Bonus issues: 1:2 in 2017, 1:4 in 2015, 1:4 in 2010. Reasonable chance to have bonus issue this time round.

There may be positive surprises in bonus issue or increased dividend to go along with better results.

Based on financial figures and compared with peers, TP 1.73 is reasonable.

Div yield of 5.56%, at current RM1.26, is still great if final div is kept at 4 sen.

From 1 to 2 and now 3 sen interim div. Great. For those property counters with capitalization higher than OSK, only IOIPG has a quarterly profit > 100 million. OSK is still the best in terms of various performance ratios.

OSK used to issue bonus shares at about 5-year intervals. More recent issues in 2010, 2015, 2017 (special issue associated with PJD & OSKP take-overs). It has been 6 years since 2017 without bonus issue, likely due to COVID disruption. Let's see whether there is a pleasant surprise this year.

The substantial stake in RHB provides stable dividend income and enable OSK to pay good dividend consistently. The stake further provides leverage to low borrowing cost to run & expand OSK's profitable money lending business.

OSK holds 10.22% of RHB Bank, worth 1.175 times the capitalization of OSK today.

agree with Firehawk that, as of today, the RHB component alone is still worth 1.25 time OSK entry cost.

2 sens is double the previous 1 sen. Total dividend of 6 sens for the year is very good indeed, if being kept or increased in the future.

Ironic that management can destroy shareholders' values and then benefit themselves via MBO....

OSK is filthy rich considering its capitalization size. Cash, bank balances .. of 831Million; investments in associates and a joint venture (including RHB) 3920 million; capital financing 688 million.
OLH must have a plan for the cash hordes not shared with us.

I am happy with the 0.04 dividend and hopeful of special dividend or bonus issue in the near future. It has been a few years already that OSK has not given such rewards to shareholders despite consistent profits.

The comparative RHB-OSK numbers are quite mind-boggling.
NOSH of RHB - 4143 million; NOSH of OSK - 2095.
Each OSK share owns indirectly 0.2 RHB share (because OSK owns 10.13% of RHB).
Today price: RHB - 5.85; OSK - 0.905.
Use 5.85 we can buy 6.464 OSK shares and own indirectly 1.295 RHB shares which is worth 7.57 --- isn't that amazing?

OSK has, of course, other profitable business in:
- property development, including Melbourne Square and Malaysia projects
- property investment - malls and commercial buildings, including OSK Plaza
- Financial services - money lending license - highly profitable
- Manufacturing - cables & building materials
- Construction
- Hospitality (currently loss-making due to covid19)


So, using the same amount of money, if we buy OSK to own RHB indirectly, we can have about 30% more of RHB straight away. At the same time we own the rest of OSK profitable business all free - proportionately. Amazing numbers.

wrong forum for xox

I am positively surprised that the disposal of BCC is not a fire sale because there is a profit of 3.8 million as stated in the announcement. NTAPS remains at 1.84.

The cash flow generated will help the turn-around.

Positive development in selling loss making BCC for 230 million, in line with turn-around strategy of disposing non-core business. Hopefully more will be announced within the next few weeks as promised by the new CEO.

I declare that I have OSK shares for long-term investment and bought some recently because I am still attracted by the key figures below as extracted from this i3 website:

OSK Price=0.915; P/E=5.65; DY=4.26; P/NAPS=0.37

Obviously the numbers are very good. OSK has been consistently profitable and paying dividends. 0.915 price is still entitled to 3 sen dividend.

I am not asking people to buy OSK, but happy to share factual information in this forum as reference to assist one's decision process.

Bear in mind too the negative view of OSK minorities on the conservative OSK management - in not creating shareholders' value as reflected in the stagnant share price. I am not aware of goreng activities if any.

I like RHB too. Instead of investing directly in RHB, I chose to invest indirectly through OSK Holdings that owns 10.13% of RHB - 2nd after EPF.

Just for goodwill sharing, let's look at some interesting figures:

RHB NOSH = 4010 million; OSK NOSH = 2095 million.
Each OSK share indirectly owns 0.1939 RHB share.

