ShareJunction - Member Posts

x 0

Previous announcement shot up to $0.715 with 32m shares traded. This time round market got other stocks to play mainly all the semi conductors stocks so like non event except early morning' s eager beavers. Market still half hearted as YZJM' s model is totally new and I think it is the case of ' no see money no talk' for the majority investors. This is the nature of the market but it may be too late to get in when the price finally surge, just like CSE Global, Innotek, Boustead, AEM, ISDN, Nam Cheong, just to name a few. Personally I am ok to wait especially it is expected that they pay higher dividends after the maiden one this year. In time to come, this shipyardless shipyard is going to deliver 53 ships or even more maybe over the course of 2 to 3 years. Besides, selling ships is only 1 part of their businesses. So far, all the public announcements is related to ships newbuild. They still have chartering, leasing, fiancing, materials procurring etc etc. In gist, they are involves in every steps of the martime value chain. The values will manifest in due course.

x 1

x 0

https://www.worldports.org/8-ships-nearly-7-billion-chinas-ship-king-enters-vlcc-market/
https://hao.cnyes.com/post/243089
http://www.shipping-daily.com/news/detail?id=6804

Old Ren said YZJM should worth at least $0.9 now. Perhaps he said it with the knowledge that what YZJM is capable of and going to do, which evidenced by the recent order of 8 VLCCs new build. Apparently, old Ren' s reputation and the orders have created quite an impact in the shipping community, as showed by the above links. These websites are focusing on shipping related businesses so if they are awed by the YZJM and old Ren' s move, it meant somethings. To those who are curious, YZJM' s order is not with YZJS, as YZJS is not known to be building VLCCs. In fact, for 319,000 DWT VLCCs, only about 3 shipyards in China are capable of buidling them. These ships are quite future proof too with the latest technogy and meeting green requirement. So, YZJM does not limit its order to YZJS which is a wise move. Essentially, it would allot capital to wherever it thinks there are money to be made. This transaction is a textbook example of the " capital cycle" strategy that makes YZJM a unique and potentially very profitable investment. It confirms they have the industry relationships, financial firepower, and strategic discipline to execute at the highest level of the shipping industry.

x 0

Trying to reclaim previous high of $2.29 before announcements of results and very likely, the special dividend? It is good enough for me if it hit and stay above $2.2 post results announcemement, which should be before end of May 2026.

x 0

The spin off siblings including big brother YZJS are focus or in other words, know their business models, know how to put their capital to work but this finance seems still don' t know what to do other than getting rid of exposure to China property. Haiz, maybe should just invest every single cents into YZJS and or YZJM rather than sitting on idle cash? Shareholders should push the management harder a bit on the coming AGM, having said so, I think the management should have some developments to update during AGM. Let' s see.

HVRRVH ( Date: 14-Apr-2026 12:56) Posted:

Kept all the shares pre spin and accumulated a bit more from $0.24 to $0.265. Last purchase this morning but I guess I wouldn' t support any further until FY2026 results. Have sent the following AGM questions to the managment:

1) The Annual Report states a target to deploy up to RMB1 billion into listed equities with yields above 4.5% in H1 2026. With H1 2026 nearly complete, can management disclose what portion of this amount has been deployed to date, the specific sectors or markets invested in, and the actual yield achieved on deployed capital?
2) The Group recognized S$290.9m in credit loss allowances in FY2025 to clean up legacy China property exposures. For FY2026, based on current recovery discussions with borrowers and collateral realisation, what is management' s realisti estimate of write back or cash recoveries from these provided NPLs? Can you quantify the expected range?
3) The Group' s long term target portfolio miz is 40% debt, 40% equity, and 20% cash. What is management' s target Return on Equity or Return on Invested Capital for this portfolio once fully deployed? And what is the current ROE on the S$618.6 m cash and S$1.71 b AUM as of the latest available date?

