HWZ Forums

Login Register FAQ Mark Forums Read

Hyflux 6% Perpetual Securities

Like Tree302Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 19-05-2019, 10:38 AM   #3481
Senior Member
 
sgdividends's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,296
Actually I diversified and it's s small percentage of my portfolio. Intended to build up for my son.
The point is, if not I kanna, who kanna?
It will still be in the market , ensnaring other investors.

I'm more worried about my other investments given the state of the regulatory environment to be honest.
__________________
Take note that DBS and OCBC are sponsors of hwz and there are banks lurking SECRETLY esp. UOB

Last edited by sgdividends; 19-05-2019 at 10:44 AM..
sgdividends is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 10:53 AM   #3482
Great Supremacy Member
 
ccostagmont's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 58,836
Tuas spring go to pub riao.

Sent from Xiaomi REDMI NOTE 5A PRIME using GAGT
ccostagmont is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 11:10 AM   #3483
Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,376
Actually I diversified and it's s small percentage of my portfolio....
Good.

I'm more worried about my other investments given the state of the regulatory environment to be honest.
If you’re truly diversified, why would you be especially worried about one regulatory environment? In other words, is your wealth overly concentrated in this particular regulatory environment (Singapore’s)? If so, how about changing that?

I don’t think it was (or is) any secret that Singapore has one of the most lax, asleep-at-the-wheel regulatory environments among developed countries. In many other countries Hyflux couldn’t have even offered its 2016 series 6% coupon, perpetual, callable, unsecured, subordinate, unrated notes. Some people like that “Wild East” aspect of Singapore and seek it out...including those looking to peddle questionable (or worse) financial products. However, there are some compensations even within Singapore, notably the great “middle class” pillars: HDB, CPF, and lately I’d add SSBs, as examples.

Last edited by BBCWatcher; 19-05-2019 at 11:13 AM..
BBCWatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 11:52 AM   #3484
Senior Member
 
sgdividends's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,296
Good.


If you’re truly diversified, why would you be especially worried about one regulatory environment? In other words, is your wealth overly concentrated in this particular regulatory environment (Singapore’s)? If so, how about changing that?

I don’t think it was (or is) any secret that Singapore has one of the most lax, asleep-at-the-wheel regulatory environments among developed countries. In many other countries Hyflux couldn’t have even offered its 2016 series 6% coupon, perpetual, callable, unsecured, subordinate, unrated notes. Some people like that “Wild East” aspect of Singapore and seek it out...including those looking to peddle questionable (or worse) financial products. However, there are some compensations even within Singapore, notably the great “middle class” pillars: HDB, CPF, and lately I’d add SSBs, as examples.

Yes saw the light .

Right now pretty diversified within Singapore . That's why I'm worried.

Interactive brokers is the way.
__________________
Take note that DBS and OCBC are sponsors of hwz and there are banks lurking SECRETLY esp. UOB
sgdividends is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 12:21 PM   #3485
Arch-Supremacy Member
 
MikeDirnt78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 18,912
Actually I diversified and it's s small percentage of my portfolio. Intended to build up for my son.
The point is, if not I kanna, who kanna?
It will still be in the market , ensnaring other investors.

I'm more worried about my other investments given the state of the regulatory environment to be honest.
The Hyflux P&P is already not available in the market.

If you want to help other investors, then you should warn on hindsight.

You cannot turn things around anymore and avoid the P&P.
__________________
Eat | Live | Punk Rock | Save | Invest | Finance | Fitness | Pixel | Tech | DIY
MikeDirnt78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 12:22 PM   #3486
Senior Member
 
FrostWurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,908
So not a single reason to blame own-self for not doing enough due diligence?

Hyflux did not go bust overnight due to fraud. There were ample warning signs for its downfall.
Hi Mike,

Due dilligence is one thing. But another issue here (and a bigger issue in my opinion) is accountability. If there are other parties that you relied upon when making an investment, and those parties did not discharge their duties in a responsible manner as required by law, it is clear to me they ought to be penalized if things go south.

To address your argument, if the management of Hyflux was completely transparent and honest about the state of affairs of the company, and the auditors did their best in assessing the viability of Hyflux, then the sole responsbility lies with the investor. A foolhardy investor, who despite knowing how bad the situation is after all material disclosures, still wants to invest in the company, then that is entirely his own doing.

My beef here is whether all these parties (management, BoD, auditors, regulators, bankers) did their jobs properly. If they did, and hyflux still went under, then one can only attribute to the risks associated with doing this business.

However, if some or all of them were asleep at the wheel (or even intentionally telling you that everything is alright when the driver knows the bus is headed towards a cliff) then it becomes a problem.

Like I mentioned in an earlier post, I do not know the details of the case, but if the parties involved knew long ago that tuaspring already became an onerous contract (specifically in accounting terms) then it follows that the value of the plant should have been written down ages ago. There is no argument that the plant was immaterial because at $1 billion dollars on the books it clearly is important.

