Member Info for ElvisRocks

Oh dear Mr Wolff, has Little Red Riding Hood bite you in the a…s?

That ain’t no faux pa of mine on the General Motors/Equity Trading Motion and I only was away from posting for a few days but was very much watching what was going on.

I like to read what is about now 1,000 pages of lawyers bill to understand the direction of travel, unlike you who believes these are a load of tosh ..

… like I say best you pop along to the judge in Texas and say perjury is being committed, I think they just closed for the day now but am sure you will be able to contact them tomorrow…

Oh hang on, they don’t let looney bins like you in the door … Wolff, “the font of all knowledge” “the grand-daddy of them all” … NOT!

Hi LM, the interesting thing here, with the Financial Times now putting out a similar article all say “and this will wipe out shareholders” or your words “transfer all equity in the company to creditors” … if this wording was to be taken at face value, then why does the share price spike if it is/was supposedly worthless?

The answer to this in CINE case is the equity trading motion that shareholders will eventually be asked to compromise on (via a proper General Meeting and probably posh paperwork being mailed out to shareholders etc) prior to old CINE being delisted with Takeover Panel / FCA involvement

That’s why, like others, I believe CINE has value at the level you suggest for Revlon today after the short squeeze.

Good shout LM, here is the Reuters article 36 minutes ago, debt also in the billions, let’s wait for Wolff to poo-poo us all on this

https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/revlon-reaches-restructuring-deal-with-key-creditors-exit-bankruptcy-april-2022-12-19/

Eh up bonkers .. you more of a Barry Manilow fan and some League 2 footballer then… long live the King …

The King is sticking to his plan of an equity trading motion, run by the Takeover Panel and FCA, for a delisting and buy out of existing shareholders at the equivalent of market cap of approx $500m (being its approximate tax losses), whatever that relates to in pence per share …

Long live the King .. and Lionel Messi (who is also invested to watch his coronation on the big screen in 2023). Next big movie release maybe? Not a dumb idea that someone in Hollywood has already written the script for this?

Long live the King … and Lionel Messi!

Maidit, hate to disappoint you but the $1.94bn was agreed by the judge long ago, Nov 3 as Hexam and Wolff have confirmed to you, wise up young man (or woman) you are a tad behind the pace!

Hexam or Wolff, a couple of weeks back we spoke on this forum we’re the debts $5bn or $6bn, you both advised the latter $6bn

However in the court docket today, the one about extending the exclusivity period at page 7, it stays the debts at petition date we’re approx $5bn and the loan “activity” since then was swapping one inflow for a similar outflow, not new debts / money?

You still sure the external debt is $6bn not $5bn?

If you look at docket 1109 and type the words “us listing” you can see this is being considered with last week talk being about a separate uk implementation plan

That (the US listing) is probably why investec are involved as they were previously involved in advising Regal and all of this partly why the reorganisation plan is being deferred.

Am travelling this week so won’t be much posting from Elvis (don’t think my wife Priscilla or daughter Lisa Marie will post on my behalf) …I’m sure you will all be gutted to hear this!

Elvis is still very much alive. Long live The King.

It’s obnoxious Wolff is t it the size of the bills, Magic Circle are one tier (above Big 4 now I believe), other New York / London / Singapore firms like Alvarez and Marsal and then of course you have the investment bankers who usually start at high 8 figures …

Imagine how hard it is to bring a negligence claim against these firms, they are so near bullet proof with T&Cs …. about 3 years ago on a FTSE100 part delist for a $15bn transaction part bought through sovereign wealth funds and European insurers, contract lawyers were there for months on £3000 per day rather than £10k per day that we can see these law firms are charging

From a Cine perspective I thought Kirkland and Ellis were moderating lawyer bills (per Ashurst bill) but seems they are on the feeding frenzy too!

I think I agree Wolff, they didn’t do a RNS when the $1bn got released so why for this (UK only) one. The opposite argument is the way the motion is written (probably by Slaughter and May) then it’s mission critical to Cine and everything goes tits up without it. Think Booker like you say is an offshoot of Tesco, possibly now private in its own right.

