Member Info for casapinos

Hi MR dt The positive option is that the money which has to be found , is found at minimal cost - though as I say SXX themselves have ruled out further "senior debt" ie the cheapest, so maybe their form of words means lower tier debt ,"mezzanine"is the trade expression, which would avoid dilution, unlike most other forms of funding, but would be more expensive to service.
The real positive is that sometime next year the funding will be in place, the SP "hit" if there is to be one, will be in the past and our worries will focus on the engineering progress, the price of poly, the stability of our torp contracts, the value of sterling versus the dollar, the tariff trade war,the US fed rate rises, global warming, the coming Chinese shadow banking crisis,......and in my case whether NUFC get relegated again!!!

Reading through this mornings news throws up the following snippets:

" $3bn of senior debt is the appropriate level and will not seek to increase......"

seeking "the most-cost effective and efficient source of ......{ST2 funding}"

"A number of financing alternatives......to fund the increased capital requirement......"

Reading between the lines and (in my opinion!!) I think the options are

A placing at a discount to the current SP with one or more new investors (possibly including ST2 lenders,and/or already established associates) or some other form of risk(and hence profit) share that would probably have a significant negative effect on the SP.
A clear up and new replacement set of convertible bonds, on similar terms to the existing CB's, less damaging(?)but still probably negative, at least in the short-term.
An "open offer" to existing shareholders(though as I have said before that , is I think difficult because of the high PI component of the share register)- normally such an offer will have been arranged by the "bookbuilders" lining up the major holders(II's) in advance to ensure success or at least limit bookbuilder's risk)perhaps the least SP negative approach but much more potentially damaging if the offer were to be under or poorly subscribed.

However unlikely, an open offer would mean that existing holders would need to be prepared to fork out additional cash to retain their %age holding, to wholly fund the shortfall would mean SXX raising ~£400mn in equity, about 28% of their existing market cap, so it is just possible that PI's would need to find additional cash equal to 28%of their holding , or sell their rights, or "tail swallow"

My only other observation is that the negative SP effects are in some measure down to the fact that ST2 is not yet resolved and until it is, the SP may languish , regardless of positive or adverse press comment!

Myo I am disappointed by your response to my last post. You impugned my integrity by suggesting that I might be connected to the FT or its journalists and therefore not wholly objective. I gave a fair reply setting out why I felt I could contribute to this board even though I defer to the greater knowledge of yourself and others about SXX. My contribution is mainly based on the background I set out , a ,long time investor, in a wide range of companies with some useful and relevant contacts in the business world which can help set the context for SXX investors who read these pages.It is my impression that many heavily invested in SXX have little or no experience of other investments . That is a dangerous position to be in , and I seek to offer a balance to the often over-enthusiastic chatter of those with no experience of,or understanding of the potential to lose heavily when an investment, however confident you may be , turns sour. My experience includes very heavy losses, which has moderated my investing behaviour. I have no agenda other than to pass on the knowledge I have gained( from both success and failure in the markets!) to others with a shorter track record, . I won't respond to your criticism further as I don't get into keyboard arguments , nor will I trade insults with you . I wish you good night

Myo No connection with the FT other than as a subscriber- it is the only relatively unbiased source of business news available in the UK, though the WSJ and the SCMP are also sound. I have however, a reasonably wide familiarity with the city both from my own former working life(IT director for a large organisation with the need for cash for technology ) and with family connections in the hedge fund industry and outsourcing consultancy . I only post when I think I have news /informed speculation to offer or when I think I can offer an informed view to this enthusiastic but sometimes a little naive board. I retired over twenty years ago when I realised that I could afford to live on the proceeds of my portfolio and have done so with a sensationally boring but sound investing strategy.
My interest in SXX is as part of a "blue sky" portfolio on which I don't depend but which might, just might ,make a fortune for my Grandkids to spend!!!

Vigneron- remind me what happened top Quindell???