Fellow shareholders please also send in your questions. I have forgotten to ask whether they expect anymore NPL provision. Also, if the targeted return for equities is only 4.5%, then shouldn' t the company conduct SBB since the share price is trading 40% below NAV now? Why not give up the cash as special dividend if it is sitting idle? If the company can tackle the challenges effecticely, I think we can see share price of $0.40 as the base when FY2026 is closed.

x 0

Ok let' s see whether it get address by the company or not. In fact, ROE below 10% seems low even if for overall. They should actively scale up deployment of its capital but with last night' s announcement, we can see that old Ren is not sitting idle. This has also somewhat address Q2 as the compay actively communicate with the investment community thru SGX announcement when there is material development on deployment of capital. Let' s see whether this is scalable and if it does, in no time the oompany will come to the market for rights issue and or placement. Imagine a shipyardless shipyard delivery an average of 10,20,30 ships annually! This is going to be massive! Let' s sit tight while the wider investment community slowly discover how YZJM is making money.

volvo125 ( Date: 16-Apr-2026 18:24) Posted:

Regarding your Q3, the indicative 10~15% IRR are projects specific returns (specifically the maritime projects), whereas the ROE ~7.8% are overall net return of the coy net asset which will include these higher returns maritime projects, the much lower returns of cash mgt and yield products, returns from other businesses such as debt investment and private equities (transferred from YFH) as well as those capital being tied up in the form of working capitals that will not have any returns.

HVRRVH ( Date: 15-Apr-2026 12:00) Posted:

AGM on 30/4/26. Hopefully the managment will address the following questions which I have emailed them.

Question 1: On Capital Allocation Strategy (Rights Issue vs. Share Buyback)
The Contradiction: In pre-spin-off interviews, management strongly suggested a rights issue to reward shareholders by allowing them to buy shares at a discount. However, post-listing, the company has sought a buyback mandate (reducing capital) instead of a rights issue (raising capital). Furthermore, despite obtaining the buyback mandate in March 2026, the company did not repurchase any shares even as the stock traded down towards $0.505.
The Question: Could management clarify the logic behind shifting from a capital-raising stance (rights issue) to a capital-reduction stance (share buyback)? Given that the buyback mandate was obtained but not utilized when the share price was depressed, does this indicate a lack of conviction in the valuation or were there other factors preventing deployment?

Question 2: On Financial Transparency and Reporting Frequency
The Context: While the company adheres to SGX listing rules, investors are currently relying on analyst reports to track capital deployment progress . Given that a key part of the investment thesis is the successful deployment of cash into vessels, there is a significant information lag between quarterly periods.
The Question: Given the market' s reliance on understanding the pace of cash deployment into the 50-vessel pipeline, will the company consider providing voluntary quarterly business updates (even if not mandatory)? This would help bridge the gap between semi-annual reports and assure shareholders that the $400 million cash hoard is being actively put to work.

Question 3: On Return on Investment (ROI) of Deployed Capital
The Context: The company targets project IRRs of 10-15% (unlevered) and 20-30% (levered). However, the FY2025 financial data shows a Return on Equity (ROE) of ~7.8% and a Return on Invested Capital (ROIC) of ~5.6% . This is significantly below the stated project targets.
The Question: The financial statements indicate a Group ROE of ~7.8% and ROIC of ~5.6% , which lags the 10-15% IRR targets. Is this simply a function of the large cash drag (where cash is earning near-zero returns), or are there specific vessel investments currently underperforming the 10% target? When does management expect the Group' s actual ROIC to converge with the 10-15% project target?

Question 4: On the 5-Year Growth Trajectory and Fleet Scaling
The Context: The company has successfully secured a $90 million leasing contract for 13 vessels. However, the long-term thesis relies on scaling this to the " up to 50" newbuild pipeline. Investors need a quantifiable benchmark to track success against management' s own aspirations.
The Question: Looking ahead 5 years, what is management' s specific target for recurring leasing income (charter income + finance lease interest) as a percentage of total income? Specifically, what proportion of the 85+ vessel portfolio (including newbuilds) do you intend to place on long-term leases versus holding for spot trading or capital gains, and what EPS growth rate does that imply?

x 0

AGM on 30/4/26. Hopefully the managment will address the following questions which I have emailed them.

