Back

Latest Forum Topics / Best World

Post Reply

THE BEST IS YET TO BE Post Reply Rate topic
destinykraze Elite	16-May-2019 16:13        destinykraze About Contact  Quote this Post!   Yells: "Reality is only a matter of perception"
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	I' m not those guy putting $0.47, $0.60 TP. But at the current stage I think the realistic range is around $1.10- $1.40. It really depends on how the situation develops. bayduck      ( Date: 16-May-2019 15:58) Posted: Agree as well. If the businses model in China is deemed as MLM-ish, then investors should basically write off the entire China revenue stream, and basically value BW as if it had never made its foray into China. My personal view is that BW is not worth zero even if the BIL and MLM issues turn out to be true. The business itself has a clean balance sheet, and there are cashflows from non-China operations. So a big haircut to the price for sure because you lose China and you put on a discount for corporate governance deficiencies, but not zero. destinykraze      ( Date: 16-May-2019 15:49) Posted: You should also remember MLM is not allowed in China, even in the best case scenario, assuming BWI is found to be free of any wrongdoings, china authorities will clamp down on such mlm-activities in china since the issue has been blown up. What is the impact on BWI when 2/3 of it' s revenue is coming from china is affected?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
curious_moo Master	16-May-2019 16:01        curious_moo About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Flexible   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	have anyone consider the the below case which i thought BR is trying to highlight, or is my understanding totally wrong. e.g. BWL sold 100mil to Changsha, and Changsha managed to re-distribute out 70mil thru MLM or direct sales or whatever. if Changsha is really controlled by BWL but posed as an independent wing (via " investments" from BIL), the book on BWL will mention 100mil as revenue (inflated), but in actual fact their revenue is the actual sales from Changsha best which is only 70mil. the rest are just inventory reported on Changsha best books.  bayduck      ( Date: 16-May-2019 15:42) Posted: Agree with you. I think the crux is whether the transactions are genuine, and are done at market rates (i.e. whether revenues and profits from Changsha are inflated). If transactions are genuine, then at most you can only give BW a small punishment for not being forthcoming with the BIL disclosure. michaeltan      ( Date: 16-May-2019 12:32) Posted: What is the intention of Changsa low responsibility? Perhaps for tax avoidance? Difficulties and mitigation of risks doing business with China counterparts? Important is that the transaction is genuide and in accordance with company appointment agreement.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
bayduck Member	16-May-2019 15:58        bayduck About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Agree as well. If the businses model in China is deemed as MLM-ish, then investors should basically write off the entire China revenue stream, and basically value BW as if it had never made its foray into China. My personal view is that BW is not worth zero even if the BIL and MLM issues turn out to be true. The business itself has a clean balance sheet, and there are cashflows from non-China operations. So a big haircut to the price for sure because you lose China and you put on a discount for corporate governance deficiencies, but not zero. destinykraze      ( Date: 16-May-2019 15:49) Posted: You should also remember MLM is not allowed in China, even in the best case scenario, assuming BWI is found to be free of any wrongdoings, china authorities will clamp down on such mlm-activities in china since the issue has been blown up. What is the impact on BWI when 2/3 of it' s revenue is coming from china is affected?   bayduck      ( Date: 16-May-2019 15:42) Posted: Agree with you. I think the crux is whether the transactions are genuine, and are done at market rates (i.e. whether revenues and profits from Changsha are inflated). If transactions are genuine, then at most you can only give BW a small punishment for not being forthcoming with the BIL disclosure
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
destinykraze Elite	16-May-2019 15:49        destinykraze About Contact  Quote this Post!   Yells: "Reality is only a matter of perception"
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	You should also remember MLM is not allowed in China, even in the best case scenario, assuming BWI is found to be free of any wrongdoings, china authorities will clamp down on such mlm-activities in china since the issue has been blown up. What is the impact on BWI when 2/3 of it' s revenue is coming from china is affected?   bayduck      ( Date: 16-May-2019 15:42) Posted: Agree with you. I think the crux is whether the transactions are genuine, and are done at market rates (i.e. whether revenues and profits from Changsha are inflated). If transactions are genuine, then at most you can only give BW a small punishment for not being forthcoming with the BIL disclosure. michaeltan      ( Date: 16-May-2019 12:32) Posted: What is the intention of Changsa low responsibility? Perhaps for tax avoidance? Difficulties and mitigation of risks doing business with China counterparts? Important is that the transaction is genuide and in accordance with company appointment agreement.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