At Friday's closing prices, RHB = 5.51, OSK=0.915.
Instead of buying RHB directly, if one spends 5.51 to buy OSK, he owns indirectly (0.1939x5.51/0.915)=1.168 RHB shares worth (1.168*5.51) = RM6.43.

Not only you have more in RHB, the rest of OSK's profitable businesses all thrown in free.

RHB is a good, solid and undervalued counter, considering the key figures shown in this i3 website:

Price=5.51; P/E=10.87; DY=3.20%; P/NAPS=0.82

It is well-managed, consistently profitable and paying dividends. There is certainly much upside potential at the right time.

Small estate holders in my kampong are doing well nowadays. So are many big plantations with very good profits announced.

If Bplant has still not turned in a profit for the last Q, then that is pure mismanagement or unaccounted for leakage.

Trading in a company's shares with privileged information not available to the general public constitutes an insider trading - a serious offence which brought even jail punishment to some in the past.

The key question to determine is whether those sell-outs by top executive was based on information that the bank would be implicated by imposition of fine which could affect the price.

The fact that so many of these top executives disposed of their entire share holdings at about the same time at Dec 2020 seem to justify an independent investigation.

So OLH no more a substantial shareholder.

Technology is not in silo. SCADA, IOT, AI, etc can be exploited together, and should be the way to go. Hopefully a new substantial shareholder may accelerate exploitation of new technologies to add value to the traditional SCADA.

Volume was very high - almost 14% of NOSH.
Hopefully something positive will emerge.
I failed to top-up recently by Q at 0.42.

Willow is an established and profitable technology company. It needs to tap on the more sexy tech theme to expand its business in new related areas in order to uplift its valuation.

Hope the large volume today enabled OLH to sell his remaining stakes to a new substantial shareholder who can energize this sleeping tech counter.

It is possible to turn around Bstead because Bplant, Pharma, Affin are profitable. Of course, possibility is one thing and actual execution is another thing.

Volume not high, no panic, just 1% plus only so far.

I shall hold and wait for the initiatives to be unveiled. If it can turn around and give dividends, say even 3 sen, then the share price will go up. It used to be very good dividend stock. BSTEAD has many unfair advantages. With good governance and management, it should be much much more than it is. It has to deliver dividend to LTAT for the latter to meet its commitments.

"Over the next few weeks, we will start unveiling our initiatives one by one to accelerate the reinvention of Boustead, and ultimately meet the expectations of our shareholders,” Mohammed Shazalli said.

For those who stay invested, hopefully the new initiatives can create positive values.

The lowered closing price may be used to create the impression that the offer price is substantially higher than the closing price, and hence justify that the offer is FAIR.

Compared with the NTA, the offer will certainly NOT be REASONABLE.

Considering that BSTEAD has been making losses and may not turn around anytime soon, it is unreasonable to expect the offer to be Fair & Reasonable.

I think those who bought yesterday afternoon will not regret. Anyway we shall wait for the announcement on 2/2. Let's have a good rest over the weekend.

Mikewg, we need to read para 3.2 which further clarifies subpara 3.1(b).

Of the few possibilities listed, only 3.2 (e) is applicable, which is

(e) A NOTICE OF TAKE-OVER BEING SERVED ON A LISTED ISSUER WHICH THE PUBLIC HAS NO PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF.

clause 3.3 requires certainty in specific offer when asking for a suspension.

3.3 Listed issuers are reminded that in relation to a corporate exercise where the facts are in a state of flux and disclosure cannot as yet be made of the said corporate exercise, the listed issuers should not make requests for suspension.

3.2 Without limiting the aforesaid, any announcement relating to any of the following matters will be regarded as a material announcement for the purposes of subparagraph 3.1(b) above:-

(a) interim financial reports
(b) bonus issues or fund raising exercises;
(c) a transaction as defined under paragraph 10.02(j) of the Listing Requirements, where the percentage ratio calculated in accordance with Chapter 10 of the Listing Requirements is equal to or exceeds 25%;
(d) a change in the controlling shareholder of the listed issuer; or

(e) A NOTICE OF TAKE-OVER BEING SERVED ON A LISTED ISSUER WHICH THE PUBLIC HAS NO PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF.


