- 在線時間
- 13 小時
- 最後登錄
- 23-3-5
- 國民生產力
- 0
- 附加生產力
- 342
- 貢獻生產力
- 0
- 註冊時間
- 15-1-12
- 閱讀權限
- 10
- 帖子
- 102
- 主題
- 0
- 精華
- 0
- 積分
- 444
- UID
- 1757878
 
|
本帖最後由 random_dad 於 15-9-25 09:22 編輯
Spiderdodo 發表於 15-9-24 14:17 
Would you know the mechanism of transferring an ICN? Would there be a "trading" platform where supp ...
There's no "trading platform" as you put it. Every school handles debentures/capital notes differently. With CAIS, there is no appreciation opportunity. The only option is to sell it back to the school at the face value, and I believe less an admin fee if I remember correctly. The school will then sell it to another interested parent at potentially another face value.
Because some of the wording is perhaps ambiguous in their documents, and the way that I interpret it is the school will only buy it back only if they can resell it. But you can only purchase an ICN as a parent/guardian of the student, so I'm not sure if there's any possibility of the school not purchasing back the ICN from the parent when you no longer have a child in the school. But the only reason that the school wouldn't buy back the ICN is if for some reason the school's enrollment is actually down, which I believe is rather unlikely.
The school is not going to sell "more" ICNs because they can. Even if you wanted to purchase an ICN now as a parent, the school will not be able to sell you one. The past two rounds are closed. Quantities of ICNs are fixed, and any issuance of the ICNs need to be approved by the board of directors, and the funds are dedicated to the build and operation of the school. It's not like they're a for-profit to make more money, and the school's backing and management is via KTAC.
Not trying to pick on another school, but to use Harrow as an example, the approaches of the two schools are different. Harrow has a $3m debenture, which I'm hearing now is worth way more. So elitist money can buy an opportunity for an interview. Harrow also hires a professional services firm that is directly affiliated to those that are in charge of the school, so the conflict-of-interest is funneling out millions of $ to those that directly set up the school (http://www.ejinsight.com/2015012 ... gh-management-firm/), plus the school effectively pays a % royalty fee to use the Harrow name. For me, it's hard to see it as a "not-for-profit" which it is registered as.
Contrast this to CAIS, where it's controlled by KTAC (a true not-for-profit), with a long history of charitable work in HK. The ICNs are not available to trade on the private market, so it's a much more level playing field for the kids to get into because it keeps the speculators and opportunists away. As a non-profit, there's no reason for them to sell more ICNs unless there's an actual need, and once's the school is built, unless there's expansion, I would believe it to be unlikely they'll sell more ICNs. |
|
發表於 15-9-24 09:20
