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.
Slimeball 2 isn't very original Noel. Sorry NTM. A hasty choice, perhaps influenced by The Simpsons - didn't they have a cat called Snowball 2, after Snowball died?
Basically, they forgot to deduct exceptional costs on the p&L account. (or add them, adding a negative to me means a deduction to the world of high finance they deduct a negative) whoever invented EBITDA and adjusted EBTIDA expected everyone to have a large stock of headache tablets nearby.
To their credit the answer was instant but they may look at this again, Stewart did say it was uncharacteristic of them.
On the question of a claim against the Company on environmental issues it appears that Natural Resources, RosPrirodNadzor were seeking further payments for the disposal of 'Extra" waste materials dating back to 2016 the claim was disputed by and the courts decided in favour of TSG in October 2019. The NRP made an appeal to the courts decision and to avoid continuance they reached a settlement.
artrader was keen to tell us that TSG is a UK company (something we already knew, but know-all oafs like that do like to think that they know everything and others know nothing) - so artrader, here are a few paragraphs about UK company law from Fresnillo's results, out yesterday -
The Directors are responsible for preparing the annual report and the Group and parent company financial statements in accordance with applicable United Kingdom law and those International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 as it applies in the European Union.
The Directors are responsible for keeping proper accounting records which disclose with reasonable accuracy at any time the financial position of the Company and of the Group and enable them to ensure that the financial statements comply with the Companies Acts 2006 and Article 4 of the IAS Regulation. They are also responsible for safeguarding the assets of the Company and the Group and hence for taking reasonable steps for the prevention and detection of fraud and other irregularities.
Under applicable UK law and regulations the Directors are responsible for the preparation of a Directors' report, Directors' remuneration report and corporate governance report that comply with that law and regulations. In addition the Directors are responsible for the maintenance and integrity of the corporate and financial information included on the Company's website. Legislation in the UK governing the preparation and dissemination of financial statements may differ from legislation in other jurisdictions.
Neither the Company nor the Directors accept any liability to any person in relation to the annual financial report except to the extent that such liability could arise under English law. Accordingly, any liability to a person who has demonstrated reliance on any untrue or misleading statement or omission shall be determined in accordance with section 90A and schedule 10A of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000.
Re: EBITDA - what went wrong here? Surely accounts ought to be doubled checked before they are released.
This isn't the first time the company has to issues corrected numbers. Last year, wasn't it resources, or reserves?
I am doubtful that I will ever be able to trust anything this company says.
Clear as mud. I thought I was getting it then the next sentence confused me again. Showing an example wrong versus right might have helped.
Ho hum...
Reply
“We split out the exceptional costs separately on the face of the P&L but when we calculated EBITDA we used an old formula which assumed that exceptionals were included within admin expenses, so we did not deduct them in the EBITDA calcs. We then adjusted EBITDA by adding the exceptionals back. Exceptional costs shouldn’t have been deducted from EBITDA. From adjusted EBITDA those costs were then deducted twice”
Let us know if you do get a response please
I sent an email
Dear Sirs
I note today’s RNS mentions that exceptional expenses were deducted twice, if this is the case then wouldn’t the EBITDA be $2m higher?”
“ Upon further internal review, it has been identified that due to exceptional expenses being deducted twice, the EBITDA figures were erroneously reported. The correct figures are EBITDA of $11.3m and Adjusted EBITDA of $13.4m. This error is standalone and all other details in the 2020 Interim Results remain unchanged.”
Many thanks if you would kindly explain.
Kind Regards
Yes - I agree - that struck me too. Somebody else can ask that one from the company. I've got my hands full with HUM and trying to extract some meaningful info out of them right now...
Thanks Adam
Seems they won yet were not interested in prolonging the fight and paid them off. Probably very wise.
However, deducting a cost twice should mean a plus when adding half of it back?
It did strike me that the best way TSG could capitalise on bad news was to buy back shares. And the bad news just keeps on coming. I also am a little uncomfortable with the amount of 'private' ownership here. Memories of HGM still recent.
Once they have the million or so shares, then it wouldn't take much to take the company back private. You could look at this 'phase' of the buy back as dirt cheap. The RNS about the fund restructuring has a group of them at 55%, with 22% in the treasury... I'm sure the accident was exactly that, but they are definitely up to something now.
https://investegate.co.uk/trans-siberian-gold--tsg-/rns/interim-results/202009290700053689A/
5. Exceptional expenses
The exceptional expenses relate entirely to the claim from the Federal Service for Supervision of Use of Natural Resources, RosPrirodNadzor ('RPN') over the payments for disposal of waste materials following a site inspection in 2016. The claim was disputed by management and was brought before the first instance court who decided in TZ's favour on 4 October 2019. Subsequently, RPN appealed the decision and the claim settlement in the amount of $1,987,000 was agreed in August 2020.
Slimeball 2 isn't very original Noel. You can do better than that. I was quite pleased with me being the Slimeball's pet rat.. you showed some though there, at least.
NTM - we have another slimeball - slimeball 2. The fun of FLX comes to TSG. Buckle up.
"Sometime later if that's ok ...?" - careful of what you say adam - if he doens't like you your reply you will get what I got just for posting information.
Whoa - arttrader - why haven't you attacked AdamSmith the way you attacked me? His words convey a similar cautionary note as mine did, so why don't you give him one of your smug lectures?
Sometime later if that's ok ...?
Adam - can you please provide a link or date to the RNS
Thanks
It's not the EBITDA error although that's not trivial. No it's the aftermath of the accident in vein 25. The Russians are past masters at extracting rent from these situations. If the company is at fault then obviously a proportionate fine is in order. However, I note from previous RNS resulting from an inspection of the company's operations a large bill was presented to the company due to inadequate clean-up. The company disputed this put still paid up a sizeable amount in the end.
The sooner we know what the consequences are the for the company the better....