Question 1: On Capital Allocation Strategy (Rights Issue vs. Share Buyback)
The Contradiction: In pre-spin-off interviews, management strongly suggested a rights issue to reward shareholders by allowing them to buy shares at a discount. However, post-listing, the company has sought a buyback mandate (reducing capital) instead of a rights issue (raising capital). Furthermore, despite obtaining the buyback mandate in March 2026, the company did not repurchase any shares even as the stock traded down towards $0.505.
The Question: Could management clarify the logic behind shifting from a capital-raising stance (rights issue) to a capital-reduction stance (share buyback)? Given that the buyback mandate was obtained but not utilized when the share price was depressed, does this indicate a lack of conviction in the valuation or were there other factors preventing deployment?

Question 2: On Financial Transparency and Reporting Frequency
The Context: While the company adheres to SGX listing rules, investors are currently relying on analyst reports to track capital deployment progress . Given that a key part of the investment thesis is the successful deployment of cash into vessels, there is a significant information lag between quarterly periods.
The Question: Given the market' s reliance on understanding the pace of cash deployment into the 50-vessel pipeline, will the company consider providing voluntary quarterly business updates (even if not mandatory)? This would help bridge the gap between semi-annual reports and assure shareholders that the $400 million cash hoard is being actively put to work.

Question 3: On Return on Investment (ROI) of Deployed Capital
The Context: The company targets project IRRs of 10-15% (unlevered) and 20-30% (levered). However, the FY2025 financial data shows a Return on Equity (ROE) of ~7.8% and a Return on Invested Capital (ROIC) of ~5.6% . This is significantly below the stated project targets.
The Question: The financial statements indicate a Group ROE of ~7.8% and ROIC of ~5.6% , which lags the 10-15% IRR targets. Is this simply a function of the large cash drag (where cash is earning near-zero returns), or are there specific vessel investments currently underperforming the 10% target? When does management expect the Group' s actual ROIC to converge with the 10-15% project target?

Question 4: On the 5-Year Growth Trajectory and Fleet Scaling
The Context: The company has successfully secured a $90 million leasing contract for 13 vessels. However, the long-term thesis relies on scaling this to the " up to 50" newbuild pipeline. Investors need a quantifiable benchmark to track success against management' s own aspirations.
The Question: Looking ahead 5 years, what is management' s specific target for recurring leasing income (charter income + finance lease interest) as a percentage of total income? Specifically, what proportion of the 85+ vessel portfolio (including newbuilds) do you intend to place on long-term leases versus holding for spot trading or capital gains, and what EPS growth rate does that imply?

x 0

Waitig for AGM date and circular. Would send them AGM question in advance. Disappointing performance post spin as summarised by old Ren' s remark, i.e., the stock should trade at least $0.90 even in current stage. This may not be entirely the ' Fault' of the company but the nature of SGX market, among other things. To be fair, overall SGX market has been performing well for quite some time already and this make it more disappointing to see YZJM' s current share price at $0.64. However, with the latest analysts coverage and old Ren' s interviews with the media, perception of YZJM could be better by the market going forward especially if FY2026 results truly show the market that YZJM' s business model can make a lot of money. As of now, nothing to be excited about until the share price is trading at least at $0.72.

x 0

Kept all the shares pre spin and accumulated a bit more from $0.24 to $0.265. Last purchase this morning but I guess I wouldn' t support any further until FY2026 results. Have sent the following AGM questions to the managment:

1) The Annual Report states a target to deploy up to RMB1 billion into listed equities with yields above 4.5% in H1 2026. With H1 2026 nearly complete, can management disclose what portion of this amount has been deployed to date, the specific sectors or markets invested in, and the actual yield achieved on deployed capital?
2) The Group recognized S$290.9m in credit loss allowances in FY2025 to clean up legacy China property exposures. For FY2026, based on current recovery discussions with borrowers and collateral realisation, what is management' s realisti estimate of write back or cash recoveries from these provided NPLs? Can you quantify the expected range?
3) The Group' s long term target portfolio miz is 40% debt, 40% equity, and 20% cash. What is management' s target Return on Equity or Return on Invested Capital for this portfolio once fully deployed? And what is the current ROE on the S$618.6 m cash and S$1.71 b AUM as of the latest available date?

