Thread: Thai PTT sets 100-year bond coupons at 5.90 pct

Thai PTT sets 100-year bond coupons at 5.90 pct
(Reporting by Pisit Changplayngam; Writing by Arada Kultawanich; Editing by Martin Petty)
Sun Nov 28, 2010

BANGKOK Nov 28 (Reuters) - Thailand's top energy firm, PTT PCL (PTT.BK), has set a coupon of 5.90 percent on a 100-year unsecured bond, the country's first ever and due to be issued in early December, a company executive said on Sunday.

The company also raised its bonds size to 4 billion baht ($132 million), from the previous plan of 3 billion baht due to strong demand, Chief Financial Officer Tevin Vongvanich told Reuters.

"The booking is all confirmed, mostly it is from insurance firms, the rest is from financial institutions," Tevin said.

The "AAA"-rated bonds, Thailand's first 100-year issue, would be available to institutional investors on Dec. 2 and the proceeds would be used for working capital and debt refinancing.

The issue's underwriters are Bangkok Bank (BBL.BK), Kasikornbank (KBAN.BK), and Siam Commercial Bank (SCB.BK).

($1=30.23 baht)

reuters.com

yep , anybody want to lend me money on a 100yr term ?

I really don't see the problem, I am sure they are callable which means the company can retire them anytime after some "callable schedule"

Originally Posted by Butterfly

I really don't see the problem

that is because your looking at the wrong side of the coin .

Papillion, tell me how this fits in with your 'modern socialist' society again, please...

Originally Posted by Butterfly

I really don't see the problem, I am sure they are callable which means the company can retire them anytime after some "callable schedule"

The call option is a minus for the investor, not a plus.
Who buys these bonds bets interest rates will go down and hopes to cash in a big capital gain. If the issuer has the option to redeem the bonds early no significant capital gain is possible.

Originally Posted by Mid

Originally Posted by Butterfly

I really don't see the problem

that is because your looking at the wrong side of the coin .

and you are barking at ghosts, that's why you are sadly hilarious mid

These bonds might be a nice catch later on if interest rates rise and therefore the market price tanks. To subscribe them now, considering the rate rise has not happened yet, does not appear a good bargain to me.

Originally Posted by wefearourdespot

The call option is a minus for the investor, not a plus.

exactly, a good deal for the issuer, so not sure why some here are barking like mad dogs

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

Papillion, tell me how this fits in with your 'modern socialist' society again, please...

modern socialism means that "businesses" make reasonable profit to finance social progress in our society

these days they are making obscene profits without benefiting society in welfare terms

^

you must spread some reputation around before giving it to butterfly again.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

modern socialism means that "businesses" make reasonable profit to finance social progress in our society

Agree whole heartedly with this. The operative word being reasonable.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

these days they are making obscene profits without benefiting society in welfare terms

100% in agreement. The worlds gone mad.

I don't see any problem with these. The company isn't going down the drain anytime soon and the bond price will adjust in line with the competitive stance of the interest rate as against other debt over a period of time.

Thus at present this is expensive money and nobody in their right mind would pay par for the loan unless they were seriously looking long term.

Now, in five years time, this could be cheap money and people could be willing to pay a premium for it, so anyone buying the bonds now may well turn a tidy profit in, say, five years time....unless you have forgotten the good old days of double-digit interest rates.

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

Although it is rare, companies do issue bonds that exceed an average person's life expectancy. For example, multi-billion dollar companies such as the Walt Disney Company

Yep, rumour has it that as Thailand's in the latter stages of reconcilliation they're also in the process of updating it's world image in order to sit well with the current adminstrations frequent political statements, they're thinking of renaming it "Disneyland". (they're not concerned about copyright)

However speaking of clowns good to see "social" droning on about Gold again as he's still leading the "TD Gold Cup" pole for idiots, so well done "social" keep up your very entertaining thought processes.

However speaking of clowns good to see "social" droning on about Gold again as he's still leading the "TD Gold Cup" pole for idiots, so well done "social" keep up your very entertaining thought processes.

As if it is my thought process. I am just more educated on this subject.

If you have never studied the material, you are not going to get it. And that's fine, just don't invest money for a living.

Originally Posted by socal

I am just more educated on this subject.

No you're not educated on the subject that's the point, you drone on about something you patently don't understand and something that isn't the single cause of the todays economic problems.

Originally Posted by socal

If you have never studied the material, you are not going to get it. And that's fine, just don't invest money for a living.

You can't have studied the subject and you don't invest money for a living (not least professionally, amateur investors / self professed economists like you are a joke and always have been) and you never have done that's obvious or you would understand just how ridicoulous the statements you've made here are!

"social" you're entitled to your ludicrous opinions and your're entitled to amuse us with them, just don't bore everyone to death with them, reading your post are similar to watching someone fuck a retarded dwarf "it isn't big and it isn't clever".

