Back

Latest Forum Topics / Neptune Orient L Rg

Post Reply

NOL Post Reply Rate topic
Lucky03 Elite	23-Jun-2014 12:10        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	The shipping industry already learn to live with low freight rate for next 2-3 years. So it is no longer the key consideration to invest in shipping stocks. The key consideration will be cost efficiency and potential corporate activities including expanding alliance network, M&A and privatization. The key is the return should any of these activities materialize vs cost of holding. Expect that the price will stabilize at current level for next few months. I believe the impact of the collapse of P3 is not fully felt yet. The 2 other alliances will likely pick up speed to solidify their advantages during this window of uncertainty not just among themselves but also with port operators who have been threatened should P3 succeeded. Besides, some strategic developments that may be up on hold due to the threat of P3 may avail themselves again and even speeded up. Important to see if NOL has made more progress with cost efficiency when they report their Q2 result early Aug. Once they hit the sweet spot, their potential will be unleashed and we can see some exciting action. earlybird14      ( Date: 23-Jun-2014 10:54) Posted: http://www1.chineseshipping.com.cn/en/indices/scfi.jsp Those shipping journal always very positive, picked up steam???? If there is picked up steam why the freight rate is dropping and demand a rate hike. Don' t be fooled by all these news which always saying rate hiking due to demand, instead, the rate drop till too low and require a wake up call to all shipping company that they need to cut their supply.   So far, only Maersk shouting for rate hike will be materialised like in  2012. So, basically, Maersk seldom do it since 2013, because they are profitable. Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 19:41) Posted: WORLD SHIPPING Carriers seek rate hikes in Asia-Europe, as consumer demand picks up SHIPPING lines are seeking a general freight rate hike to stick in July on the Asia-Europe trade after prices on services to northern Europe picked up steam. Thursday, 19.Jun.2014, 22:37 (GMT) Carriers seek rate hikes in Asia-Europe, as consumer demand picks up SHIPPING lines are seeking a general freight rate hike to stick in July on the Asia-Europe trade after prices on services to northern Europe picked up steam. The latest figures from the Shanghai Containerised Freight Index show that freight rates on services from Shanghai to northern Europe increased by US$19 on a week ago to $1,202 TEU. Prices from Shanghai to the Mediterranean slid $90 week on week to $1,671 per TEU, with reports suggesting this could reflect a decline in utilisation over the Ramadan holidays, reported Lloyd's List. Freight Investor Services (FIS) broker Richard Ward said: "Carriers will hope that July offers more support than what has been witnessed from the June attempt with the SCFI showing an increase over the past few weeks of just $47 per TEU." In mid-June 2013 prices to northern Europe stood at $533 per TEU and to the Mediterranean, the SCFI reached $1,202 per TEU. For services to the Mediterranean, the average weekly price stands at $1,550 per TEU, compared with $1,173 last year. On the transpacific trade, Drewry's Hong Kong-Los Angeles Container Rate Benchmark stands at $1,750 per FEU, the same price as a week ago. Analysts said they expect "prices to increase over the coming weeks on the back of a peak-season surcharge of $400 per FEU as requested by the rate-recommending group, the Transpacific Stabilisation Agreement. However, the increase is expected to fade quickly, due to weak pricing discipline by carriers, they said.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
earlybird14 Supreme	23-Jun-2014 10:54        earlybird14 About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Combined   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	http://www1.chineseshipping.com.cn/en/indices/scfi.jsp Those shipping journal always very positive, picked up steam???? If there is picked up steam why the freight rate is dropping and demand a rate hike. Don' t be fooled by all these news which always saying rate hiking due to demand, instead, the rate drop till too low and require a wake up call to all shipping company that they need to cut their supply.   So far, only Maersk shouting for rate hike will be materialised like in  2012. So, basically, Maersk seldom do it since 2013, because they are profitable. Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 19:41) Posted: WORLD SHIPPING Carriers seek rate hikes in Asia-Europe, as consumer demand picks up SHIPPING lines are seeking a general freight rate hike to stick in July on the Asia-Europe trade after prices on services to northern Europe picked up steam. Thursday, 19.Jun.2014, 22:37 (GMT) Carriers seek rate hikes in Asia-Europe, as consumer demand picks up SHIPPING lines are seeking a general freight rate hike to stick in July on the Asia-Europe trade after prices on services to northern Europe picked up steam. The latest figures from the Shanghai Containerised Freight Index show that freight rates on services from Shanghai to northern Europe increased by US$19 on a week ago to $1,202 TEU. Prices from Shanghai to the Mediterranean slid $90 week on week to $1,671 per TEU, with reports suggesting this could reflect