bayduck Member	16-May-2019 15:42        bayduck About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Agree with you. I think the crux is whether the transactions are genuine, and are done at market rates (i.e. whether revenues and profits from Changsha are inflated). If transactions are genuine, then at most you can only give BW a small punishment for not being forthcoming with the BIL disclosure. michaeltan      ( Date: 16-May-2019 12:32) Posted: What is the intention of Changsa low responsibility? Perhaps for tax avoidance? Difficulties and mitigation of risks doing business with China counterparts? Important is that the transaction is genuide and in accordance with company appointment agreement.   bayduck      ( Date: 16-May-2019 11:59) Posted: 1) Legal rep' s status in China is basically emperor of the company, responsible for all things. So many cases of S-Chips gone case even though CEO is Singaporean, because the legal rep of the operating sub is PRC and basically just took control 2) BIL also has 100% claims to profits of Changsha, being the sole shareholder. Yes, many people invest more than $100,000 in a stock, but don' t get involved, but that' s such a bad analogy. The $100,000 is only share capital, and if Changsha is really importing hundreds of millions from BW, the profits must also be huge. BIL is entitled to 100% of the profits, so the monetary value is definitely beyond $100,000. A better analogy would be that you invest $100,000 as sole shareholder to start a business, but the business then grew to make revenues in hundreds of millions, making many millions in profits. You, as the sole shareholder, is entitled to ALL the profits. It' s a hard sell to convince me you do not exercise control or influence, or that you completely heck care the business. If you had been a minority shareholder, then it' s more believable
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
destinykraze Elite	16-May-2019 15:41        destinykraze About Contact  Quote this Post!   Yells: "Reality is only a matter of perception"
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Most of the time, frauds and insider trades are exposed by people who didn' t get a piece of the cake. Back in 2011, I had a friend working for a PRC company in sg as admin, few phone calls a month, not much work. $4k per month. She doesn' t even know what the company' s business is about. People wouldn' t complain if they stand to gain too. like2learn      ( Date: 16-May-2019 15:28) Posted: i m actually v impressed by the person who discovered the relationship of Mary and Dora, given it is not exactly surname match, i.e. Huan and Hoan. this is super due diligence.  the person probably knows the family ?  my guess wld be a " whistle blower" and my question why and his/her relation to VV ?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
bayduck Member	16-May-2019 15:37        bayduck About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Yes, I agree with you that the company seal might be held by someone else, and BIL really didn' t have any influence or interference in Changsha, instead management is done by the PRC guy with the seal. But between this possibility and the second possibility that BIL has influence, I personally think the probability is higher for the second possibility.  Shifu8888      ( Date: 16-May-2019 12:04) Posted: Not true for point 1. I have seen cases whereby legal rep is really passive. Important is who holds the 法 人 盖 章 . Technically, the legal rep should be holding it BUT being singaporean, it is functionally not possible cos he will need to fly there for every routine stamping. It is not uncommon for a legal rep to be only on paper. But I am not supporting what BW is doing. They should have disclosed the BIL relationship and not circumvent the loop hole. This is bad for the AC and Adrian may be in deep trouble. I am looking at next announcement to see if any ID resigns or not. Maybe not now but I am sure after this dust settles, some will resign because they may feel played out and (sabotaged) by the two aunties. My POV. bayduck      ( Date: 16-May-2019 11:59) Posted: 1) Legal rep' s status in China is basically emperor of the company, responsible for all things. So many cases of S-Chips gone case even though CEO is Singaporean, because the legal rep of the operating sub is PRC and basically just took control 2) BIL also has 100% claims to profits of Changsha, being the sole shareholder. Yes, many people invest more than $100,000 in a stock, but don' t get involved, but that' s such a bad analogy. The $100,000 is only share capital, and if Changsha is really importing hundreds of millions from BW, the profits must also be huge. BIL is entitled to 100% of the profits, so the monetary value is definitely beyond $100,000. A better analogy would be that you invest $100,000 as sole shareholder to start a business, but the business then grew to make revenues in hundreds of millions, making many millions in profits. You, as the sole shareholder, is entitled to ALL the profits. It' s a hard sell to convince me you do not exercise control or influence, or that you completely heck care the business. If you had been a minority shareholder, then it' s more believable
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
like2learn Veteran	16-May-2019 15:28        like2learn About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	i m actually v impressed by the person who discovered the relationship of Mary and Dora, given it is not exactly surname match, i.e. Huan and Hoan. this is super due diligence.  the person probably knows the family ?  my guess wld be a " whistle blower" and my question why and his/her relation to VV ?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
stockpicker Master	16-May-2019 14:57        stockpicker About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Think there is something lying somewhere in the unknown yet to be discovered to provide an anwser to satisfy all parties including the short sellers.. it is always easy to create and tell a liar but very difficult to do the covering up.  It will take people like Trump to tell a liar because he never bother to cover up his liars and people getting used to it.. NextEvolution      ( Date: 16-May-2019 11:19) Posted: Sole shareholder of the company, tend of millions $ in turnover. Millions in profit. If you are the sole owner, do you think you can say never involved in the business? And let a Chinaman run the show? warrenbuffet2018      ( Date: 16-May-2019 10:57) Posted: ADD on HOTEL stay record in China {no issue to get in China} Koh Kim Chuan and Mary Huan had never been involved in the management or business operations of the Primary Import Agent or the Group.    Ways to tell is truth 1. Check their oversea record. 2. Check their mobile record.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
