Evans Medical Plc

[pegheneji]

Originally Posted by hispy99

Vanguard News Online-SEC queries Evans Medicals, suspends MD, finance director

them need to invite some boys also at CSL registrar some years back they did willy willy on me with my evans and crusader bonuses, them go make you waka tire and in the end fill form for them to get back to you only for you to start all over after some weeks.

[saheewale]

SEC angers over N490m Evans Medical Plc loss

[hispy99]

EVANS MEDICAL PLC
UNAUDITED Q2 (JUNE) 2009
2009 2008 % Change

TURNOVER N1.890B N1.974B (4.26)
PROFIT BEFORE TAX (N294.540M) N61.543M (578.62)
TAXATION (N3.634M) (N22.658M) (83.96)
PROFIT AFTER TAXATION (N298.174M) N38.885M (666.81)

[Oracle]

Originally Posted by 123.rado

EVANS MEDICAL PLC
26 May 2010
Audited Year Ended (October) 2008

Profit and Loss Information
Turnover 08 N4.465b 07 N3.151b
PBT And Extraordinary Items 08 N162.062m 07 (N373.436m) Exceptional Items 08 (N549.886m) 07 Nil
PBT 08 (N387.824m) 07 (N373.436m)
Taxation 08 (N122.274m) 07 N56.417m
PAT 08 (N510.098m) 07 (N317.019m)

Balance Sheet Information
Fixed Assets 31-12-08 N1.735b 31-12-07 N1.598b
Stock 08 N1.460b 07 N1.707b
Trade Debtors 08 N748.457m 07 N602.154m
Cash And Bank Balances 08 N493.777m 07 N387.643m
Other Debit Balances 08 N259.018m 07 N52.301m
Trade Creditors 08 N462.912m 07 N168.103m
Short Term Borrowings 08 N467.128m 07 N1.284b
Other Credit Balances 08 N2.943b 07 N1.570b
Working Capital 08 (N533.064m) 07 N35.557m
Net Assets 08 N823.784m 07 N1.323b

decrease of N499m from it net asset,management issues,PO or no PO?, right issues or no right issues?,debt still mounting and reserve falling. This stock may fall btw N1-N1.24 but don't buy until all issues are cleared.

[Oracle]

Originally Posted by hispy99

EVANS MEDICAL PLC
UNAUDITED Q2 (JUNE) 2009
2009 2008 % Change

TURNOVER N1.890B N1.974B (4.26)
PROFIT BEFORE TAX (N294.540M) N61.543M (578.62)
TAXATION (N3.634M) (N22.658M) (83.96)
PROFIT AFTER TAXATION (N298.174M) N38.885M (666.81)

From this PAT of N298.174m, year-to-Q2 net asset should be N525.61m ceteris paribus. this means that the stock should be valued at N1.19 and bought at N0.8(bargain price) or N0.50

If Q3 and YE 2009 give negative PAT,then net asset would be negative or near zero.

I think we should use our tongue to count our teeth on issues concerning this stock.

[nosa2]

Originally Posted by Oracle

From this PAT of N298.174m, year-to-Q2 net asset should be N525.61m ceteris paribus. this means that the stock should be valued at N1.19 and bought at N0.8(bargain price) or N0.50

If Q3 and YE 2009 give negative PAT,then net asset would be negative or near zero.

I think we should use our tongue to count our teeth on issues concerning this stock.

oracle it seems you use assets/book value to arrive at your valuations for stocks, am i right?

[Oracle]

Originally Posted by nosa2

oracle it seems you use assets/book value to arrive at your valuations for stocks, am i right?

Yes oo.
i also use PE but i don't base my analysis entirely on PE. It wouldn't give an accurate valuation of the company u want to buy especially when the stocks are in different sectors. U only use PE to screen stocks in the same sector. For example, if in banking sector, there are 25 stocks there, u will use PE to sort them into order. But that doesn't mean u should buy one with the lowest PE.the reason is cos u have not read the balance sheets of the company. PE is like the basic in the analysis of stock.

