Member Info for Beo1

So analysts were saying about £350m and we came in at £396. And an EPS of 7.8. Sure that's where I said it would be ;-)

Considering the 24% YoY Growth is in a period of unprecedented deterioration in advertising revenues, to achieve 24% in that backdrop, and then needing a CAGR of 20% for 3 years seems there guidance is correct

The annualised rate on H1 is £436m, but that excludes any growth in H2. But even if we outturn at £436m at 20% CAGR thats £753m by 2026. H1 was 24% YoY btw. and as I said H2 will outturn higher than £218m IMO

Actually my maths are wrong £700m to double net income / 20% operating profit % = about £3b more revenue on £3.7b. yes I can't believe she would have said that, so if you could share the link and if she has I might even sign that silly petition 🤣

Can you share the link she promised that income would be double where it is? You talking about headline Income, or Net Income. as I struggle to believe she promised the headline revenue number would double in 2 years. I can't even get my head around promises that net income would double seeing as we operate at a cost to revenue ratio of about 80%, so a doubling of net income requires a 20% growth in revenue in 2 years, again very bullish so if you can share the link that would be great.

There is absolutely nothing in that article that the market doesn't already know

Last Year H1 was £301m profit, This H1 was £118m. the trading updates have indicated the revenue deterioration has slowed, and H2 should out turn better than H1. So no if the numbers come in as per that article then no i dont think she will go as she would have already gone on the trading updates that indicated that performance. People thinking it will come in at last years numbers, when all the messaging and results have shown 100% that it wont need there head examining.

I think your being a bit harsh. She's obviously see value sub 60p, I know i do, based on fundamentals, yes she might have to wait a bit longer to realise that value. But don't think she ever claimed to be a day trader. But if she see's value at 60p then she'll see more at a lower value? Its all about risk reward, at 60p the risk is higher and reward lower, at 58p the risk goes lower, the reward higher, therefor a larger amount of your bank roll can go it. I just wasn't sure the multiplying 1/15 element made sense.

Yes, feels a bit like the Martingale Strategy in betting. perhaps not doubling down but the principle of chasing losses.

So you want them to double down on the part of the business that is in freefall? Advertising revenue is down and wont return in quick time (I get the economy has driven some of that value down, but so has more competition, EG Amazon/Disney plus / Netflix all introducing advertising).

They are legally obliged to publish information at a certain point. EG they can't "keep" hold of this information indefinitely as anyone who becomes privy to the information will have an advantage of those not in the know. Once it is legally confirmed sale, signed contracts etc then every day holding onto the news runs the risk of market manipulation on behalf of ITV. Which in essence what you are asking them to do, manipulate the price to stay low to release it later and a time beneficial to them. I suspect the legalities were done, and they released the information. to read anything more into it, seems a bit flat earther. (nudge nudge, wink wink Wimbledon)

Not really. if anything the net assets and gearing will get worse. They are selling the business and returning all the proceeds via buybacks, so the Asset comes off the balance sheet and debt stays the same, the cash asset leaves the business. So No its not shoring up the Balance sheet, but it will remove an asset probably below there cost of capital so improving FCF

Plus, the Illiad offer was a 50/50 split. Italy makes returns below the cost of capital, so effectively yes we get some money upfront, but every year we own % in the NewCo we are going to have to pump more loans into it, so effectively reducing the value of that offer year after year, Plus Illiad wanted to slowly take 100% ownership over multiple years, so basically putting it own a payment plan on todays value of money, so thus making the consideration less due to time value of money (plus the fact we would need to subsidise % of a loss making business in the meantime).

I think the 11b was the value of the merged Italy business, not the implicit value we were getting for giving away a proportion of the business

So looking into something similar today,

Italy & Spain for a combined enterprise value of £11.5b if you extrapolate by revenue that puts an MCAP of £23.1b or 85p. But Italy & Spain are effectively loss making, so if you use the EBITDAaL numbers to gross it up instead, then puts an MCAP of £34.4b or 127p. I wanted to add UK to it, as the merger has an implicit value to it, but we are the "purchaser" in that so not sure its good to include anyway.

Yes, it does make sense.

On the group accounts the debt numbers would be the actual debt from external providers and yes thats sat in the group accounts. The Group holding company will then inter company loan X amounts to the individual entities (eg Vodafone Ltd), that debt will not be part of NewCo Italy. so therefor the asset on the holding company will be £0 but the actual debt with the finance company will still be there till we pay it. Based on the UK i estimated the Italy inter company loan to be about 2b eur but it is a guess.

That's a dad joke and a half right there

Perhaps Illiad offloading there investment? Pure speculation on my part, but whats the point of there investment now, clearly bought to try and hold some sway on the Italy decision.

Anyone else fear those in the know have some info us plebs dont, share price down nearly 8% in a week in the lead up to the results has me worried a tad

If i had to guess I'd say about 2b Eur, UK is 2.5b but Italy is 2/3 of the size, but Italy operates at a return below the cost of capital which should translate to a higher debt value comparatively to UK.

But, I've read some news articles where it say's the 8b eur includes them taking on the debt, but the RNS said they are buying if "free" of debt, so we are either getting 8b to the net debt position or 6b (based on 2b loan estimate)

For me there is more upside potential here than other shares I am looking at or invested in. Reward (upside on 70p) > Risk (the SP retrace's futher). So yes I'm invested here for a bit longer