• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Nanofilm Technologies with questionable disclosures going to IPO here

Patriotmissile said:
Another high fuck? Sgx can only attract questionable companies to list here. Making investors lose their life savings is their mantra.
Even blue chips companies can lose 50 to 99.9% of their values when listed in SGX.
Click to expand...
The company also painted a rosy picture to the analysts. That's why you had $6 and $5 price-targets.
 
SOS said:
For many years, even the old parents of the founder and wife are getting paid from the company payroll.


In many ways, Nanofilm founder is like Hyflux founder.

They are initially backed by local universities, then boasted to Temasek that their tech are all proprietary. True and not true, the core of nanofilm's business is actually sputtering. There are many ways to make something, and nanofilm's FVCA technology is just one of them. Generally speaking, it is known as sputtering in China. India, Korea, Japan, etc have similar technologies, serving Japanese tech companies, Xiaomi, Samsung, etc. What they did was repackage these sputtering machines and claimed as their own tech. The largest sputtered films company in Singapore in the past twenty years (since nanofilm's founding) has almost exited this business; it says a lot about the industry.

Like Olivia Lum, they are very eager to do sales buy-backs. Could some insiders have pledged their sales like OKH global? They had only spent $2.8m for dividends and in the past two days, they had spent $12.6m to buy back the shares at 5-7 times of NTA value. NTA is less than 70cents and 40% of it are properties & equipments. https://www.theedgesingapore.com/ne...on-share-buybacks-following-earnings-surprise
Apparently, they are not acting in the best interest of the company. If you offload all the fixed assets, like Hyflux, you will understand that they are inflated and not depreciated sufficiently too, because this industry has a lot of excess capacity, and there are many of such idling sputtering machines in commercial and university research facilities in China.

Why do you think the CEO & COO run road in 8-10 months after listing?
Click to expand...
Tumorsick also know hyflux and nanofilm are just one-nite-stand companies. They are all complicit in this 圈钱游戏 lah. As long as there are stupid 接盘侠 joining the party, this will carry on.
 
If this profile is real, it says a lot about this company.
Hao Wei is mentioned in https://www.allenandgledhill.com/sg...f-nanofilm-technologies-international-limited

VP obtained his masters 35 years ago in unrelated field.
https://sg.linkedin.com/in/hao-wei-（魏浩）-1597076

He cited his specializations:
1. supply vacuum and thin film coating solutions
2. supply vacuum coating system by the use of our FCVA coating technology as well as conventional technologies
3. offer coating services

Lots of idling sputtering machines of such capabilities in Chinese universities.
Their core biz repackaged these existing techs as their own.

Last but not least, his linkedin profiled claimed to be from:
https://sg.linkedin.com/company/nti-as?trk=public_profile_topcard-current-company
What the hell? Same company name but not the same company. A founding member of the company yet.......
 
SOS said:
Cash in hand is significantly lower after closing of Dec 2021 due to continued share buy-backs (IPO at $2.59, buybacks $3.00-3.48 range in Jan 2022), and dubious capex on AR and sputtering research. This company had been "researching" for a decade prior to IPO by reboxing existing China-tech as their own. Pre-IPO claims about 1400 existing employees proven fake, as company HR costs expected to outpace profit-margin growth.
Click to expand...
UOBKH got similar info about the expenses

UOB KH lowers target price on Nanofilm as it foresees higher expenditures​

Published on Tue, Jan 25, 2022 / 12:51 PM GMT+8
https://www.theedgesingapore.com/ca...rice-nanofilm-it-foresees-higher-expenditures
 
Second Full-Year results is only 13% higher than first FY results after listing.
Assets grew by appx $100m while revenue grew by $30m.
Total Assets is more almost triple that of Revenue.
 
Black Swan said:
You should have submitted a poison pen letter to MAS detailing the scams when they lodged their prospectus. What is the point of highlighting them now?
Click to expand...
You may think that Heliconia in cahoots with Nanofilms if you googled the address of their "facility" in Japan. Shanghai is just reboxing redundant sputtering tech from China's universities. Fuck the China conmen.

