Member Info for cta100

Agree, it is confusing. Point making is that subject to and best efforts don't mean that a raise is nailed on.
Don't believe in any collusion theories.

Either;
The company is willing to push on and see if it can make the accelerated debt repayments on its own and if it can't then will raise to keep to that structure. Which makes sense why not raised now, and just giving the creditors lipservice re a raise.
Or the new management want the cash now to accelerate the online transformation; and it just hasn't been sorted out yet, in which case it has been badly handled regarding timing and allowing market to front run it.

I think its the former. But this just opinion.

Haven't good head in the sand. The company have been roughly saying the thing same since about January regarding raising capital. Can you tell me why it hasn't been placed to date? It would take probably 1-2 days to do a book build for £70m and six months later here we still are. And it hasn't been placed with the banks since the last announcement, the volume hasn't been there on the exchange if for that.

Can you rule out a subordianted loan instead based off the last announcement?

Yes - I think the online turnaround should work. It should be relatively cheap and easy to do. And glad that the management now clearly recognise that, both in terms of their announcements, and actions such as hiring an agency to sort out online visibility.

It isn't a certainty that an equity raise will happen. The lenders clearly want the renegotiated facility paid back more quickly. And if that can't be done out of operating cashflow then a raise will be required.

Under the previous covenants they were already committed to "trying" to raise equity, but that hasn't happened to date. So they are just re-iterating that. That is what the best efforts refer to rather than an a non underwritten placing.

But the uncertainty and dithering caused by this has probably done as much damage as a placement already would have done. So it is messy.

Probably get the opportunity to buy at the placing price over the next couple of weeks. Only 2m traded today and punchy drop, so with another ~100m available, some of which will definately be flipped between now and the AGM. Have to wonder if completed the book build in one afternoon whether was too deeply discounted, isn't hard to sell something at 30% discount.

The trading update shouldn't even by in the RNS. It doesn't say anything, and got prelims early next month.

Surely, if a raise was intended to be done it would be announced now at the same time as the refinancing? It has been going on long enough so not lack of time to sort out. They can't be so naive as to say going to raise 70 quid, but will do it later on. That is just going to get front run badly.

Agreed with 1 and 2, decent outcome. Think 3 is probably more to do with getting out of gov schemes than any future divi propsect. Will likey recover today once properly digested, the volume is relatively light so probably knee jerk reaction to mention of raise.

Still not totally clear if going to be an equity raise... They have been under a best efforts obligation to raise cash since went into covenant breach, so for a while now. Finally, although its taken a pandemic and change of management, looks like the penny has dropped about the need to improve online.

Probably a broker, who would have sold them in advance over the last couple of days judging by the volume and price action. Anyway, looks like it has gone through now.

Volume isn't there for a leak. But a decent push up nonetheless.

Anyone have an understanding on whether lumber prices will effect input costs for card production?
Or whether wood chip prices go up as base lumber more expensive, or whether wood chip prices go down as more lumbar being cut?

Its another 5.1m from the directors to pay for there warrants at 4.1p, and assuming the other warrant holders off their lot in full, that is another 5m. So 10m in total to the overhang.

Has the required number of shares been met to get those lodged?
If are short, how much more is needed? And when does it need to be completed by?

Thanks

You are of course right to an extent, but I think the context is important. Given management have recently have been banging on about no more dilution and had a decent pay rise anyway. And the RKH shareholder overhang, all of which was kept below notification holdings, despite being dressed up as institutional for the register. And the tone in today's RNS tries to spin it as a positive of increasing management holding, when really it is just a give away, so its not skin in the game in a traditional sense. So that is the rub for me, if you present yourself as no nonsense but your actions contradict that it will annoy people.

The RNS is much better than "converstations ongoing" but the lack of detail stands out.
I still don't know whether there is an equity element to this refinancing or not, or if so what those terms are, so until that is cleared up I don't see the big move happening. Should still be positive effect though as a timeline established now.

It won't be to do with going concern wranglings with the auditor in my opinion. Preliminary results aren't even required to be published under the listing rules, let alone be of audited information or accompanied by an auditor's report, even though that is probably the more common way.

The AGM, and the publication of the full results, will be on the 28th July. So they have backed that up as far as can, with a Jan year end, a 4 month reporting period and an additional 2 month extension for covid. That is what driving the timelines. That are still doing a preliminary, when could have dropped it completely.

But the market may not like it. Just adds to the continued radio silence on the refinancing beyond the monthly waiver and conversations on going. How many other main market companies have delayed full year results? Don't know the answer, but probably not that many, but then I guess reporting season is really just kicking off.

Thank you for the response.

Anyone know how long the well test on ASD-1X is being run for and when results would be expected by?

28th June is the implemenation date for the Net Stable Funding Ration (NSFR), I think the LBMA may have an extension granted for that but not sure on the detail. Gold on the balance sheet is affected as it is not classed as a high quality liquid asset (bonds are for example). It is primarily liquidity related regulation for banks, which is part of a broader set of Capital Requirements Regulations. Some of those other deadlines go out for a few years yet (they have been running in some BCBS from since about 2010), depend upon the size of the bank implementing (bigger is earlier) and there have been some extensions up to a year for covid too. It is all a bit of a quagmire. The BIS website is the place to start, but beware that banks have teams dedicated to going through all this paperwork (and ultimately trying to find cheapest way around it).

There are legal mechanisms that can be applied to look through separately incorporated entites and treat them as a single entity, but the courts are reluctant to use them and I doubt it would be applied in the situation of PFG.

I am less sure whether the Amigo scheme will get approved on creditor grounds though. 50% by vote (and 75% by value) potentially looks like quite a high threshold given the practicalities of it, though at least the regulator has said it won't block it.

They have been monthly waives to date so don't see why would be different this month. But anything longer than that would be a strong positive.

The monthly covs only have 3 months left anway (think June is the last one), then back to half yearly tests; so if could eek through the next quarter and be cashflow positive again would give some decent breathing room.

p.s. volume over the last few weeks has been next to nothing so it is a tight ship, which is probably not a coincidence now the consultants no longer involved...