Member Info for DC2007

I think it'll drift a bit further up overall, albeit with marked chop along the way. Next few weeks and months will see some serious volatility.

Unpopular Knowbody (if the board copper is on patrol this morning, you'll be in for questioning!) but very valid points.

Expanding rapidly in the US meant they've took their eye off their core market and now revenues are fast shrinking in both markets.

They should have stuck to doing more of what they were good at. Trying to chase both objectives simultaneously could result in ending up with neither.

Yeah, when I see 'hold', there's often a subtext and they're really saying sell. Brokers can't be too blunt otherwise they'd have no clients. 'Hold' is hardly an enthusiastic endorsement for something.

Quite a lot that frequent here come out with jaw-dropping howlers on a regular basis. Doesn't surprise me it's happening in the wake of the TU. It's scary to think of these folks managing their own finances,. And they're so supercilious that they try 'advise' others but get all prickly if anyone offers a differing point of view or corrects an error in understanding as Golden has done.

Must be dividends in 25, profit in 26 then. ^_^

Yep, those were the values I used Goldenyears.

It is notable too that the RNS says expectation for net debt at year-end only. They've said nothing about what it is right now; or what they may already know it'll approximately be at some future point next fiscal year. So during those two unknown periods either side of year-end, net debt could be much higher than £60m.

That's before even getting into definitions of net debt and adjusted EBITDA (which is why I loath usage of them). And 'less or greater than' is quickly clouded should expressions include negative values, depending on how these are used and presented. That's further underpinned by how a company might classify its composing elements as assets/liabilities/equity. And even further still, how they use and then present these data.

Much vagueness that this causes could be avoided by companies instead simply stating 'total debt' or 'net statutory earnings'. The reader can then be left to form their own interpretations of these if they wish. Far better that than companies pushing the prettified figures so hard. Sound companies just don't bother with such trickery - they don't need to.

"Net dept for boohoo will come in around 35 million or less.... It's pretty easy to figure that out...."

Wrong. They don't make it easy with that RNS, but the few valyes they do offer imply net-debt at the end of this February might be as high as £60m. A fair whack more than the 10m or such that someone else mentioned.

The values and terms Boo have come to use bring opacity rather than clarity. A company doing that looks like it's hiding something, or at least being economical with disclosure. But markets don't like that one bit, as a company oughta know. So the efforts to stage manage backfire by partly causing the thing the company wants to avoid, i.e. a depressed SP.

If the company would be candid about significant issues, as long as those issues are surmountable, the market might not punish the SP so much compared to how much it might assuming the same issues but coupled with coyness.

"...still have the old habit of adding words to other people it seems".

Misquote. Embellish. Remove context. Repeat. It's the tradey way! Does it a lot, in between launching a rusk or two.

Yeah, it's loss aversion and confirmational bias amongst the characters here making them hesitate from selling up, even though they'll probably deep down realise that's the right response.

Instead they're saying potentially libellous things about the Winniforth guy. That could be more risky than holding Boo shares!

Don't envisage the Boo ever paying a dividend tbh. Affording the generous assumption they *might* one day be in a position to, I think instead it's far likelier by then to have been swallowed up and/or regurgitated as some other entity.

Yep, I remember T4G mentioning their ASOS investment a while back too. Maybe they were confusing it with something else.

So in summary L5, you've no idea what the SP is gonna do.

'In line with guidance' has become a thoughtless mantra of those grasping at any straw. It's based on the fallacy that if it was going to be any different, Boo would've been obliged to say so before the update tomorrow. Nope.

The flaky reasoning is quickly exposed and rebutted with a glance at THG's update yesterday – a new profit warning that of hitherto undisclosed news about their reduced financial performance. A similar happening with Boo is entirely possible.

There was a similar little rally into the last update. It draws in the credulous and gives just enough hope to get suckers buying before it falls back again. 27p before winter's out.

It'd be impossible for Boo to issue a profit warning with their results – because they're not going to make any profit.

Hmm, the Asc update and market response are rather disconnected. Once the relief washes away, it'll fall back. It really wasn't a very good Xmas, the update at least rules out them being in trouble for now.

Asc data suggest Boo will have had a poor UK Xmas too with falling revenues & margin. Compared to other retailers who've already reported, online only outfits are struggling.

Once the dust and excitement settles, Boo and Asc will trickle back down towards their respective lows.

With many other retailers reporting a stronger than expected Xmas, that puts more pressure on Boo because it gives them tougher comparatives.

Now, if the TU Is anything other than perfect, the market will punish.

Aye, caught in another porky whopper. Referring to 'the list', tis true that tradey has been abusive and insulting about me. All whilst proclaiming their conduct to be impeccable.

I don't know of a word that properly captures their near unbelievable lack of even the tiniest self-insight. It must be pathological. Egocentricity isn't a trait associated with successful investment I suppose.

I don't see how it can become a massive cash generator spk. First, they have to recover all the lost sales (US revenue is sharply down YoY) resulting from putting resource into getting setup instead. That's no given.

Second, the DC is manual rather than automated. So there'll be substantial fixed labour costs, along with the sunk costs; presumably some of these met by the debt facility.

Thirdly, concentrating so much on this seems like it could be to the detriment of the core UK market where sales have already stalled.

Overall, there's been no talk of what the expected US ROI will be or the time to breakeven. The opacity doesn't do much for confidence, and that's why expectations for future earnings have become so muted and uncertain. Liberum's sceptical conclusions about FCF/earnings, & therefore therefore the capacity to pay back debt, or even a first dividend, look zbout right

The summary from Liberum sums things up well & it's how I expect Boo's finances to go over the next couple of years.

The US is going to be a white elephant that shallows cash. The concept and delivery for the US operation is going to be a costly mistake.

It's in recent RNS bulletins logo; and in the HY23 results than they drew down the whole facility. Look at the HY23 balance sheet and you'll see the debt there.

AFAIK, they haven't said how much has been spent. They weren't too forthcoming either about why they drew it down in full & what they'd be spending it on. My guess is Xmas inventory: I hope they spent wisely.