London Asia Chinese Private Eq.F Share Discussion Threads

[phbatbjco] 31/10/2007 15:47

Ha Ha Buff -

per google



tem·po·rar·y (tmp-rr)
adj.
Lasting, used, serving, or enjoyed for a limited time.
n. pl. tem·po·rar·ies Informal
One that serves for a limited time: an office staffed by temporaries.





I like the "enjoyed for a limited time" bit - certainly not in this case

[buffin] 30/10/2007 10:33

Not permanent?

[phbatbjco] 30/10/2007 09:51

What's the defininition of "temporary" suspension?

[painting] 05/10/2007 02:41

LDC ony gets paid its bonus on realised, not accounting, profits Means the Fund has to actually sell the investment bfore LDC get paid the bonus, so pretty irrlevant to LDC what the NAV is.

[robsy2] 03/10/2007 08:32

Sure but I think , correct me if I'm wrong, that LDC get bonus fees on any increase in net asset value of the fund over and above 6%(?) a year. so LDC as fund manager want the high NAV for their fee income.

[phbatbjco] 01/10/2007 14:34

probably cos noone has a clue how to value Chinese Companies (valuing UK non quoted companies is difficult enough!!), and I've never known an auditor to stick his neck out, unless he happened to work for Arthur Anderson on the Enron audit.
Stupid concept really to value at fair value in these situations. At least with the investments being valued at the lower of cost or NRV there was less chance of an overvaluation taking place.

[painting] 29/9/2007 06:48

LDC has STG6m+ in the bank, and overheads of STG1.2m a year based on their latest acounts, so unlikely they would be massaging the number upwards as they have little to gain (a 10% increase in net assets at the fund only equates to an extra STG100k pa of income for LDC), and LDC only get paid their 20% performance fee on sale of the assets

My guess is the auditor got scared when they said they showing the assets at fair value (the Interims were stated at cos, not Fair Value), so insisted on having a third party valuer to hide behind

[buffin] 27/9/2007 16:16

Great. Well a number of institutions invested with them, and I expect they'll be applying massive pressure for a speedy resolution.

You have to wonder why the qualified third party is only now being appointed, and what these operational procedures are.

There will be some very unhappy institutions, and shortcomings are bound to result in sackings.

P.S. The core problem seems to be the auditors' "difficulty in determining the increase in value of certain investments in China" (my italics).

I wonder why this difficulty wasn't foreseen. Hopefully the businesses exist.

P.P.S. Spoke to the PR people. Obviously they can't go beyond the RNS, but as far as they are aware there is no question of any fraud. I asked him to feed my query about this back to the company.

[nickcduk] 27/9/2007 16:14

I don't think todays announcement is as disastrous as you make out moumou3. Getting information from Chinese companies is not easy because of a chronic shortage of accountants in China. Procedures need to be improved as referred to in todays statement. London Asia Capital are responsible for some of the blame as they rely far too much on Simon Littlewood to get things done. Hopefully that will change in future for the better for both companies.

[moumou3] 27/9/2007 16:02

suspended...no audit and chairman stating he is GENERALLY quite happy with funds investments but need independent auditing.............get the hell out of there when you can

[damanko] 13/9/2007 16:52

Yes, pretty much agree with Rosby2, I too will stay put. See it as a longer term holding. In the past few months this has only gone in one direction, though good results may sort that out. I think the SL factor is probably making some in the market a little nervous. Let's face it, his reputation could do with some smart PR. Smartish. Some of the London Asia fallout was bound to rub off on LCP.

[robsy2] 13/9/2007 16:18

dunno. All I ever see is good news, perhaps the worry is that anything in China is a bit dodgy, its all overpriced( this fund doesn't seem to be ) and that LCP people manage the fund so its tainted , on top of that SL is the head honcho on the fund so maybe all the deal making that is going on will make more moeny for SL and LDC and less for the holders: ON top of that there is no news about when the results are due , so all in all quite a lot of negatives but for me I am staying put.The investments look great and the diversification is good for what is a high risk, plus they have some big institutional invsters on board, so there atre lots of positives, maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised with the results come out.

[capt bligh] 13/9/2007 10:01

unbelievable

[phbatbjco] 13/9/2007 09:14

so why the mark down on a seemingly positive statement?

[robsy2] 31/8/2007 16:54

I've been wondering when we would get an annual report , looking at the extract from the prospectus below, it will be sometime before 30.09.07.
Should show good progress.

"Financial Information and Reports
The first accounting period of the Company will run until 31 March 2007 and, thereafter, accounting periods will end on 31 March in each year. The audited annual accounts will be sent to Shareholders within 6 months of the year end to which they relate"

[robsy2] 31/8/2007 16:27

saw this on the ldc thread posted by Jellybean.looks interesting

"e-mailed the company (i.e. LDC)last week

got a bit of a standard reply saying that they were disappointed at the
share price as well as the NAV was 14.7p on 31st Dec/ positive developments in the London Asia Chinese Private Equity Fund/LAC has a stake China EastSea which is looking to float on AIM in the fourth quarter."UNQOUTE

I can't see any investmnt in China East sea, Anyone know anymore?

[painting] 27/7/2007 00:53

SL leaving LDC Board to spend more time working on the Fund shd be good for LCP.

[damanko] 26/7/2007 11:16

Yes, looks good on paper. Interestingly, all the stuff going on at London Asia this week - and recently, ie share price drop, massive overhang/dilution of shares etc -doesn't seem to have affected LCP at all.

[painting] 26/7/2007 10:49

good week for the fund - strengthened the Board, and refinanced one of the portfolio companies at 5x what they paid

[buffin] 03/7/2007 09:31

Richard Scott, senior investment manager at Iimia, which holds 2m shares in the London Asia Chinese Private Equity Fund, says that the fund had already realised returns, which he says is a rarity for private equity funds at this early stage.

Scott says that LACPEF sold Devotion Energy in May for £3.7m after buying it for £1.4m in November, a 120% profit in less than six months. He says that specialist closed ended funds had a tendency to open to a fanfare on AIM only to disappear relatively swiftly but believes that LACPEF will stay.

[painting] 20/6/2007 02:00

Pesticides deal a nice shift for the Fund - first time they investing in a Chinese deal going to listing in China, where the PE's are much higher than can get for Chinese businesses anywhere else, so should be bigger return for the Fund.

[damanko] 18/6/2007 09:52

Agree with your last line, will have a look.

I am a holder in LCP, and they are well supported by institutions, no worries there.

Will have a shuftee at the other thread, I'm just curious as to why LCD, as the organisation behind LCP - doesn't do better. If you get my drift.

[buffin] 18/6/2007 09:22

There's LDC - where the shareprice has halved lately - and LCP, this fund which LDC runs. LCP was over-subscribed at the start, and by and large the institutions still have their stakes.

Do you think LCP is poorly regarded? If so why?

There are many questions about LDC. They are best discussed on the LDC thread, though.