STI Year-To-Date +1.6%
Nanofilms Year-To-Date -32%
 
SOS said:
Nanofilm hits new-lows at $2.30 after analysts lower target price, cash-in-hand expected to be shrink further to less than 10% of market cap for financial results ending 30th June 2022. https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/co...m-target-price-on-dampened-earnings-estimates
Click to expand...
Hi SOS, thanks for the informative writeup provided in this thread. I must confess I know nothing of this industry and some of your comments have been insightful.

My two cents layman POV just reading from their website is this appears to be a rather shifty company that refuses to tell its investors what exactly is their business model. The biggest red flag I feel is that they market themselves heavily as a super high tech materials firm whereby bombastic terms are thrown at readers / investors one after another.

Although investors receive an avalanche of sexy sounding material and manufacturing process jargons, nothing is being communicated on what exactly is the role of Nanofilm in all of this and what is their value proposition and profit model. I mean a company regardless of industry usually participates in one or more of the following value chain areas:

Upstream
1) R&D / Product Development
2) Exploration / Extraction
3) Farming

Midstream
1) Procure
2) Manufacture
3) Testing / Quality / Assembly
4) Store / Distribute / Transport

Downstream
1) Retail (B2B, B2C, C2C)
2) Market / A&P / Pricing
3) After Sales

After combing through Nanofilm's website, I can't get a grip on even what business they are in. For e.g. when they throw out a fancy term like "Nano Imprints", what exactly is their role in this product? Do they research & develop a new Nano Imprint product from scratch? Do they provide procurement services/consultation on behalf of their clients? Do they manufacture this product? Do they distribute this product? Do their directly sell and market this product? Do they provide after sales for this product?

I don't have a clue after going through their entire website. Investors are given the impression that they are a 100% vertically integrated firm involved in all aspects of "Nano Imprint". For a company of this size and headcount, I'm pretty sure their value add and profit model is only in one or two aspects listed above. If they can't even be upfront on what they do on a daily basis, why should I believe in anything else they say?
 
Why would anybody with a sound mind invest in dead pond singapore shares aka SGX stocks???
 
maxsanic said:
Hi SOS, thanks for the informative writeup provided in this thread. I must confess I know nothing of this industry and some of your comments have been insightful.

My two cents layman POV just reading from their website is this appears to be a rather shifty company that refuses to tell its investors what exactly is their business model. The biggest red flag I feel is that they market themselves heavily as a super high tech materials firm whereby bombastic terms are thrown at readers / investors one after another.

Although investors receive an avalanche of sexy sounding material and manufacturing process jargons, nothing is being communicated on what exactly is the role of Nanofilm in all of this and what is their value proposition and profit model. I mean a company regardless of industry usually participates in one or more of the following value chain areas:

Upstream
1) R&D / Product Development
2) Exploration / Extraction
3) Farming

Midstream
1) Procure
2) Manufacture
3) Testing / Quality / Assembly
4) Store / Distribute / Transport

Downstream
1) Retail (B2B, B2C, C2C)
2) Market / A&P / Pricing
3) After Sales

After combing through Nanofilm's website, I can't get a grip on even what business they are in. For e.g. when they throw out a fancy term like "Nano Imprints", what exactly is their role in this product? Do they research & develop a new Nano Imprint product from scratch? Do they provide procurement services/consultation on behalf of their clients? Do they manufacture this product? Do they distribute this product? Do their directly sell and market this product? Do they provide after sales for this product?

I don't have a clue after going through their entire website. Investors are given the impression that they are a 100% vertically integrated firm involved in all aspects of "Nano Imprint". For a company of this size and headcount, I'm pretty sure their value add and profit model is only in one or two aspects listed above. If they can't even be upfront on what they do on a daily basis, why should I believe in anything else they say?
Click to expand...
Thank you, I can't put it better in words than you.
 
