? What does this means, they buy the material and fabricates until money receive is 5.3+3.9 = 9.2quarters = 2.3years. They get the material and pay the supplier within 2.7quarter = 0.7years. Thus money did not comein within 1.6years??????? Based on the cash flow statement and financial statement, which we can deduce that 76.8% of the revenue does not translate into payment. Change in inventories & Trade receiver $155,345.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Change in I & TR / Revenue 76.8% Change in Trade and other payable $43,936.0 Cost of sales $151,318.0 Change in T & OP/Cost of sales 29.0% But they only retain 29% of the payment to their supplier??

 

Is there any way to read midas' jv company's financial report? Loss sharing with it is another drag also. Not very transparent...

cheongsl      ( Date: 15-May-2013 20:16) Posted: Have take a look at Q1 2013 Financial statement, the situation have get worst. The inventories have increased. Based on first quarter revenue, it take almost 1 year for them to clear off the inventor. Inventories $787,675.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Inventories/ Revenue 3.9 Quarter Trade and other receiver have also increase quite significantly. At current level, it already more then 1year. Trade and other receiver $1,076,080.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Receiver/Revenue 5.3 Quarter Isn't current asset suppose to clear within one year, anything above one year should be classified as bad debt?? or even reclassified under long term asset as account receivable. For the Payable portion it also increase, but taking the ratio is slightly more then 1/2 years. Trade and other payable $411,070.0 Cost of sales $151,318.0 Payable/Cost of sales 2.7 Quarter Why did they pay their supplier within 2.7 quarter, but get the payment from their customer within more then 5.3quarter? Why did they buyin their goods and fabricate and keep it in their storage for nearly 1year?? What does this means, they buy the material and fabricates until money receive is 5.3+3.9 = 9.2quarters = 2.3years. They get the material and pay the supplier within 2.7quarter = 0.7years. Thus money did not comein within 1.6years??????? Based on the cash flow statement and financial statement, which we can deduce that 76.8% of the revenue does not translate into payment. Change in inventories & Trade receiver $155,345.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Change in I & TR / Revenue 76.8% Change in Trade and other payable $43,936.0 Cost of sales $151,318.0 Change in T & OP/Cost of sales 29.0% But they only retain 29% of the payment to their supplier??

 

Wahahaha. Expert read report. Wahahaha!!!!!!

 

I think it was mainly related to the Chinese gov restructuring the railway dept after the high speed train accident.

cheongsl      ( Date: 15-May-2013 20:16) Posted: Have take a look at Q1 2013 Financial statement, the situation have get worst. The inventories have increased. Based on first quarter revenue, it take almost 1 year for them to clear off the inventor. Inventories $787,675.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Inventories/ Revenue 3.9 Quarter Trade and other receiver have also increase quite significantly. At current level, it already more then 1year. Trade and other receiver $1,076,080.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Receiver/Revenue 5.3 Quarter Isn't current asset suppose to clear within one year, anything above one year should be classified as bad debt?? or even reclassified under long term asset as account receivable. For the Payable portion it also increase, but taking the ratio is slightly more then 1/2 years. Trade and other payable $411,070.0 Cost of sales $151,318.0 Payable/Cost of sales 2.7 Quarter Why did they pay their supplier within 2.7 quarter, but get the payment from their customer within more then 5.3quarter? Why did they buyin their goods and fabricate and keep it in their storage for nearly 1year?? What does this means, they buy the material and fabricates until money receive is 5.3+3.9 = 9.2quarters = 2.3years. They get the material and pay the supplier within 2.7quarter = 0.7years. Thus money did not comein within 1.6years??????? Based on the cash flow statement and financial statement, which we can deduce that 76.8% of the revenue does not translate into payment. Change in inventories & Trade receiver $155,345.0 Revenue $202,391.0 Change in I & TR / Revenue 76.8% Change in Trade and other payable $43,936.0 Cost of sales $151,318.0 Change in T & OP/Cost of sales 29.0% But they only retain 29% of the payment to their supplier??

 

Have take a look at Q1 2013 Financial statement, the situation have get worst.

The inventories have increased. Based on first quarter revenue, it take almost 1 year for them to clear off the inventor.