After this one would then seek to know what is in the balance sheet. Everything on the balance sheet is very important. since we can't attend the company's AGM or easily get their reports, we presume that whatever NSE gives us is an extraction of the company's balance sheet. working with those data, we should be able to check for the net asset and compare it with the fixed asset. If the net asset is less than the fixed asset, then u can deduce that there is a problem depending on the margin. Cos a net asset lower than fixed asset means that the current liabilities are greater than the current assets and that implies debt or more expenditure (than sales). so imagine a company having a net asset lower than fixed asset but having a high turnover (or just made a good sales) and stated a good PAT and even went on to give dividend. U can easily calculate its PE from the PAT and the stock would have investors patronage cos of the dividend but it's in debt or having high expenditure. Why should such company declare dividend instead of send the the whole PAT to its reserve to boost the net asset and brace for another working year? The answer is cos they want to make investors happy and for them to be able to have a good PE amongst its peers. meanwhile the stock is worthless. e.g multiverse(having a turnover,+PAT and declaring dividend while having liabilities that the dividends that would be paid can easily offset or reduce)

I also check the prices. i use this analysis after I have used the net asset valuation. I will then research the stock to know what its IPO,PO, private placement prices were. If in year 2000 a stock was trading for N1( IPO price) and got to a range of N8-N15 in 2006-2007 and now it is trading for N0.6, then buy it.cos you are buying N1 for N0.60 after 10 years(but u will need to check the balance sheet first before deciding to know if they are going out of business)


if u do ur valuations well, u will not time the market. Cos no one had been successful timing the market.

With these methods, u will always pray for a bear market cos that is when u will get happy the most. Like me, I save during any bull market or rally and hope for a bear. And when the prices click for u, buy volume--big volume.Some people may make 250% on a stock but it's only volume that would translate the percentage into ''pepper''.Cos a 250% gain on stock A bought at N1 with a volume of 20,000 units is just N70,000.imagine the volume to be 7million units???

[nosa2]

Originally Posted by Oracle

Yes oo.
i also use PE but i don't base my analysis entirely on PE. It wouldn't give an accurate valuation of the company u want to buy especially when the stocks are in different sectors. U only use PE to screen stocks in the same sector. For example, if in banking sector, there are 25 stocks there, u will use PE to sort them into order. But that doesn't mean u should buy one with the lowest PE.the reason is cos u have not read the balance sheets of the company. PE is like the basic in the analysis of stock.

After this one would then seek to know what is in the balance sheet. Everything on the balance sheet is very important. since we can't attend the company's AGM or easily get their reports, we presume that whatever NSE gives us is an extraction of the company's balance sheet. working with those data, we should be able to check for the net asset and compare it with the fixed asset. If the net asset is less than the fixed asset, then u can deduce that there is a problem depending on the margin. Cos a net asset lower than fixed asset means that the current liabilities are greater than the current assets and that implies debt or more expenditure (than sales). so imagine a company having a net asset lower than fixed asset but having a high turnover (or just made a good sales) and stated a good PAT and even went on to give dividend. U can easily calculate its PE from the PAT and the stock would have investors patronage cos of the dividend but it's in debt or having high expenditure. Why should such company declare dividend instead of send the the whole PAT to its reserve to boost the net asset and brace for another working year? The answer is cos they want to make investors happy and for them to be able to have a good PE amongst its peers. meanwhile the stock is worthless. e.g multiverse(having a turnover,+PAT and declaring dividend while having liabilities that the dividends that would be paid can easily offset or reduce)

I also check the prices. i use this analysis after I have used the net asset valuation. I will then research the stock to know what its IPO,PO, private placement prices were. If in year 2000 a stock was trading for N1( IPO price) and got to a range of N8-N15 in 2006-2007 and now it is trading for N0.6, then buy it.cos you are buying N1 for N0.60 after 10 years(but u will need to check the balance sheet first before deciding to know if they are going out of business)


if u do ur valuations well, u will not time the market. Cos no one had been successful timing the market.

With these methods, u will always pray for a bear market cos that is when u will get happy the most. Like me, I save during any bull market or rally and hope for a bear. And when the prices click for u, buy volume--big volume.Some people may make 250% on a stock but it's only volume that would translate the percentage into ''pepper''.Cos a 250% gain on stock A bought at N1 with a volume of 20,000 units is just N70,000.imagine the volume to be 7million units???

Nice method, i look forward to reading your real world analysis. Just one thing you should have at the back of your mind is that some companies (mostly in manufacturing) buy their raw materials in bulk and on credit and this would appear as a current liability. If these raw materials aren't processed before the balance sheet is produced it can distort the books (I NO BE ACCOUNTANT O! SO IF I WRONG LET ME KNOW).

