| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
  eskay67 http://www.bursamalaysia.com/market/listed-companies/company-announcements/6293193 26/09/2019 5:23 PM Ricky Yeo Some context on MFRS9 - https://www.pwc.com/my/en/assets/publications/alert123-mfrs9.pdf "One of the main criticism on the MFRS 139's impairment model is the delay in recognition of credit losses due to the need for a loss event to occur. Understandably, the biggest change under MFRS 9 would be, impairment based on expected credit losses even if a loss event has not occurred. This would result in entities needing to book in day 1 credit losses." 27/09/2019 9:58 AM brushsoo further add on to the note below, the additional expected credit loss is a non-cash items, and only impact PL. "One of the main criticism on the MFRS 139's impairment model is the delay in recognition of credit losses due to the need for a loss event to occur. Understandably, the biggest change under MFRS 9 would be, impairment based on expected credit losses even if a loss event has not occurred. This would result in entities needing to book in day 1 credit losses." 27/09/2019 4:40 PM SilverHawk If now still at MFRS 139, this QR is at 110M profit vs MFRS9 49M. Everything still remains good, revenue historical high. Only different is presentation style with different accounting method. 27/09/2019 6:01 PM hellbender YES...accounting treatment didnt impact cashflow. Revenue is still strong... dont understand the selloff. 30/09/2019 5:15 PM chl1989 no one can answer this question: will the profit go back to 80mil since this is just change of accounting standard. if the ans is yes, buy more. if the ans is no, bye 01/10/2019 4:00 PM Guilefighter silverhawk already answer your (chl1989) question, just that you still dun understand what he meant.. 01/10/2019 6:41 PM ironcrowz Share by @Ricky Yeo https://www.pwc.com/my/en/assets/publications/alert123-mfrs9.pdf "One of the main criticism on the MFRS 139's impairment model is the delay in recognition of credit losses due to the need for a loss event to occur. Understandably, the biggest change under MFRS 9 would be, impairment based on expected credit losses even if a loss event has not occurred. This would result in entities needing to book in day 1 credit losses." Old MFRS 139, recognise credit loss when it happens New MFRS 9, recognise credit loss when it is "expected" to happen (it is subjective to management judgement, everything's kinda like a guessing game here) In AEONCR case, we all know they do consumer and motor financing, which usually have a higher interest rate but also a higher default rate, hence a higher "expectation" in credit losses, so they recognise these losses early. They'll know if they over- or under- provided for these provisions when they collect more (or less) repayment than they initially expected. If more, they'll reverse out these provisions eventually, if less they'll provide even more. Assuming no major changes in business model, AEONCR's cashflow will remain unnchanged. So now, do you want them to "expect" low credit losses eventhough they are in a high interest high default business, just to make you feel good with high short-term profit or; do you want them to "expect" high credit losses, prudently reflecting the business nature but it'll lead to lower short-term profit? 02/10/2019 10:53 AM StockStalker Net asset value per share has declined to RM5.98 from RM6.37 which is mainly due to the opening downward adjustment to retained earnings of RM344.53 million arising from the adoption of MFRS 9 and a higher capital base from ICULS conversion. Similarly, earnings per share were accordingly impacted, and declined to 133.55 sen from 139.23 sen, notwithstanding a recorded increase in earnings for the year. 04/10/2019 11:07 PM StockStalker There could be fundamental dilutive risks with an estimated balance of 49.1 million units of ICULS remaining, which if fully converted could expand its share base by a further 4%. 04/10/2019 11:36 PM ironcrowz @StockStalker How to get 4%? My calculation up to FY2019 is only another 1.8% to be diluted, which is 4,468,311 shares. How to get RM12? A 1.8% or even 4% dilution only affect the PE ratio minimally, so how do u justify? 08/10/2019 11:03 AM SilverHawk Dilution is nearing insignificant. If there is good dilution, u will see it directly at diluted eps. Company had clearly stated that dilution is nearing zero, so had totally ignored the diluted eps column. 08/10/2019 1:44 PM StockStalker @ ironcrowz Good pick up, thanks. Dilution should be 1.8% instead of 4% as per Kenanga Research - 27 Sept 2019. Perhaps Kenanga can explain how they got the 4%. https://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/kenangaresearch/226971.jsp 11/10/2019 11:48 AM ironcrowz @ StockStalker Why use BV? Also why use 2 times BV? Good companies i always buy based on earnings 16/10/2019 11:44 AM StockStalker @ ironcrowz Consumer Finance business is generally sensitive to economic conditions, and during period of declining economic growth, a conservative approach (based on PBV) to investing will provide adequate margin of safety. Based on current market price, Aeon Credit's PBV 2.61 is higher than industry average of 1.9505 for Finance/Rental/Leasing business. Besides, PBV 2.61 is much higher than all the major local Banks (PBV of Maybank 1.25 Public 1.83 HL Bank 1.47 CIMB 0.92) with more diversified financial services instead of strictly consumer financing. In addition, Aeon Credit's DY 2.86% is lower than those of major local Banks (DY of Maybank 5.87% Public 3.63% RHB Bank 4.51% CIMB 5.23%). For comparison sake, Aeon Credit's DY is even lower than most local Banks 12 months FD rates. I agree with investing decision for good companies to be based on earnings, provided in period of strong economic growth. Nevertheless, investing decision depends highly on individual's investment objective and risk appetite. All the best and happy investing ! 18/10/2019 3:44 PM SilverHawk 16.40 now hehe ... Those panic sold after QR, now new round of panic ... 18/10/2019 6:07 PM  Choivo Capital :) I bought at 15.1 before Q out, and was thinking of doubling up at 14.7, but kept trying to get more discount. Haha i'm really not suited for trading. I should just stick to business analysis. 