Many invest in All these bombastic high-sounding names like nano, crypto-currency,bitcoin,NFT....etc and many don't even understand what is the product or service.
In the end,their investments depreciated to little or zero value.:biggrin:
 
batman1 said:
Many invest in All these bombastic high-sounding names like nano, crypto-currency,bitcoin,NFT....etc and many don't even understand what is the product or service.
In the end,their investments depreciated to little or zero value.:biggrin:
Click to expand...
I no know what nano. Neh neh I know. :smile:
 
A year since former COO and CEO call it quits, nanofilms crashed by 50% in the midst of cash burn, they knew the worms in the can.
 
Thought that their founder already bought a GCB liao. Mission completed
 
Haha I see our good old SOS is still on the tracks of Nano Film.

Anyway out of curiosity and abundance of time, I took a look at their leadership profile and one of the things that struck me as odd is the fact that though this Company brands itself as a leader in nano material sciences, other than the founder none of the senior management have scientific academic qualification or professional experience in this area.

In fact, majority of its Directors and C-suites are either from the investment community, in charge of business development or were in some sort of finance role. This misalignment between talent inventory and professed business proposition is usually a red flag that warrants deeper investigation. Here’s a summary of Nano Film’s key leaders besides the GCB founder:

Mr Gary Ho Hock Yong, Executive Director and, Group Chief Executive Officer
Education – Diploma in Production Technology + MBA
Career – Various management positions in Hi-P, a telecom equipment manufacturing company

Mr Russell Tham Min Yew, Non-Executive and Non-Independent Director
Education – Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering
Career –Sales and business development in Applied Materials and investment related in Temasek

Ms Ong Siew Koon, Lead Independent Director
Education – Bachelor of Accountancy
Career – EY Finance

Mr Kristian John Robinson, Independent Director
Education – Bachelor of Chemical Engineering
Career – Patent Attorney

Ms Lee Lee Khoon, Independent Director
Education – Bachelor of Accountancy
Career – EY Finance

Mr Wan Kum Tho, Independent Director
Education – Bachelor of Business Administration
Career – Investments related

Mr Lim Kian Onn, Group Chief Financial Officer
Education – Bachelor of Accountancy
Career – Investment related

Mr Gian Yi-Hsen, Group Chief Commercial and Strategy Officer
Education – Bachelor of Electronic Engineering
Career – Investment, corporate strategy and business development in various companies

Mr Lars Lieberwirth, Group Chief Technology Officer
Education – Graduate Engineer in Precision Engineering
Career – Very broad based, all sorts of positions in different industries (Pharma, FMCG, Telecom)

One can see that for a Company that sells itself as a participant in frontier nano materials Science, none of the key management personnel possess the academic qualifications to really understand what they are selling. The closest we get is Bachelors in various Engineering fields. Career wise none of them have ever been involved in nano material research and/or implementation.

In theory there is nothing wrong with having a heavily lopsided leadership focused on investment, finance and business development, but when this same company splatters all sorts of scientific and R&D jargons to imply that it competes by achieving scientific breakthroughs in material sciences and production technologies, you gotta question where their priorities are.

Either they’ve got the wrong people steering the ship or the ship is not what it seems.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Serious Singapore is Worst IPO Market in Southeast Asia! First World Cuntry, Zero Innovators!
Replies
8
Views
728
winners
W
k1976
Another Sinki High Tech Unicorn seeking 1.5B huat big big IPO.
Replies
7
Views
780
syed putra
syed putra
P
Serious Temasick funded One Championship LeeTrenched many Jiakliaobees!
Replies
7
Views
442
k1976
k1976
JohnTan
Serious Madam Ho Ching Wanted To Retire Early! But Dhanabalan Visited Ho Ching Three Times To Invite Her Out Of Seclusion!
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
dr.wailing
dr.wailing
k1976
Wow...Boss John, have u buy the $1 Office Building at Beekok?
Replies
6
Views
745
k1976
k1976
Back
Top