I see that Mohan communicated w/ their investor relations (everything is relative in a name, I guess) firm.
Just for the sake of anybody who cares, here's a history of communication w/ Mr. Tam @ CHRB re: the issues at hand.
Subject: Questions about the company
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1996 21:54:49 -0800
From: khris vogel <khris@baker.cnw.com>
To: cfo@chrb.com
Mr. Tam,
I have a couple questions regarding the co. I was hoping you would
respond to.
First, I've read that the co. held back some rubber production from last quarter until the current quarter due to price considerations. Does this decision appear to be paying off? I am not knowledgable of the commodity price.
I have read the co.'s announcement concerning the proposed reverse stock split. Has the co. ever considered initiating a stock buy back program?
While I understand your wanting to meet the NASDAQ requirements and open the co. up to more institutional investors, but reverse splits have often earned negative reviews in this co.
Also, when you publish quarterly earnings, would it be possible to state current AND last year's earnings in US dollars?
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Khris Vogel
Subject: RE: Questions about the company
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1996 14:22:26 +-800
From: Chief Financial Officer <cfo@chrb.com>
To: "'khris vogel'" <khris@baker.cnw.com>
Dear Mr. Voqel
Thanks for your email and interests in our Company.
Regarding your questions:
1. Holding of stocks for the 4th quarter is only a business decision by the management with the sole objective of getting better prices of stocks and profits for the Company.
2. We have thought of buy back of stocks in the market but the general consent from our directors is that we hope to have as little direct intervention in the stock market by us as possible and our main direction will be to involve more public relations work to bring the public investing interests in our company.
3. Your comments is noted for the comparison of earnings in US dollars.
Thanks and regards
Tam Cheuk Ho
Chief Financial Officer
Subject: CHRB shareholder value and current price levels
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 00:17:51 -0800
From: khris vogel <khris@baker.cnw.com>
To: cfo@chrb.com
Dear Mr. Tam,
In November, you responded to an e-mail I had sent you regarding China
Resources.
One of the questions I had was asking if the company would entertain the thought of buying back some of its common stock at the levels it was trading at the time. You responded to me, "We have thought of buy back of stocks in the market but the general consent from our directors is that we hope to have as little direct intervention in the stock market by us as possible and our main direction will be to involve more public relations work to bring the public investing interests in our company."
As a stockholder of CHRB common shares, I'm rather concerned re: the
continuing detoriation of the share price. Does management have any
plans in place to enhance shareholder value? You mentioned above that
the directors have little desire to intervene in the stock market. But as a shareholder (i.e., a part owner of the company), don't the directors have an obligation to me and other shareholders to act upon the share price decline, especially in light of the relatively good cash position of the company?
Mr. Tam, I think that CHRB offers uncommon value at the current price,
trading at an extremely low price-earnings multiple, all the while you've been able to continue earnings growth. But I wonder if the co.'s directors and/or management has the same view on the company's prospects.
If so, wouldn't it make sense for the company to act in the best
interests of its shareholders and buy back some of the outstanding shares or perhaps take other action that would quickly and clearly translate into shareholder value?
Please bear in mind that, besides just the drop in the share price, much of what is driving my questions and comments is the additional shares that have been issued as of late resulting from exchanging of common shares for convertible preferred shares has further diluted the value of my holdings. To possibly risk beating the above points to death, at what point does the co.'s directors deem it appropriate to take action in the interest of the common shareholder? I find that I must respectfully disagree with your comments regarding the increase of public relations by the co. as a way to support the share price. One can easily argue that all the public relations in the world will not offset a lack of action on the part of co. directors who are seemingly indifferent to the plight of their shareholders.
I thank you for your time, as I anxiously await your thoughts as to the above.
Regards,
Khris Vogel
>>To this and further emails (equally professional in tone), I receive no response to.<<
As far as any production and/or marketing decisions go, I have little or no criticism of mgmt., as I do not profess to be knowledgable re: the Chinese rubber industry.
BUT ...
"We have thought of buy back of stocks in the market but the general consent from our directors is that we hope to have as little direct intervention in the stock market by us as possible and our main direction will be to involve more public relations work to bring the public investing interests in our company."
So now the Chinese decide to become free market mavens? Just great.
Maybe this is a symbollic war being wage on capitalism?, I ask, tongue firmly in cheek.
So mgmt.'s master strategy, if I undestand it fully, is to let the stock drift wherever, and the co.'s shareholders be damned. But they're offering us a ray of hope in the form increased public relations. Oh, yeah, it's working.
Is this another CIND? I really hope not, but mgmt. seems equally ignorant. Or are they exceedingly clever? That's the question.
Either way, things are obviously not good.
|