First I strongly echo PAAA ' s warning, breach of copyright is illegal and will if widespread ,damage the already difficult business of providing news, something from which we all benefit.
Second, having read the article my conclusion is that it appears to be factually accurate, assuming , as we must ,that the journalist has conducted the research and interviews as described.
Third , while it re-affirms the notes of caution which the FT , and , in particular this journalist, have previously expressed, SXX holders should accept that not everyone has the enormous (and , just possibly, naive?)faith in the company that most on this board have.
There is a prospect of large-scale success for the company , which is why I am, cautiously, invested BUT I fear there is insufficient recognition of the prospects of failure and/or delay, due to economic circumstances, engineering or financial problems ,a major change of circumstances which could be anything from an alternative disruptive product to revolutionary progress in GM just as a couple of examples.Even a smooth ride to large scale production still means several years before earnings(NOTE, not revenues)justify the sort of SP's often bandied about here.
Before that , some of you need to get used to the idea that there will be views expressed which differ from their own- that doesn't mean they aren't valid!
i said in early August that my concerns were such as to persuade me to sharply lower my holdings , that has been vindicated.
I still believe that SXX long-term prospects are high enough to invest but I am very aware that there will certainly be setbacks, real or perceived, along the way . responding to them by crying foul or bad-mouthing the messenger serve no purpose . Better to read and analyse all inputs whether positive or negative, consider the implications , and if justified adjust your financial commitment, that is the sensible approach to investment , other strategies are more akin to gambling or religious fervour.

The SP fall here is only partly because of fears of a labour government and taking utilities into public ownership (the first targets appear to be the railways and the water co's). I think the concerns centre on the tough talking by OFGEM and the implications of RIIO-2, the new five year pricing structure due to come in in 2021. I have read the document and it is the usual overlong , deliberately obscure and far from definitive product that is always delivered by regulators.However , it does suggest that CPIH will be the basis for comparison , that additional funding for innovation and recognition of the cost of capital will be assessed at market rates.
There is also the likelihood that interest rates will rise, giving NG a double whammy, ie higher costs of debt and higher bond rates as competition for investors funds, However my conclusion , insofar as any conclusions can be drawn is that NG will continue to operate in a constrained but rational environment , will be able to generate significant revenue and will, probably, be able to maintain its rising divi(though maybe not at RPI rates).
Having been a long-term holder i sold earlier this year to wait and see what the future might hold - it's not yet entirely clear ,but I will be buying back, progressively, over the next few months to hold NG as a low-beta, medium income stock.

Snippet in the business sundays,Tidal lagoon power(the Swansea bay project)has lost three high-profile backers including Sanjeev Gupta who is "pursuing a rival tidal project with SAE" and Rajeev Gandhi (SAE CFO) . so it looks like their eggs are all in this basket. I assume therefore that progress is being/will be made and news will emerge eventually.

2nd attempt, my first reply disappeared.
I have sold but AIUI if you accept the offer and wait to be paid(by Comcast)you will get the full 1728p ie 4/5/6p more in about a month and as it is not a market sale you will incur no dealing costs which might be significant if you have a large holding/and or trade infrequently. or have an expensive broker. however as the SP is pretty close to the offer price I sold this am at 1724.

typo "1586 fri."

Hi Luddite, I'm in exactly the same boat as you , bought at 1576 fri am , will wait to see how close the SP is to the offer price this am . But as noted, you will only have to wait a few weeks to be paid and IIRC there are no dealing costs if you wait, so maybe worth it(depends how big your stake is) and how desperate you are to spend/reinvest it!!

Hi Janners I'm sure you are correct as to the mechanics of the holdings,as described in your first two para's My main point which I sought to illustrate by a somewhat simplistic description is that I suspect that relatively few SXX shares fall into the category of directly held by any institutions for their "own book".Between the published data under discussion today and a trawl back through "holding" RNS' there is little clear evidence that we have significant major II holders who have committed their own cash. The volume of PI interest in SXX as evidenced by board chatter and claimed holdings and the company's repeated desire to up the II involvement is perhaps my major concern, on two counts , first that bad news will affect the wealth and morale of the large PI base and of course that it militates against any substantial funds raise through share offers.