a decline in utilisation over the Ramadan holidays, reported Lloyd's List. Freight Investor Services (FIS) broker Richard Ward said: "Carriers will hope that July offers more support than what has been witnessed from the June attempt with the SCFI showing an increase over the past few weeks of just $47 per TEU." In mid-June 2013 prices to northern Europe stood at $533 per TEU and to the Mediterranean, the SCFI reached $1,202 per TEU. For services to the Mediterranean, the average weekly price stands at $1,550 per TEU, compared with $1,173 last year. On the transpacific trade, Drewry's Hong Kong-Los Angeles Container Rate Benchmark stands at $1,750 per FEU, the same price as a week ago. Analysts said they expect "prices to increase over the coming weeks on the back of a peak-season surcharge of $400 per FEU as requested by the rate-recommending group, the Transpacific Stabilisation Agreement. However, the increase is expected to fade quickly, due to weak pricing discipline by carriers, they said.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
wtleads Member	23-Jun-2014 05:57        wtleads About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Transportation is an important topic in this world. Technology and innovation in logistics and Transportation are very important points. They are many networks that work in Logistics and Freight Forwarding field. They try to make the freight forwarding as easy as 1 2 3. One of the famous Logistics and B2B Marketplaces is wtleads.com. This portal connects Freight Forwarders, Suppliers and Buyers together and with advanced technology it really makes Business as easy as 1 2 3 . Wtleads portal URL is : www.wtleads.com Freight Forwarders suppliers and Buyers can easily register in this portal and post their: Freight Inquiries Freight Rates Selling Leads Buying Leads Products
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
stevenk Senior	22-Jun-2014 21:19        stevenk About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	going down
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
sgng123 Supreme	21-Jun-2014 02:19        sgng123 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Well from mine point of view, P3 rejection is more of a protectism for chinese shipping companies as they also poured billions of dollars to purchase the 18K-19K TEU ultra ships to reduce cost. IT is private sector Vesu government in which the government win handdown and private sector back away swiftly. This also warns other shipping liners not to over stretch their market shares and diminished chinese shipping lines interest. China as the world factory commanded the shipping market and if they say no it a goner no repeal or anything. G6 lucky cos OOCL is hong kong based therefore got chinese interest in it plus it is a more  international group consist of germany, US, Japan, Korea etc. G6 = everyone interest covered so faced no problem in setting up a vessel sharing alliance. Just watch out for merger and acquisition later this year as the container shipping industry need consolidation to take out/ scrap less efficency ships bringing profit margin back. Whoever left standing would be the last one to laugh after the dust is settled. Like what lot of peep had mentioned, NOL loses billions during tis 3 years but still never sink, infact get a lifeline of credit injection of 800Mil MTN and US4Billion  for fleet renewal and financial stability. Privatisation might be in the card once the flee renewal programme is completed this year and final slot cost expense made know in 2Q15. Staying listed don serve NOL purpose anymore as it did not need to raise cash from putting out rights, just need to ask temasek for the money and they would 100% get it  due to the fact NOL serve Singapore and united state national interest. Getting privatisation is best senario for investors as they do not need to wait for another 5 years to see ship  return back to  sustainable profit, can straightaway cash in and buy other stuffs. Olam is one good example, dumping out warrant to be fully covered by temasek followed by a privatisation and still get a credit line of US$2.1Billion lol. Amazing how those temasek linked companies can tap on our CPF money like a ATM machine without limits lol. NOL no need to be listed, just take it private best for everyone. Question is what is a reasonable buyout price since current container shipping valuation are hit by overcapacity but global demand recovering. Very hard to gauge a  price to guarantee 90% takeup rate. Anyway hand off ship til world cup is over, dangerous water ahead better to keep money safe by side. Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 19:48) Posted: WORLD SHIPPING P3: Great expectations dashed, but G6 and other networks sail on SOME take China's rejection of the P3 mega alliance at face value, that an operational union of Maersk, MSC and CMA CGM, was just too big to be anything other than a threat to competition.other than a threat to competition. Thursday, 19.Jun.2014, 22:31 (GMT) P3: Great expectations dashed, but G6 and other networks sail on SOME take China's rejection of the P3 mega alliance at face value, that an operational union of Maersk, MSC and CMA CGM, was just too big to be anything other than a threat to competition. Others ascribe protectionist motives, seeing a will to shield Cosco, the fifth largest box shipping line and China Shipping, the ninth largest, from a combine of the world's first, second and third biggest. But there was also a consensus that smaller G6 alliance that was to be P3's chief rival among the networks, would not encounter regulatory trouble because of its structure and smaller size. The P3 rejection marks the first time China blocked a proposal by foreign firms since its anti-monopoly regulator was granted greater powers six years ago, said Reuters. Taking the Ministry of Commerce ruling at face value, Norton Rose Fulbright anti-trust lawyer Marc Waha said: "This industry is very important for China, which is the manufacturing powerhouse of the world. It is very important that shipping remains competitive." Taking a darker view, Barclays analyst Jon Windham said: "China's rejection of the P3 is more an effort to insulate Chinese shipping companies, from competing with a more effective rival than it is an effort to maintain industry fair play." But grateful China Shippers Association (CSA) vice-chairman Cai Jiangxiang said: "We're very happy, we think it's a fair result. All the small and medium firms are very happy because they were worried about being squeezed out by P3." Of the G6, made up of APL, Hapag-Lloyd, Hyundai, MOL, NYK and OOCL, Lloyd's List said Beijing shared the view of US Federal Maritime Commissioner Richard Lidinsky, who cast a no vote against P6 in March. But Mr Lidinsky admired the G6: "From the organisational chart, multi-diverse membership, rotating chairmen, vessel-sharing agreement terms and flexible operational procedures, it is well-equipped to serve the international waterborne commerce of the US in a fair and efficient manner," he said. An industry source told Lloyd's List that the G6 Alliance was not expecting P3 trouble because it was already operational on the Asia-North Europe, Asia-Mediterranean and transpacific east coast trade lane. The G6 is only expanding onto the transatlantic and transpacific west coast, unlike the P3, which is a new start-up. What's more, only part of the G6 expansion, the transpacific west coast move, affects China. SeaIntel analyst Kasper Hansen said another factor was that the G6 centre in Singapore would work more like a co-ordination centre, while the proposed P3 would act for like a manager of fleet operations. The implications for Maersk, CMA CGM and MSC are less clear, said the UK's Transport Intelligence. P3 was an attempt to drive-down costs and thus improve margins, something that remains an imperative for all players. "Its success was far from assured as the three companies have very different business cultures, yet the attractiveness of such a big move was the potential for major cost reductions combined with the potential for increases in market share," said Ti analyst Thomas Cullen. In the short-term the urgency may have eased as Maersk seems to have established a cost-competitive. This suggests that CMA CGM and MSC may be under greater pressure to look for other solutions, he said. Said a CMA CGM statement: "With a presence on every continent through its network of 650 agencies, the group will continue to deploy a strategy combining innovative transport solutions, financial discipline and excellence in customer service. CMA CGM is confident that it will maintain its operating performance and continue to over-perform the industry."
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	20-Jun-2014 19:52        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	PUBLISHED JUNE 20, 2014 Eurozone current account surplus grows: ECB PRINT |EMAIL THIS ARTICLE The eurozone's current account surplus grew to 21.5 billion euros (US$29.3 billion) in April, European Central Bank data showed Friday - PHOTO: AFP [BERLIN] The eurozone's current account surplus grew to 21.5 billion euros (US$29.3 billion) in April, European Central Bank data showed Friday. The monthly figure is higher than a surplus of 19.6 billion euros in March, according to revised data. The current account on the balance of payments, which includes payments for imports and exports in both goods and services plus all other current transfers, is a closely tracked indicator of the ability of a country or area to pay its way. It is crucial for the long-term confidence of investors and trading partners, and an important factor in the value of a currency, in this case the euro, on the foreign exchange market.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	20-Jun-2014 19:48        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	WORLD SHIPPING P3: Great expectations dashed, but G6 and other networks sail on SOME take China's rejection of the P3 mega alliance at face value, that an operational union of Maersk, MSC and CMA CGM, was just too big to be anything other than a threat to competition.other than a threat to competition. Thursday, 19.Jun.2014, 22:31 (GMT) P3: Great expectations dashed, but G6 and other networks sail on SOME take China's rejection of the P3 mega alliance at face value, that an operational union of Maersk, MSC and CMA CGM, was just too big to be anything other than a threat to competition. Others ascribe protectionist motives, seeing a will to shield Cosco, the fifth largest box shipping line and China Shipping, the ninth largest, from a combine of the world's first, second and third biggest. But there was also a consensus that smaller G6 alliance that was to be P3's chief rival among the networks, would not encounter regulatory