18/10/2019 6:09 PM SilverHawk Action speak louder than word. Time to buy, buy. Time to sell, sell. Time to hold, hold. 呵呵 18/10/2019 7:21 PM Guilefighter @StockStalker Benjamin Graham saying PBV below 0.70 only can buy!! btw aeon cr totally different from bank, cannot compare apple to orange. 19/10/2019 3:29 PM ironcrowz @StockStalker I agree with u that during period of uncertainties, buying assets (PBV) is safer than buying earnings (PER). However, since AEONCR mainly finances some daily necessities like smartphones, motorcycles, and automobiles, i am quite confident in their stability (provided the defaults are controlled) Its PBV will always (mayb 90% of the time?) be higher than that of bigger banks, simply because it has higher ROA. Dividends to me are always irrelevant, imagine this, if u 100% own a company, does it matter whether the company pay u dividend or not? If yes, the money is in ur pocket; if not, the money is also in ur pocket since the company is 100% urs. A dividend paying co is prone to share price being tied closely to DY, limiting share price growth; a non dividend paying co will have its "dividend" reflected in its share price, yet still allow for more speculation gain in share price. Nice that we all can discuss our investment thoughts here. Have fun investing :) 21/10/2019 10:20 AM Ricky Yeo Outside of AeonCr topic, one thing I have been thinking for sometime is whether dividend affects valuation. On one hand, theoretically, dividend doesn't affect valuation. Since valuation comes from all the future cash flow a business can generate aka Operations cash flow minus maintenance capex, so whether a company pays dividend or not is irrelevant. But on the other hand, dividend does affect valuation. Because of time value of money. The cash receive today is worth more than one received tomorrow. And in a lot of cases, high dividend paying stocks have been valued based on their dividend i.e dividend growth model. And it also seems to be the case that dividend paying stocks do trade at a higher multiples. So something interesting to think about. 21/10/2019 1:48 PM gongkia is not dividend doesn't affect valuation, dividend is part of the earning, and it is already reflect on the valuation. so adding dividend to valuation is double counting. 22/10/2019 8:43 AM Ricky Yeo You're right in that sense. But still people who use DDM factor dividend into valuation. 22/10/2019 10:06 AM ironcrowz Hmm I think i simplified things a little too much, i should make it clear.. Dividend does affect valuation. It affects the compounding rate of the company's value. If no dividend is paid (100% earnings is retained), and if the company can reinvest them for growth, then the company's value will compound faster than another company that pays 60% earnings out as dividends, since it only left with 40% earnings to be reinvested for future growth. Not sure how time value of money will effected in this case. If received dividend now, the money received worth more now, if don't receive dividend now, the money reinvested will compound the company's value. Maybe the TVOM effect will offset? Maybe the compounding rate will surpass the discounting effect? High dividend payout ratio stocks usually are large and stable companies (if otherwise, most likely they have established consistent dividend record), hence usually they attract investors looking for dividend. Now, if u r investing for dividend, u look at the dividend yield right? So if 6% dividend yield is good enough for u, you will happily buy at PE 16.67, some may even think 5% is good enough, higher than FD already, so again happily buy at PE 20. So a higher PE is not unusual. 22/10/2019 10:39 AM xiaotee Silverhawk: Hope so, but why do you think so? Wouldn't the MFRS 9 accounting depress the net income for at least 12 months? 12/11/2019 9:40 PM Choivo Capital Its not the adoption of MFRS9 here, its the change in assumptions in calculating their ECL. ==== xiaotee Silverhawk: Hope so, but why do you think so? Wouldn't the MFRS 9 accounting depress the net income for at least 12 months? 12/11/2019 9:40 PM 04/12/2019 10:30 AM xiaotee Thanks for the great insights into dividends relating to valuation.I venture a reason why such stocks tend to be given better and added valuation. A company regularly paying dividends communicates it's caring for it's minority shareholders and just management. Even better if the dividend yield matches the common bank FD rates and is sustainable. Growing dividend yields further communicate that net earnings are growing and hence the stock gets a higher rating by it's shareholders. Not giving any dividends/ only giving a miserable dividend yield year after year in spite of healthy growing retained earnings only arouse suspicions that the controlling shareholders are up to no good, and they could be planning privatisation exercises at a low price to it's true value. Yet such exercises would be usually be approved albeit with comments like the offer price is "unfair" but "reasonable" - in actual fact the minority shareholders get shortchanged of their true share of the stock! Hence the many "value traps" in Bursa - it actually becomes irrelevant to count their true value because the controlling party has no intention of sharing the fruits equitably with the minority party! 05/12/2019 10:24 PM Ricky Yeo That's only true up to a certain extent. A great example is Berkshire, Berkshire never pays a single cent of dividend in their history 40+ years, yet Berkshire don't trade at a 'cheap' price i.e below NTA, mainly because they have managed to compound return at a rate higher than index fund. On the flip side, distributing large portion of earnings as dividend isn't necessary a good thing either because if the company has the ability to reinvest more into the business and generate a high incremental return, that is, higher than what a common investor can find in the market, then that is a bad investment decision. Although this is far harder to assess. But you're right that companies with a strong dividend record tend to garner higher valuation than one that doesn't. 06/12/2019 11:35 AM gongkia comparing pbv between a high growth aeoncr to the low single digit growth of general banks is not meaningful. 06/12/2019 1:15 PM  |
 436 284 495 0 ActiveGainersLosers
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
