【SUPERMX 7106 交流专区】速伯玛

Mr.Business

原帖由 khliew7 于 3-11-2007 12:41 PM 发表
。。。 我到觉得SUPERMAX方面不会做假帐。记得之前的生產丁晴手套廠商遭侵權訴訟的案件吗？当时TOPGLOVE和KOSSAN等手套公司都提出上诉，唯有SUPERMAX没有这么做，而乖乖作出赔偿，因为SUPERMAX用了生产丁晴手套的知识产权来生产自己品牌的手套。这么诚实的管理层，应该不会作假帐吧。。。。

讲起这美国的Tillotson Corporation的nitrile gloves专利权官司，就得看看以下的新闻报道。。。其实在这件事件上Supermax受到的冲击会最大。"Nitrile gloves make up about 7% of Supermax's annual sales, and about 30% of Seal Polymer"。"每1000隻手套徵收2美元推算，速伯瑪受衝擊最大，2007年每股盈利料減少14%，高產尼品和頂級手套每股盈利分別下滑9.46和7.13%。"

Supermax选择与Tillotson和解，而Top glove和其他厂家认为官司有的打，所以决定和Tillotson打官司。我的看法：
1. Supermax现在每1000只出口去美国的nitrile gloves就已经比其他厂家的价钱贵2美元，Supermax的订单会不会被抢走？
2. Tillotson所谓的专利权将在2010年到期，而官司至少要花一年半的时间来打，而在打官司的期间，Top glove和其他厂家可以照常出口nitrile gloves去美国。
3. 不应该因为Supermax愿意给royalty fee而认定Supermax的管理层是诚实的，何况这专利权还是被争议的。


Updated : 04-07-2007
Media : 星洲日報
全球多家涉及代工生產丁晴手套（無粉手套）的廠商，遭擁有丁晴手套專利權的美國Tillotson機構，入稟法院索取侵權賠償，一旦勝訴，所有丁晴手套出口美國，須徵收1000隻手套2美元的知識產權費，大馬膠手套生產公司也首當其衝。
聯昌證券的報告指出，大馬的13家手套生產商，包括頂級手套（TOPGLOV,7113）、速伯瑪（SUPERMX,7106）和高產尼品（KOSSAN,7153）皆受牽連，一旦美國公司勝 訴，3家上市的膠手套公司2007年每股盈利，受影響幅度介於7至14%。
用戶若改用膠手套因禍得福
不過，大馬膠手套公司可將費用轉嫁給客戶，影響不會太顯著。同時，丁晴手套售價走高或促使用戶改用膠手套，大馬業者將因禍得福。
本地業者在這項消息中並非完全處於不利情況，因為大多數業者是以代工方式，為國外客戶生產丁晴手套，而且不受美國的不平等法令第337條文。
業者須斥30萬作初步法律費用
據知，涉及的本地業者已成立一個委員會以應對這項訴訟，聯昌證券預估，每家業者須籌備約30萬令吉的初步法律費用開銷。
若本地業者同意作出賠償，業者將無可避免轉移額外成本，以每1000隻手套平均售價33美元估算，每繳付額外2美元的知識產權費，將推高生產成本6%，漲幅並不算大，預料客戶能接受。
速伯瑪衝擊最大
每1000隻手套徵收2美元推算，速伯瑪受衝擊最大，2007年每股盈利料減少14%，高產尼品和頂級手套每股盈利分別下滑9.46和7.13%。
同時，本地業者或許因禍得福，由於丁晴手套售價走高，或使客戶改用價格更便宜的膠手套，而大馬生產商在獲取膠乳原料供應上較中國的競爭對手更具優勢。


