We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
This is what I asked google..
Here is the answer...
The primary difference between the two procedures is that company administration aims to help the company repay debts in order to escape insolvency (if possible), whereas liquidation is the process of selling all assets before dissolving the company completely
The long and the short of all this is shareholders have been sold a kipper ,given false hope . Shareholders have every right to feel aggrieved and angry that they have been dealt a dummy hand
This outcome should never have happeend and could have been avoided if action had been taken last year
Gewillia spelt it out sometime ago how this was going to play out and played out it was . I was less pessimistic but as time went on .the suicidal deal on Derby and the extraordinary fact they hadn't got busy marketing other UK centres this stunk
Only at the beginning of the year did they try and get some extra finance They sleepwalked shareholder equity to oblivion
Roberts has some explaining to do
"Not doubting your words, but how do you know which asset management companies have been assigned to the centre's?"
I believe React Property news are reporting is. Specificallly David Hatcher, Editorial Director. It's wasstill on his Twitter (last time I checked) @hatcherdavid (10k followers)
They were announced by React News mid afternoon yesterday I posted a list of the various parties involved in an earlier post yesterday afternoon
Not only that British Land offered £1.4bn and Dealncey already in a head to head on Trafford Centre
Delancey headed up by Ritblat son ofJohn Ritblat ironically the founder of British Land
This unravelling has been happening behind closed doors for sometime as is the way of all flesh
Not doubting your words, but how do you know which asset management companies have been assigned to the centre's?
"Devonplay
I agree with you..."
The Company once said it's debt structure was it's crowning jewel; as you could cut off a limb and rest of the body would survive.....and in reality it's ended up being it's a Achilles' heel. It's more like a centipede who's limbs want to go in different directions. I really don't think there's going to be anything left for shareholders. As I'm in one of the bonds, I'm wondering if there's going to be a recovery for me. I suspect much of that will have to do with how dominant any one holder is in my trance of the program.
Canadian " Joint partners with INTU in the shopping centre "That is Puerto Venecia not Trafford Centre
In theory .there should be something left in the pot for investors after the administrators stop administering !
However this now will be a bucket load of Xmas's for the professionals lawyers,investment bankers,professional property mangers, investment agents ,valuers accountants . They will be effectively trousering £00ms
The party has just started for all those who joined the bus to make a concerted effort to drive this beast into the ground A half hearted attempted to stop it .This ship had set sail sometimeago
Shareholders can certainly feel that they have been royally shafted
Shareholders equity has already changed hands
All the 50% owners are in very strong negotiating positions to pick up the other half for a song . As Gewillia points out he started the bidding at £100 for Derby . Certainly £100m+has gone byebyes in just over a year on that centre alone
By 3pm yesterday each and every centre had been assigned a property manger dependent on where the individual centres was likely to be heading
That indicates to anyone with any skin in the game proof that the conversation taking place of a carve up had already moved on some days , .weeks ago ,that this was always going to be the likely outcome .Saving the company was the longshot no matter what guff was pedalled
What it does show how easy it was to replace INTU with professional shopping managers like MAPP . They had no USP.
The Canadian company who has been flagged up as the convenient scapegoat as the spoiler would have declared their hand sometime ago that they were not for turning . Not only had they lent £250m secured on the Trafford Centre they were joint partners with INTU in the shopping centre
What we don't know as completion of Puerto was delayed eventually took place during lockdown is whether any monies were being held back etc In addition very likely the buyer wanted a sweetener hence the delay. Just guessing but should imagine INTU were desperate to get hold of every peseta to distribute elsewhere and the Canadians were playing hard ball
Maybe also some control over where the monies were heading to be ringfenced and INTU wanted a release to pare down debts
I wonder if the true story will be ever revealed
Fair point dotlink.
Keep calm & carry on :)
Intu is just as complex as Carillion so i think it will unlikely to come out of suspension
can't blame the loan providers because they need the money to pay back their own loan providers like banks or they the loan providers go admin themselves, blame intu bod for not raising money or selling assets to raise cash last year
Newbie here (ex-furloughed part-time share gambler)
So net assets (allowing for all debt) roughly equals all equity (shares etc) at last year-end report.
I know asset value is low atm, with another year or two needed to get back to this level at last year-end report.
Are loan providers essentially blocking the company from being liquid in order to get assets on the cheap?
If this is the case, imho we need to find out who the loan providers are so we don't invest in any "pies" they have their fingers in.
My advice : dont get mad, get even...learn and get back on another horse for another try , only wiser and stronger.... nobody gets success in this game without the klunkers that lead to the crafting of the skills required....
"You've got to know when to hold 'em
Know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away
And know when to run "
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDwCMxPwJ_4
I lost over £7k on flybe it’s a s h I t feeling. If anyone wants to talk scream or shout I’m here...
