Posted by Investee > 2020-05-14 15:01 | Report Abuse

Forgive me. Why do we always assume FCFE = 12% of U$1.87b instead of the 12% of U$468m (i.e. 25% of 1.87b)? Take note that this is FCFE, not FCF.

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 15:08 | Report Abuse

by Investee > May 14, 2020 3:01 PM | Report Abuse

Forgive me. Why do we always assume FCFE = 12% of U$1.87b instead of the 12% of U$468m (i.e. 25% of 1.87b)? Take note that this is FCFE, not FCF.
========


u are the only one Awake..........hahahahaha

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 15:13 | Report Abuse

when one eyed jack becomes king in the land of the blind.

Pretend is the only solution

Being awake the world looks different......

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 15:26 | Report Abuse

FCFE = Free cash flow to Equity

It is not whether it is based on 1.87b or 468m, it is the free cash flow derived by PBB to be RM327m to Jaks. You need to ask PBB how it derived its FCF.

-------------------------
Investee Forgive me. Why do we always assume FCFE = 12% of U$1.87b instead of the 12% of U$468m (i.e. 25% of 1.87b)? Take note that this is FCFE, not FCF.

Posted by Investee > 2020-05-14 15:51 | Report Abuse

Hey DK66, u have my respect. This is just for argument sake. Ignore me if this is too noob question.

Actually it is whether 1.87b or 468m. JAKS' equity contribution is 25% x 1.87b x 30% stake = 140m. PB ascribing 82m (RM329/4) is weird but maybe not so big difference as presented here.

The logic is Vietnam will give fixed capacity charge to cover fixed principal repayment and interest expense. The leftover for equity holder (EBITDA - principal repayment - interest) is really 12% Return on Invest Equity. That's why we need to compare Invested Equity to leftover for equity holder.

Refer:
https://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/Jaks%20resources/2019-04-29-story204451-Jaks_Resources_Peer_Comparison_With_Mong_Duong_II.jsp

"The Capacity Charge is a fixed payment that is paid each period for each kilowatt of available (not dispatched) capacity. It includes fixed charges involved in the construction, operation, and maintenance of the power plant, including charges for: – Repayment of the principal and interest of the debt used to construct the facility – Return on equity capital invested..... bla bla bla~"

Therefore, capacity charge is for return invested equity after netting of mainly principal repayment and interest.

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 16:04 | Report Abuse

don't be silly.........where did PBB says free cash flow to Jaks is $ 327 pa ?


some thing that can give $ 300 million pa will be worth much more.

want to forecast contributions from the plant?

then as a short cut, just compute a planned return of 10 -12% pa on equity participation of $ 600 million.........( 30% X 25% X 2 billion )....my answer about $ 60 - $ 70 million per annum.........and 100% of the plant about $ 200 to $ 240 million pa.

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 16:07 | Report Abuse

in concept PBB is right to take present day NTA plus NPV of the plant....

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 16:09 | Report Abuse

30% discount is also very reasonable in view of the low quality of the assets ( the mall) and the uncertainties of the project......

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 16:10 | Report Abuse

blind leading the blind is no fun...........

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 16:19 | Report Abuse

Investee, I m sorry. I don't quite understand the below

Actually it is whether 1.87b or 468m. JAKS' equity contribution is 25% x 1.87b x 30% stake = 140m. PB ascribing 82m (RM329/4) is weird but maybe not so big difference as presented here.


------------------
Investee Hey DK66, u have my respect. This is just for argument sake. Ignore me if this is too noob question.

Actually it is whether 1.87b or 468m. JAKS' equity contribution is 25% x 1.87b x 30% stake = 140m. PB ascribing 82m (RM329/4) is weird but maybe not so big difference as presented here.

The logic is Vietnam will give fixed capacity charge to cover fixed principal repayment and interest expense. The leftover for equity holder (EBITDA - principal repayment - interest) is really 12% Return on Invest Equity. That's why we need to compare Invested Equity to leftover for equity holder.

Refer:
https://klse.i3investor.com/blogs/Jaks%20resources/2019-04-29-story204...

"The Capacity Charge is a fixed payment that is paid each period for each kilowatt of available (not dispatched) capacity. It includes fixed charges involved in the construction, operation, and maintenance of the power plant, including charges for: – Repayment of the principal and interest of the debt used to construct the facility – Return on equity capital invested..... bla bla bla~"

Therefore, capacity charge is for return invested equity after netting of mainly principal repayment and interest.
14/05/2020 3:51 PM

Posted by Investee > 2020-05-14 16:48 | Report Abuse

If you invest 1.87b equity, I will pay u 12% on 1.87b. If you invest 468m equity, I will ensure fixed capacity charge = principal repayment + interest + 12% on 468m.