Updated : 05-07-2007
Media : The Edge
Thirteen Malaysian-based rubber glove makers are among the 30 companies in Indonesia, China and the United States being investigated by the US International Trade Commission (ITC) for alleged intellectual property infringement .
The action is based on a complaint by US-based Tillotson Corporation on an alleged patent infringement in the imports of certain nitrile gloves for hand protection. The patent expires in 2010.
Tillotson is seeking compensation estimated at US$2 (RM7) per 1,000 nitrile gloves or 6% of average selling price of 1,000 nitrile gloves. A settlement could see a lower compensation.
The case is being referred to an ITC administrative law judge.
Top Glove Corp Bhd, Supermax Corp Bhd and Kossan Rubber Industries Bhd are among the respondents.
Out of the 13 manufacturers cited, one has ceased producing rubber gloves. Nitrile gloves are made of synthetic latex and offer more puncture and chemical resistance than standard rubber gloves and is usually used for non-medical inspections such as in the semiconductor industry.
Malaysia Rubber Glove Manufacturers Association (Margma) yesterday said that it would contest any possible case ensuing against 11 of its members.
Margma's president, Oon Kim Huang, said: "It is a general exclusion order, in that, not only does it go against manufacturers in Malaysia but also other countries such as China."
He said the ITC investigation and possible findings need not necessarily lead to an automatic suit.
"This is because the ITC would still need to get the permission of the US Trade Representative to do so," he told The Edge Financial Daily.
Meanwhile, Supermax said the group had no issue against the infringement and was in the midst of settling the case. Supermax was cited as it is in the midst of acquiring Seal Polymer Industries Bhd which produces nitrile gloves.
Supermax executive chairman and group managing director Datuk Seri Stanley Thai said US based companies in the past had been slapped with similar infringement and in the ensuing suits, had never been successful in fighting it.
"Impact on the group would be minimal," he said, adding that the cost would be passed on to its customers.
Seal Polymer has the capacity to produce 3.96 billion pieces of gloves of which 40% are nitrile glove production.
Meanwhile, AmResearch said Tillotson could only stop imports of nitrile gloves and had no legitimate right to claim compensation on imports from the date the case is won or in the past.
It also said legal opinions stated that Malaysia was outside the jurisdiction of the specific regulation.
It further stated that 90% of Malaysian glove makers were OEM manufacturers. "This means only buyers or customers who import the gloves will be governed" by the regulation, it said, adding that any possible impact would be minimal on the glove makers.


Updated : 18-07-2007
Media : Bernama
PETALING JAYA, July 18 (Bernama) -- Supermax Corp Bhd expects its negotiations with US-based Tillotson Corp to pay the royalty for exports of nitrile gloves to US to be finalised by the end of this month.
"We are working towards reaching a mutual agreement with the patent rights holder to pay the royalty of maximum US$2.00 per 1,000 nitrile gloves," said its executive chairman and group managing director Datuk Seri Stanley Thai.
"Next week I will be at United States to finalise the agreements. We should be able to finalise by end of this month and once done, we will pay the royalty in quarterly (basis)," he told reporters after the company's extraordinary general meeting here, today.
On May 30, Tillotson Corp officially filed a complaint against all nitrile glove manufacturers, distributors or importers worldwide being the patent holder for nitrile gloves until 2010.
The US company previously brought a suit against 19 US and Chinese companies for patent infringement and in all cases won.
Supermax, the world's second-largest rubber glove producer, is one of the 13 Malaysian glove manufacturers who are involved in manufacturing, distributing or exporting gloves into the US.
All the nitrile gloves exported by Supermax are today produced by Seal Polymer Industries Bhd, a subsidiary which it hopes to fully acquire by September.
Thai said the impact of the royalties to the group's bottom line will be minimal and the additional cost of royalty will be transferred back to the consumers in US.


Updated : 19-07-2007  
Media : The Edge  
To a question on the recent allegation of intellectual property infringement by US-based Tillotson Corporation, Thai said Supermax was working towards reaching a mutual agreement with the patent right holders.
Thirteen Malaysian-based rubber glove makers are among the 30 companies in Indonesia, China and the US being investigated by the US International Trade Commission (ITC) for alleged intellectual property infringement.
The action is based on a complaint by US-based Tillotson Corporation on an alleged patent infringement in the imports of certain nitrile gloves for hand protection. The patent expires in 2010.
Tillotson is seeking compensation estimated at US$2 (RM7) per 1,000 nitrile gloves, or 6% of the average selling price of 1,000 nitrile gloves. A settlement could see a lower compensation.
"We should finalise the agreement (with Tillotson) by the end of this month and once the deal is finalised, we will pay royalty every quarter," he said.
Thai added that the royalty payment would not affect its FY08 revenue target of RM940 million as the cost would be passed down to consumers.
He said the infringement issue also opened up an opportunity for rubber gloves producers to increase their capacity due to the higher demand for latex gloves from nitral gloves.
"The selling price that the consumer will be paying is much higher price on the nitral gloves after factoring the 20 sen additional cost. Ultimately, somebody is going to pay for that royalty," Thai said.