However as I said earlier your leading the "TD Gold Cup" of idiotic posters and that's something you've managed to ahieve on your own and you're not winning it on a single vote! think about that....can everyone else on here be a wrong?

Originally Posted by The Bold Rodney

Originally Posted by socal

I am just more educated on this subject.

No you're not educated on the subject that's the point, you drone on about something you patently don't understand and something that isn't the single cause of the todays economic problems.

Originally Posted by socal

If you have never studied the material, you are not going to get it. And that's fine, just don't invest money for a living.

You can't have studied the subject and you don't invest money for a living (not least professionally, amateur investors / self professed economists like you are a joke and always have been) and you never have done that's obvious or you would understand just how ridicoulous the statements you've made here are!

"social" you're entitled to your ludicrous opinions and your're entitled to amuse us with them, just don't bore everyone to death with them, reading your post are similar to watching someone fuck a retarded dwarf "it isn't big and it isn't clever".

However as I said earlier your leading the "TD Gold Cup" of idiotic posters and that's something you've managed to ahieve on your own and you're not winning it on a single vote! think about that....can everyone else on here be a wrong?

Yes I am educated on the subject and I understand it very well. Opinions ? Did you think I have been making this stuff up ?

55555, I don't know what to say .........

Point to one particular thing that I said wrong about the subject and explain to why it is wrong.

Point to any recent economic events that would prove that I have been wrong about anything.

Originally Posted by socal

I don't know what to say

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Originally Posted by socal

I don't know what to say

Just a cut and paste job that might talk some sense into people, not necessarily you two pricks.

One cannot say (with a straight face) that banks are looking after our savings as the very purchasing value of those savings is being diluted through legalized counterfeiting known as leverage and or the money multiplier(thats where the obscene profits are born) . I do not think anyone is arguing against the concept of banking, but rather organizing the end of the current predatory casino model paraded around as capitalism. Calling this model capitalism is an insult to capital, as it is after all savings. True capitalism cannot exist in a system where money is based on debt, not value; a printing press and not from savings. On the point that the concept of banking is not evil, one concedes that an idea cannot posses any characteristics of a living entity as it is an idea. That said debt based monetary systems utilizing a fiat currency, are historically used by oppressive régimes as the system itself is a giant wealth transfer and consolidation mechanism.

Ask yourselves how can it be that I, my friends and family, businesses and corporations, states, nations and indeed every entity created by man be in debt all at the same time? It is because of the banking and monetary system itself. The assets of the people are transferred to banks by creating ever more "reserves". There is no hope for savings in a fiat currency as the nominal value can be maintained, but the actual purchasing value is devalued at an exponential rate. Most importantly in this type of system you can never be out of debt as the system is based on debt. Banks create principal and not interest, which is why there is a minimum payment on credit cards. This is the interest payment. Banks do not care if you ever liquidate debt and it is in their best interest that you don't. If you round up every last dollar both physical and digital, and apply it to all of the debts, there still will not be enough money as it has yet to be created. In short is a scam and once trapped inside, it is very difficult to escape.

The crisis we are facing is that exponential growth of debt, also known as the money supply, is an unsustainable function and the banks knew this. They only had to refer to the "small" history of banking spanning the last 500 years. Every person, corporation, state and government is well beyond prudent debt saturation levels, and has been so for some time. In short we cannot take on more debt, and this breaks the entire system forcing all to liquidate assets at a fraction of their value as no new value is being created by the banks in the form of debt as the exponential monster requires. This is how banks transfer wealth, for pennies on the dollar, from the aggregate to the few with little to no personal cost to them, as their money is a created based on a multiplier of our money. Banking and indeed money should be based on value not debt and only when gold is re-monetized is banking be based on value.

please post the link of that comedy material, need to know the blog nutter behind it

Originally Posted by Mid

Originally Posted by Butterfly

I really don't see the problem

that is because your looking at the wrong side of the con .

Edited for truth

Originally Posted by Butterfly

reasonable profit

Originally Posted by Butterfly

obscene profits without benefiting society

This is the problem, as noted above; 'reasonable' and 'obscene' have no concrete meaning...

I consider meself a capitalist; but, I don't accept corruption or abuse of power, thus in theory we have the same ideals, but you do accept corruption and abuse of power, so... ???

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

This is the problem, as noted above; 'reasonable' and 'obscene' have no concrete meaning...

actually they do, we can quantify reasonable or obscene in relative and absolute terms. Having a net profit margin of 5% is acceptable, having a net profit margin of 20% or more is too much. It simply means that companies are overcharging and not being socially efficient. What "consumers" or "users" overpay is taken out of their small budget and finance "wealthy" business owners instead. That's unacceptable.