trouble because of its structure and smaller size. The P3 rejection marks the first time China blocked a proposal by foreign firms since its anti-monopoly regulator was granted greater powers six years ago, said Reuters. Taking the Ministry of Commerce ruling at face value, Norton Rose Fulbright anti-trust lawyer Marc Waha said: "This industry is very important for China, which is the manufacturing powerhouse of the world. It is very important that shipping remains competitive." Taking a darker view, Barclays analyst Jon Windham said: "China's rejection of the P3 is more an effort to insulate Chinese shipping companies, from competing with a more effective rival than it is an effort to maintain industry fair play." But grateful China Shippers Association (CSA) vice-chairman Cai Jiangxiang said: "We're very happy, we think it's a fair result. All the small and medium firms are very happy because they were worried about being squeezed out by P3." Of the G6, made up of APL, Hapag-Lloyd, Hyundai, MOL, NYK and OOCL, Lloyd's List said Beijing shared the view of US Federal Maritime Commissioner Richard Lidinsky, who cast a no vote against P6 in March. But Mr Lidinsky admired the G6: "From the organisational chart, multi-diverse membership, rotating chairmen, vessel-sharing agreement terms and flexible operational procedures, it is well-equipped to serve the international waterborne commerce of the US in a fair and efficient manner," he said. An industry source told Lloyd's List that the G6 Alliance was not expecting P3 trouble because it was already operational on the Asia-North Europe, Asia-Mediterranean and transpacific east coast trade lane. The G6 is only expanding onto the transatlantic and transpacific west coast, unlike the P3, which is a new start-up. What's more, only part of the G6 expansion, the transpacific west coast move, affects China. SeaIntel analyst Kasper Hansen said another factor was that the G6 centre in Singapore would work more like a co-ordination centre, while the proposed P3 would act for like a manager of fleet operations. The implications for Maersk, CMA CGM and MSC are less clear, said the UK's Transport Intelligence. P3 was an attempt to drive-down costs and thus improve margins, something that remains an imperative for all players. "Its success was far from assured as the three companies have very different business cultures, yet the attractiveness of such a big move was the potential for major cost reductions combined with the potential for increases in market share," said Ti analyst Thomas Cullen. In the short-term the urgency may have eased as Maersk seems to have established a cost-competitive. This suggests that CMA CGM and MSC may be under greater pressure to look for other solutions, he said. Said a CMA CGM statement: "With a presence on every continent through its network of 650 agencies, the group will continue to deploy a strategy combining innovative transport solutions, financial discipline and excellence in customer service. CMA CGM is confident that it will maintain its operating performance and continue to over-perform the industry."
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	20-Jun-2014 19:41        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	WORLD SHIPPING Carriers seek rate hikes in Asia-Europe, as consumer demand picks up SHIPPING lines are seeking a general freight rate hike to stick in July on the Asia-Europe trade after prices on services to northern Europe picked up steam. Thursday, 19.Jun.2014, 22:37 (GMT) Carriers seek rate hikes in Asia-Europe, as consumer demand picks up SHIPPING lines are seeking a general freight rate hike to stick in July on the Asia-Europe trade after prices on services to northern Europe picked up steam. The latest figures from the Shanghai Containerised Freight Index show that freight rates on services from Shanghai to northern Europe increased by US$19 on a week ago to $1,202 TEU. Prices from Shanghai to the Mediterranean slid $90 week on week to $1,671 per TEU, with reports suggesting this could reflect a decline in utilisation over the Ramadan holidays, reported Lloyd's List. Freight Investor Services (FIS) broker Richard Ward said: "Carriers will hope that July offers more support than what has been witnessed from the June attempt with the SCFI showing an increase over the past few weeks of just $47 per TEU." In mid-June 2013 prices to northern Europe stood at $533 per TEU and to the Mediterranean, the SCFI reached $1,202 per TEU. For services to the Mediterranean, the average weekly price stands at $1,550 per TEU, compared with $1,173 last year. On the transpacific trade, Drewry's Hong Kong-Los Angeles Container Rate Benchmark stands at $1,750 per FEU, the same price as a week ago. Analysts said they expect "prices to increase over the coming weeks on the back of a peak-season surcharge of $400 per FEU as requested by the rate-recommending group, the Transpacific Stabilisation Agreement. However, the increase is expected to fade quickly, due to weak pricing discipline by carriers, they said.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	20-Jun-2014 17:09        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Someone almost pushed the closin price to 0.98. I thought it was a trick to lure in buyers in the last 5 mins but it closed respectfully at 0.975 despite a late sell off pushing to a low of 0.965. Short covering over the weekend ?