Indeed, the regulators might have stepped in much earlier and would probably have forbidden them from issuing the latest rounds of those instruments.

Due dilligence by the investor is important, but so are the responsibilities of everyone else. You don't do your job properly, you should pay the price.

Running a business is hard, and often comes with risks that are difficult to estimate and manage. The key question here is not whether your strategy was the right one, but whether you were upfront and truthful about the information you were presenting to stakeholders. Because this information would inevitably have affected their actions towards you.

There have been companies on the verge of bankruptcy (with numerous warning signs) that made a turnaround. There have also been others with no warning signs that went bust overnight.

If I trust you enough, surely you shouldn't betray my trust? A pity that Singapore in general doesn't think that way.
FrostWurm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 12:42 PM   #3487
Arch-Supremacy Member
 
MikeDirnt78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 18,912
Hi Mike,

Due dilligence is one thing. But another issue here (and a bigger issue in my opinion) is accountability. If there are other parties that you relied upon when making an investment, and those parties did not discharge their duties in a responsible manner as required by law, it is clear to me they ought to be penalized if things go south.

To address your argument, if the management of Hyflux was completely transparent and honest about the state of affairs of the company, and the auditors did their best in assessing the viability of Hyflux, then the sole responsbility lies with the investor. A foolhardy investor, who despite knowing how bad the situation is after all material disclosures, still wants to invest in the company, then that is entirely his own doing.

My beef here is whether all these parties (management, BoD, auditors, regulators, bankers) did their jobs properly. If they did, and hyflux still went under, then one can only attribute to the risks associated with doing this business.

However, if some or all of them were asleep at the wheel (or even intentionally telling you that everything is alright when the driver knows the bus is headed towards a cliff) then it becomes a problem.

Like I mentioned in an earlier post, I do not know the details of the case, but if the parties involved knew long ago that tuaspring already became an onerous contract (specifically in accounting terms) then it follows that the value of the plant should have been written down ages ago. There is no argument that the plant was immaterial because at $1 billion dollars on the books it clearly is important.

Indeed, the regulators might have stepped in much earlier and would probably have forbidden them from issuing the latest rounds of those instruments.

Due dilligence by the investor is important, but so are the responsibilities of everyone else. You don't do your job properly, you should pay the price.

Running a business is hard, and often comes with risks that are difficult to estimate and manage. The key question here is not whether your strategy was the right one, but whether you were upfront and truthful about the information you were presenting to stakeholders. Because this information would inevitably have affected their actions towards you.

There have been companies on the verge of bankruptcy (with numerous warning signs) that made a turnaround. There have also been others with no warning signs that went bust overnight.

If I trust you enough, surely you shouldn't betray my trust? A pity that Singapore in general doesn't think that way.
When sh*t hasn't hit the fence, nobody is going to question about the regulators, bankers, management, auditors, etc.

Finding fault on the management decisions and auditors require a higher level of investment skills.

Focus on the basic information first from their Income, BS and CF statements. You can already identify red flags. These red flags are good enough to avoid Hyflux.

Sadly, most P&P holders just looked at the coupons and that's it.

If you read from the beginning of this thread, hindsight was the first one to give a warning. At the point of time, he was merely looking at the 3 statements. ie high debt, poor cash flows, etc. Nobody ever blamed the bankers, regulators, auditors, management yet.

Do you get the drift?
__________________
Eat | Live | Punk Rock | Save | Invest | Finance | Fitness | Pixel | Tech | DIY
MikeDirnt78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 02:07 PM   #3488
Senior Member
 
sgdividends's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,296
The Hyflux P&P is already not available in the market.

If you want to help other investors, then you should warn on hindsight.

You cannot turn things around anymore and avoid the P&P.
This is not a normal scenario where money loss already , treat it as monetary loss.

I have lost much more in other SGX counters but I never made noise.

This is different. The issue is about accountability and material non disclosures.

And of cos , how apathetic , in my view, the regulator can be.

Look at noble . Foreigners ( muddy and iceberg) already flagged and wrote their evidence based reports about noble in 2015.

Yet noble can still raise 300-500 million in 2016 from public and separately 300-500 million again from public in 2017...I didn't touch noble so didn't know about this. This Hyflux episode make me read more ...

4 years and counting , no one accountable as of yet...still investigating

Ridiculous.

Last edited by sgdividends; 19-05-2019 at 04:47 PM..
sgdividends is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 05:35 PM   #3489
Senior Member
 
FrostWurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,908
When sh*t hasn't hit the fence, nobody is going to question about the regulators, bankers, management, auditors, etc.

Finding fault on the management decisions and auditors require a higher level of investment skills.

Focus on the basic information first from their Income, BS and CF statements. You can already identify red flags. These red flags are good enough to avoid Hyflux.

Sadly, most P&P holders just looked at the coupons and that's it.

If you read from the beginning of this thread, hindsight was the first one to give a warning. At the point of time, he was merely looking at the 3 statements. ie high debt, poor cash flows, etc. Nobody ever blamed the bankers, regulators, auditors, management yet.

