I Don’t Get It? No One Saw This Coming? (TRE)

By: ispeculatornew
Date posted: 06.22.2011 (5:00 am) | Write a Comment  (6 Comments)

      Post a Comment

Last week, I wrote about my growing doubts about China and investing in Chinese companies despite China’s growing place in the world economy. I did write a line or two about reverse mergers, and about Sino-Forest (TRE) specifically. The company listed on a Toronto stock exchange (and as a pink sheet in the US) is based in Hong Kong and up until a few weeks ago, very few would have believed that such strong allegations could be made about it. Independent research company Muddy Waters released a very striking report calling the company a Ponzi scheme, saying that financial statements were mostly exaggerations if not pure fabrications, etc. The report is very telling and given Muddy’s past success in finding such frauds, the market gave Sino’s stock a serious beating right before the stock was halted by the exchange.

In such circumstances, it becomes very difficult for retail investors such as myself to judge a company like Sino-Forest. On one hand, Muddy Waters has been successful in finding such frauds in the past. However, wouldn’t institutional investors such as John Paulson, research analysts in major banks and brokers, regulation agencies and audit firms have found clues years ago? If Muddy Waters conclusions were even partially true, how could everyone miss it? It seemed impossible to many and like many others, I was anxious to see how all of these parties would defend their work on Sino-Forest…. Weeks later, I am still waiting.

Yesterday, John Paulson confirmed that despite being the company’s largest shareholder just a few weeks ago, he has now sold all holdings of the company, even selling off his bond positions thus realizing a loss of $750 million. That is incredible. Is it just me or should I be surprised/shocked that this is happening? I can understand the fact that as a retail investor, it is difficult and probably unthinkable to investigate such companies in order to determine if there is a scam. However, when an investor is going to put over $1 billion, wouldn’t it make sense to send a few analysts over for a few weeks to investigate the company, its holdings, financial statements, etc? Am I crazy to think that? Are guys like Warren Buffett and John Paulson relying on the same financial statements that I use when investigating these companies?

How about the analysts? Several of them had buy or strong buy ratings on Sino-Forest. What were those based off of? If there were so many inaccuracies in the financial statements, shouldn’t they have been able to find those and accumulate enough doubts to be more reserved? Also, this company was publishing audited reports… so an auditor, as well as regulatory agencies were supposed to be confirming what the executives were reporting. I do understand that investigating what is mostly a Chinese company is an enormous challenge but isn’t that what they are being paid to do?

What am I missing here? How do so many powerful agencies get conned by a company like Sino-Forest?

If you liked this post, you can consider subscribing to our free newsletters here


6 Comments

  1. Comment by Zavi — June 22, 2011 @ 7:11 am

    Great post! That’s an incredible story! I can believe it still happens nowadays!! And for Paulson, that’s huge $750 million realized loss wooww Is there any possible recourse to take against Sino-forest?

    NB it’s Warren Buffett 🙂

  2. Comment by IS — June 22, 2011 @ 7:54 am

    @Zavi – Thanks a lot:)

    And yes… it’s incredible! I’m sure there will be but if the company is bankrupt, there is not much to be made out of a lawsuit.

  3. Comment by Greg Davis — June 22, 2011 @ 6:00 pm

    You post such drivel. How do you know Paulson lost 750 million? How do you know TRE is a fraud?

    You don’t. You’re an idiot posting garbage opinions that are worthless.

  4. Comment by IS — June 22, 2011 @ 6:08 pm

    @Greg Davis – Paulson holdings as of the last quarter are known and he has admitted to selling, it’s not an assumption

    As for the fraud, it looks like it’s a fraud but you have a great buying opportunity if you don’t think so…stock is now under $2…

  5. Comment by Blindfolded Monkey — June 23, 2011 @ 7:36 pm

    While none of us know for sure whether TRE is a fraud, the market is clearly saying so. They have not been able to come up with any credible response to the accusations and the smart money is dumping the stock. If the fraud turns out to be true there will be very negative fallout for auditors and analysts in Canada.

  6. Comment by IS — June 24, 2011 @ 4:10 am

    @Blindfolded Monkey – Could not agree more and I’m surprised that this is not a bigger part of the story.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.