We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fortune Oil | FTO | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 10.50 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10.50 | 10.50 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 23/7/2015 14:56 by del44 I will happily sell them my "None shares" in FTO, if they contact me...LOL....:-) |
Posted at 04/7/2015 10:58 by thaiger Will this improve the chance of FTO Shareholder getting the 5p per share in 10 months time? |
Posted at 03/7/2015 07:59 by del44 Citi Maintains CHINA GAS HOLD(00384.HK) at Buy with Target Cut to $16.82015/06/25 11:31 Citigroup, in a report, stated that CHINA GAS HOLD(00384.HK) -0.380 (-2.950%) 's FY15 net profit surged 31% on a yearly basis to $3.37 billion, in line with market consensus. The group's dividend payout ratio was revised up from 22.5% to 24%. The research house expects for a 20% EPS growth, driven by better LPG margins, rising gas volumes and steady connection ramp for its city-gas projects. The rating was maintained at Buy. However, owing to a more conservative gas volume growth, the target price was lowered from $18.05 to $16.8 and FY16/17 earnings forecast was trimmed by 6% to 7%. Near-term catalysts include higher gas connection growth which outperformed its peers; better margins arising from LPG business after stabilization of oil prices; joint venture projects with shareholders which facilitate the development of offshore business. |
Posted at 24/6/2015 20:56 by del44 CHINA GAS HOLD (00384.HK) announced that for the year as of the end of March, the net profit rose 30.89% yearly to HK$3.37 billion. The EPS equaled HK67.3 cents; a final dividend of HK13.95 cents was declared.Meanwhile, the turnover rose 21.83% yearly to HK$31.69 billion; gross profit rose 22.16% yearly to HK$6.46 billion |
Posted at 13/4/2015 19:43 by johnives Well chaps after years of frustration with FTO one of the boards suggested I look at AFC on AIM. I bought in at 9p and now they are 40p. Thank you FTO I would never have found this gem otherwise |
Posted at 07/2/2015 16:58 by neptune_tad Copied from Pete44 on Interactive Investor ForumSIMON THOMPSON INVESTORS CHRONICLE THIS WEEK Quote:- The main attraction when I advised buying FTO shares was FTO's investment in China Gas. FTO owns197m shares outright & has beneficial interest in744m shares thro' a jt. venture in China Gas Group Ltd. Combined this means that FTO has an interest in 18.8% of China Gas equity. CG currently has a market value of HK$60bn or £5.1bn at current exchange rates based in stock price of HK$11.96. This means that FTO's direct investment in the company is worth £200m and its 50% share of CG Group's stake is worth a further £379m. Combined that equates to £579m or more than double FTO's market value of £259m. The book value of the investment in CG is £402m in FTO accounts or 30% less than its current open market value.. Glaring valuation anomaly, a fact that a consortium owning almost 57% of FTO issued share capital is attempting to capitalise on by launching a cash bid of 10p a share for the company. FTO's shareholders are also being given a contingent value right ( CVR ) worth 5p a share to benefit from a material share in any value realised from FTO's valuable share holding in CG within 12 months after the completion of the takeover. The CVR is payable if at least 35% of FTO's holding in CG is sold for a price in excess of HK$ 11 per share. If there was any certainty that a sell down of the CG stake would happen, then an exit price of 15p a share seems fair right now. However the minimum cash offer of 10p would be a bargain buy for the acquirer and having had a close look at the offer doc. I feel that an outright bid of 15p a share is more than reasonable, given that FTO's NAV is closer to 20p a share if the stake in CG is marked at market value ( SIT TIGHT ) |
Posted at 09/11/2014 19:09 by alanadale Biffa, (17127) Fortune’s fall from grace has nothing to do with the oil price. Anyone remotely interested in Fortune knows full well that that the oil tab is a misnomer.Originally Fortune attracted investment for capital appreciation. We forewent a dividend for many, many years in expectation of the shares rising over time. In the event Fortune has been a great trading share but a lousy investment. The shares have traded more or less within the same range for the last decade. The board has to accept responsibility for this thoroughly unsatisfactory state of affairs and address it: why has there been no underlying appreciation in the share price in that time and why is it trading at less than a quarter of NAV? There are of course endemic issues: the lack of liquidity, the loss of a premium listing and rerating as an investment company. But that does not explain why the shares are trading at a quarter of NAV. At that kind of discount one would normally imagine something fishy going on; investment companies usually trade at close to NAV. In Fortune’s case it doesn’t because Fortune is controlled by the Concert Group which effectively ‘owns’ the capital appreciation. We, the minority shareholders, having no control over when the underlying assets may or may not be realised, only receive value through dividends. At present there is no dividend and the board has given no guidance on what that dividend might be, so the share price is at sea. It is the management’s cavalier attitude to the market and minority shareholders that is the root of the problem, viz Mr Tee Poon’s famous remark that the company was not responsible for the share price; well, in any self respecting ‘open’ Western company that remark alone would have earned him his P45. Market acceptance is built on profit consistency and predictability. This has traditionally been very difficult for Fortune given the market it has been operating in where size is everything. The board was correct to concentrate on building up the company and in the process withholding a dividend and I