Mr.Business

Updated : 20-07-2007
Media : The Edge
The Malaysian Rubber Glove Manufacturers¡¦ Association is co-ordinating a joint defence by seven Malaysian manufacturers of nitrile gloves, with at least one Indonesian maker, to counter allegations from US-based Tillotson Corp¡¦s allegations of patent infringement.
The manufacturers are Top Glove Corporation Bhd, Hartalega Holdings Bhd, Kossan Rubber Industries Bhd, Laglove (M) Sdn Bhd, Riverstone Resources Sdn. Bhd, Smart Glove Holdings Sdn Bhd, YTY Holdings Sdn Bhd, and PT Shamrock Manufacturing Corporation.
Tillotson had sued American re-sellers and foreign manufacturers of nitrile gloves in the US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
"The manufacturers intend to answer Tillotson¡¦s allegations and prove that they do not infringe the asserted claims, that Tillotson¡¦s patent is invalid, and that the patent was obtained through inequitable conduct in the patent office," it said.
By working together to defeat Tillotson¡¦s allegations of patent infringement, the manufacturers intend to secure a stable and uninterrupted supply of high-quality nitrile gloves for their customers.
It said that according to Tillotson¡¦s complaint, Tillotson previously sued several other nitrile glove suppliers which resulted in ongoing litigation, confidential settlement, or default judgment. Tillotson has not identified any court which fully evaluated the validity of its patent or its claims of infringement in resolving those patent suits.
The manufacturers have retained Perry R. Clark, of the San Francisco office of Kirkland & Ellis LLP, to represent them in both the district court and ITC cases.
Kirkland & Ellis LLP is a leading international law firm with extensive patent litigation experience.
Pending the outcome of the investigation, which could take up to 14 months or more, the manufacturers may continue to export nitrile gloves to the US.


Updated : 01-08-2007
Media : 中國報
（吉隆坡1日訊）頂級手套（TOPGLOV，7113，主板工業）希望更多公司加入對抗團隊，一同反擊美國公司Tillootson的無粉末手套（nitrile glove）專利侵權控訴。
大馬橡膠手套廠商公會（MARGMA）7月21日宣佈，將代表7家本地及1家印尼生產商，與Tillotson對抗到底，其中包括頂級手套、及高產柅品（KOSSAN，7153，主板工業）2家上市公司。
頂級手套執行董事李金謀向《馬新社》指出，冀更多公司站出來，參與反抗團隊。
“我們的代表律師已在美國採取法律行動。”
“我必須說明，Tillotson在過去的侵權賠償申訴案中，並非大獲全勝。其實，類似案件不應帶上法庭，應通過自願性質合約與生產商達成協議。”
需時1年半
他說，上述案件需時1年半。
MARGMA曾指出，美國國際貿易局（TIC）的調查結果，需14個月或更久時間才能出爐。期間，生產商將繼續出口無粉末手套到美國。
全球多家涉及代工生產無粉末手套的廠商，遭擁有無粉末手套專利權的Tillotson公司，入稟法院索取侵權賠償，一旦勝訴，所有無粉末手套出口美國，須征收1000隻手套2美元的專利金。


Updated : 01-08-2007
Media : Bernama
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 1 (Bernama) -- Seven Malaysian and one Indonesian glove producers have teamed up to contest US-based Tillotson Corp's claim that there has been a patent infringement by the companies on nitrile gloves exported to the U.S.
There is a possibility that more companies will join the group.
The joint committee inclusive of Malaysian's Top Glove Corp Bhd, Hartalega Holdings Bhd, Kossan Rubber Industries Bhd, Laglove (M) Sdn Bhd, Riverstone Resources Sdn Bhd, Smart Glove Holdings Sdn Bhd, YTY Holdings Sdn Bhd and Indonesia's PT Shamrock Manufacturing Corp, is making its move through the Malaysian Rubber Glove Manufacturers Association (MARGMA).
"We hope to group more (companies) to counter Tillotson's claims and the U.S. lawyers we've engaged have already put things into action.
"We want to invalidate the patent, and will make our stand based on arguments why we do not think the patent is valid," Top Glove executive director K.M. Lee told Bernama when met at a mock-cheque presentation here, today.
Tillotson Corp lodged a complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) on May 30, requesting investigation into possible intellectual property infringement among 30 global nitrile glove manufacturers, dealers and importers, including more than 10 Malaysian companies.
The U.S company is asking US$2 royalty for every 1,000 nitrile gloves imported into the U.S.
Before this, Top Glove which is the world's largest rubber glove maker, has already said that it was expecting no material implications to its financial results from the allegations. Its nitrile glove sales to U.S. makes up less than three percent of its total turnover.
"I also want to clarify that Tillotson did not actually win all the previous suits as reported ... Most of these cases were not actually taken to court and they were settled outside through voluntary agreements," Lee said.
"With a big number in our group, I believe we can succeed in the contest against the claims," he added.
A case like this could take up one and a half years before settlement but with the nearing expiry date for Tillotson which claims the US patent for nitrile gloves until 2010, a positive outcome is expected.
When ITC makes a decision, it will also not affect the company as no backdated payments are expected to be made, Lee added.