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
earlybird14 Supreme	20-Jun-2014 14:03        earlybird14 About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Combined   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	The loss that NOL made cannot be covered by any asset sales. The loss is just too huge, we are talking about billion of loss. In SGX, you can' t find any company can make loss this way but still listed there. Only reason, again, Temasek. RoundRound      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 13:27) Posted: They already tried many ways liao. Buying over APL and later under mounting debts, sold-&-leaseback off their iconic NOL building to raise fund. Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 13:00) Posted: If NOL continues to fail to deliver profit, a major restructuring or M&A is needed and taking it private will be easier to execute. On the other hand, if NOL finally turns around, then shareholders should rejoice too.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	20-Jun-2014 14:00        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	They still have a port terminal and a warehouse to turn into cash but they are profitable. RoundRound      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 13:27) Posted: They already tried many ways liao. Buying over APL and later under mounting debts, sold-&-leaseback off their iconic NOL building to raise fund. Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 13:00) Posted: If NOL continues to fail to deliver profit, a major restructuring or M&A is needed and taking it private will be easier to execute. On the other hand, if NOL finally turns around, then shareholders should rejoice too.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
RoundRound Elite	20-Jun-2014 13:27        RoundRound About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Flexible   Mood: Yells: "Tikam Tikam can also"
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	They already tried many ways liao. Buying over APL and later under mounting debts, sold-&-leaseback off their iconic NOL building to raise fund. Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 13:00) Posted: If NOL continues to fail to deliver profit, a major restructuring or M&A is needed and taking it private will be easier to execute. On the other hand, if NOL finally turns around, then shareholders should rejoice too. famouspinky      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 12:30) Posted: Temesek won't be stupid to snap it's indicators
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	20-Jun-2014 13:00        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	If NOL continues to fail to deliver profit, a major restructuring or M&A is needed and taking it private will be easier to execute. On the other hand, if NOL finally turns around, then shareholders should rejoice too. famouspinky      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 12:30) Posted: Temesek won't be stupid to snap it's indicators. Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 12:26) Posted: Thanks for sharing your thoughts :) I agree with your assessment. There are occasions where I took up some bets but it will need holding power. We all know NOL is running out of time. If it doesn't deliver profit this year, there is high chance it will be put on the watch list - biggest embarrassment to Tamesek Holding ! While we know cash flow is needed, it is highly unlikely (not impossible) to call a rights issue at current price. It is very damaging and even suicidal as the price will tumble and the rights many not even be fully subscribed if the market price drops below the discounted conversion price, Tamesek aside who already owns 67% of NOL. G6 Alliance is important to Singapore port development as Singapore is one of the major transshipment ports for G6. As you know there is plan to invest in relocating and expanding the port in Singapore, NOL leadership in G6 is crucial. Tamesek must maintain control and ensure it survives. If profitability is a key sore point in staying listed and taking into consideration the bigger picture of national interest, privatization is a very real and likely outcome. We just don't know and it is tough to guess when they will draw out the plan. After all, Tamesek failed in 2004 and now they can do it easily at less than half the price they would have to pay. The worst could have already been factored in and near bottom. Anyway, nobody can be 100% accurate. As I said, it is a balance of risk and gain and if it makes sense as it tilted in favour of the gain, then it is a reasonable bet.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	20-Jun-2014 12:35        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	I thought so too based on the criteria so I was surprised that NOL had to post on SGX recently that it may be put on the watch list ??! Even so, it is embarrassing to have to put up such posting year on year ... RoundRound      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 12:29) Posted: For company of this size, it's impossible to be on the Watchlist. Capitalisation over $40m will not be in Watchlist, NOL is many many times over this Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 12:26) Posted: Thanks for sharing your thoughts :) I agree with your assessment. There are occasions where I took up some bets but it will need holding power. We all know NOL is running out of time. If it doesn't deliver profit this year, there is high chance it will be put on the watch list - biggest embarrassment to Tamesek Holding ! While we know cash flow is needed, it is highly unlikely (not impossible) to call a rights issue at current price. It is very damaging and even suicidal as the