Fellow shareholders please also send in your questions. I have forgotten to ask whether they expect anymore NPL provision. Also, if the targeted return for equities is only 4.5%, then shouldn' t the company conduct SBB since the share price is trading 40% below NAV now? Why not give up the cash as special dividend if it is sitting idle? If the company can tackle the challenges effecticely, I think we can see share price of $0.40 as the base when FY2026 is closed.

x 0

Personally it' s ok for me to buy at current price, and if price drop, can buy a bit more. Similar thing happened to the parent Boustead where after I first bought, it keep dropping for the next 3 to 4 years before trending up. I am trying to say it is hard to time the bottom. Everyone wish they could.

JurongW ( Date: 11-Apr-2026 15:11) Posted:

x 0

Yes there are risks, chiefly from high interest rate but SSB right now is still low 2% after coming down from high of 3+%. It' s hard to see saving rates of 4 to 5% even if Fed rate going higher to 5%. That said, wary of high interest rate environment is exactly the reason why I am relunctance to add to my reit portfolio to beging with but in UIB I see value. It is better to take a position now because even if the price come down, there is always room to add. I have been cutting Lendlease so as to maintain certain amount of reit portfolio and I will continue to adjust in the same direction. If Lendlease hit $0.65, perhaps it is time for me to let go of it all.

x 0

Agree. No reason why UIB can' t trade around $1 with its projected yield. Even if 4% yield, this stock should trade around $1. Intend to add more if the low price persist but time on my side.

Alignment ( Date: 08-Apr-2026 13:57) Posted:

Looks like the institutional investors see a bargain and are tucking in

x 0

First bought this stock in 2021 for its good and sustainable dividend yield, plus solid book value which was largly below the actual market value. Continue to buy till 2025 even though by 2024 and 2025 it was 12% and 8% paper loss respectively without factoring in dividends. Last purchase was $1.72 in Nov 2025 which by then already sitting with almost 100% unrealise capital gain. I think Boustead has now finally reach stable state by forcing the market to take cognizant of its property values by listing UI Boustead Reit. At first, I was reclunctance to hold UIB to avoid concentration and related company risks. However, I think UIB price is too attractive now. When dust finally settle which should begin with maiden dividend, there is no reason why UIB cannot be around $1. Therefor, I have started to buy UIB with a small position. If the low price persist, it may compel me to buy more. Let' s see.

x 0

Yes fair enough, the company did not commit to a rights issue even though the question was asked during EGM. Nonetheless, they ought to be more categorical in tackling the question. After the spin off, we now know instead of short of cash, they have excessive cash because the cash was not deployed. Of course there wasn' t a need for rights issue now with the excessive cash. In fact, the excess cash amounting to SGD$507m if remain undeploy is a waste of capital. I was under the impression during the lead up to the spin off that, after the spin off, YZJM would have no problem finding opportunities to put their money and that' s why they even willing to entertain the question of rights issue. However, it seems that both YZJF and YZJM are facing challenges to put their money into good use now. For YZJF, the only significant news was their $100m anchor fund in local mid and small cap equities investment after failing to be the white knight of Shan Shan. The returns is not expected to be a lot even we assume that the ROI is 10% for their 100m local fund. YZJM has excess fund to such an extend that they are prepare to use it for SBB. Well, if they have good use of the money for bigger returns, perhaps they would not consider SBB so that illustrate the challenges they face in deploying the money. The strtegic positioning of the SBB is also questionble. After the mandate is obtained, they didn' t even bother to buy back any shares from $0.58 to $0.505. Yes, that the price movements since the SBB mandate was obtained and now, the price has move back up to $0.625 and I think we can forget about any SBB. So did the company in fact deploy some of its cash during the time SBB mandate was obtain till now? If not, is this a case of no SBB and no investment of its cash from then till now? If so, it raise the question of competency and optimal managment of cash capital. Is this the reason why they are reluctance to conduct quarterly volunteer business update? Even though old Ren has proven that he is shrew and can make money for shareholders, I think more information need to be disclose on regular basis for shareholders to stay inform. One thing good about old Ren is that he always try to create value for shareholders, latest being floating the idea of secondary HKSE listing. Also, the latest 2 coverage by Phillip and DBS have somehow make the business model clearer to the wider investment community and have boosted the investors' confidence in the company.