Thanks for your views (genuinely)

The lawyers bills also talks about UK MAR (Market Abuse Regulation) and people who could be trading on inside information, market manipulation leading to possible suspension of shares and also buy backs taking place (off market). Buy backs also mentioned in lawyers bills

Food for thought definitively in terms of what cards could get pulled next

https://www.fca.org.uk/markets/market-abuse/regulation

Would welcome views on this, if as the motion says regarding bookers concession supply is crucial, it then goes on to say who will be supplied with the confidentiality terms on this .. the creditors, these hoc loan group etc. it also says the US SEC gets a copy and any other “government agency with a regulatory or statutory interest in this case” which presumably makes the FCA one such party

Who makes the decision to issue a RNS, surely if the judge said no it would be a material factor needing an RNS, same true if positive message surely. It’s also mentioned in the SM lawyer bill about advice on “one supplier” (which I guess is this one)

Para 17s in the attached

https://cases.ra.kroll.com/cineworld/Home-DownloadPDF?id1=MjMyNTI5OA==&id2=-1

It probably isn’t RNS able, think concessions are about 27% of profit (worldwide) so I guess they will have been paying more to each local supplier plus the pain in the …s factor. So restores continuity of supply

On its own probably not RNS able but would be a positive message … imagine the alternative if the judge says no.

Wolff, bookers have been placed on stop countrywide, their credit insurers won’t allow them to supply, been on stop since start of C11

Wolff, if you have a close read of docket 1000 it says (basically) bookers are the only choice available, stronger than that even, basically saying they are stuffed without them. I think it’s the last 4 pages that sets that fundamental position out … there is no viable alternative…

So lawyers, whoever writes these motions, have done a good write up there and wh6 it’s an emergency motion,

Srin, very good article and thanks for both researching and posting … I suspect that’s how they did it in the General Motors case (via the equity trading motion) that left shareholders with almost nothing … the slight difference in this case is the massive debt that the US Government bailed them out with

Here in Cine, circumstances are not indifferent to that, my argument here is the tax losses that need protecting here ($500m plus) need a shareholder compromise to achieve to go into newco, six times the current market cap. I would doubt General Motors had $300bn tax losses, five times the bailout.

From what I have seen in yesterday’s lawyers bills they are calling for “who has >5% of the equity” (apart from Mooky obviously) and they have to be carefully paraded through the restructure versus us little shareholders who get told.

That’s why I believe takeover panel come in

Wolffie, what I can agree with you on is no one knows, yet, what the final outcome or twists and turns will be, where we have always differed is your view the “equity could wipe you out RNS” trumps all, I have argued the case in point about grubby lawyer hands all over that and the listing regulations force your hand on this. The case in point is that same guy who seemed to have his grubby lawyer hands on it, sought to argue that an equal announcement should be put out on the share price spike, for what purpose… to shoot the share price down to 1p again

Re the taxation fixation or fantasy that you seem to claim I have that is the clear direction of travel here, where I have joined the dots, the convenient “vehicle” that allows Cine to do this is the equity trading motion like General Motors. So it is more than “tax is important”, it’s only of the fundamental tools that will allow us equity shareholders to get out of here. And yes, there are of course other important factors at play here.

Anyway enough of that, what did you think about docket 1,100 Bookers restarting catering supplies (their credit insurer were involved in putting Cine on stop), you think that is worth a RNS of itself given the margin at stake to the UK business? It reads a bit like if you go to a Cine theatre at the moment you are sure of a big surprise… no hotdogs, no popcorn, no cappuccino, no sweeties ….

Wolffie… you dismissed the motion when I came on here that the lawyers bills have any relevance, even inferred, and we now have probably the best part of 1,000 pages of lawyers bills allowing insights into what may be going on, I would say more than anything I’ve ever seen, on the semi inside, for a share that continues to trade

… and you dissed me only this week on the irrelevance of the equity trading motion, along with the tax work being undertaken believing it’s “just a tax comp and most of the tax losses will be in the USA”. That, along with UK implementation or separation plans, are why it’s highly relevant