Note that (a), (b), (c) and (d) are not applicable in this case.

Hence only (e) is applicable - that is "a notice of take-over"

PRACTICE NOTE NO 2/2001 relates to REQUESTS FOR SUSPENSION

3.0 Situations which may warrant suspension
3.1 Upon a request made by a listed issuer, a suspension may be allowed by the Exchange, at its discretion, on the basis of the following reasons:-
(a) where the listed issuer requires time to prepare and release an announcement relating to a material transaction, such as:- (i) a reverse take-over; (ii) very substantial acquisition; (iii) significant change in the business direction or policy of a listed company as defined under Chapter 1 of the Listing Requirements; or (iv) any other corporate exercise which the Exchange considers to be material;

(b) where the listed issuer intends to:- (i) make a material announcement; or (ii) hold a press conference to make a material announcement, before the close of trading; or

(c) any other reason which, in the opinion of the Exchange, justifies a suspension.

The request for suspension (yesterday evening) is made under subparagraph 3.1(b) of Practice Note 2 on Requests for Suspension of the Main Market Listing Requirements of Bursa Securities.

I agree with TheContrarian that:

"Request of suspension of Boustead shares is made under subparagraph 3.1 (b) which list the following : A notice of take-over served on a listed issuer (in this case Boustead) which the public has no prior knowledge of."

I believe the outcome should be positive for those who stay.

Counter suspended for material announcement.

... before (not below) considering the offer ...

What wahud stated could be a scenario in play considering that there was large volume transacted at depressed price recently - an action to created low weighted average price.

In that case OSK shareholders should reject the unfair and unreasonable offer since the share value from RHB is already well above such offer. We can consider a court injunction against it and demand that RHB shares be distributed first below considering the offer of the rest of the OSK assets and businesses.

For example, if a listed company has net cash in the bank of RM 1.00, it will be total injustice to allow offer of say RM 0.8 even if the weighted average share price has been trading well below the offer price.

If there is any corporate action, this form of unusually large volume and depressed price is clearly an indication of price manipulation and should be against the regulations.

Based on Q1 results, projected PE=4.9, stock price (Muthuarum) at 62.1% discount to NTA, RHB holding already 30% more than entire OSK market cap.

Consistently making money.

Technically, can't think of good reason how and why it can go down further.

No good reason why OSK price is coming down while RHB is going up when OSK's 10.13% holding in RHB is already 1.3 times the total market value of OSK!!

Some cartel could probably try to manipulate the stock??

Can we alert the regulator???

Agree with TK's viewpoint.

Regulators should be more forthcoming in enforcing the rules.

Maybank is very profitable.

The 100% exposure to Hyflux is less than a quarterly profit.

Worst case is for Maybank having one-off zero profit for a quarter, and then moves on with regular over RM2B quarterly profit going forward.

Nothing that alarming really. The correction was overdone considering that 20 sen justifiable reduction in share price.

Total exposure of Maybank to Hyflux is RM1.9B and is supposedly secured loans. This means that there will be something left.

If "kosong" recovery being the worst case, and base on RM100B market capitalization of Maybank, the share price may be shaved by no more than 20 sen. Simple maths.

Calvin's assertion that Maybank is only worth RM7.00 is completely absurd and without mathematical basis.

Reading through details of the AR, it is clear that Faber Tower belongs to PJD which OSK owns 96.96%. Even if FT is sold, PJD must declare SD before OSK can have the money. The recent one-off gain of OSK came from selling PJD's Swiss-Garden Hotel at Pudu Road.

PJD is not declaring dividend for 2018 most likely because of the working capital required to develop Melbourne Square.

OSK holds 129 million PJDEV-WC which is expiring in Dec 2020 and will need RM129,000,000 for conversion. Hence SD is remote.

Great! So the 20+8 sen is a regular dividend policy now.