This way, you will have IRR 12% on equity and payback period of 8 years to recover 468m invested equity.

You cannot use 12% on 1.87b and assume that's the FCF because capacity charge already take care of your principal repayment and interest. Capacity charge - principal repayment - interest will give you 12% IRR on equity.

Aside to PBB report, the 82m is a NPV, i.e. PV of future FCF (however derived by PBB) minus invested equity capital. It's not how much it's worth, i.e. PV of future FCF. Can understand ah?

_____________________________________________________________
DK66 Investee, I m sorry. I don't quite understand the below

Actually it is whether 1.87b or 468m. JAKS' equity contribution is 25% x 1.87b x 30% stake = 140m. PB ascribing 82m (RM329/4) is weird but maybe not so big difference as presented here.

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 16:51 | Report Abuse

blind leading the blind is no fun.

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 16:52 | Report Abuse

investee is awake..........all the rest, I think pretend only...........

Posted by Investee > 2020-05-14 17:02 | Report Abuse

Hey, don't go for personal attack. Try to explain can already. Just a forum to exchange idea.

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 17:03 | Report Abuse

investee


not personal attack.............I think they all pretend don't know only.....

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 17:05 | Report Abuse

dk

The crux of the matter.......U think the PPA will give returns of 12% pa on the project cost of US$ 2 billion or 12% on capital brought in which 30% X 25% X US$ 2 billion. ( US$ 150 million )....

In the case of a risk free return of 12% is very good already when Vietnam guarantees both the costs and the revenue.....

still want super profits at 12% X 4 because of the gearing?

This is not Mahathir/ YTL in 1990.........This is Vietnam........U think they are cronies meh? Vietnam want to war with China if they think they can win.

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 17:18 | Report Abuse

qqq3, Readers here are not interested in theory. Tell me do you think JHDP can make RM652m like Vinh Tan 1 ?

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 17:19 | Report Abuse

We must not assume. Believe what you see. No such thing as too good to be true.

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 17:25 | Report Abuse

i3lurker > May 14, 2020 5:12 PM | Report Abuse

qqq3

TUTUP DUA MATA

these are very desperate people
dun play the fool with them
They will do anything, anything

go and huat Gloves better.
========


and squeeze the last sen out of them? no thanks........

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 17:27 | Report Abuse

sted by DK66 > May 14, 2020 5:18 PM | Report Abuse

qqq3, Readers here are not interested in theory. Tell me do you think JHDP can make RM652m like Vinh Tan 1 ?

===========

a straight forward answer is No..........

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 17:33 | Report Abuse

the big funds who buy the big 2 last few days are late comers..........clumsy big funds.......well....they intend to keep forever, .............

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 17:35 | Report Abuse

At least someone showed some calculations this time

Now everyone can decide.
But don't ask me why x0.80, why 900m, and why x6. I don't know

-------------------------
i3lurker qqq3

I can give you the famous 1 liner

652 X 0.8 X 0.3 / 900 million shares X 6 = RM1.04 per share
14/05/2020 5:21 PM

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 17:43 | Report Abuse

This does not come from public bank
--------------
652 X 0.8 X 0.3 / 900 million shares X 6 = RM1.04 per share
14/05/2020 5:21 PM

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 17:50 | Report Abuse

Public bank gave RM329m as annual free cash flow to Jaks only. Nothing else.

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 18:14 | Report Abuse

I suppose you don't know why
------------
qqq33333333 sted by DK66 > May 14, 2020 5:18 PM | Report Abuse

qqq3, Readers here are not interested in theory. Tell me do you think JHDP can make RM652m like Vinh Tan 1 ?

===========

a straight forward answer is No..........
14/05/2020 5:27 PM

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 18:24 | Report Abuse

DK66 > May 14, 2020 6:14 PM | Report Abuse

I suppose you don't know why
===========

there are many reasons why......it can be timing, changed circumstances, can be gearing, can be political, negotiating powers........they wanted some American investments?

but its reasonable to assume returns of 12% on funds invested is reasonable....and returns of 4 X 12 % is super profits and exceptional...........

Posted by Ehome009 > 2020-05-14 19:14 | Report Abuse

qqq333,
I am from engineering field, do not have accounting background, yet I still tried hard to learn about financial jargon and produced an elementary article in an aim to find the fair valuation for JHDP.

You have been talking a lot to undermine the potential valuation of JHDP. I believe you have sound financial background and you should utilise your strength to come out a convincing article to refute DK66 & mine and many other sifus' earning projections. Do not give vague arguments or beat around the bush statements to justify your claims. Be professional, thank you.