Do you get the drift?
My point is: If you are a foolish investor who just looks at 6% and invests, then you deserve to get burnt. But if you did your homework based on the work of other parties, then some recourse should be available to you.

The balance sheet a couple of years back could have made a case for investing. The plant was not written down yet, and the gearing was not excessive. Operating cashflow was an issue, but any non-investment grade securities will have their own set of problems.

It is easy to look with the benefit of hindsight and comment on how this disaster should have been spotted ages ago. Hindsight is afterall, 20/20.

And it is not true that auditors can get away with anything. They have been sued numerous times in the US and London. It just happes that Singapore is not developed in this respect.

So hope you can catch my drift too: Investors naturally have to do their homework, but there are other parties that also have duties to discharge responsibly, and if they don't, they should face the music.
FrostWurm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 05:37 PM   #3490
Senior Member
 
FrostWurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,908
4 years and counting , no one accountable as of yet...still investigating

Ridiculous.
The moral of the story is...don't invest in Singapore....cause bad guys always win

(but of course, you can be the bad guy)
FrostWurm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 05:53 PM   #3491
Arch-Supremacy Member
 
MikeDirnt78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 18,912
My point is: If you are a foolish investor who just looks at 6% and invests, then you deserve to get burnt. But if you did your homework based on the work of other parties, then some recourse should be available to you.

The balance sheet a couple of years back could have made a case for investing. The plant was not written down yet, and the gearing was not excessive. Operating cashflow was an issue, but any non-investment grade securities will have their own set of problems.

It is easy to look with the benefit of hindsight and comment on how this disaster should have been spotted ages ago. Hindsight is afterall, 20/20.

And it is not true that auditors can get away with anything. They have been sued numerous times in the US and London. It just happes that Singapore is not developed in this respect.

So hope you can catch my drift too: Investors naturally have to do their homework, but there are other parties that also have duties to discharge responsibly, and if they don't, they should face the music.
Maybe you like to read from the beginning of this thread?

So many people already gave warnings.
__________________
Eat | Live | Punk Rock | Save | Invest | Finance | Fitness | Pixel | Tech | DIY
MikeDirnt78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 06:05 PM   #3492
Senior Member
 
sgdividends's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,296
The moral of the story is...don't invest in Singapore....cause bad guys always win

(but of course, you can be the bad guy)
Yeah everyone should turn bad to win haha
__________________
Take note that DBS and OCBC are sponsors of hwz and there are banks lurking SECRETLY esp. UOB
sgdividends is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 08:44 PM   #3493
Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 9,376
If a director, manager, book runner, or accountant did something illegal, then that person might be fined and/or imprisoned. However, even in that event, there's not going to be any material restitution paid to investors. Hyflux's senior creditors might get a couple more pennies on the dollar, but that's as far as it goes.
BBCWatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 10:19 PM   #3494
Arch-Supremacy Member
 
dreamwork7878's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 24,014
OL serve as board at ST Engineeering from which year to which year?
while hyflux is burning away.
https://www.straitstimes.com/busines...ineering-board

is she getting paid there?
how many millions in salary is she getting there too ?
is it free service ?

how come can do 2 roles when company hyflux is bleeding and on the verge of bankrupcy and yet in 2016 can still ask for cash from the retailer ?




tuasspring is zero value according to PUB.
who is the one who signed such lousy contract?

and all the PNP are not aware of such contracts.


and on the book , it clearly show few billions.
is this misleading or what ?

now tuas spring is taken away just like that ?
nothing is returned.

is like day light robbery.


is this even fair ?

Last edited by dreamwork7878; 19-05-2019 at 10:31 PM..
dreamwork7878 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-05-2019, 10:55 PM   #3495
Arch-Supremacy Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 11,856
This is not a normal scenario where money loss already , treat it as monetary loss.

I have lost much more in other SGX counters but I never made noise.

This is different. The issue is about accountability and material non disclosures.

And of cos , how apathetic , in my view, the regulator can be.

Look at noble . Foreigners ( muddy and iceberg) already flagged and wrote their evidence based reports about noble in 2015.

Yet noble can still raise 300-500 million in 2016 from public and separately 300-500 million again from public in 2017...I didn't touch noble so didn't know about this. This Hyflux episode make me read more ...

4 years and counting , no one accountable as of yet...still investigating

Ridiculous.
Let's be honest here, are you willing to pay to get back nothing for accountability or you want accountability so that you can get back 100% plus all accumulated interest...If you are seeking the former and not looking to recover 100% plus all accumulated interest, I will personally donate to any crowdfund for you and the other Hyflux investors to seek redress by legal actions so that those people are held accountable...But if your objective is just so you can earn back 100% plus all accumulated interest just so that some people are "accountable", I don't think anyone will support such a view as it is in your own self interest for the so-called accountability so that you can just get back 100% plus all accumulated interest...
makav31i is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Terms of Service for more information.


Thread Tools

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On