In case we were dealing with a straightforward company, listed in XYZ , we would have a discussion about performance, expectations etc. I have never seen a discussion where so many intelligent people are involved but where the confusion, misunderstanding and frustration continues to fly. The structure of the company is simply too complicated and one has to wonder how and why such a structure was created in the first place. I believe they started small and were thinking to be smart and were assisted by"smart" consultants. They have created traps for themselves. But the character of the persons involved has not changed. We will continue to be surprised by actions and dealings by this management and unfortunately we will continue to discuss why we should have patience and WAIT a little bit longer (we're almost there). We are always explaining why things did NOT work out as expected or it took a bit LONGER. We never discuss why it was nice they bought MORE shares back or INCREASED the dividend or concluded MORE new deals. That is the characteristic of a good company. The moment management engages in smoke screens, does not surprise to the upside, does not take care of all shareholders, as a shareholder you have a problem. Unfortunately I'm in for quite a substantial position and waiting for the exit moment; No mr Caffeine you need not to advise me when to sell my shares! But the moment the share price is in the 22-25 range I will leave this frustration for 80 % and invest all of it in Cirrus Logic! Cherio
Pere, ,never have advised anyone to buy or sell. Not sure I am reading you right but I do believe that management has done a great job running this company. I think just about everyone here agrees with that or they still would not be invested. Remember the reason we are here is because of what we all feel is a very undervalued company. We could not have said that 4 years ago and I am just as frustrated as the rest of us why we have not been able to achieve true value. The corporate structure as you said developed into a mess and the only way to get true value has been to unwind the tangled web. This unwinding and being able to move to Taiwan and trade as most of all off our Taiwan competitors has been a lengthy process starting back when we had to do a reverse split which is usually the kiss of death. One thing to think about is that SPIL which is the largest shareholder sits on the board and controls about 30% of the total entity . Does anyone hear really think that SK and SJ are making these decisions themselves. I think SPIL has had a hand in every aspect of this restructuring and has also been a team player by selling 800,000 shares way below what we all think IMOS was worth. Lets just take a deep breath and let management finish the restructuring . You could bet your bottom dollar that SPIL gave the go ahead when the pricing of the 170 million shares were placed. I have to trust that they looked at many options and this was the best path for SPIL and the rest of the shareholders including you me and SJ .
Well said Caff. Also keep in mind that management bought 23million shares and one of the key metrics to any good investment is insider buying. Did they get a good price? Yes, about in line with IMOS at the current price. SJ and SK bought and they now have real skin in the game so make no mistake, they want this stock to go up and realize its true potential. I for one am thrilled that they are putting their own capital at risk.
I don't know how much influence SPIL actually has, I am sure they are aware of the events taking place in the background and possibly advising in some manner. One of the directors who also purchased a large slug of shares was formerly with SPIL. Smart money is buying and that is good enough for me.
Joseph, I agree with parts of that and also disagree. There are historical reasons for the convoluted structure. For instance, ChipMOS bought out SPIL's LCD group in exchange for partial ownership. That was a good move, even if it makes it more complex. Likewise, ThaiLin received IMOS stock as part of the events after the recession, and that is a good thing even though it also makes this more complex.
Yes they did things that we could complain about like poor buybacks and relatively slow and unexplained moves in the restructuring, but they also did a lot of good things like became very prudent with capex since the recession, built over time an impressive LCD driver service that is part of a duopoly with high margins, expanded in multiple areas all at once, etc. We have less motivation to talk about those things though because we don't want any change in them. Those things are already great so there's no point in talking about them.
Suit yourself for when you sell. If revenue grows like it seems it should, and if they do a decent job with the rest of the restructuring, I will hold for longer than that.