To be fair it is possible to come out of administration ...look at JD Sports who just bought their subsiduary Go Outdoors which they had put into Administration, but the complexity here is of a different scale altogether
Devonplay
I agree with you...much more complex...and of course an administration isnt the same as a pre-pack administration....
RiskReepReward - I think you might be hoping they can back peddle and go back to a line that has already been crossed and somehow now resolve that hurdle...but it seems somewhat unlikely to me
I think a few knew it was game over yesterday when there was that spike....I saw a lot of very small buy trades , which the algorithms used to pump up the share price...the retail investors got excited and jumped in , whilst others who engineered the tiny buys used the subsequent spike to sell out
It's always possible but unlikely
"No...it is too late...that should have happened by now, and you also have the problem of the terms of the lending covenants across many centres"
You also have the porblem of there being different debt programs that have security against specific assets. That makes the whole process even more complex (in principal). You end up with the situation that debt secured against one asset might me more realisable than the next. That's why the Canadian's held out, they where secured against the largest and possibly most attractive site The assets securing the senior SGS structure also look capable of protecting those bond holder. Maybe that's what stops it returning. It's attractive for the debt holders, and each debt holder has a different objective. A diffferent stratgy to protect themselves and make a return. I can basically see the Canadian's taking their site and being happy and whoever wins over the SGS bond holders taking on their 4 sites in whatever structure works for them - with debt or without it. I can't see anyone wanting to pre-packing the whole entity, but I can see some secured lenders being willing to take over control from the assortment of SPV's controlled by PLC shareholders and then shuffling them off into the abyss.
This firm managed it. https://www.retail-week.com/home/united-carpets-share-suspension-lifted-after-administration/5046710.article?authent=1
Someone daid BOD of Flybe accepted 1p offer and some people were paying 5p two days after that.
True, but I don't think Flybe shares were suspended? Sirrus were also rescued, but again, they weren't suspended either.
Not saying it's impossible to come out of suspension, but think it's unlikely.
Well JustMatt, the answer to your question would seem to be yes, at least in the short term. As you know, UK online retailing accounted for 18% of the total market in 2019. Then in May, the number for April, the first full month of lockdown, the online sales total was announced at 31% of all retail sales. Close to double.
The number for May must be due anytime soon. IMO it's a stretch that all these new online customers will remain online. People enjoy visiting centres. but I'd imagine that some people forced to shop online will stay there. Maybe around 25%, but that's just a wild guess.
Speculating like this Matt on the future of brick centres was what, for me, made Intu such a dodgy punt, starting in 2018. Online penetration has to stop eventually, but there's no logical or analytical way of coming up with a remotely accurate number. for where it will stop Thus, there's no way of analysing how much shopping space any town or city needs. If nobody knows how many shops will be needed in, say, 10 years time, then there's no way of accurately valuing the remaining centres, or deciding which need to be demolished and rebuilt as housing, offices, whatever.
It will be interesting to see what the bond and mortgage holders do with the assets that are now being dumped into their laps. Were I still practising, and asked for my views, my suggestion would be to hold the asset, if you can get a reasonably positive cash-flow. Why? Simply because right now just has to be the absolute bottom of a truly dreadful market. Bottom fishers from around the world will descend on any weak financiers holding Intu centres and pick their pockets clean. Online plus Covid = the perfect storm and history suggests that on a 3 to 5 year view, the investment market has to improve.
But what do I know? As events play out, I'll be glued to HMSO's ongoing results. Tenants on rent-strikes. Landlords legal rights shredded at 3 monthly intervals. Bondholders taking centres off the Administrators. It's all a massive Muldoon's Picnic, as my Irish forebears liked to say. And a gambling speculator's paradise, as the Intu share price and trading volumes have shown, once the SP broke under 10 pence.
" If parts of the company are sold off to pay if the debt could the suspension be lifted and trade again? "
No...it is too late...that should have happened by now, and you also have the problem of the terms of the lending covenants across many centres in relation to the loan value against the current the asset value....so..you would need to sell a lot of assets and you wouldnt get a good price if any decent offers at all..(look at Hammerson asset sale that collapsed) ..so..what would you be left with ??..
The banks and bondholders
Thanks, so if the administrators manage to sell enough assets to pay creditors we could in theory be back with the suspension lifted?
Who is ftse Russel?
" Created by FTSE Russell, the FTSE 100 index was launched in January 1984 to encompass the top 100 Companies listed on the London Stock Exchange (LSE) by market capitalization."
They manage who is included in each of the FTSE Indexes ...they decide on who goes into and out , when they do each 3 month shuffle ...
Who is ftse Russel? If parts of the company are sold off to pay if the debt could the suspension be lifted and trade again?