price will tumble and the rights many not even be fully subscribed if the market price drops below the discounted conversion price, Tamesek aside who already owns 67% of NOL. G6 Alliance is important to Singapore port development as Singapore is one of the major transshipment ports for G6. As you know there is plan to invest in relocating and expanding the port in Singapore, NOL leadership in G6 is crucial. Tamesek must maintain control and ensure it survives. If profitability is a key sore point in staying listed and taking into consideration the bigger picture of national interest, privatization is a very real and likely outcome. We just don't know and it is tough to guess when they will draw out the plan. After all, Tamesek failed in 2004 and now they can do it easily at less than half the price they would have to pay. The worst could have already been factored in and near bottom. Anyway, nobody can be 100% accurate. As I said, it is a balance of risk and gain and if it makes sense as it tilted in favour of the gain, then it is a reasonable bet.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
famouspinky Supreme	20-Jun-2014 12:30        famouspinky About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Temesek won't be stupid to snap it's indicators. Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 12:26) Posted: Thanks for sharing your thoughts :) I agree with your assessment. There are occasions where I took up some bets but it will need holding power. We all know NOL is running out of time. If it doesn't deliver profit this year, there is high chance it will be put on the watch list - biggest embarrassment to Tamesek Holding ! While we know cash flow is needed, it is highly unlikely (not impossible) to call a rights issue at current price. It is very damaging and even suicidal as the price will tumble and the rights many not even be fully subscribed if the market price drops below the discounted conversion price, Tamesek aside who already owns 67% of NOL. G6 Alliance is important to Singapore port development as Singapore is one of the major transshipment ports for G6. As you know there is plan to invest in relocating and expanding the port in Singapore, NOL leadership in G6 is crucial. Tamesek must maintain control and ensure it survives. If profitability is a key sore point in staying listed and taking into consideration the bigger picture of national interest, privatization is a very real and likely outcome. We just don't know and it is tough to guess when they will draw out the plan. After all, Tamesek failed in 2004 and now they can do it easily at less than half the price they would have to pay. The worst could have already been factored in and near bottom. Anyway, nobody can be 100% accurate. As I said, it is a balance of risk and gain and if it makes sense as it tilted in favour of the gain, then it is a reasonable bet. earlybird14      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 11:10) Posted: To retailer shorting, who shorting NOL is not wise, because retail shortist have to pay heavy interest and commission. But for Fund managers or brokers or other BBs who have the special account will be different, they will have absolutely sufficient patient to deal with the shorting giant case like NOL, this is to short a billion market capital company. I will believe the possibility of right issue is high, short sell now and cover with right in the future soon. I am not vested and not shorting. Lucky, you post facts and believe your decision which I respect. But I am kepo to post negative facts is to let new comers to have other thinking and not to mislead by the one who continually posting positive till unreasonable recently. The fact is  NOL content huge risk and current share price doesn' t reflect the real situation that NOL facing.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
RoundRound Elite	20-Jun-2014 12:29        RoundRound About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Flexible   Mood: Yells: "Tikam Tikam can also"
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	For company of this size, it's impossible to be on the Watchlist. Capitalisation over $40m will not be in Watchlist, NOL is many many times over this Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 12:26) Posted: Thanks for sharing your thoughts :) I agree with your assessment. There are occasions where I took up some bets but it will need holding power. We all know NOL is running out of time. If it doesn't deliver profit this year, there is high chance it will be put on the watch list - biggest embarrassment to Tamesek Holding ! While we know cash flow is needed, it is highly unlikely (not impossible) to call a rights issue at current price. It is very damaging and even suicidal as the price will tumble and the rights many not even be fully subscribed if the market price drops below the discounted conversion price, Tamesek aside who already owns 67% of NOL. G6 Alliance is important to Singapore port development as Singapore is one of the major transshipment ports for G6. As you know there is plan to invest in relocating and expanding the port in Singapore, NOL leadership in G6 is crucial. Tamesek must maintain control and ensure it survives. If profitability is a key sore point in staying listed and taking into consideration the bigger picture of national interest, privatization is a very real and likely outcome. We just don't know and it is tough to guess when they will draw out the plan. After all, Tamesek failed in 2004 and now they can do it easily at less than half the price they would have to pay. The worst could have already been factored in and near bottom. Anyway, nobody can be 100% accurate. As I said, it is a balance of risk and gain and if it