New World Development Company Limited's (HKG:17) Stock Price Dropped 6.6% Last Week; Private Companies Would Not Be Happy
New World Development Company Limited's (HKG:17) Stock Price Dropped 6.6% Last Week; Private Companies Would Not Be Happy
Key Insights
關鍵見解
- New World Development's significant private companies ownership suggests that the key decisions are influenced by shareholders from the larger public
- 51% of the business is held by the top 2 shareholders
- 15% of New World Development is held by Institutions
- 新世界發展擁有大量私營公司所有權,這表明關鍵決策受廣大公衆股東的影響
- 51% 的業務由前 2 名股東持有
- 新世界發展的15%由機構持有
A look at the shareholders of New World Development Company Limited (HKG:17) can tell us which group is most powerful. The group holding the most number of shares in the company, around 45% to be precise, is private companies. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
看看新世界發展有限公司(HKG: 17)的股東可以告訴我們哪個集團最強大。持有該公司股份最多的集團是私營公司,準確地說約爲45%。換句話說,該集團面臨最大的上行潛力(或下行風險)。
And following last week's 6.6% decline in share price, private companies suffered the most losses.
繼上週股價下跌6.6%之後,私營公司遭受的損失最大。
Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about New World Development.
讓我們仔細看看不同類型的股東能告訴我們關於新世界發展的什麼。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About New World Development?
關於新世界發展,機構所有權告訴我們什麼?
Institutional investors commonly compare their own returns to the returns of a commonly followed index. So they generally do consider buying larger companies that are included in the relevant benchmark index.
機構投資者通常將自己的回報與常見指數的回報進行比較。因此,他們通常會考慮收購相關基準指數中包含的大型公司。
We can see that New World Development does have institutional investors; and they hold a good portion of the company's stock. This implies the analysts working for those institutions have looked at the stock and they like it. But just like anyone else, they could be wrong. It is not uncommon to see a big share price drop if two large institutional investors try to sell out of a stock at the same time. So it is worth checking the past earnings trajectory of New World Development, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.
我們可以看到,新世界發展確實有機構投資者;他們持有公司很大一部分股票。這意味着在這些機構工作的分析師已經看過這隻股票,他們很喜歡。但是就像其他人一樣,他們可能錯了。如果兩個大型機構投資者試圖同時拋售股票,股價大幅下跌的情況並不少見。因此,值得查看新世界發展過去的收益軌跡(見下文)。當然,請記住,還有其他因素需要考慮。
New World Development is not owned by hedge funds. Chow Tai Fook Capital Limited is currently the largest shareholder, with 45% of shares outstanding. With 5.7% and 2.4% of the shares outstanding respectively, BlackRock, Inc. and Ashmore Investment Management Limited are the second and third largest shareholders.
新世界發展不歸對沖基金所有。周大福資本有限公司目前是最大股東,已發行股份的45%。貝萊德公司和阿什莫爾投資管理有限公司分別擁有5.7%和2.4%的已發行股份,是第二和第三大股東。
A more detailed study of the shareholder registry showed us that 2 of the top shareholders have a considerable amount of ownership in the company, via their 51% stake.
對股東登記冊的更詳細研究表明,前兩名股東通過其51%的股份擁有公司的大量所有權。
While it makes sense to study institutional ownership data for a company, it also makes sense to study analyst sentiments to know which way the wind is blowing. There are plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too.
雖然研究公司的機構所有權數據是有意義的,但研究分析師的情緒以了解風向哪個方向吹來也是有意義的。有很多分析師在報道該股,因此可能也值得一看他們的預測。
Insider Ownership Of New World Development
新世界發展的內部所有權
The definition of company insiders can be subjective and does vary between jurisdictions. Our data reflects individual insiders, capturing board members at the very least. Management ultimately answers to the board. However, it is not uncommon for managers to be executive board members, especially if they are a founder or the CEO.