Updated : 07-09-2007
Media : The Edge
On the Tillotson suit, Seal Polymer had made a provision of RM1.7 million for royalties in its financial year ending June 2007, although the case had yet to be concluded. Effective August, Seal Polymer had started to include the royalty payment in the selling prices of nitrile gloves shipped to the US. Nitrile gloves make up about 7% of Supermax¡¦s annual sales, and about 30% of Seal Polymer.

[ 本帖最后由 Mr.Business 于 4-11-2007 04:43 PM 编辑 ]

khliew7

原帖由 Mr.Business 于 4-11-2007 03:58 PM 发表


我想Supermax的坏消息还没出完，等11月杪Supermax公布第3季度报告时，Supermax的Equity将是RM410628K (完成收购Seal Polymer)，而债务共是RM371.22 million，D/E是0.90。
PS：资料根据06/03/2007的Bursa文 ...

想请教Mr.Business，如果RAM把SUPERMX的债卷降级以后，对SUPERMX有什么负面影响吗？降级以后，SUPERMX要还的利息是否比较高？

谢谢。

Mr.Business

原帖由 khliew7 于 4-11-2007 10:45 AM 发表
另外，Atlantis Investment Management Ltd 在8月和9月间不断的买进SUPERMAX的股票。直到9月7号，已经累积了15,002,000股。难道又多一个受害者？

不应该因为基金继续买进而觉得没有问题，基金不是管理层，基金懂的不见得会很多，金人都买进过AsiaEP，Redtone都出现问题，没有基金买进过Redtone吗？

事实上我相信假帐的目的是为了让人们相信APLI已经转亏为盈, 并不是为了弄钱 (我现在的看法是如此)。。。。

原帖由 keatsmon 于 4-11-2007 07:31 AM 发表
有同感。
生意兄，可在你的email中向BURSA反映我们对大马公司帐目监督不严（有意或无意）的不满吗？

当APLI的假帐事件爆发出来时，我一开始是对KLSE很失望的，又来假帐？！后来我想想，应该是新法令执行和当局越看越紧，因此auditor （他X的，又是KPMG）不敢放水，所以假帐才爆发出来。这其实是好的进展。。。

[ 本帖最后由 Mr.Business 于 4-11-2007 05:01 PM 编辑 ]

Mr.Business

原帖由 khliew7 于 4-11-2007 04:46 PM 发表
想请教Mr.Business，如果RAM把SUPERMX的债卷降级以后，对SUPERMX有什么负面影响吗？降级以后，SUPERMX要还的利息是否比较高？
谢谢。

根据我所知道的：
1. RAM把SUPERMX的债卷降级；
2. SUPERMX的债卷的市场价格将下跌；
3. SUPERMX要还的利息是定好的，可是债卷的市场价格下跌了，债卷回报因此提高，敢在这时候买进SUPERMX的债卷的投资者将得到更高的回报。

可是重点是投资者，银行，基金会因此对Supermax失去信心。。。Supermax要再借钱会很困难。。。

khliew7

原帖由 Mr.Business 于 4-11-2007 05:00 PM 发表


根据我所知道的：
1. RAM把SUPERMX的债卷降级；
2. SUPERMX的债卷的市场价格将下跌；
3. SUPERMX要还的利息是定好的，可是债卷的市场价格下跌了，债卷回报因此提高，敢在这时候买进SUPERMX的债卷的投资者 ...

谢谢Mr.Business的指教。

那么，接下来就要注意SUPERMX的走势了，看看是否会有很大的卖压出现。根据2006年的年报，30大股东已经控制了81％的股权，如果它们没有丢货的话，SUPERMX的股价应该可以企稳。

季报将要出了，就耐心地等等吧。。

Mr.Business

原帖由 Mr.Business 于 4-11-2007 12:45 AM 发表
请看看RAM Ratings所带出来的讯息。。。
1. Supermax不能再增加债务了以继续扩张。
2. Supermax手上的现金是要支持债务的，所以是不能动的。

RAM Ratings reaffirms Supermax’s bonds; outlook revised from stable to negative
20 July 2007

RAM Ratings has reaffirmed the A2 rating of Supermax Corporation Berhad’s (“Supermax” or “the Group”) RM120 million Fixed-Rate Serial Bonds (“the Bonds”). However, the outlook on the rating has been revised from stable to negative, premised on RAM Ratings’ concerns about Supermax’s rising debt level and thin operating cashflow in the last 2 years. As at end-FYE 31 December 2006 (“FY Dec 2006”), Supermax’s debt load of RM215.44 million had already exceeded our expected maximum of RM150 million during the initial rating exercise. The heavier debt burden had been largely due to the Group’s continuous capital expansion and heftier-than-expected working-capital requirements due to more costly latex and slow collections from its overseas trading arms. More importantly, the increased debt burden has not been matched by a commensurate growth in the Group’s net operating cashflow.

