Capital Award (CA) will be listed before Tri-way. Solomon talked about a bunch of possible countries to list CA in but at the end he mentioned Stockholm with such a tonality that I interpreted it as the most likely place for listning.
There are 3-4 projects in the pipeline for Capital Award and it seemed very likely that an agreement would be completed this year regarding one of those projects and its financing. Solomon talked about India and Malaysia.
On a personal note I think that Capital Award will be a great source of value in the future. If Tri-way gets financing so that they can resume capex (more about that in the next part about Tri-way) and thus continue buying services from CA and CA also gets other projects in other countries the future looks very bright. Especially if CA can be listed on a stock exchange as well and that the company might be able to secure more debt financing in the future.
Etiketter: Sino Agro Food
That’s too bad. I was hoping for a market with better exposure.
Yeah, however it is positive that CA will be listed at all I guess. I didn’t know beforehand that CA would be listed in such a short time frame. I didn’t even consider it.
Interesting. CA listing surely implies something new projects are becoming reality. It needs at least 2-3 new long-term projects to become a serious listing candidate. As we see currently, being dependent on a single source of revenue is too risky.
Financing is again a key to success. Did Mr Lee tell is SIAF/CA still going to act as a one owner in these new projects? As it was a case with (what is now called as) Tri-way?
Stockholm as a home bourse for CA does not sound a great choice in terms of appreciation. I don’t know is Mr. Tiusanen still involved with SIAF, but he stepped down from CFO position and opted to run some SIAF’s European activities, if my memory serves we well. Could it be something to do with CA’s listing plans or projects?
SIAF is truly becoming a holding company. After making the proposed spinoffs, the rest of the non-listed business is uninteresting small scale activity.
As I’ve understood from other posts SIAF would not be an owner in the new projects. They would build the new farms, and get paid for it. The long term income would be from licensing fees.
“Financing is again a key to success. Did Mr Lee tell is SIAF/CA still going to act as a one owner in these new projects? As it was a case with (what is now called as) Tri-way?”
He did not say anything about that when I was on the meeting at least, not that I heard. But as SIAF! writes other posters have written about it.
I asked Solomon about possible ownership in the ventures outside China. The reply w<ilas that CA would not have any stake (ownership) in these businesses. Owership might have entailed that CA would have had to invest its own cash in these ventures or invested the profits generated from serving those ventures.
Thanks Emilez and SIAF!
I hope your interpretation is right and CA is not required to finance the future projects first before getting payment from the projects.
Again, I hope Mr Lee has learnt the lesson to keep business straightforward. Investors and analysts won’t appreciate CA becoming “mini SIAF” getting small stakes from the companies it’s serving to.