[Oracle]

Originally Posted by nosa2

Nice method, i look forward to reading your real world analysis. Just one thing you should

real world ke!!! na dream analysis be this?

[nosa2]

Originally Posted by Oracle

real world ke!!! na dream analysis be this?

my brother no vex but i rely 80% on p.e ratio and thou you may call it simple I cant remember it ever failing me (well apart from financial services companies releasing fraudulent quarterly results). I respect your analysis on nampak and based on it I'm holding my purchase even thou i dont believe it would fall to the level you're predicting because if it gets to the price level you're predicting the company would have a forward p.e of less than 2 and i cant remember ever seeing any manufacturing company selling at such earnings multiple.

[Oracle]

Originally Posted by nosa2

my brother no vex but i rely 80% on p.e ratio and thou you may call it simple I cant remember it ever failing me (well apart from financial services companies releasing fraudulent quarterly results). I respect your analysis on nampak and based on it I'm holding my purchase even thou i dont believe it would fall to the level you're predicting because if it gets to the price level you're predicting the company would have a forward p.e of less than 2 and i cant remember ever seeing any manufacturing company selling at such earnings multiple.

vex ke!
I know PE is ok for traders. I even forgot to say the analysis was for long term investors. I bought what I needed in 2008-2009. Now it is to siddon dey look and hope for another bear.

[Oracle]

[QUOTE=nosa2;75264]Nice method, i look forward to reading your real world analysis. Just one thing you should have at the back of your mind is that some companies (mostly in manufacturing) buy their raw materials in bulk and on credit and this would appear as a current liability. If these raw materials aren't processed before the balance sheet is produced it can distort the books (I NO BE ACCOUNTANT O! SO IF I WRONG LET ME KNOW).[/QUOTE]

I didn't see the other part of ur text(in red). In every business, creditors/suppliers must always be paid. If u don't pay na court case be dat(which add cost on the bussiness as legal fees and other payments). Whether u pay now or later, it is credit and must be on ur liability column. If the company doesn't use the raw material bought (either with cash or on credit), they wouldn't make profit. It would then be a capital tied up as waste( cos after a while the material may degrade and no longer useful). But if within the time frame the material is still useful, then they will process it and sell it( depend on whether the market is still interested in them too) and they will make profit or loss. They cannot put raw material as stock/assets cos they have not converted it to finished goods. it is only when it has been converted into finished goods that it would be classed as an asset and a price higher than the cost of the raw material (plus processing cost) would be attached to the final commodity.

[Oracle]

21-06-2010 EVANS MEDICAL PLC Unaudited Q3 September
2009 2008
Turnover N2.770b N2.814b
Profit Before Tax (N387.569m) N14.123m
Taxation (N3.634m) (N31.327m)
Profit After Taxation (N391.203m) (N17.204m)
30-09-09 31-12-08
Fixed Assets N1.715b N1.735b
Stock N1.963b N1.460b
Trade Debtors N673.553m N839.615m
Cash And Bank Balances N322.748m N493.777m
Other Debit Balances N256.005m N167.860m
Trade Creditors N290.246m N220.941m
Short Term Borrowings N2.886b N2.690b
Other Credit Balances N1.086b N961.517m
Working Capital (N803.438m) (N553.064m)
Net Assets N667.097m N823.784m

[knightofdelta]

Originally Posted by Oracle

Yes oo.
i also use PE but i don't base my analysis entirely on PE. It wouldn't give an accurate valuation of the company u want to buy especially when the stocks are in different sectors. U only use PE to screen stocks in the same sector. For example, if in banking sector, there are 25 stocks there, u will use PE to sort them into order. But that doesn't mean u should buy one with the lowest PE.the reason is cos u have not read the balance sheets of the company. PE is like the basic in the analysis of stock.