Addendum should have added insurance co.s to my final category -they hold vast sums in bonds and equities.

I May be teaching Granny egg-sucking, but for any who wonder, these are(IMV) the primary ways in which shares can be held
BY PI's with a share cert arrangement or a personal crest membership(now uncommon/infrequent/very large portfolios only, who have voting rights)
By PI's in a nominee account(most of us who buy via our broker/bank and hence have no voting rights unless we demand them)
By pooled funds/index trackers who hold stock in a "real" or "synthetic "way to reflect an index/region/industry....)
By organisations like investment banks, hedgies etc who "take a position"(ie using their own or their organisations cash)

My view is that only this latter category is truly institutional investment , because in all the rest it is eventually the individual who bears the risk.

Hi JimV useful data. However it refers mainly to "pooled investments" ie funds who invest their clients money to reflect the index they are seeking to match, rather than investing on their own account. I remain convinced that SXX is unusual, indeed possibly unique , in having grown to a MC of £1.8 bill with a share register so heavily skewed in favour of directly invested PI's .

Hi looking@
see below- showing 44% and "top ten" But as you can see many of these holders are asset managers ,not holding in their own right, I note the reuters data quotes 62 holders?. From these data it is very hard to judge "real" II investments as opposed to holdings which are actually II's via their broker

https://markets.ft.com/data/equities/tearsheet/profile?s=SXX:LSE

Hi Looking@ can I ask where you got your data from? I use the FT (despite it's unpopularity here! ) and I have two problems , first the FT figs differ and second it's sometimes hard to distinguish between Holders in their own right and holders who are brokers, and/or asset managers who hold stock on behalf of others (including PI's) .

In my self-appointed role as Cassandra, I feel duty-bound to point out that for a relatively small(as compared to most of the others on that list) co. it is almost certainly NOT a good thing to appear on the list.
For one thing it means that the company is constrained in what it can do WRT share issuance, ie if , as I suspect PI's hold well over half the Equity, lets say £0.75 bill 's worth, then an open offer to enlarge the equity is a risk ,- how many PI's would or could, fund a cash call equivalent to say an additional half of their existing investment? As I have said before, the reliance on an all-debt ST2 is a function of the fact that a large cash call for further shares to the existing register just wouldn't fly.
In addition, a glance further down the list reveals a few highly speculative smaller companies whose company iIwould rather not keep!
Amerisur/Greatland/UKOG anyone??
Without wishing to be too unkind to my fellow PI's they are not always the best judges of merit in their investment selections!

GK first off well done for trying to get a handle on whether or not SXX can handle the repayments on the borrowing - that's exactly what the lenders will be doing .
Second your figures are(almost) as good as any for the purpose BUT you forget that during those first 7 years the sum lent will have accrued almost a further debt of~$1bill as the interest on the outstanding amount is added back each year . It's a bit like your mortgage in that you end up paying almost twice the initial sum (or even more depending on duration interest rates etc )
there are other factors like the fact that rates of inflation might drive up labour costs, suppliers might want to renegotiate initial estimates as work specs change (and they undoubtedly will - no project planner ever anticipates all eventualities.
BUT the broad thrust of your argument is valid- at projected rates of extraction and sales SXX have the capacity to fund the loan , the question as we all know is whether the terms will be near the companies expressed hopes(oops I nearly wrote "plans" there!!).There is also the expressed desire to fund dividends , which we , and more importantly, what i would like to see as a growing number of II's, on the register, are expecting.Every dividend penny costs 2p(ish) in deferred debt clearance.

Scotman / Andy (prepare for the sound of own trumpet!!) I was IT director for a large organisation , responsible for implementation of very large IT systems in UK/USA?OZ so , no I didn't have to actually plead for the cash, all I did was to draft the plans, cost it, determine timescales, procure technology , oversee development and implementation on time and within budget.
BUT I was present at many meetings with bankers and I know why banks make so much money . They are hard-nosed, clever, devious , driven and very well-paid depending on how successful their deals are . So don't believe that they will act charitably, they are a business and their business is lending money.