Inventories	$787,675.0
Revenue	$202,391.0
Inventories/ Revenue	3.9	Quarter

Trade and other receiver have also increase quite significantly. At current level, it already more then 1year.

Trade and other receiver	$1,076,080.0
Revenue	$202,391.0
Receiver/Revenue	5.3	Quarter

Isn't current asset suppose to clear within one year, anything above one year should be classified as bad debt?? or even reclassified under long term asset as account receivable.

For the Payable portion it also increase, but taking the ratio is slightly more then 1/2 years.

Trade and other payable	$411,070.0
Cost of sales	$151,318.0
Payable/Cost of sales	2.7	Quarter

Why did they pay their supplier within 2.7 quarter, but get the payment from their customer within more then 5.3quarter?

Why did they buyin their goods and fabricate and keep it in their storage for nearly 1year??

What does this means, they buy the material and fabricates until money receive is 5.3+3.9 = 9.2quarters = 2.3years.

They get the material and pay the supplier within 2.7quarter = 0.7years. Thus money did not comein within 1.6years???????

Based on the cash flow statement and financial statement, which we can deduce that 76.8% of the revenue does not translate into payment.

Change in inventories & Trade receiver	$155,345.0
Revenue	$202,391.0
Change in I & TR / Revenue	76.8%

Change in Trade and other payable	$43,936.0
Cost of sales	$151,318.0
Change in T & OP/Cost of sales	29.0%

But they only retain 29% of the payment to their supplier??

 

Wow..3 buy/outperform calls... so will waiting till it move above 50 to decide

paul1688      ( Date: 15-May-2013 15:36) Posted: From OCBC today. In line with its profit guidance issued on 10 May, Midas Holdings reported a net loss attributable to shareholders of CNY4.9m in 1Q13, versus PATMI of CNY15.3m in 1Q12. Revenue fell 12.1% YoY to CNY202.4m. While we had expected Midas to report a loss-making quarter, the magnitude was larger than our forecast for a net loss of CNY3.2m. However, revenue was within our CNY199.8m estimate. The below expectations bottomline performance was due partially to weaker-than-estimated gross margin and largely attributed to a wider share of loss of CNY4.0m from its associated company, Nanjing SR Puzhen Rail Transport (OIR forecast: share of loss of CNY0.8m). On an operational basis, Midas was actually profitable, although profit from operations dipped 50.4% YoY to CNY18.9m. We will provide more updates after the analyst conference call. For now we have a BUY rating on Midas. However, our forecasts, 1.2x P/B target peg and S$0.595 fair value estimate are likely to be lowered given the ongoing uncertainty over the timeline of resumption of new high-speed train car orders. (Wong Teck Ching Andy) From CIMB today 1Q13 disappointed, with a reported net loss of Rmb4.9mn vs. our FY13 forecast of Rmb40.63mn due to the lack of major contracts on its orderbook. This is in line as we are confident that Midas will clinch major HSR contracts in 2H13, which will make up for the losses this quarter. We keep our FY13-15 EPS intact and leave our target price of $0.70 unchanged, still based on 1.29x CY13 P/BV. Maintain Outperform.

 

From OCBC today.

In line with its profit guidance issued on 10 May, Midas Holdings reported a net loss attributable to shareholders of CNY4.9m in 1Q13, versus PATMI of CNY15.3m in 1Q12. Revenue fell 12.1% YoY to CNY202.4m. While we had expected Midas to report a loss-making quarter, the magnitude was larger than our forecast for a net loss of CNY3.2m. However, revenue was within our CNY199.8m estimate. The below expectations bottomline performance was due partially to weaker-than-estimated gross margin and largely attributed to a wider share of loss of CNY4.0m from its associated company, Nanjing SR Puzhen Rail Transport (OIR forecast: share of loss of CNY0.8m). On an operational basis, Midas was actually profitable, although profit from operations dipped 50.4% YoY to CNY18.9m. We will provide more updates after the analyst conference call. For now we have a BUY rating on Midas. However, our forecasts, 1.2x P/B target peg and S$0.595 fair value estimate are likely to be lowered given the ongoing uncertainty over the timeline of resumption of new high-speed train car orders. (Wong Teck Ching Andy)

From CIMB today

1Q13 disappointed, with a reported net loss of Rmb4.9mn vs. our FY13 forecast of Rmb40.63mn due to the lack of major contracts on its orderbook. This is in line as we are confident that Midas will clinch major HSR contracts in 2H13, which will make up for the losses this quarter. We keep our FY13-15 EPS intact and leave our target price of $0.70 unchanged, still based on 1.29x CY13 P/BV. Maintain Outperform.