JarBinx Member	16-May-2019 14:36        JarBinx About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Like Hyflux... Starship      ( Date: 16-May-2019 13:43) Posted: Most awards are actually paid advertising just like those award certificates pasted on many hawker stalls..................... They are all organised by businesses that specialise in " creating" awards for profit. Also, any MP/Minister/govt official attending or handing out the awards does not mean that the awards are official govt awards or championed by the govt.  They are merely Guest of Honour invited by the organising business to grace the event. It' s all in the news.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
NextEvolution Elite	16-May-2019 13:47        NextEvolution About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Cannot fight with Midas. 5 or 6 years in a row Sias awards Midas but then..... all these awards Sias already said they chong-kong back destinykraze      ( Date: 16-May-2019 13:18) Posted: Noble group also had a lot of awards. JarBinx      ( Date: 16-May-2019 12:22) Posted: BWL still can win awards.. http://www.bestworld.com.sg/awards.html
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Starship Supreme	16-May-2019 13:43        Starship About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Most awards are actually paid advertising just like those award certificates pasted on many hawker stalls..................... They are all organised by businesses that specialise in " creating" awards for profit. Also, any MP/Minister/govt official attending or handing out the awards does not mean that the awards are official govt awards or championed by the govt.  They are merely Guest of Honour invited by the organising business to grace the event. It' s all in the news.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
destinykraze Elite	16-May-2019 13:18        destinykraze About Contact  Quote this Post!   Yells: "Reality is only a matter of perception"
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Noble group also had a lot of awards. JarBinx      ( Date: 16-May-2019 12:22) Posted: BWL still can win awards.. http://www.bestworld.com.sg/awards.html bwavep      ( Date: 16-May-2019 12:12) Posted: at end of the day, forumners here can at least agree that at the minimum, the management didn' t follow best business practices or adhere to regulatory rules whilst enriching themselves to the maximum. not much point defending the indefensible after the spotlight has been shone and the regulators have weighed in .  in this game, congrats to those who made a killing on both the long and short side and commiseration for those on the other side. have to say, plenty of heads-up red flags before it came to this...
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
michaeltan Master	16-May-2019 12:52        michaeltan About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Fundamental   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Better that you engage a private detective to find out which hotel room whether is there any sperm of DNA as proof of evidence. LOL! warrenbuffet2018      ( Date: 16-May-2019 10:57) Posted: ADD on HOTEL stay record in China {no issue to get in China} Koh Kim Chuan and Mary Huan had never been involved in the management or business operations of the Primary Import Agent or the Group.    Ways to tell is truth 1. Check their oversea record. 2. Check their mobile record. warrenbuffet2018      ( Date: 16-May-2019 10:24) Posted: Koh Kim Chuan and Mary Huan had never been involved in the management or business operations of the Primary Import Agent or the Group.  Ways to tell is truth 1. Check their oversea record. 2. Check their mobile record.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
michaeltan Master	16-May-2019 12:32        michaeltan About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Fundamental   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	What is the intention of Changsa low responsibility? Perhaps for tax avoidance? Difficulties and mitigation of risks doing business with China counterparts? Important is that the transaction is genuide and in accordance with company appointment agreement.   bayduck      ( Date: 16-May-2019 11:59) Posted: 1) Legal rep' s status in China is basically emperor of the company, responsible for all things. So many cases of S-Chips gone case even though CEO is Singaporean, because the legal rep of the operating sub is PRC and basically just took control 2) BIL also has 100% claims to profits of Changsha, being the sole shareholder. Yes, many people invest more than $100,000 in a stock, but don' t get involved, but that' s such a bad analogy. The $100,000 is only share capital, and if Changsha is really importing hundreds of millions from BW, the profits must also be huge. BIL is entitled to 100% of the profits, so the monetary value is definitely beyond $100,000. A better analogy would be that you invest $100,000 as sole shareholder to start a business, but the business then grew to make revenues in hundreds of millions, making many millions in profits. You, as the sole shareholder, is entitled to ALL the profits. It' s a hard sell to convince me you do not exercise control or influence, or that you completely heck care the business. If you had been a minority shareholder, then it' s more believable. michaeltan      ( Date: 16-May-2019 11:40) Posted: Is a passive investor only. S100,000 is not very big sum. I believe you have many people like me invest in stock more than that but not involved the management.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
