Share
clock Created with Sketch.
20/10/17
17:44
Share
Originally posted by Dumas
↑
Yoda
As to the value of CGA - it may have capital to fund its business for another 12 months, but you can't value a fund management that has almost halved its FUM ( and Revenues ) in just 4 months, has a large cash bleed, and has not gained an independent FUM insto contract in ? years -- so you actually have nothing in a year's time -- Nil cash and an ongoing loss. Even the easiest IE Report would normally value that at 'NIL".
Yoda I am sorry, you are normally so right. But you can't apply a CTN IMA multiple that CGA and NAOS have invented for their own purposes ( particularly one that overstates the real potential life of the contract ), and not look at inhouse costs ), and apply that multiple in the real world to a mish mash of CIE , CQG, Switzer and unlisted trusts - lower fees, more back office. 1% 0f FUM may be the highest you might pay for the platforms in place. ie 8 cents a share? Sounds like we will see further adjustments to CGA's Balance Sheet ( impairments of value ) -- query where the optimistic view of 17/ 18 profit came from, or was that taking an asset sale creeping into P & L?
DYOR
Expand
Dumas, yoda agrees. Yoda thinks Dumas misunderstood. Yoda used the monetisation fantasy extrapolation approach as playful way of max valuation for CGA. Anyway you cut and dice it, the majority of CGA's share price is hot air. Why did Packer sell moons ago?