By end-FY Dec 2007, Supermax’s debt level is expected to elevate to RM265 million, as the Group intends to borrow further to partially fund its ongoing expansion. Nonetheless,the management has intimated that the additional debt will be supportedby an anticipated increase in Supermax’s cash reserves to beyond RM100 million by end-FY Dec 2007; the Group expects better collection efforts vis-à-vis its associates (as demonstrated by its healthier financials in 1Q FY Dec 2007). Therefore, while the additional debt isexpected to push the Group’s gearing ratio up to 0.92 times, the management has represented that Supermax’s net gearing ratio will remain relatively manageable at around 0.55 times as at end-FY Dec2007, bolstered by the envisaged increase in its cash reserves. Given the expectation of a stronger operating cashflow in FY Dec 2007, the management is also optimistic that Supermax’s operating cashflow debt coverage (“OCFDC”) will revert to the earlier projected level of around 0.2 times, compared to a mere 0.04 times as at end-FY Dec 2006.

RAM Ratings has consistently highlighted that Supermax has little flexibility to continue relying on debt to financeits expansion programme, without affecting its credit rating. Given that its overall debt load has continued to exceed our expectations, we highlight that it is imperative for Supermax to demonstrate a substantially better operating cashflow in FY Dec 2007 to avoid even more deterioration in its credit-protection measures. Should Supermax’s net gearing and OCFDC ratios still fall short of RAM Ratings’expectations by end-FY Dec 2007, there will be downward pressure on its credit rating. Conversely, the rating outlook may be revised to stable if Supermax is able to demonstrate significant and sustained improvement in its financial performance over the next 1-2 fiscal years.

On a separate note, Tillotson Corporation (“Tillotson”), which haspatented its nitrile gloves, filed a complaint on 30 May 2007 against 30 rubber-glove manufacturers from the US, Malaysia (including Supermax), Indonesia and China over alleged infringement of its patent.Tillotson is also demanding a royalty fee of USD2.00 per carton of1,000 nitrile gloves. According to the management, Tillotson’s actions will have minimal impact on Supermax as the Group’s distribution arm in the US will factor the requested royalty fee into its selling prices.Following this, Supermax expects to have to pay around RM1 million of royalties in FY Dec 2008; the management is confident that this will eventually be passed on to its customers. Meanwhile, for Supermax’s associate, Seal Polymer Industries Berhad (“Seal Polymer”) has some of its major customers agreeing to bear the royalty fee. This would also alleviate some of Seal Polymer’s burden of having to bear the additional cost.

RAM的看法和Supermax的看法不一样。。。

Updated : 04-07-2007
Media : 中國報
鄭金森說，速伯瑪未來將著重自行成長。若日后尋得合適併購機會，並不排除收購相關資產或企業。
“收購對象必須能與速伯瑪現有業務互補、或公司目前所缺的業務。”


Updated : 06-09-2007
Media : 星洲日報
速伯瑪（SUPERMX，7106）不排除繼續增持亞太工業（APLI，5479）持股數量，同時正與數家國內私人領域公司進行併購洽談，惟目前仍未有任何定案。
目前持有亞太工業12.9%
該公司執行主席兼董事經理拿督斯里鄭金森在業績匯報會後表示，目前該公司持有亞太工業12.9%股權，並不排除未來繼續增持該公司股權，但拒絕透露進一步詳情。
“增持股權是一項選擇，但我們目前將會專注現有業務發展。”
他說，儘管目前已有數家國內私人領域公司向該公司表示併購興趣，惟目前沒有任何定案，但不排除將繼續進行相關洽談。
他補充，一旦該公司欲進行併購活動，那些靠近港口或旗下廠房的公司將是首要考量，而相關公司必須有利於擴大公司市佔率及加強公司業務。


Updated : 06-09-2007
Media : The Star
KUALA LUMPUR: Supermax Corp Bhd anticipates acquiring more local glove-making companies.
Executive chairman Datuk Seri Stanley Thai said several privately held firms had approached the company but any decision made would be different from its earlier acquisitions of Seal Polymer Industries Bhd and APL Industries Bhd (APLI).
"Any decision will be done differently ... perhaps it will be based on the model we adopted when we bought the Alor Gajah plant in 2003, wherewe only bought the assets and business but not the company," he said at a media briefing yesterday.
He said the acquisitions would enhance Supermax's value and earnings per share as well as increase its market share.


