Member Info for DC2007

I don't buy it. If it really was the legacy rental issue, then it would have traded at this level for ages. The rents are not new and have been known by the market since the leases were set.

The big change is Debenhams' relevance to the consumer retail: the revenue/profit they derive from those leased assets has taken a big hit. It's future over the coming months looks very shaky. So the leases are now a burden to Debs and are crippling its valuation; they could become very onerous to the lessors too.

Hi Knigelk,

Strip out all of the cash costs of Resigned compared with doing nothing and see the difference. New CEOs like to make a splash. What better way than by having something to 'fix'? If there isn't anything readily available, construct a narrative that says otherwise. I'm not saying Redesigned is the sole cause of the current mess, but it has hardly been successful. Where do you think net profit would have been if previous management had just kept going?

On causes, I would say that Debs as a UK focused business has been hurt by three things: consumer downturn as a result of Brexit uncertainty; competition from rapid expansion of online consumerism; lack of differentiation in their offer - why shop at Debenhams vs. somewhere else? Collapsing revenues and dissolving margins say there is no attractive reason - consumers are taking their currency elsewhere. I don't see anything unique to Debenhams to bring them back.

What's your position here Poker?

I don't envy your decision though Pearls with that average. I'm down to write-off/residue levels so from here for m it barely matters. I'm holding on the off-chance of something unusual providing an opportunity for recovering something on exit, albeit without any realistic expectation of that. But that makes your capital holding down only about 40%. Getting an exit with 60% intact is not terrible. Losing most of that from here seems quite likely.

With absolute values, then the call is to weigh if that is material or otherwise important to you. I reckon the chance of loss of near permanent loss of 90% in equity value from here as greater than 50/50.

Have to acknowledge your sentiments Pearls - I am a long term holder and therein is my perspective and outlook. If your approach is more to trade then I wish you well. Somewhat I agree. With so much uncertainty, those who bought in the past few months might do alright through random volatility or a relatively positive outcome. Those who've been long for years though, the investors, they will see no more than pennies in their pound.

ATB

Between the lines of the RNS or the fundamentals, the numbers - this has been going down the pan for a year. It rallies and then falls; real recoveries continue their ascent.

I wasn't surprised to see (~5%) today and that would have had a normality to it; but the sudden crumble on nothing this afternoon says this is done. The intraday volatility alone means the market has no idea what this is worth but the sharp vacillation shouts 'COMPANY IN EXTREME DISTRESS'. Investors who don't see this are kidding themselves. Holding lots or buying are a foolish gamble; it's wouldn't even be weak speculation.

Apple has suddenly lost interest in TCG, yet they had evangelical affection for it until it fell back; 40% spike here yesterday and suddenly they were all over this.

The inception of this has sunk the whole company with all of its associated costs. I bought in 2016 because profits and revenues were steady and stagnant, not spectacular. The reinvent-the-wheel-from-the-new-CEO has proven to be a terminal 'fix' to something that wasn't broke. The cash outflow from Redesigned has done them in and it's going to be cash negative indefinitely.

For retail investors (myself included) this has been a disaster. The denial from some posters below is unfathomable. I remember someone here in Autumn repeatedly predicting a generous Christmas and a 35p SP by New Year. I'll not embarrass them by naming, but they've since been quiet.

Pearls, n1, smartie, sv, real, apple haven't a clue. They're reactionary only and chasing a kite in a hurricane. Yesterday, everyone said 10-12p soon, easy. Today, all is bad.

Anyone that got material amounts in here should look for an exit. It's blindingly obvious that outsider equity holders are sunk. If you've lost half, take the hit and preserve the rest.

What happened around 2pm?

Good RNS beyond expectations and the market clearly likes it too. Like an oil tanker, this has given them new waters to turn around in, where previously rocks were fast encroaching.

Well this isn't too good if it's true. But the article says nothing of sources and the £40m is too samey and undermines its credence.

Lse's a wind-up; one of those half-bull, half-bear creatures that you can never tell which end is which. Take no notice.

On the accuracy of short data, I've got doubts about Shortracker: the values are far below those reported in the FT who quote from IHS/Markit for a given equity.

Anyone have any ideas?

I don't think I've seen the programme but the letters/Annual Reports on BH website are worth studying. Honesty and likeability spring from those. He's frank about his losses as you point out; although these are minor and occasional compared to the mighty successes.

I'm coming to the opinion that, for nearly everyone, investing in individual equities is a waste of time and money; emulating WB's success is impossible and those who try will lose some or a lot of money. Best summarised with his own words in response to a request for investment advice - 'buy an index'.

ATB

Atb

Just to pick up on the Buffet point: his approach is much more sophisticated than doing the opposite of what experts are saying. If it was that easy, we could all replicate it (and the approach would quickly no longer work). I've not heard him referring to investments as gambles either. His ability is more to see an absence of risk where others perceive a great deal of risk, and to be nearly always proved correct in his assessment.

In a quick look, I can't find anything from Fitch. S&P downgraded their credit rating in April 2018. Don't know if this was specific to the 2021 notes or a general comment on credit-worthiness. I agree it's not good, as is the price at near half par. Although relatively, they rallied quite sharply in the past couple of weeks after striking all time lows. Curious that there was no specific company news to prompt this.

Atb

Erm, Moody's 'Caa' means they rate the debt as speculative. I think that's the kind way of saying junk.

Was it in an RNS that Deb's creditors are preventing them selling any assets whilst they refinance?

Bit disingenuous then the way your previously brought that up and the BL link you posted.

That their portfolio is concentrated could turn out to be advantageous for negotiation. BL are not going to want to see that revenue stream dry up unless they think it can be easily replaced.