Back

Latest Forum Topics / Renaissance United    Last:0.001 --

Post Reply

Neglected, Illiquid, Undervalue, Recovery counter Post Reply Rate topic
Lucky03 Elite	16-Apr-2014 21:13        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	I got mine at 0.9c. This sounds unbelievable when someone was suggesting 0.9c when it was trading at 2.5c. Perhaps it may really drop to 0.5c but in the meantime, will q for more at 0.8c. guoyanyunyan      ( Date: 16-Apr-2014 09:51) Posted: ...oops some throw down to $0.009..10,000lots ne...
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Bigmama Elite	16-Apr-2014 10:43        Bigmama About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	This price will tempt me in too..... Unless I think it will SUSP. Lol cccx123      ( Date: 16-Apr-2014 09:04) Posted: I queuing buy at .5cts lol Bigmama      ( Date: 16-Apr-2014 08:59) Posted: Will drift down till CEO replace or quit
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
guoyanyunyan Supreme	16-Apr-2014 09:51        guoyanyunyan About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 1   x 1  Alert Admin	...oops some throw down to $0.009..10,000lots ne...
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
cccx123 Elite	16-Apr-2014 09:04        cccx123 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	I queuing buy at .5cts lol Bigmama      ( Date: 16-Apr-2014 08:59) Posted: Will drift down till CEO replace or quit
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Bigmama Elite	16-Apr-2014 08:59        Bigmama About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 1   x 0  Alert Admin	Will drift down till CEO replace or quit
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
mesz33 Veteran	15-Apr-2014 23:37        mesz33 About Contact  Quote this Post!   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	lol if uare using scb trading acct no minimum charge.. lol Lucky03      ( Date: 15-Apr-2014 22:35) Posted: and pay minimum $25 commission ! guoyanyunyan      ( Date: 15-Apr-2014 17:05) Posted: ...20 lots done at $0.009, or $180...
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	15-Apr-2014 22:35        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	and pay minimum $25 commission ! guoyanyunyan      ( Date: 15-Apr-2014 17:05) Posted: ...20 lots done at $0.009, or $180...
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
guoyanyunyan Supreme	15-Apr-2014 17:05        guoyanyunyan About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	...20 lots done at $0.009, or $180...
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	13-Apr-2014 00:57        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Thanks, Jackpot ! Will q some at 0.9c and some more at 0.8c and then out them aside for them to ' mature' :) Jackpot2010      ( Date: 12-Apr-2014 23:06) Posted: Let' s do a rough calculation of book NTA assuming the placement of 1.02b shares@ 0.0108 went thru. as planned & using latest FS 3Q@ 31.1.14 as starting point. Published NTA @ 3Q 31.1.14= $118.398k Assumption: 1) Placement nett = $10,956k  2) Financial assets of $21,569k + 10,640k = $32,209k (assumed is worth zero. maybe unrealistic). 3) Intangible assets of $49,111k (assumed is worth zero, maybe unrealistic). Revised NTA (i.e. published NTA add (1) & minus (2 & 3) above. = $48,034k Total No. of shares (after placement) = 6,120,800k Revised NTA = 48,034 divided by 6,120,800 = $0.0078 Current share price = $0.0100 This is a  worst case scenario  assuming after write-off all financial assets & intangible assets to zero (which maybe unrealistic). So the revised NTA of $0.0078 is considered a good support level (vs current price $0.100). DYODD
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Jackpot2010 Master	12-Apr-2014 23:06        Jackpot2010 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Let' s do a rough calculation of book NTA assuming the placement of 1.02b shares@ 0.0108 went thru. as planned & using latest FS 3Q@ 31.1.14 as starting point. Published NTA @ 3Q 31.1.14= $118.398k Assumption: 1) Placement nett = $10,956k  2) Financial assets of $21,569k + 10,640k = $32,209k (assumed is worth zero. maybe unrealistic). 3) Intangible assets of $49,111k (assumed is worth zero, maybe unrealistic). Revised NTA (i.e. published NTA add (1) & minus (2 & 3) above. = $48,034k Total No. of shares (after placement) = 6,120,800k Revised NTA = 48,034 divided by 6,120,800 = $0.0078 Current share price = $0.0100 This is a  worst case scenario  assuming after write-off all financial assets & intangible assets to zero (which maybe unrealistic). So the revised NTA of $0.0078 is considered a good support level (vs current price $0.100). DYODD