Updated : 06-09-2007
Media : The Edge
KUALA LUMPUR: Supermax Corporation Bhd is continuing to scout for acquisition opportunities of quality and ideally sited assets despite the recent acquisition of Seal Polymer Industries Bhd and APLIndustries Bhd in 2005, said its executive chairman and group managing director Datuk Seri Stanley Thai.
"Ideally, the glove manufacturing assets must also be near to the source of supply of materials and near the ports," he said, adding that several privately-held local companies had approached Supermax.
"The industry is under consolidation stage and we have to look at the companies that want to sell as to why they want to sell," Thai said ata press conference after briefing fund managers, analysts and media onthe group's activities yesterday.

[ 本帖最后由 Mr.Business 于 4-11-2007 05:30 PM 编辑 ]

Mr.Business

原帖由 Mr.Business 于 4-11-2007 03:58 PM 发表
我想Supermax的坏消息还没出完，等11月杪Supermax公布第3季度报告时，Supermax的Equity将是RM410628K (完成收购Seal Polymer)，而债务共是RM371.22 million，D/E是0.90。
PS：资料根据06/03/2007的Bursa文告。

RAM本以为"By end-FY Dec 2007, Supermax’s debt level is expected to elevateto RM265 million＂，现在Supermax的债务已经有RM371.22 million，整整多了RM100million！你认为RAM会有什么反应？再次降级是有可能的。RAM将Supermax的RM120 million的债券的评级从stableoutlook降为negative outlook是有原因的，请再看看我的76楼。。。想想Megan的教训。。。

我是很理性和客观来分析和看待这件事情的发展，而我察觉你非常的乐观，你能不能提出你的看法和理据？

原帖由 khliew7 于 4-11-2007 05:22 PM 发表
。。。
那么，接下来就要注意SUPERMX的走势了，看看是否会有很大的卖压出现。根据2006年的年报，30大股东已经控制了81％的股权，如果它们没有丢货的话，SUPERMX的股价应该可以企稳。
季报将要出了，就耐心地等等吧。。

刚刚查了查，Supermax完成收购Seal Polymer后Equity和负债的增加将在Q4才呈现出来。。。

Mr.Business

新闻。

速伯玛难题已损及形像与信誉 专注重组亚太工业
二零零七年十一月四日 下午五时三十一分

（吉隆坡4日讯）随着全面收购献议后，斯保利工业有限公司（Seal Polymer Industries Bhd）目前已是一家独资子公司，速伯玛机构有限公司（SUPERMX，7106，主板工业产品组）可以专注于持股12.9％联号亚太工业有限公司（APLI，5479，主板工业产品组）的企业重组计划。这也是适时的。

速伯玛机构取得亚太工业的控制权已将近3年，后者仍然是一根芒刺以及连续3年亏损。分析师说，自改换管理层以来，该公司宣布即将扭转亏损，但是迄今仍然是等待。

例如在去年12月发出的亚太工业2006年报，主席丹斯里阿都拉莫哈末泰希说：“我深信在管理层策划下，重组计划将会成功推行以及该集团很快由亏转盈。”

但是至上周情况没有好转。在周三，该家手套制造厂发出截至2007年6月止财政年已稽查账目，包含2个坏消息。第1是随着稽查调整后，亚太工业的2007财政年净亏损大幅高过在8月29日公布第4季业绩的数字。该公司亏损2千110万令吉，而不是450万令吉；差距主要可归因于稽查会计师针对会计课题的调整。

第2个惊讶是亚太工业被归类为PN17组公司，因为它的股东资金4千640万令吉是低过25％的缴足股本3亿4千760万令吉。 这是与该公司亏损相关，因为累积亏损已侵蚀股东资金。

被归类PN17组基本上预示该公司陷入财务困境。在大马交易所的挂牌上市条例下，亚太工业须在8个月内向证券交易监督委员会以及其他相关机构提呈将财务纳回正轨的计划。

在2005 年速伯玛机构成为亚工业以及斯保利工业的主要大股东，是选择透过合并收购促进业务增长。该公司在2月收购12.9％亚太工业股权，以及3个月后收购17％斯保利工业股权。速伯玛机构几乎立即参与该2家公司的日常营运，最终目标是3家挂牌沙上市手套制造商合并为一，当然速伯玛是控股公司。