x 0

Got it very wrong here with regard to price action, thinking that it may still hover round low $0.50+ so dry powder hasn' t deploy. On hindsight BBs have been accumulating at low before pushing up aggressively from $0.54. Should be trying $0.68 next with supports at current level. Waiting for AGM and will pose a few questions to the management, among others, 1) why give mixed signals- During spin off time say will consider rights issue but no sign of case 2) SBB mandate - Instead of rights issue, hurridedly obtained SBB mandate, which is in contrast with earlier intention of issuing rights shares, one is to increase float one is to reduce float 3) Just like rights issue with regard to SBB - no follow up after talk about it and obtained the mandate 4) New talk of second HKSE listing - Is it still exploring or again, just talk only? 5) How about summary quartely release so that investors can track closely the performance of the company.

HVRRVH ( Date: 07-Apr-2026 16:52) Posted:

This stock now give the vibe of queuing at between $0.5 and $0.51 can get like that, regardless of seemingly aggressive upward moments, just like today' s price actions. I think old Ren is right to make noise and highlight how unhappy he was about the undervaluation of the stock. However, make noise is one thing, show the market the money is another. Old Ren was rather aggressive, looking back, within a short 2 years plus, he spin off YZJM from YZJF when YZJF was still finding its foothold. With the benefit of hindsight, we now know it is true, YZJF has to suddenly provide huge provision to take advantage of the reset to wipe clean its balance sheet. Suffice to say, YZJF now start from scratch again and its current valuation is what it is. The market would not give it any premium as it has no profit and suspend paying dividend. In fact, the market has price the stock below its NAV per share and going forward, no profit no talk and old Ren and mdm Liu better start showing the market that YZJF can make money, and fast. As for YZJM, it fare better. After all, it has taken the most lucrative part of the old combined entities, it has profit to show and despite only operated on its own for few weeks before the book closed, it still declare token dividend. However, the same principles applies, YZJM must show the market that it can make money and fast or else no amount of making noise by old Ren is going to move the price up. I am cautiously optimistic that old Ren can delivers within 2 to 3 years. Let' s see.

x 0

This Philip joker or what? Start the coverage with TP of $0.69 but stated TP as $0.72 at pg 11 of the report. Anyway, after going through the 2 analyst coverage, in summary, both gave similar profits projection through FY2027 and it is envisaged that as soon as from this year, YZJM should start to show the market that they can made money. A DPS of minimum $0.025 is my short term target for pay out in 2028. The trajectory is relistic or not can be gauged with next 2 sets of financial results. On a side note, maybe YZJF will get coverage soon too. Let' s see.

Sunraku ( Date: 06-Apr-2026 12:44) Posted:

Phillip Capital initiates coverage with a BUY rating and a target price of S$0.69. Our target price is pegged to 1.0x P/B FY26e, 11% above peer valuations of 0.9x P/B. We believe this premium is warranted given the Group&rsquo s net cash of S$507mn (27% of market cap), rapid mbook value growth trajectory (S$0.5bn to S$2.0bn in net assets over three years), and differentiated positioning as a full-lifecycle maritime financial platform rather than a pure vessel operator. There is upside to the book value from rising earnings and unrealized gains in newbuilds.

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7446777716743454721

x 0

2H results will be out in late May. Special dividend is expected and therefore, price is likely to hover around current level. Nonetheless, have set price alert at $1.79 and if it comes to that, hopefully can add a little.