 

DBS Vickers (Spore) Result Snapshot: Midas Holdings: Earnings should rebound in 2H (Buy S$0.45 Price Target : 12-Month S$ 0.60) MIDAS SP)

 

No wonder never down, SGX strongest broker back Midas. Wahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!

paul1688      ( Date: 15-May-2013 12:59) Posted: From DBSV 15 May. Midas reported a small loss in 1Q of Rmb 4.9m vs. profit of Rmb 15.2m last year due to lack of contract wins in the last 18 months. We expect a turnaround in 2H13 as the group’s order book has now grown to c. Rmb800m from just Rmb400m in January. The magnitude of turnaround for Midas would depend on the timing of the high speed rail contracts. Maintain BUY with S$0.60 TP based on 1.2x P/BV.

 

From DBSV 15 May.

Midas reported a small loss in 1Q of Rmb 4.9m vs. profit of Rmb 15.2m last year due to lack of contract wins in the last 18 months. We expect a turnaround in 2H13 as the group’s order book has now grown to c. Rmb800m from just Rmb400m in January. The magnitude of turnaround for Midas would depend on the timing of the high speed rail contracts. Maintain BUY with S$0.60 TP based on 1.2x P/BV.

 

Dunno about Midas if bottom or not, but the big China railway companies listed on HKSE seem to have bottom out lio and u turn up?

 

Anyone thinks Midas has bottomed??

 

FMs buying for more contracts....coming up

 

Recently also observe something strange, the company seems to invest alot on plant, capital expenditure, etc. By right property price is rising in China, plant and equipment is the one that will depreciate. The depreciation year should be increasing if the property price is increasing but what observe is depreciation is increasing. And what declare for bank loan to buy property and plants, capital expenditure used for the share issue in Hong Kong, all this does not see a significant increase in property, plant and equipment portion.

	2012	2011	2010
	19.57	24.48	29.12
Depreciation	114,930	79,187	47,860
Property, plant, etc	2,249,418	1,938,385	1,393,505

cheongsl      ( Date: 14-May-2013 19:38) Posted: I was also nearly vested, as so many house calling. The more indept research done, it seems to talk another story. shareflux      ( Date: 13-May-2013 22:55) Posted: X-date is 14 May which is tomorrow. Will like to see what kind of price action brought about by this ex-div. the dividend is neglible at $8 but if the market really sell it down at xd beyond 0.8cts, this counter is really bearish. For the bull out there, patience should be exercised. I would not touch this stock unless there is more visibility of earning. Cheong, I remember you were saying that OCBC was distributing this stock and i am not surprised that their price target is liberal with no correlation to the impairment of earning. Again, thanks for your advice as I am a fan of Midas when it was at around 49cts. Thought of chasing it up until I read your posting here. i think there is just no short cut to share investing. And house call should be the first but not the final reference you should use in evaluating a stock.

 

I was also nearly vested, as so many house calling. The more indept research done, it seems to talk another story.

shareflux      ( Date: 13-May-2013 22:55) Posted: X-date is 14 May which is tomorrow. Will like to see what kind of price action brought about by this ex-div. the dividend is neglible at $8 but if the market really sell it down at xd beyond 0.8cts, this counter is really bearish. For the bull out there, patience should be exercised. I would not touch this stock unless there is more visibility of earning. Cheong, I remember you were saying that OCBC was distributing this stock and i am not surprised that their price target is liberal with no correlation to the impairment of earning. Again, thanks for your advice as I am a fan of Midas when it was at around 49cts. Thought of chasing it up until I read your posting here. i think there is just no short cut to share investing. And house call should be the first but not the final reference you should use in evaluating a stock.

 

Q 500lots to buy at pre-close hope can buy at 44.5cents