专长于制造亚硝酸脂的斯保利工业将是第1家被全面收构的公司。速伯玛机构在2005年9月增持斯保利工业股权至23％，因此可以分享后者的盈利。在2006年的一次不恰当开始后，速伯玛机购去年3月宣布将在公司法令176节条文下将斯保利工业私有化。已持有28.7％股权的速伯玛机构将以每股1.10令吉收购斯保利工业其余股权。该收购计划在9月18日完成。

亚太工业面对的困境是巨额呆账必须注消，现有工厂已陈旧以及在越南的新厂出现很多难题；意味了这不是适合收购的目标。亚太工业的2006年报也认同这弱点。

斯保利工业也面对难题。在去年8月，它宣布账目经稽查后，2006财政年净利被削减几乎一半。这可归因于会计职员以及会计准则变动。

分析师说这些困境与难题已损及速伯玛机构的形像与信誉。提及最近在亚太工业的进展时，分析师说这的确令人惊讶以及不受投资者欢迎。亚太工业是上周四交投最炙热的一只股，由38仙剧跌至31仙。

速伯玛机构在亚太工业的投资是每股60仙。它在2005年2月买进4千500万股之后没有再买进任何股票。这是由于专注稳定以及增强业务，而不是财务或企业重组。亚太工业的新管理层已停止销售给“素质差劣”的客户，争取新客户，整合营业提高生产效率，着手处理在越南的难题，以及集中某些职务。

速伯玛机构是长期投资在亚太工业。该公司与咨询顾问及证券银行多次会谈以及近期内将公布重组计划。由于累积亏损将近5千万令吉以及2000年挂牌上市前重组遗留下来的赤字2亿5千200万令吉，亚太工业的重组计划将涵盖股本结构。

http://www.kwongwah.com.my/news/2007/11/04/71.html

8years

"2000年挂牌上市前重组遗留下来的赤字2亿5千200万令吉"
可以看到foo家有几肥了，好，这才是骗钱发达之道。

Mr.Business

原帖由 8years 于 4-11-2007 07:13 PM 发表
"2000年挂牌上市前重组遗留下来的赤字2亿5千200万令吉"
可以看到foo家有几肥了，好，这才是骗钱发达之道。

截止30/06/2007, APLI的资本结构如下：
Equity (RM'000)
Equity capital 347612
Accumulated loss (49567)
Merger deficit (non-distributable) (251962)
Translation reserve (non-distributable) 352

Total Equity 46435

你提到的赤字就是指Merger deficit (RM251.962 million)是有它的历史的。2000年时APLI借用Red Box后门上市，APLI发出新股票收购Red Box的资产，而那批新股票的总面值超过当时Red Box资产的NTA达RM251.962 million，也就是说APLI买贵货了。。。为何APLI要买贵货？为何当年重组时不把资本结构弄清洁些？我们心里有数。。。

假设没有更多的write-off或假帐，我想APLI的重组会象我以下讲的。。。

原帖由 Mr.Business 于 3-11-2007 01:18 AM 发表
APLI的短期债务共RM30 million，而长期债务共RM50 million，手上现金有RM168K。。。不知道Supermax要如何救APLI。我想到的方法是：
1. 缩阳。Share Capital RM347612K减少到剩下的RM46435K，也就是8变一。
2. 发新股。main board公司的股本至少要RM60 million, 所以发出13565000新股, 得到资金RM13.565 million。

就算PN17的问题可以解决，那庞大的债务要如何解决呢？要如何去找RM30 million来还一年内到期的短期债务？APLI还要想继续发展越南的工厂，根本是做梦吧了。。。

缩阳8变一之后，8张股票变成一张股票，NTA变成RM1。所以如果现在你在RM0.26买进APLI，你等于是以RM2.08的价钱买入缩阳后的APLI，不划算，要就等股价跌到RM0.10再买进吧。。。

8years

那supermax的投资不是要缩水80%？？要writeoff不就要亏大钱？？

Mr.Business

原帖由 Mr.Business 于 3-11-2007 10:59 PM 发表
Supermax的危机。
２. PN17疑云。

APLI于31/10/2007宣布成为PN17公司：
Pursuant to the Paragraph 8.14C of the Listing Requirements (“LR”) ofBursa Malaysia Securities Berhad (“Bursa Securities”) and Practice NoteNo. 17/2005 (“Amended PN17”), the Board of Directors of APLI wishes toannounce that, based on the consolidated audited financial statementsfor the financial year ended 30 June 2007, as announced 31 October2007, APLI is considered an Affected Listed Issuer as the Company’sshareholders’ equity on consolidated basis amounting to RM46.435million is less than twenty five percent (25%) of its total issued andpaid-up share capital of RM347.612 million of the Company and suchshareholders’ equity is less than the minimum issued and paid-upcapital as required under Paragraph 8.16A(i) of the LR (“the FirstAnnouncement”).