x 0

This stock now give the vibe of queuing at between $0.5 and $0.51 can get like that, regardless of seemingly aggressive upward moments, just like today' s price actions. I think old Ren is right to make noise and highlight how unhappy he was about the undervaluation of the stock. However, make noise is one thing, show the market the money is another. Old Ren was rather aggressive, looking back, within a short 2 years plus, he spin off YZJM from YZJF when YZJF was still finding its foothold. With the benefit of hindsight, we now know it is true, YZJF has to suddenly provide huge provision to take advantage of the reset to wipe clean its balance sheet. Suffice to say, YZJF now start from scratch again and its current valuation is what it is. The market would not give it any premium as it has no profit and suspend paying dividend. In fact, the market has price the stock below its NAV per share and going forward, no profit no talk and old Ren and mdm Liu better start showing the market that YZJF can make money, and fast. As for YZJM, it fare better. After all, it has taken the most lucrative part of the old combined entities, it has profit to show and despite only operated on its own for few weeks before the book closed, it still declare token dividend. However, the same principles applies, YZJM must show the market that it can make money and fast or else no amount of making noise by old Ren is going to move the price up. I am cautiously optimistic that old Ren can delivers within 2 to 3 years. Let' s see.

x 0

Let' s hope it is option 2. Even though not all dual listings are successful, such as PC Partner, who has been dual listed but has now choose to only list in SGX. However, for YZJM/F, its China root with accessiblity through HKSE could close the valuation gap quickly, it should receive better valuation than in SGX. Today market reaction just prove that Ren is right. I think that to him, YZJM and YZJF are not those run of a mill companies that just want to get listed for whatever purpose. To him, the YZJ series are serious businesses that can make a lot of money for himself and shareholders. So far, I think he has proven it with YZJS, from sub $1 years back to now a steady $3+ $4 stock. It is in fact remarkable if someone simply invest big in YZJS since day 1, now the returns will be free YZJM and YZJF! Easily 500 to 600% returns if took a position in YZJS when it was sub $1. Nevertheless, there are people who complained not enough and unfairly abscribe S-chips label on YZJF and YZJM. Technically yes, YZJF and YZJM are S-chips since they are China stocks but S-chips have negative connotation as we all know, it refers to those Chinese stocks that simply cannot make it but somehow got listed in SGX. Today market pushed up the price after old Ren made noise. This alone already vindicate old Ren' s point that SGX is moribund and shallow in liquidity. No vibrancy, investors go after proven STI components blue chips only. Investors have no patience and appetite for growing companies like YZJF and YZJM and push down their valuation as if they deserve to be punished for listing in SGX. Having said so, I think at least in YZJF case, it is no surprise that the price has dropped. Afterall, no dividend and no profit after NPL provision. YZJF and YZJM can only emulate YZJS in term of share price if they start consistently produce results with EPS of at least $0.1 and DPS of $0.04. If this come to frution, then even remain primary listed in SGX only also can see share price of at least $1 each.

volvo125 ( Date: 31-Mar-2026 23:07) Posted:

Ya ... agree, Ren is really full of surprises, YMD listing last year was a superb good one, the YFH huge npl provisions recently was a very bad one (legacy problem, Ren has no coice), and now the floating of a dual listing at HKSE ( or delist from SGX then relist in HKSE) signal is, in my opinion, an ultra good one because HKSE is a much more vibrant market capable of offering a much higher valuation.

Regardless Option 1 DeL then ReL or Option 2 DualL, if happens or even thought to have a high chance of happening, the share price should go up significantly to at least nearer towards the NAV value, or even more.

This is what i think. Feel free to correct me or add your input if you have experience dealing in a DeList/Re-List and/or DualList stocks.

If Option 1, the coy must make offer to buy back all the sgx shares from the market at some premium. Investors smelling this will load up as much as possible early to get this premium, wheather it is a 10% or 20% above some future average prevailing market price, or better still the offer at NAV.

If Option 2, then high valuation potential HKSE DualL at HKSE will lead the SGX price significantly up. If YFH and/or YMD were to DualL in HKSE, Ren cannot be listing them at 0.25 and 0.51 at the onset, the listed price has to be at least the NAVs of 0.502 and 0.60 respectively, or more if some other underwritten methods of valuation not based on PB are used by the listing managers. Again, investors smelling this will load up as much as possible early in anticipation of these huge potential future price gains to come.

I think existing shareholders will stand to benefit much more in Option 2 DualL than the X% premium against the mandatory buyback from Option 1.