JarBinx Member	16-May-2019 12:22        JarBinx About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	BWL still can win awards.. http://www.bestworld.com.sg/awards.html bwavep      ( Date: 16-May-2019 12:12) Posted: at end of the day, forumners here can at least agree that at the minimum, the management didn' t follow best business practices or adhere to regulatory rules whilst enriching themselves to the maximum. not much point defending the indefensible after the spotlight has been shone and the regulators have weighed in .  in this game, congrats to those who made a killing on both the long and short side and commiseration for those on the other side. have to say, plenty of heads-up red flags before it came to this.... warrenbuffet2018      ( Date: 16-May-2019 10:57) Posted: ADD on HOTEL stay record in China {no issue to get in China} Koh Kim Chuan and Mary Huan had never been involved in the management or business operations of the Primary Import Agent or the Group.    Ways to tell is truth 1. Check their oversea record. 2. Check their mobile record.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
slidoffads Member	16-May-2019 12:21        slidoffads About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Bump slidoffads      ( Date: 16-May-2019 08:26) Posted: Bump slidoffads      ( Date: 15-May-2019 13:44) Posted: Hi all, I am looking to sell 5,000 shares of best world. Any shortist who traded using phillip securities and don' t wish to incur risk and borrowing costs kindly contact me. Matching price is preferably $1.26-$1.46 but negotiable.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
bwavep Senior	16-May-2019 12:12        bwavep About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	at end of the day, forumners here can at least agree that at the minimum, the management didn' t follow best business practices or adhere to regulatory rules whilst enriching themselves to the maximum. not much point defending the indefensible after the spotlight has been shone and the regulators have weighed in .  in this game, congrats to those who made a killing on both the long and short side and commiseration for those on the other side. have to say, plenty of heads-up red flags before it came to this.... warrenbuffet2018      ( Date: 16-May-2019 10:57) Posted: ADD on HOTEL stay record in China {no issue to get in China} Koh Kim Chuan and Mary Huan had never been involved in the management or business operations of the Primary Import Agent or the Group.    Ways to tell is truth 1. Check their oversea record. 2. Check their mobile record. warrenbuffet2018      ( Date: 16-May-2019 10:24) Posted: Koh Kim Chuan and Mary Huan had never been involved in the management or business operations of the Primary Import Agent or the Group.  Ways to tell is truth 1. Check their oversea record. 2. Check their mobile record.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Richardlai Master	16-May-2019 12:07        Richardlai About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Too hot ! Ha Ha ! Hope no one gets charged for Fake News here. Starship      ( Date: 16-May-2019 11:06) Posted: Careful, this is already the Hottest Thread in SJF without any post mentioning any other counter. So Hot that it might even get deleted for being Too Hot just like SG thread..............................  destinykraze      ( Date: 16-May-2019 10:58) Posted: Based on what? It looks like it' s struggling to stay afloat. CNMC. It' s earnings are not stable even if u leave gold price out of the equation. But don' t discuss other counter on this thread
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Shifu8888 Supreme	16-May-2019 12:04        Shifu8888 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Not true for point 1. I have seen cases whereby legal rep is really passive. Important is who holds the 法 人 盖 章 . Technically, the legal rep should be holding it BUT being singaporean, it is functionally not possible cos he will need to fly there for every routine stamping. It is not uncommon for a legal rep to be only on paper. But I am not supporting what BW is doing. They should have disclosed the BIL relationship and not circumvent the loop hole. This is bad for the AC and Adrian may be in deep trouble. I am looking at next announcement to see if any ID resigns or not. Maybe not now but I am sure after this dust settles, some will resign because they may feel played out and (sabotaged) by the two aunties. My POV. bayduck      ( Date: 16-May-2019 11:59) Posted: 1) Legal rep' s status in China is basically emperor of the company, responsible for all things. So many cases of S-Chips gone case even though CEO is Singaporean, because the legal rep of the operating sub is PRC and basically just took control 2) BIL also has 100% claims to profits of Changsha, being the sole shareholder. Yes, many people invest more than $100,000 in a stock, but don' t get involved, but that' s such a bad analogy. The $100,000 is only share capital, and if Changsha is really importing hundreds of millions from BW, the profits must also be huge. BIL is entitled to 100% of the profits, so the monetary value is definitely beyond $100,000. A better analogy would be that you invest $100,000 as sole shareholder to start a business, but the business then grew to make revenues in hundreds of millions, making many millions in profits. You, as the sole shareholder, is entitled to ALL the profits. It' s a hard sell to convince me you do not exercise control or influence, or that you completely heck care the business. If you had been a minority shareholder, then it' s more believable. michaeltan      ( Date: 16-May-2019 11:40) Posted: Is a passive investor only. S100,000 is not very big sum. I believe you have many people like me invest in stock more than that but not involved the management.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me

                                                         First   < Newer   2281-2300 of 8843   Older>   Last