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 19:21 | Report Abuse

Investee, You have to take risk into account.

Think of it this way, when you invest USD1.87b on a project, whether you use borrowing or not your total risk is USD1.87b. If you can't complete the power plant, you lost USD1.87b, not 468m.

In the 25 years of operation. Your capacity payment is only guaranteed if you make the capacity available. If for any reason your power plant does operate because of your fault (not Vietnam EVN's fault), there is no capacity payment, and your total loss will be the whole sum not just the equity portion. Therefore, you think you will base your projection on 468m and not 1.87b ?

In any case, Vinh Tan 1 would not have achieved its results had its IRR is equity based.

----------------
Investee If you invest 1.87b equity, I will pay u 12% on 1.87b. If you invest 468m equity, I will ensure fixed capacity charge = principal repayment + interest + 12% on 468m.

This way, you will have IRR 12% on equity and payback period of 8 years to recover 468m invested equity.

You cannot use 12% on 1.87b and assume that's the FCF because capacity charge already take care of your principal repayment and interest. Capacity charge - principal repayment - interest will give you 12% IRR on equity.

Aside to PBB report, the 82m is a NPV, i.e. PV of future FCF (however derived by PBB) minus invested equity capital. It's not how much it's worth, i.e. PV of future FCF. Can understand ah?

Posted by elbrutus > 2020-05-14 20:09 | Report Abuse

is better than smeone with no eyes and ...GO HOLLAND LEFT WITH A BLOODY SHITTY MOUTH ONLY ...in cantonese !

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 20:29 | Report Abuse

Posted by Ehome009 > May 14, 2020 7:14 PM | Report Abuse

qqq333,
I am from engineering field, do not have accounting background, yet I still tried hard to learn about financial jargon and produced an elementary article in an aim to find the fair valuation for JHDP.

You have been talking a lot to undermine the potential valuation of JHDP. I believe you have sound financial background and you should utilise your strength to come out a convincing article to refute DK66 & mine and many other sifus' earning projections. Do not give vague arguments or beat around the bush statements to justify your claims. Be professional, thank you.
=

I believe u...........now your turn to believe me and don't pretend.

what I write not that complicated.........

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 20:31 | Report Abuse

u don't understand me.........try to understand investee.

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 20:34 | Report Abuse

ehome...........

IPPs do not give u 12% returns on gross assets..........


they give u 12% return on capital employed very good already.........

Posted by elbrutus > 2020-05-14 20:37 | Report Abuse

DK66 / Ehome009 bros...just ask that HE/SHE WHO JUST ABOUT KNOWS ALL...i think!!!...to prepare n lay out his/her worksheet to convince n make you guys to BELIEVE HIM?HER ....i suppose that is d least he can do after so many days of ...SO MANY TALK !!!

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 20:40 | Report Abuse

ehome...........the only time I have seen 12% returns on gross assets for IPPs are those Jho Low transactions..........I scratch your back, u scratch mine.......

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 20:54 | Report Abuse

Stock: [JAKS]: JAKS RESOURCES BHD

May 14, 2020 12:20 AM | Report Abuse

Dear All,

From now on, I will keep posting this remark to remind you that you may seek my comment if you wish to clarify what you read in this forum no matter how stupid they are. I will not be responding to comments here unless requested by sincere readers.

I trust most readers here are able to differentiate for themselves comments that are reliable from those that are ridiculous. If you are not sure, ask.

Thank you.

P/S Aseng may help to post this remark frequently. TQ
14/05/2020 8:28 PM

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 21:00 | Report Abuse

dk....stop pretending............u lose money, your business.....don't drag every one down with u..........

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 21:04 | Report Abuse

qqq3. I shut my mouth also made you angry??

Posted by elbrutus > 2020-05-14 21:04 | Report Abuse

DK bro...u sure u really never step on this PUCKER TOES BEFORE ???

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 21:07 | Report Abuse

why said I lose money ? you don't know my cost ?

Posted by elbrutus > 2020-05-14 21:11 | Report Abuse

DK66 bro...when u got a ...CHING NGOW KIM... residenting here day in day out ...u dont need to go anywhere else lo...hahaha ...joking eh..ok...tough luck bro

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 21:13 | Report Abuse

I angry because u are pretending........

enough is enough.......


if u are not pretending, u will at least acknowledge that at least PBB is conceptually correct based on information supplied by Jaks management to PBB.

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 21:15 | Report Abuse

by DK66 > May 14, 2020 9:07 PM | Report Abuse

why said I lose money ? you don't know my cost ?
==========
my exact words....


..stop pretending............u lose money ( in future ), your business.....don't drag every one down with u........