HVRRVH ( Date: 31-Mar-2026 18:51) Posted:

Wah never a dull days with old Ren! I think he was saying other than STI components stocks, the rest of the stocks are seriously lacking in liquidity and proper valuation. He could be just venting to the press as YZJM' s and YZJF' s trading volumes have been decreasing [thought I think this has to do wtih the ongoing ME war] and trading below NAV per share. If he want to delist M& F from SG and relist them in HK, then he has to make a publice offer. I think very unlikely and if he really want to do so, let' s just hope he will take care of his reputation and match the offer price with the NAV per share price. However, we all know in such scenario, the offerer will likely to offer 10-20% above market price and that it. Only a few rare ones ever offered premium to NAVs. On the other hand, if old Ren wants to list the 2 companeis as a dual listed companies in SGX and HKEX, then potentially wider pools of investors especially from China may have access to YZJM and YZJF and this may bridge what old Ren viewed as ' valuation gap' . This is just another financial manuveour by old Ren, in a good way, as he constantly seeking to increase shareholders' value but of course, he himself is the biggest shareholer in the 2 companies. Just a side note, in 2010, YZJS also explore secondary listing in HK/Taiwan but it did not materalise.

x 0

Wah never a dull days with old Ren! I think he was saying other than STI components stocks, the rest of the stocks are seriously lacking in liquidity and proper valuation. He could be just venting to the press as YZJM' s and YZJF' s trading volumes have been decreasing [thought I think this has to do wtih the ongoing ME war] and trading below NAV per share. If he want to delist M& F from SG and relist them in HK, then he has to make a publice offer. I think very unlikely and if he really want to do so, let' s just hope he will take care of his reputation and match the offer price with the NAV per share price. However, we all know in such scenario, the offerer will likely to offer 10-20% above market price and that it. Only a few rare ones ever offered premium to NAVs. On the other hand, if old Ren wants to list the 2 companeis as a dual listed companies in SGX and HKEX, then potentially wider pools of investors especially from China may have access to YZJM and YZJF and this may bridge what old Ren viewed as ' valuation gap' . This is just another financial manuveour by old Ren, in a good way, as he constantly seeking to increase shareholders' value but of course, he himself is the biggest shareholer in the 2 companies. Just a side note, in 2010, YZJS also explore secondary listing in HK/Taiwan but it did not materalise.

x 0

Ren probably would say, if asked, that SBB has been heldback because of the new developments in the Middle East. YZJM probably would have conducted the buy back by now but with ME war ongoing, which is 100% negative for stock markets in general, unless the companies' businesses are related to producing weapons or weapons related such as chips. Maybe Ren is waiting for worse case scenario where overall market tank 20% in short time and YZJM would then start to buy back the shares. As it is, if the war does not get worse, $0.5 is strong support level and I think for SG market, generally it is still strong, especially for companies that are involved in producing chips, semi conductors and even banks especially if they are profitable historicially. In this regard, YZJM [and YZJF for that matter] has nothing to show for. Also, companies with huge cash such as ComfortDelco, even though their businesses seems affected badly due to higher fuel cost and uncertainty, they are still doing well. This implies that if situations get worse, markets may favour companies which are net cash. Therefore, YZJM and YZJF are in a kind of awkward positions, both are regarded as new entities by the market which market will be cautious especially in this uncertain time. On the other hand, both companies have huge cash in hands which the market cannot ignore too and both share prices are below respective NAV per share now. As it is, pessimism seems to have upper hand, as the prices are being pushed down constantly. However, market' s appetite on risk on could be ferocious if marco environment improves. If for some reasons the war stopped in the near future, both YZJM and YZJF would have many opportunities to utilise their huge cash. For now it is only normal and nature to be pessimistic and I wouldn' t be surprised YZJM get tested for price below $0.5 but YZJM seems to have found the footing around $0.25. Let' s see. Long investors can make own assessment and act accordingly, whether to sell, add or do nothihg. Whatever it is, we really have to seriously run through the scenarios where the share price drop below $0.5 and $0.235 for YZJM and YZJF respectively. Don' t say I would add or do nothing but ended up selling at the lowest price range due to panic when the price crashes.