可是当APLI于31/102006宣布FY2006的Annual AuditedAccounts时，APLI的Equity就已经只有RM67041K，少过Share CapitalRM347612K的25%。APLI在当时已经应该进入PN17，为何过了一年现在才宣布呢？很明显的，APLI的管理层(也就是Supermax的管理层)已经犯下大错了，因此我决定向Securities Commission和Bursa投诉。

现在Media，分析员和投资者还不知道APLI和Supermax的问题的严重性，有买进APLI和Supermax的网友要小心考虑。。。

资料来源：
APLI的FY2006的Annual Audited Accounts。

原帖由 8years 于 3-11-2007 11:40 PM 发表
考虑什么？？？你的letter也不会effect apli的股价表现的。要等bursa做事也要等2个星期后啦。更何况可能什么事也不会做。。。。

也对，我刚刚向SC和Bursa发出投诉电邮，看他们会不会做事了。。。

Mr.Business

原帖由 8years 于 4-11-2007 08:17 PM 发表
那supermax的投资不是要缩水80%？？要writeoff不就要亏大钱？？

补充：
Supermax是于2005年2月买下45 million的APLI股份 (每股RM0.60)，所以投资额是RM27 million。

会不会write-off那RM27 million，我不是很清楚，我是觉得暂时不用。。。

mjchua

原帖由 Mr.Business 于 4-11-2007 08:25 PM 发表


补充：
Supermax是于2005年2月买下45 million的APLI股份 (每股RM0.60)，所以投资额是RM27 million。

会不会write-off那RM27 million，我不是很清楚，我是觉得暂时不用。。。

不是 write off... 要看 supermax 何時要調整

mjchua

原帖由 Mr.Business 于 4-11-2007 08:09 PM 发表


截止30/06/2007, APLI的资本结构如下：
Equity (RM'000)
Equity capital 347612
Accumulated loss (49567)
Merger deficit (non-distributable) (251962)
Translation reserve (non-distributable) 35 ...

不需要 8 變 1 ... 只要想辦法把 shareholders equity 由目前的 46m 提高到 86m 就可以從 PN17 出來了

mjchua

原帖由 mjchua 于 5-11-2007 12:18 AM 发表


不需要 8 變 1 ... 只要想辦法把 shareholders equity 由目前的 46m 提高到 86m 就可以從 PN17 出來了

10% 的 private placement 可以解決這個問題嗎 ?

mjchua

原帖由 mjchua 于 5-11-2007 12:23 AM 发表


10% 的 private placement 可以解決這個問題嗎 ?

看來沒有辦法來個 10% 的 private placement

http://www.sc.com.my/ENG/HTML/resources/guidelines/Guidelines%20on%20Private%20Placements.pdf

mjchua

原帖由 mjchua 于 5-11-2007 12:18 AM 发表


不需要 8 變 1 ... 只要想辦法把 shareholders equity 由目前的 46m 提高到 86m 就可以從 PN17 出來了

2 變 1 是不是就可以解決這個問題 ?

Mr.Business

mjchua兄，
不要自问自答咯，你有多拿分数的嫌疑咯，哈。。。

APLI是因为以下原因成为PN17公司。
"The shareholders’ equity of the listed issuer on a consolidated basis is equal to or less than 25% of the issued and paid-up capital of the listed issuer and such shareholders’ equity is less than the minimum issued and paid-up capital as required under paragraph 8.16A(1) of the Listing Requirements"

为了解除PN17地位：
1. The shareholders’ equity of APLI must be more than 25% of the issued and paid-up capital of the listed issuer;

2. The shareholders’ equity must be more than the minimum issued and paid-up capital.
主板公司的minimum issued and paid-up capital是RM60 million，所以APLI的shareholders’equity需要是RM60 million。

截止30/06/2007, APLI的资本结构如下：
Equity (RM'000)
Equity capital 347612
Accumulated loss (49567)
Merger deficit (non-distributable) (251962)
Translation reserve (non-distributable) 352

Total Equity 46435

APLI的shareholders’equity只有RM46.435 million，所以应该是要发出新股票以得到新资金了。 而要新股票之前，APLI的capital structure需要弄干净，NTA至少需要是Par value，所以我认为缩阳是不能避免的。

PS: 各位可以参考Halifax的重组计划。。。

[ 本帖最后由 Mr.Business 于 5-11-2007 03:42 PM 编辑 ]