Spackman   

Spackman entertainment

useless co..

FrancisLim      ( Date: 21-Nov-2022 10:11) Posted: " SGX RegCo will look into the potential rule breaches and where relevant, refer the Independent Review report to the relevant authorities for their further investigation into the Past Acquisitions. Where investigations indicate breaches of the listing rules, SGX RegCo will proceed to take disciplinary actions against the culpable parties. Disclosure is fundamentally important to the operation of a fair and orderly market and SGX RegCo expects listed issuers and their boards to uphold high disclosure standards. The Exchange expects listed issuers to conduct adequate due diligence and exercise due care prior to entering into acquisitions and disposals. Listed issuers should also establish adequate and effective systems of internal controls to safeguard the interest of the company and its shareholders." Queries after Queries, Maximalisation after Maximalisation.. So far, what the results of SGX RegCo' s actions? The recent disclosure again indicates that there are still dirts under the carpet inspite of the audits, reviews, queries, etc.

 

" SGX RegCo will look into the potential rule breaches and where relevant, refer the Independent Review report to the relevant authorities for their further investigation into the Past Acquisitions. Where investigations indicate breaches of the listing rules, SGX RegCo will proceed to take disciplinary actions against the culpable parties.

Disclosure is fundamentally important to the operation of a fair and orderly market and SGX RegCo expects listed issuers and their boards to uphold high disclosure standards. The Exchange expects listed issuers to conduct adequate due diligence and exercise due care prior to entering into acquisitions and disposals. Listed issuers should also establish adequate and effective systems of internal controls to safeguard the interest of the company and its shareholders."

Queries after Queries, Maximalisation after Maximalisation.. So far, what the results of SGX RegCo' s actions?
The recent disclosure again indicates that there are still dirts under the carpet inspite of the audits, reviews, queries, etc.   
 

 

More red flags.. ceo can buy property and board not aware ?
No material impact ? Run like ftx one man show ? Amazing..
the entire saga seems like no one is responsible..
Wait for SGX to query ? Another noc ?

 

Transformation complete ..
cfo resigned, replaced by korean accountant.
Director resign , replaced by korean .
Hmm .. might as well listed im korea exchange !!
Dyodd

 

Guess, the Regulator does not impose timeline for the Co to finalize its independent review report...

and it has no timeline for it to review and decide whether there has been any breach in regulations and laws by the Co and its management...

 

Yes, not investable.  Same old tricks.

Irony being that much had been written of this Co during its series of purchases of the SMGL.. questions raised on valuations or the absence ..

series of private placements, hyped over its films whch a few of them did well in South Korea box offices, but the returns to the Co wrere neligible due to the other investors' profit share

Yet throughout, the Regulator did its normal routines -query and riduculous response without determining the substance

Then like kicking the can down the road, asked for independent review... the Co dragged the appointment, and dragged  the finalization and relase... the so called Maxwellisation.  The Regulator did not put a timeline on the review and the report...

Now what, the Regulator will sit down and seriously determine whether any breaches of applicable regulations and laws, and actions if any to be taken?

 

lahaha      ( Date: 20-Jul-2022 11:46) Posted: This is a company that is untouchable. Doesn?t matter what the regulators say. The regulators allowed this company to list on the SGX even though the founder was involved in a Korean listco (Littauer Tech) that was essentially a scam years ago. Just go and read the litigation case notes of Sang Cheol Woo versus Charles Spackman. All available on the internet. Essentially if he is using the same method as Littauer Tech, it seems the modus operandi is to do a private placement, use the proceeds to acquire a paper company that is secretly controlled by him and then transfer the money out from there.

 

This is a company that is untouchable. Doesn?t matter what the regulators say. The regulators allowed this company to list on the SGX even though the founder was involved in a Korean listco (Littauer Tech) that was essentially a scam years ago.

Just go and read the litigation case notes of Sang Cheol Woo versus Charles Spackman. All available on the internet. Essentially if he is using the same method as Littauer Tech, it seems the modus operandi is to do a private placement, use the proceeds to acquire a paper company that is secretly controlled by him and then transfer the money out from there.

 

Out of the 3 directors, one is newly appinted.

The substantial shareholders remain the same in the absence of notification on changes.

Stay far, far away from this Company share until the Regulators determine whether any breaches of regulations and laws and any actions to be taken based on the independent reviewer report.

Nothing to crow about this share buyback.. it has tumbled from its high of 27 cents (or more) to its current misery 0.5 cents..  Basically, it had not consistently brought in operating profits and cashflows, but maily relying on placements...  last annual report it has 1.9 billion issued shares.