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	12-Apr-2014 22:22        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Actually for the Q3 result ended 31 Jan, IPCO has already adjusted its NTA to 2.3c and 4c for Group and Company respectively from 8c and 6.7c of preceding FY.  Lucky03      ( Date: 12-Apr-2014 21:53) Posted: Jackpot 2010, you are right on the NTA values. Assuming write down of Blumont to nil value, don' t forget that they do have 4 lines of businesses.  Today, IPCO has a diversified portfolio of strategic investments in oil and gas, high-tech semiconductors, integrated automotive component manufacturing, and real estate development, among others. They have to worth something. Assuming their NTA is cut by 80%, it would still be worth 1.2c. I' m sure the 3 investors when agreed to take up at 1.08c would have done their due diligence that they should have much to gain. The concern with such companies is that you can' t really get any cash out of them. They are used as vehicles to advance some insider interests. Just take advantage of once in a few years bottom and top for capital gain. I don' t believe it will seriously disappear even of its CEO gets into serious problems.    Jackpot2010      ( Date: 12-Apr-2014 21:21) Posted: somehow below NTA analysis don' t look right. i.e.  Current price 1c being 14 to 16x NTA is wrong. Instead current price is below NTA, at least on paper. NTA cannot be (cents) 0.071 (before)/ 0.061 (after). NTA should be 7.1c (before), 1c vs 6.1c (after) vs current price 1c. Also, above NTA of 7.1c or 6.1c was @ 30/4/2013 i.e. before the write-down of financial assets (esp. holdings in Blumont Gp etc). Instead using Latest FS @ 3Q 31/12/03 after write-down would be much more realistic. Thereafter there should be further write-down to-date.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	12-Apr-2014 21:53        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Jackpot 2010, you are right on the NTA values. Assuming write down of Blumont to nil value, don' t forget that they do have 4 lines of businesses.  Today, IPCO has a diversified portfolio of strategic investments in oil and gas, high-tech semiconductors, integrated automotive component manufacturing, and real estate development, among others. They have to worth something. Assuming their NTA is cut by 80%, it would still be worth 1.2c. I' m sure the 3 investors when agreed to take up at 1.08c would have done their due diligence that they should have much to gain. The concern with such companies is that you can' t really get any cash out of them. They are used as vehicles to advance some insider interests. Just take advantage of once in a few years bottom and top for capital gain. I don' t believe it will seriously disappear even of its CEO gets into serious problems.    Jackpot2010      ( Date: 12-Apr-2014 21:21) Posted: somehow below NTA analysis don' t look right. i.e.  Current price 1c being 14 to 16x NTA is wrong. Instead current price is below NTA, at least on paper. NTA cannot be (cents) 0.071 (before)/ 0.061 (after). NTA should be 7.1c (before), 1c vs 6.1c (after) vs current price 1c. Also, above NTA of 7.1c or 6.1c was @ 30/4/2013 i.e. before the write-down of financial assets (esp. holdings in Blumont Gp etc). Instead using Latest FS @ 3Q 31/12/03 after write-down would be much more realistic. Thereafter there should be further write-down to-date.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Jackpot2010 Master	12-Apr-2014 21:21        Jackpot2010 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	somehow below NTA analysis don' t look right. i.e.  Current price 1c being 14 to 16x NTA is wrong. Instead current price is below NTA, at least on paper. NTA cannot be (cents) 0.071 (before)/ 0.061 (after). NTA should be 7.1c (before), 1c vs 6.1c (after) vs current price 1c. Also, above NTA of 7.1c or 6.1c was @ 30/4/2013 i.e. before the write-down of financial assets (esp. holdings in Blumont Gp etc). Instead using Latest FS @ 3Q 31/12/03 after write-down would be much more realistic. Thereafter there should be further write-down to-date.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