makes sense as it tilted in favour of the gain, then it is a reasonable bet. earlybird14      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 11:10) Posted: To retailer shorting, who shorting NOL is not wise, because retail shortist have to pay heavy interest and commission. But for Fund managers or brokers or other BBs who have the special account will be different, they will have absolutely sufficient patient to deal with the shorting giant case like NOL, this is to short a billion market capital company. I will believe the possibility of right issue is high, short sell now and cover with right in the future soon. I am not vested and not shorting. Lucky, you post facts and believe your decision which I respect. But I am kepo to post negative facts is to let new comers to have other thinking and not to mislead by the one who continually posting positive till unreasonable recently. The fact is  NOL content huge risk and current share price doesn' t reflect the real situation that NOL facing.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	20-Jun-2014 12:26        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Thanks for sharing your thoughts :) I agree with your assessment. There are occasions where I took up some bets but it will need holding power. We all know NOL is running out of time. If it doesn't deliver profit this year, there is high chance it will be put on the watch list - biggest embarrassment to Tamesek Holding ! While we know cash flow is needed, it is highly unlikely (not impossible) to call a rights issue at current price. It is very damaging and even suicidal as the price will tumble and the rights many not even be fully subscribed if the market price drops below the discounted conversion price, Tamesek aside who already owns 67% of NOL. G6 Alliance is important to Singapore port development as Singapore is one of the major transshipment ports for G6. As you know there is plan to invest in relocating and expanding the port in Singapore, NOL leadership in G6 is crucial. Tamesek must maintain control and ensure it survives. If profitability is a key sore point in staying listed and taking into consideration the bigger picture of national interest, privatization is a very real and likely outcome. We just don't know and it is tough to guess when they will draw out the plan. After all, Tamesek failed in 2004 and now they can do it easily at less than half the price they would have to pay. The worst could have already been factored in and near bottom. Anyway, nobody can be 100% accurate. As I said, it is a balance of risk and gain and if it makes sense as it tilted in favour of the gain, then it is a reasonable bet. earlybird14      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 11:10) Posted: To retailer shorting, who shorting NOL is not wise, because retail shortist have to pay heavy interest and commission. But for Fund managers or brokers or other BBs who have the special account will be different, they will have absolutely sufficient patient to deal with the shorting giant case like NOL, this is to short a billion market capital company. I will believe the possibility of right issue is high, short sell now and cover with right in the future soon. I am not vested and not shorting. Lucky, you post facts and believe your decision which I respect. But I am kepo to post negative facts is to let new comers to have other thinking and not to mislead by the one who continually posting positive till unreasonable recently. The fact is  NOL content huge risk and current share price doesn' t reflect the real situation that NOL facing. Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 10:57) Posted: Are you vested with heavy short positions
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
earlybird14 Supreme	20-Jun-2014 11:10        earlybird14 About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Combined   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	To retailer shorting, who shorting NOL is not wise, because retail shortist have to pay heavy interest and commission. But for Fund managers or brokers or other BBs who have the special account will be different, they will have absolutely sufficient patient to deal with the shorting giant case like NOL, this is to short a billion market capital company. I will believe the possibility of right issue is high, short sell now and cover with right in the future soon. I am not vested and not shorting. Lucky, you post facts and believe your decision which I respect. But I am kepo to post negative facts is to let new comers to have other thinking and not to mislead by the one who continually posting positive till unreasonable recently. The fact is  NOL content huge risk and current share price doesn' t reflect the real situation that NOL facing. Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 10:57) Posted: Are you vested with heavy short positions ? earlybird14      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 10:43) Posted: G6 total capacity is about same as Maersk and MSC. Basically Maersk and MSC are 2 x G6 with same policy and consistency. No matter what G6 do, hardly touching Maersk and MSC margin since G6 are independent organisation with own interest. Yesterday shorting volume is 1237 lots, increase 50% compared to past 6 days total shorting volume. warning signal for next breakout to new low.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