Those past shareholders and the general investing public would only be happy if the Regulators come to a determination on the Independent Reviewer Report.  Hope, the Reglators do not take the same amount of time as the Co management in its Maxwellisation process.

 

I thought you would be happy with all the old management (responsible for the mess at Spackman) leaving. They were as fishy as possible 
Would it not be fair to give the new people in a fair chance at redeeming themselves...

moonsun      ( Date: 18-Jul-2022 12:34) Posted: Cfo left.. replaced w a korean accountant 3 Directors resigned recently. Replaced w a korean korea. Getting a all korea outfit here? fishy..

 

Yes, I agree the past history is extremely shady.
But maybe the old directors leaving and the start of buybacks is a positive sign...
We will have to wait and watch to see how the story unfolds.

BTW it is 56 million shares at $0.005 amounting to S$280,000.00. They have allocated around $1 million towards buybacks. Let' s see if they spend the full amount and what is the share price at the end of the buybacks...

FrancisLim      ( Date: 18-Jul-2022 09:29) Posted: Look at the past history of the co' s share transactions.  Another likely pump and dump.  56 million shares at 0.004 amounting to SGD224,000.. If its is a pump and dump, probably, the amount expended is a fraction. Dont get caught in the dump, look back.  Even one time, it got a well known investor to take a private placement, and after that the share price plummented. Waiting for the Regulatory Authorities to study the Independent Reviewer Report and to determine whether any breaches had taken palce and any actions to be taken ... Avoid this Company like a plague...just take a look at its past history ...

 

Cfo left.. replaced w a korean accountant
3 Directors resigned recently. Replaced w a korean korea.
Getting a all korea outfit here? fishy..

 

Look at the past history of the co' s share transactions.  Another likely pump and dump.  56 million shares at 0.004 amounting to SGD224,000..
If its is a pump and dump, probably, the amount expended is a fraction.

Dont get caught in the dump, look back.  Even one time, it got a well known investor to take a private placement, and after that the share price plummented.

Waiting for the Regulatory Authorities to study the Independent Reviewer Report and to determine whether any breaches had taken palce and any actions to be taken ...


Avoid this Company like a plague...just take a look at its past history ...

 

Buybacks continue on Friday as well. Seems like most sellers at $0.005 are done with their sale. Let' s see if buybacks start at $0.006 in the coming week...
24,991,000 shares on 13.07 2022
30,000,000 shares on 14.07.2022
1,000,000 shares on 15.07.2022

Almost 56 million shares in 3 trading sessions does indicate that management feels the market is perhaps pricing Spackman wrongly and maybe the cash the company has is real. Spackman is still trading at a P/NAV of 0.25 (NAV=S$0.024 as on 31.12.2021)

 

Spackman management has been true to their words....buybacks have started in full earnest 
24,991,000 shares on 13.07.2022
30,000,000 shares on 14.07.2022
 

 

2/3 otw.............

ThankYou      ( Date: 22-Jun-2022 14:29) Posted: Ya. You try buying. See what happens. Buy to keep but better for it to come down to 2/3. Then buy to keep. tankoksee      ( Date: 22-Jun-2022 12:48) Posted: wtf..nta 24 ...eps 1.5..p/e 2x.... doing 4/5........so cheap!!!

 

Ya. You try buying. See what happens. Buy to keep but better for it to come down to 2/3. Then buy to keep.

tankoksee      ( Date: 22-Jun-2022 12:48) Posted: wtf..nta 24 ...eps 1.5..p/e 2x.... doing 4/5........so cheap!!!

 

wtf..nta 24 ...eps 1.5..p/e 2x....

doing 4/5........so cheap!!!

 

The report was issued on 16th June 2022.  Thanks for the update.  The release was long overdue.

Hope the Regulatory would determine whether that the series of transations taken together violate the spirit of the regulations.

Based on past cases, one has to wait for quite a while before actions are being taken.

How the transaction passed audit?

 

IDs resigned to take the responsibility for the report...

from here..hope for a new start...new IDs...MBO or share buyback...last done was 10 when co did it.

cash per share is 8..

 

Thought the report already released last week. SGX to further investigate further and take necessary actions. 

FrancisLim      ( Date: 21-Jun-2022 12:50) Posted: Since the Co does not have the minimum no of directors to comply with SGX regulations, the Independent Review Report should be released with whatever reservations expressed by the directors notated. It is about time for the Authority and Regulator to call for the release of the report which had been long overdue...  The BOD owes the shareholders and other stakeholders to release the independent review report.  Whether there are or there are no material findings, the stakeholders have waited long enough to know the findings and conclusions.