After this one would then seek to know what is in the balance sheet. Everything on the balance sheet is very important. since we can't attend the company's AGM or easily get their reports, we presume that whatever NSE gives us is an extraction of the company's balance sheet. working with those data, we should be able to check for the net asset and compare it with the fixed asset. If the net asset is less than the fixed asset, then u can deduce that there is a problem depending on the margin. Cos a net asset lower than fixed asset means that the current liabilities are greater than the current assets and that implies debt or more expenditure (than sales). so imagine a company having a net asset lower than fixed asset but having a high turnover (or just made a good sales) and stated a good PAT and even went on to give dividend. U can easily calculate its PE from the PAT and the stock would have investors patronage cos of the dividend but it's in debt or having high expenditure. Why should such company declare dividend instead of send the the whole PAT to its reserve to boost the net asset and brace for another working year? The answer is cos they want to make investors happy and for them to be able to have a good PE amongst its peers. meanwhile the stock is worthless. e.g multiverse(having a turnover,+PAT and declaring dividend while having liabilities that the dividends that would be paid can easily offset or reduce)

I also check the prices. i use this analysis after I have used the net asset valuation. I will then research the stock to know what its IPO,PO, private placement prices were. If in year 2000 a stock was trading for N1( IPO price) and got to a range of N8-N15 in 2006-2007 and now it is trading for N0.6, then buy it.cos you are buying N1 for N0.60 after 10 years(but u will need to check the balance sheet first before deciding to know if they are going out of business)


if u do ur valuations well, u will not time the market. Cos no one had been successful timing the market.

With these methods, u will always pray for a bear market cos that is when u will get happy the most. Like me, I save during any bull market or rally and hope for a bear. And when the prices click for u, buy volume--big volume.Some people may make 250% on a stock but it's only volume that would translate the percentage into ''pepper''.Cos a 250% gain on stock A bought at N1 with a volume of 20,000 units is just N70,000.imagine the volume to be 7million units???

Bros small small oh. I think you may be mixing up your terminologies. When fixed assets exceed net assets, it does not automatically mean that current liabilities exceed current assets (translating into a negative working capital). Oando for example, has a leverage ratio of over 6x and it still has a positive working capital because most of its liabilities are long term debts.

Another thing is volumes... buying a stock simply because of the volumes is the fastest way to dig a grave for your portfolio. The expected return on investment is far better than the number of volumes you buy for volumes sake.

[Oracle]

Originally Posted by knightofdelta

Bros small small oh. I think you may be mixing up your terminologies. When fixed assets exceed net assets, it does not automatically mean that current liabilities exceed current assets (translating into a negative working capital). Oando for example, has a leverage ratio of over 6x and it still has a positive working capital because most of its liabilities are long term debts.

Another thing is volumes... buying a stock simply because of the volumes is the fastest way to dig a grave for your portfolio. The expected return on investment is far better than the number of volumes you buy for volumes sake.

Yes I understand u.cos long term liabilities may also cause the fixed asset to be greater than the net assets( in the case of Oando that u mentioned) while still having a positive working capital. The working capital thing is calculated with current assets and current liabilities. I usually base my calculations on net asset and whenever the fixed asset is greater(by a large margin) compared to the net asset, I usually assume that there is a debt by that margin. Maybe mix-up with terminologies.

For you 2nd paragraph,you don't buy for volume sake. No one does that. U need to do ur calculations right.if you say return on investment, what do u mean? Do u mean you just say I want to invest N1m and I hope to get N1.5m and so my ROI being 50% tells me to jump into it. Cos that is expected ROI. what then is ur entry price and the time frame for your ROI? You will need to do ur calculation and then know ur price and then u buy volume. My explanation there was if after knowing ur entry price(using any method) and deciding when you want to exit, then u can buy.
What use is a stock(to you) that gives an ROI of 500% and u buy 1 unit of it. Compare it with the same stock but with a big volume.

There are many ways of calculating ROI. As for me oo,there are 2 types of ROI: ROI in hand(after selling u calculate) and ROI on paper(calculate without selling).

approximate ROI= (exit price- entry price)/ entry price [in %]

Even if you use the amount invested, you will still get the same ROI.

[knightofdelta]

Originally Posted by Oracle

Yes I understand u.cos long term liabilities may also cause the fixed asset to be greater than the net assets( in the case of Oando that u mentioned) while still having a positive working capital. The working capital thing is calculated with current assets and current liabilities. I usually base my calculations on net asset and whenever the fixed asset is greater(by a large margin) compared to the net asset, I usually assume that there is a debt by that margin. Maybe mix-up with terminologies.