公司內部人員的定義可能是主觀的,並且在不同的司法管轄區之間確實有所不同。我們的數據反映了個人內部人士,至少涵蓋了董事會成員。管理層最終對董事會負責。但是,經理成爲執行委員會成員的情況並不少見,尤其是當他們是創始人或首席執行官時。
Insider ownership is positive when it signals leadership are thinking like the true owners of the company. However, high insider ownership can also give immense power to a small group within the company. This can be negative in some circumstances.
當內部所有權表明領導層像公司的真正所有者一樣思考時,內部所有權是積極的。但是,高度的內部所有權也可以賦予公司內部的一小部分人巨大的權力。在某些情況下,這可能是負面的。
Our data suggests that insiders own under 1% of New World Development Company Limited in their own names. However, it's possible that insiders might have an indirect interest through a more complex structure. It's a big company, so even a small proportional interest can create alignment between the board and shareholders. In this case insiders own HK$83m worth of shares. It is good to see board members owning shares, but it might be worth checking if those insiders have been buying.
我們的數據顯示,內部人士以自己的名義擁有新世界發展有限公司不到1%的股份。但是,內部人士有可能通過更復雜的結構獲得間接利益。這是一家大公司,因此即使是很小的比例權益也可以在董事會和股東之間建立一致。在本案中,內部人士擁有價值8300萬港元的股票。很高興看到董事會成員擁有股票,但可能值得檢查一下這些內部人士是否在買入。
General Public Ownership
一般公有制
The general public-- including retail investors -- own 39% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. This size of ownership, while considerable, may not be enough to change company policy if the decision is not in sync with other large shareholders.
包括散戶投資者在內的公衆擁有該公司39%的股份,因此不容忽視。這種所有權規模雖然可觀,但如果決定與其他大股東不同步,可能不足以改變公司的政策。
Private Company Ownership
私人公司所有權
We can see that Private Companies own 45%, of the shares on issue. Private companies may be related parties. Sometimes insiders have an interest in a public company through a holding in a private company, rather than in their own capacity as an individual. While it's hard to draw any broad stroke conclusions, it is worth noting as an area for further research.
我們可以看到,私人公司擁有45%的已發行股份。私營公司可能是關聯方。有時,內部人士通過控股私營公司而對上市公司擁有權益,而不是以個人身份擁有權益。儘管很難得出任何寬泛的結論,但值得注意的是,這是一個需要進一步研究的領域。
Next Steps:
後續步驟:
While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important. Case in point: We've spotted 3 warning signs for New World Development you should be aware of, and 2 of them are a bit concerning.
儘管值得考慮擁有公司的不同群體,但還有其他因素更爲重要。一個很好的例子:我們發現了你應該注意的 3 個新世界發展的警告信號,其中兩個有點令人擔憂。
But ultimately it is the future, not the past, that will determine how well the owners of this business will do. Therefore we think it advisable to take a look at this free report showing whether analysts are predicting a brighter future.
但歸根結底,決定這家企業所有者的表現的是未來,而不是過去。因此,我們認爲最好看一下這份免費報告,該報告顯示了分析師是否預測了更光明的未來。
NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures.
注意:本文中的數字是使用過去十二個月的數據計算得出的,這些數據是指截至財務報表日期當月最後一天的12個月期間。這可能與全年年度報告數據不一致。
Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com.
This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
對這篇文章有反饋嗎?對內容感到擔憂?直接聯繫我們。 或者,給編輯團隊 (at) simplywallst.com 發送電子郵件。
Simply Wall St的這篇文章本質上是籠統的。我們僅使用公正的方法根據歷史數據和分析師的預測提供評論,我們的文章無意作爲財務建議。它不構成買入或賣出任何股票的建議,也沒有考慮到您的目標或財務狀況。我們的目標是爲您提供由基本數據驅動的長期重點分析。請注意,我們的分析可能不考慮最新的價格敏感型公司公告或定性材料。簡而言之,華爾街沒有持有任何上述股票的頭寸。