earlybird14 Supreme	20-Jun-2014 11:01        earlybird14 About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Combined   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Breakout to new low will not come in next few week. NOL will slowly down and move across new low 94, breakout to new low close to 70 to 80, it will happen in next 3 to 6 month, especially NOL fails to deliver again in next coming quarter, market will look at it cash position and heavy debt and punish it heavily. famouspinky      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 10:52) Posted: Touch new low, yes. Breakout to new low, no. earlybird14      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 10:43) Posted: G6 total capacity is about same as Maersk and MSC. Basically Maersk and MSC are 2 x G6 with same policy and consistency. No matter what G6 do, hardly touching Maersk and MSC margin since G6 are independent organisation with own interest. Yesterday shorting volume is 1237 lots, increase 50% compared to past 6 days total shorting volume. warning signal for next breakout to new low.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	20-Jun-2014 10:57        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Are you vested with heavy short positions ? earlybird14      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 10:43) Posted: G6 total capacity is about same as Maersk and MSC. Basically Maersk and MSC are 2 x G6 with same policy and consistency. No matter what G6 do, hardly touching Maersk and MSC margin since G6 are independent organisation with own interest. Yesterday shorting volume is 1237 lots, increase 50% compared to past 6 days total shorting volume. warning signal for next breakout to new low. Lucky03      ( Date: 20-Jun-2014 08:03) Posted: Thanks, earlybird14. I suppose G6 needs big ships too and given that partners such as NOL is only taking delivery of the big ships starting 2013 and next few years that their effectiveness takes time to materialize. 19th June 2014 Seatrade Main Menu G6 Alliance announces port rotations for service expansion By Charlie Bartlett from London The G6 Alliance members have released the proposed port rotations for the expansion of Asia-North America West Coast and Trans-Atlantic services. The move, proposed at the end of 2013, is now undergoing regulatory assessment and, if approved, will start in the second quarter of 2014. The expansion will bring G6?s service offering to 29 routes, covering all three major East-West trade lanes. ?The G6 Alliance monitors market developments closely and is continuously seeking opportunities to improve our service offerings,? the coalition of APL, Hapag-Lloyd, Hyundai Merchant Marine, Mitsui OSK Lines, Nippon Yusen Kaisha and Orient Overseas Container Line said in a statement. ?With the introduction of the Asia-North America West Coast and Trans-Atlantic services, the G6 Alliance will further strengthen its position to meet shippers? demand for more comprehensive, seamless and efficient services with competitive transit times. ?Further, each of the G6 Alliance members will be able to offer its customers significantly improved port-pair connections compared to their previous products.? The services will operate as follows. SE1 (South East Asia 1): Singapore ? Chiwan/Shekou ? Kaohsiung ? Los Angeles ? (Manzanillo, Mexico* ? Lazaro Cardenas*) ? Los Angeles ? Yokohama ? Kaohsiung ? Singapore *only APL and Hapag-Lloyd are participating in these calls SE2: Laem Chabang ? Cai Mep ? Hong Kong ? Los Angeles ? Oakland ? Hong Kong ? Laem Chabang SE3: Port Klang - Singapore ? Laem Chabang ? Yantian ? Los Angeles ? Oakland ? Pusan ? Shanghai (Waigaoqiao) ? Ningbo ? Yantian ?Singapore SC1 (South China 1): Xiamen ? Chiwan/Shekou ? Yantian ? Los Angeles ? Oakland ? Kaohsiung ? Xiamen SC2: Dachan Bay ? Hong Kong ? Yantian ? Kaohsiung ? Los Angeles ? Kaohsiung ? Xiamen - Hong Kong ? Dachan Bay CC1 (Central China 1): Shanghai (Waigaoqiao) ? Kwangyang ? Pusan ? Los Angeles ? Oakland ? Pusan ? Kwangyang ? Shanghai CC2: Ningbo ? Shanghai (Waigaoqiao) ? Los Angeles ? Ningbo CC3: Qingdao ? Xingang ? Pusan ? Yokohama ? Los Angeles ? Oakland ? (Dutch Harbor*) - Yokohama ? Pusan ? (Naha*) - Qingdao *only APL is participating in these calls CC4: Shanghai (Waigaoqiao) ? Ningbo ? Los Angeles ? Oakland ? Shanghai NP1 (North Pacific 1): Singapore ? Laem Chabang ? Dachan Bay ? Hong Kong ? Yantian ? Vancouver ? Tacoma ? Seattle ? Pusan ? Kaohsiung ? Singapore NP2: Hong Kong ? Yantian ? Kaohsiung ? Shanghai* ? Pusan ? Tacoma ? Seattle ? Vancouver ? Yokohama ? Pusan ? Kwangyang ? Hong Kong *terminal to be confirmed NP3: Qingdao ? Ningbo ? Shanghai (Yangshan) ? Pusan ? Vancouver ? Tacoma ? Vancouver ? Tokyo ? Nagoya ? Kobe ? Qingdao AX1 (Atlantic Express 1): UK port* ? Rotterdam ? Hamburg ? Le Havre ? New York ? Norfolk ? UK port* *terminal to be confirmed AX2: Southampton ? Antwerp ? Bremerhaven ? Le Havre ? Veracruz ? Altamira ? Houston ? New Orleans ? Charleston ? Southampton AX3: Antwerp ? Bremerhaven ? Southampton ? Charleston ? Port Everglades ? Houston ? Savannah ? Norfolk ? Antwerp PA1 (Pacific Atlantic 1): Shanghai* ? Pusan ? Kobe ? Nagoya ? Tokyo ? Tacoma ? Vancouver ? Oakland ? Los Angeles ? Balboa** ? Panama Canal ? Manzanillo, Panama ? Savannah ? Norfolk ? New York - Halifax ? Southampton ? Antwerp ? Hamburg ? Rotterdam ? Halifax ? New York ? Norfolk ?Savannah ? Manzanillo, Panama ? Panama Canal ? Los Angeles ? Oakland ? Yokohama ? Shanghai *terminal to be confirmed ** to be confirmed PA2: Kaohsiung ? Pusan ? Kobe ? Tokyo ? Balboa ? Panama Canal ? Manzanillo, Panama ? Miami ? Jacksonville ? Savannah ? Charleston ? New York ? Rotterdam ? Bremerhaven ? UK port* ? Le Havre ? New York ? Norfolk ? Charleston ? Manzanillo, Panama ? Panama Canal ? Balboa ? Los Angeles ? Oakland ? Tokyo ? Kobe ? Kaohsiung *terminal to be confirmed Published inAsia, Europe, Containers, Port & Logistics, Ship Operation
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me

                                                         First   < Newer   7601-7620 of 11177   Older>   Last