believe the decision to piggyback on CGH was sound. But then, having made the breakthrough, they’ve blown it and the sooner they own up to a totally unnecessary extension of the period of uncertainty the better. Mr Chiu and co still haven’t got it that they owe a responsibility to minority shareholders to see we get fair value. They could mitigate the damage by declaring a special interim dividend and indicating the final (without repeating last year’s fiasco of predicting a dividend and then passing it.) They should also provide profit forecasts – the business has settled down sufficiently now – as every other company does. We should all be pestering the board with demands for greater transparency as a way to gaining the market’s trust and to measure performance. If the management has any intellectual honesty it should have the humility to accept that the reason for the dire share price is the market’s scepticism that it is acting in the interests of minority shareholders and it should act to allay that scepticism. |
Posted at 20/10/2014 15:47 by via con Del , a good point but I´d contend that FTO´s stake was done because Ming Hui Liu could see the writing on the wall, and asked his mate Danny to help him maintain control at the company he had founded. As for our little FTO having the ability to swallow up CGH on the cheap, was optimistic to say the least. Don´t forget Ming was under house arrest and "his" company´s share price was under attack, so I think Ming was very well aware of the potential iminent threats and quite naturally looked for allies, one obviously was our Danny and FTO. The result of which became the JV once the enemies appeared at the gatesAs for CGH being a strategic investment I find that very unlikely. If anything you could say the two companies are competitors. The only strategical investment case would be if CGH had offered jvs in its upcoming operations. Before, during and since the CGG JV, FTO have had zero from CGH, so where´s the strategy ? What has FTO gained thus far from saving Ming from the Chinese ? (not including the share price rise, although that´s on paper, as we haven´t seen a penny of it yet). And moreover the company is now less investable, being classed as an investment vehicle due to Danny saving Ming´s company from the Chinese. Wow thanks Danny but what about us ? We´ve only lost, then lost, then lost - Lost premium, lost rights, lost the dividend. Well if that´s a strategy, then I´m lost for words |
Posted at 20/10/2014 14:25 by via con That is a very important point you have raised catscats regarding citizenship, one which I did not/have not taken into consideration, although DC has worked closely with the Chinese authorities, seemingly without hinderance, although Beijing one would imagine would prefer one of theirs rather than a Hong Konger (or a Hong Kong Chinese) taking the reins of a large and strategic Chinese company.Even so it does not completely rule out my theory as the Stockmarket might feel that a HKC is a better option than a potential puppet Chinese CEO, who could make CGH a SOE in all but name. IMO it is worth remembering the case for buying shares in CGH originally was to fight off the Chinese from taking over the business. Months and months later, FTO´s stake in CGH remains very high, long after DC came to the defence of his mate. So considering CGH´s emergency has passed, why hasn´t FTO sold its incredibly profitable holding. It´s not as if FTO is receiving any crumbs from CGH´s table. So DC must be after something more, hence the hier apparent angle which could also include (although more difficult) DC and his mate taking CGH private. As for the big discount to NAVs in HK, if that is indeed correct, I´d imagine that it is the dividends that keep those families and shareholders content, something which we do not have in common. The result is that the shareholders here have no dividends and is heavily discounted to NAV which are bitter pills to swallow for the years of keeping the faith with Danny boy. With regard to Institutional Investors, it is pretty inconceivable that they would invest in the black box business model that FTO has adopted, and even if its veil of opacity were to be removed I think the lack of a free float would also undermine their investment case, well that and the non premium listing and of course the lack of a dividend |
Posted at 26/9/2014 16:19 by via con gwatson56 and alanadale thank you for your posts. But forgive me but your posts leave more questions than answersWhy is the new CEo the right man for the job ? Why was the CGH tie up 100% right thing to do ? What is FTO´s strategic intent in holding its CGH shares and apart from its divi what is the benefit for FTO and its shareholders ? Was the loss of FTO´s premium listing worth it ? Why after all these years having "evolved" is the share price still languishing around the same price I initial bought it over 10 years ago ? Why hasn´t the share price "evolved" at the same time ?(accepting more shares now and not taking into account the special bribe divi) How the bloody hell did they f up the divi ? Why is it only the BOD that has benefitted from being involved with FTO all these years ? Who is really incharge now ? The CEO or daddy Daniel ? When will the BOD decide it can illuminate its intentions so that the city boys can understand what is FTO now and what it will become ? Will FTO ever get its premium listing back ? Why should we wait 10 months to see after so many years ? Why would a divi change anything ? The city boys won´t care, we simply want clarity Where is the company going ? I´m fed up of sitting in the back seat being told "we´re nearly there" by daddy Daniel I appreciate my questions cross over, but imo the black box FTO model is the problem. The city doesn´t invest in a black box story. Forgive me for asking these questions but my frustration is getting the best of me EDITED |
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