Posted by i3lurker > 2020-05-14 21:17 |

Post removed.Why?

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 21:20 | Report Abuse

DK66 Shan Kee Tiow, 我真的希望每个人都有您这样的了解。如此我便不必一直为JAKS辩护。
---------------------------
Shan Kee Tiow DK66
不要吐血，快乐一天也算赚到！我告诉你，其实很多人自以为是，但是他们都不知道自己像个傻瓜一样在炫耀什么。因为他们不清楚jaks用的12%就是IRR rate，而PBB为什么用rate为12%是因为这12%就是IRR rate，也就是内部回酬旅。当这IRR rate用在discounted cash flow method（DCF），这12%就是贴现率。什么是贴现率？贴现率就是用利率的方式把未来钱计算成现在的价值。

Internal rate of return (IRR) is the interest rate at which the net present value of all the cash flows (both positive and negative) from a project or investment equal zero.

Internal rate of return is used to evaluate the attractiveness of a project or investment. If the IRR of a new project exceeds a company’s required rate of return, that project is desirable. If IRR falls below the required rate of return, the project should be rejected.

所以需要谢谢他们提到的NPV。CF/（1+r)^n就是正在贴现方程式，但是有人搞不明白我们在算什么。JAKS的总投资是8.04b，以12%的IRR rate来计算。为什么Ehome009要找的是free cash flow（FCF）？原因很简单，8.04b就是NPV，12%的IRR rate就是计算25年里每年进账多少FCF经过以12%的贴现率后才能与8.04b相等。

找到的答案是每年进账1020m，再以12%的discounted rate（贴现率）计算，你就会找回8.04b的NPV，只有每年进账1020m才能证明投资hai duong IPP是值得的，因为保值。PBB给的TP是什么？现在NPV？现在投入8b，结果说NPV是1b，我不知道贷出6b的三家银行有什么感想。target price是对未来股票会涨到什么价位而给出的一个预期价，说target price是npv（现金价值），倒不如叫那位分析员不要写报告好吗？因为所有股价都是NPV。target price就是要预期未来，发电厂正要完成，就已经宣布要破产剩10亿。说多了都是累！我这篇文章不是写给喷子看的，而是写给有兴趣了解jaks然后实事求是的人看的。谢谢
14/05/2020 9:17 PM

Posted by DK66 > 2020-05-14 21:22 | Report Abuse

qqq3, stop pretending to be the good guy. You are already very well known.

Posted by CT > 2020-05-14 23:34 | Report Abuse

DK66 just ignore qqq3. Dont waste time to read his comment. Tin kosong only

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 23:43 | Report Abuse

refer to Jaks forum page 848

Posted by Investee > 2020-05-14 23:45 | Report Abuse

Not so agree because Vietnam Government is a financing guarantor.

If you think it's 12% on $1.87b, that means debt structure is irrelevant and EVN doesn't care how the project is financed, right? In this case, it contradicts with Appendix 2 of Circular No. 56/2014 which includes principal repayment under cash outflow. In other words, the fixed capacity charge includes a portion for debt repayment and hence debt structure is relevant in EVN's 12% computation. Does this make sense?

This is also the reason why EVN cap equity at 20%-30% of project cost in the circular. Too high equity % will be too costly for EVN. EVN needs to give 20-30% to incentivise foreigners to build and transfer knowledge. EVN will make sure capacity charge is enough to service debt repayments and add on 12% return on invested equity.

The issue with Vinh Tan 1 is that we have no detailed financial breakdown to analyse. Any one-off income will throw that out of whack. Mong Duong 2 has detailed financials disclosed up to Q1'19, just not in its IR section. Haha, need to search harder.
______________________________________________________
DK66 Investee, You have to take risk into account.

Think of it this way, when you invest USD1.87b on a project, whether you use borrowing or not your total risk is USD1.87b. If you can't complete the power plant, you lost USD1.87b, not 468m.

In the 25 years of operation. Your capacity payment is only guaranteed if you make the capacity available. If for any reason your power plant does operate because of your fault (not Vietnam EVN's fault), there is no capacity payment, and your total loss will be the whole sum not just the equity portion. Therefore, you think you will base your projection on 468m and not 1.87b ?

In any case, Vinh Tan 1 would not have achieved its results had its IRR is equity based.

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 23:46 | Report Abuse

dk66...u think pretend is all that is needed?


just pretend to be pig eat tiger?


refer to page 848 Jaks forum...........

Posted by qqq33333333 > 2020-05-14 23:50 | Report Abuse

just because invested in Jaks then can pretend to be any thing?


what about dragging others down the drain with you?

investee is awake......even if OTB and his whole cabal is asleep................