|
Home
Articles
Get our Free
Newsletter!
Vote in our Opinion Polls
Tell a Friend!
Contact us
| |
On Monday, Webb-site.com broke the story of how CNOOC
had been lent up to RMB6.6bn to its parent group without shareholders' approval.
Since then, media have reported that the Stock Exchange is looking into the
matter, and that the company's CFO claims no rules were broken - a claim
which does not stand up to our scrutiny. |
CNOOC's Sister Knew
22nd
April 2004
On Monday 19-Apr-04, we
urged investors to vote against
the proposed connected transactions in which CNOOC Ltd (CNOOC, 0883)
would lend up to RMB6,800m to CNOOC Finance Corp Ltd (CNOOC Finance), a
62.9% subsidiary of its parent, China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC
Parent).
Since then, the media have picked up on the story, and although
there has been no official company announcement from CNOOC on which investors
could legally rely, it's Chief Financial Officer Mark Qiu has been telling the
media that the company hasn't broken any rules.
This claim, which may be intended to affect the voting result at
the meeting next week in the company's favour, does not stand up to the
slightest bit of scrutiny - as we will show below. Frankly we find this
behaviour disappointing and misleading to investors who are in the middle of a
voting decision. If the company has anything to say about this, then it should
do so by way of formal announcement and adjourn the extraordinary shareholders'
meeting until investors have had sufficient time to digest the new information.
Refuting Mr Qiu's claim that no rules have been broken, we point
first, to CNOOC's own announcement of 8-Apr-04, in which it admitted that
"the transactions with CNOOC Finance contemplated by the Framework Agreement
constitute continuing connected transactions for the purposes of the Listing
Rules". These transactions include "placing of [CNOOC]'s cash deposits
with CNOOC Finance" so it can hardly be the case that the same transactions
in the past were not connected transactions.
The left hand knows what the right hand does
Second, CNOOC Parent has another HK-listed subsidiary, China
Oilfield Services Ltd (COS, 2883). Mr Fu Chengyu is President of CNOOC
Parent and Chairman of both CNOOC and COS, so he signed off on the COS
prospectus and is presumed to know what was in it.
On
page 87 of its
prospectus dated 11-Nov-02, COS makes clear that it (and the Stock Exchange)
regards its transactions with CNOOC Finance, including cash "deposits", as
connected transactions for which it needed a pre-IPO waiver, so it obtained a
waiver effective for 3 years ending 31-Dec-04. Page 89 shows that this waiver in
each year is capped at 10% of turnover for the previous year.
What this shows is that CNOOC Parent and CNOOC must have been
aware at least as early as 11-Nov-02, when the COS prospectus was published,
that transactions between a HK-listed subsidiary and CNOOC Finance, including
the so-called deposits (or loans) to CNOOC Finance, were regarded as connected
transactions under the Listing Rules, and yet it did nothing about the same type
of transactions with CNOOC for another 17 months until 8-Apr-04.
The
risk factors section of the COS prospectus also makes clear:
"Our connected transactions with [CNOOC Finance] will include
deposits of our funds... This non-bank finance company has the authority to
engage in a variety of finance and investment activities including investments
in equity securities, debt securities and real estate as well as borrowings
and guarantees. It may also engage in CNOOC intra-group lending. Our deposits
will not have the protection of any security interest or guaranty from CNOOC."
By the end of 2003, COS was owed RMB252.6m by CNOOC Finance, or
about 9.3% of turnover for the preceding year, just below the 10% limit. Before
the end of this year, COS must seek approval from minority shareholders if it
wishes to continue lending money to CNOOC Finance. We urge investors to veto
that arrangement too, when the time comes.
Let's be clear. Whether you call these transactions "deposits",
"advances" or "loans", the result of such transactions is the same, namely that
CNOOC and COS are owed money by CNOOC Finance, and that's all that should matter
as far as the Listing Rules are concerned.
And if they didn't break the rules, then there's no limit
The most worrying thing about Mr Qiu's claim is that if CNOOC
now believes that these loans to CNOOC Finance are somehow outside of the
connected transaction Rules, and if the Stock Exchange were to agree with that
position, then that would make next week's shareholders' approval of the loans
unnecessary and non-binding, in which case, whether or not the arrangement is
approved by minority shareholders, the company may just carry on making these
loans (or if you prefer, deposits) anyway, without regard to the proposed limit.
A race to vote
Shareholders are almost out of time to vote, because most public
shares are held through Hong Kong Securities Clearing Co Ltd (HKSCC), the
operator of the clearing system which is a subsidiary of Hong Kong Exchanges and
Clearing Ltd. HKSCC told us today that the voting deadline is 3.45pm tomorrow,
Friday 23-Apr-04, HK time, even though the meeting does not take place until
28-Apr-04.
We have also received an e-mail from a US investor who has yet
to receive proxy forms for his CNOOC ADRs, so there is some concern that US
investors will not have time to vote.
© Webb-site.com, 2004
Sign up for our free newsletter
Recommend Webb-site.com to a friend
Important notice: All material on this site, except
where otherwise accredited, is copyright to Webb-site.com.
Media and researchers are welcome to quote from articles on this site, provided that such
quotation is attributed to Webb-site.com. The
information in this site should not be relied upon by any person in making any investment
decision. No responsibility or liability is accepted by Webb-site.com or any person
related to it for any loss arising from or in reliance upon the whole or any part of the
contents of this site. Persons who are in any doubt about an investment or potential
investment should take professional investment advice. From time to time parties associated with Webb-site.com may
own long or short positions in securities issued by or related to companies or governments
on which we comment.
Back to top
|