guoyanyunyan Supreme	12-Apr-2014 20:42        guoyanyunyan About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	...from recent document: PROPOSED PLACEMENT OF 1,020,000,000 NEW ORDINARY SHARES... NTA per Share (cents)   0.071 before placement and 0.061   after placement last done is 1 cents ie (14 to 16) x NTA EPS (cents) 1.608    before placement and  1.198      after placement ie pay 1 cents and earn 1.2 to 1.6 cents EPS is calculated by dividing the Company' s consolidated net earnings attributable to equity holders of the Company by the weighted average number of ordinary shares.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
guoyanyunyan Supreme	12-Apr-2014 18:04        guoyanyunyan About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	...from recent document: PROPOSED PLACEMENT OF 1,020,000,000 NEW ORDINARY SHARES... NTA per Share (cents)   0.071 before placement and 0.061  after placement last done is 1 cents ie (14 to 16) x NTA
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Bigmama Elite	11-Apr-2014 23:12        Bigmama About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	I mention a few times that penny play is over since last year 4th quarter. Don't be stubborn..... Anyone make loads on penny this year? I guess most people losses on penny counters. ...... Take a break.....penny play will not come back so SOON.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
RosyAiry Master	11-Apr-2014 19:46        RosyAiry About Contact  Quote this Post!   Yells: "banned!"
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	I supposed $3 was due to Soh Chee Wen' s manipulation Lucky03      ( Date: 11-Apr-2014 18:59) Posted: The 3 private placement investors will do themselves a good deal by just mobbing up from market at 1c instead of buying 1.08c. One can be seen as fool or shrewd to accumulate now. After all lowest was 0.8 or more accurately 0.9c. It is almost impossible to imagine that IPCO was once a $3 stock in 2000.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
cccx123 Elite	11-Apr-2014 19:37        cccx123 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Those ppl who bought at $3 without cutting loss probably already skydived without bringing parachute. Nothing to lose also...I am thinking of entering at .9cts actually. Nothing to lose also but lots to gain. Though I cannot believe that Innopac and ipco are currently around the same price. Like wtf...one was 20ct last year and the other merely hit peak of 4.5cts. Lucky03      ( Date: 11-Apr-2014 18:59) Posted: The 3 private placement investors will do themselves a good deal by just mobbing up from market at 1c instead of buying 1.08c. One can be seen as fool or shrewd to accumulate now. After all lowest was 0.8 or more accurately 0.9c. It is almost impossible to imagine that IPCO was once a $3 stock in 2000.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
hmphie Veteran	11-Apr-2014 19:37        hmphie About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Flexible   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	I suspect they couldnt scoop up that kind of volume without pushing up the price. The fees and brokerage involved could have made it cost ineffective as well. Lucky03      ( Date: 11-Apr-2014 18:59) Posted: The 3 private placement investors will do themselves a good deal by just mobbing up from market at 1c instead of buying 1.08c. One can be seen as fool or shrewd to accumulate now. After all lowest was 0.8 or more accurately 0.9c. It is almost impossible to imagine that IPCO was once a $3 stock in 2000.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
Lucky03 Elite	11-Apr-2014 18:59        Lucky03 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	The 3 private placement investors will do themselves a good deal by just mobbing up from market at 1c instead of buying 1.08c. One can be seen as fool or shrewd to accumulate now. After all lowest was 0.8 or more accurately 0.9c. It is almost impossible to imagine that IPCO was once a $3 stock in 2000.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me

                                                         First   < Newer   981-1000 of 12595   Older>   Last