For you 2nd paragraph,you don't buy for volume sake. No one does that. U need to do ur calculations right.if you say return on investment, what do u mean? Do u mean you just say I want to invest N1m and I hope to get N1.5m and so my ROI being 50% tells me to jump into it. Cos that is expected ROI. what then is ur entry price and the time frame for your ROI? You will need to do ur calculation and then know ur price and then u buy volume. My explanation there was if after knowing ur entry price(using any method) and deciding when you want to exit, then u can buy.
What use is a stock(to you) that gives an ROI of 500% and u buy 1 unit of it. Compare it with the same stock but with a big volume.

There are many ways of calculating ROI. As for me oo,there are 2 types of ROI: ROI in hand(after selling u calculate) and ROI on paper(calculate without selling).

approximate ROI= (exit price- entry price)/ entry price [in %]

Even if you use the amount invested, you will still get the same ROI.

The highlighted statements are contradictory. You buy 1 unit of stock worth N1000 and get 500% returns, price before sales will be N6000. You buy 1000 units of stock worth N1 and get 500% returns, total value before sales will be N6000. Transaction fees are based on the value of transactions and are hence the same. For both scenarios, pre and post transaction returns are equal. On the NSE, higher priced stocks are usually more liquid than lower priced stocks on the average, hence if I expect equal returns on a low price stock and a high price stock, I will prefer to buy the higher priced stock. 50,000 units of a low price stocks will crash the price if everybody is selling but you need a much more higher value (price wise) to crash a high priced stock.

[Oracle]

Originally Posted by knightofdelta

The highlighted statements are contradictory. You buy 1 unit of stock worth N1000 and get 500% returns, price before sales will be N6000. You buy 1000 units of stock worth N1 and get 500% returns, total value before sales will be N6000. Transaction fees are based on the value of transactions and are hence the same. For both scenarios, pre and post transaction returns are equal. On the NSE, higher priced stocks are usually more liquid than lower priced stocks on the average, hence if I expect equal returns on a low price stock and a high price stock, I will prefer to buy the higher priced stock. 50,000 units of a low price stocks will crash the price if everybody is selling but you need a much more higher value (price wise) to crash a high priced stock.

what I meant there was that if u have a stock that gives an ROI of 500% and u buy it(based on what u said earlier about ROI being better than volume) and I buy the same stock with the same ROI and buy 100,000 units of it, which one would translate into more money.the % return(ROI) is the same for both, but the money gotten is different. if u read what i wrote initially, u will see that I was comparing someone buying a stock with 250% gain( with little volume) and the same stock ( with high volume). i never compared different prices of different stocks.

see excerpt from my earlier post:

''What use is a stock(to you) that gives an ROI of 500% and u buy 1 unit of it. Compare it with the same stock but with a big volume''

''And when the prices click for u, buy volume--big volume.Some people may make 250% on a stock but it's only volume that would translate the percentage into ''pepper''.Cos a 250% gain on stock A bought at N1 with a volume of 20,000 units is just N70,000.imagine the volume to be 7million units???''

As for the crashing of price I understand u very well.

[Oracle]

But in this case it would depend on whether the person has money to buy such volume.

Why i said that(about volume) was that i was explaining the need to hold money when stocks are over-priced and expect a time when everyone wants to sell and few wants to buy. Then u can enter into such stocks with an expected high ROI and a well calculated entry point.

[knightofdelta]

Originally Posted by Oracle

what I meant there was that if u have a stock that gives an ROI of 500% and u buy it(based on what u said earlier about ROI being better than volume) and I buy the same stock with the same ROI and buy 100,000 units of it, which one would translate into more money.the % return(ROI) is the same for both, but the money gotten is different. if u read what i wrote initially, u will see that I was comparing someone buying a stock with 250% gain( with little volume) and the same stock ( with high volume). i never compared different prices of different stocks.

see excerpt from my earlier post:

''What use is a stock(to you) that gives an ROI of 500% and u buy 1 unit of it. Compare it with the same stock but with a big volume''

''And when the prices click for u, buy volume--big volume.Some people may make 250% on a stock but it's only volume that would translate the percentage into ''pepper''.Cos a 250% gain on stock A bought at N1 with a volume of 20,000 units is just N70,000.imagine the volume to be 7million units???''

As for the crashing of price I understand u very well.

I get your point now...

[hispy99]

Evans Medical Still in Red