|
Printable version |
From: | "David & Jill Stevenson" <djstevo@quicksilver.net.nz> |
Date: | Mon, 2 Feb 2004 10:50:38 +1300 |
With appropriate respect Phaedrus to an
obvious craftsman in his field. No amount of historical TA charting
is going to have a correct read on whether 2004 might not be an unusual
year for CAH taking readings at this point in time where undercurrent
manoeuvering may be soon surfacing impacting on share price. The narrow band on
trading in recent times is partly,maybe significantly, attributable to the fact
that ,apart from negativity aspect surrounding the log trade
and $NZ/$US adverse exchange
movement, no fundamental course changing has
occured in the industries within which CAH does it`s business. Except its
presence in Chile. Except,of course, strong domestic construction activity
on the local scene has cushioned the negativity mentioned above helping
keep the share price within a less volatile trading band as you
mentioned.
Why this might be an exceptional year
could be the outcome of rumours that Oregon-based timber investor Campbells are
speculated to be interested in CAH 330,000 ha estate. A fundamental factor
such as that is less frequent than Haley`s comet. Has anyone done an exercise at
varying realisation prices from a tender process and assuming the possibility of
a full capital return to shareholders , though that is not likely . If that
happened ,and only the residual and .I believe. successfully
operating industries remained operative it should be far easier to
determine a more precise NTA position for CAH applying a discounted cash flow
projection on other stand alone companies within the group or a given number of
years capitalisation at current sustainable earnings level . Remember
that stellar performer in Australia Sinsmetal was once owned by CAH. Until
now only a Grant sammuels or other perhaps overbold assessor would dare
attempt a publicly announced valuation. Just look at FFS and CAH write
downs in recent years from what they believed the year before were
conservative valuations.
Regards,
David Stevenson
|
|