Member Info for FunInvestor

Usernamedbut, more or less fun than the fact of current share price?
;-)
I preferred when it was on a rise a year ago and over £1 maybe you and some others need called out as pump and dumpers? ;-)

Ian, structure of payments was "worked out". Part paid and the sum mentioned held in escrow to be paid by March this year.
Why on earth would they agree to getting drip fed over two years?? That's frankly ridiculous!
UNLESS Cineworld make it tasty by paying a greater sum to them than already agreed.

Usernames, As Bonkers says a waste of keyboard time.
Some will tell the truth here some won't.
Some will believe some of the truth tellers and the liars without knowing who is who possibly.
Others wont believe truth, but will the lies and so on so on.

I would say there is no point only speaking positive about the company as there are CLEARLY negatives.
Otherwise be under no illusions the share price would be back in the £1.50 - £2:50 range.
NEWSFLASH: To the blinkered that slate those that view whole picture the current share price is sub 40p. That's correct about 20% of prepandemic prices.

That's NOT the share price of a company where everything is dreamy perfect.

I know I am wrongly on the list of some as (well it depends on the day or their time of the month I guess) a shorter, a day trader, a forked tongue (read liar).

That's their problem (if you are in that category then read also your problem), not mine.

If "we' Cineworld don't win at least one case soon then we must have the world's most inept legal advisors in the world.
Let's hope something substantial finally is found in our favour.

https://www.thewrap.com/regal-cinemas-sues-insurers-pandemic-closures/

https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/19878900.cineworld-applies-licence-new-cinema-colchester/

Done what others have done in the past and slipped rather conveniently to JUST under the 0.5% reporting threshold.

Yeah Hollywood, what do they know.
It's not as if by the end of this year there will be probably 3 - 5 of the top ten grossing movies of all time releases in the last 12 months (Starting with Spider-Man which we have just had, culminating with Avatar).
In between we have candidates such as Blackpanther, Thor, Aquaman, Batman, Jurassic World.......
No need to go on with list of very likely other big big releases. Such as Top Gun, the Toy story one, few other "comic book" movies etc etc.

iParsnip, There are other operators in the industry and at least one has just such a seat pricing so bang goes that theory I guess

Sing 2 will be adding reasonably in last days of this month and early next month for UK box office.
It has however done big chunk of its overall take being released over a month ago in US.
US to date $130.7m
International already $112.8m

Spiderman has done well this month and compares well with previous years bug December releases carrying solid Box Office into this month.
That's the good news.
The bad news is we (still) just don't have the volume of movies to back up and support these massive movies. Therefore we will end up way short on Box Office for January compared to previous years (in region of 50% , even with better concessions and "if" we have strong advertising revenues January has been a bad month).

That's no disaster, but we do want to see progression.
I would measure maybe in quarters to allow for lumpy movie releases and give a reasonable period to compare.

This in mind we are looking at $2.4 - $2.9bn for the period in the five years to 2019.
With January sitting at $360m (3 days to go).
For me that has us wanting to see far nearer $1bn for each of Feb and March.
This is US domestic and it is by some way the biggest chunk of business for us and easy to keep an eye on.
Both months look considerably better in regards film releases so let's see.
Personal view anything below say $750m/month is poor and less than we want/need.
I am intrigued to see if there is a strong Tom Holland effect for his February release.
Think we have a few $100m + type movies each month to give a bit support to likes of Batman.

Sing 2 - watched it last night.
If you have kids go see it.
If you are a big kid yourself, go see it.
If you want to contribute to Cineworld/cinema recovery, go see it.
Heck, just go and see it!

Great fun film for all :-)

HNS,
I don't know if it is the reporting of this or is this getting more absurd?

While I don't know if it was/is right or wrong to say Cineworld were the party in the wrong in this case it did and does seem crazy that damages were calculated as lost synergies.
That seemed "novel" (read incomprehensible).

This cross appeal seems on first reading to have taken the madness to a whole new level.

Are they putting previous claim another way basically and on one part wanting payment for the difference in bid share price to current?
AND claiming Cineworld benefited by not having the additional debt burden Cineplex took on to survive COVID (that's the "benefit" Cineworld got from walking away!?).

As I have said number of times I dont know which party was "right" and which was "wrong'.

However the methods and amounts claimed do seem to follow a pattern of being wrong (excessively high).

I still haven't got my head round synergies bombshell and this latest seems as/even more ridiculous.

History tells me our Cineworld BB legal experts got it so wrong first time round to not engage further on much of today's crazy postings.

Whufc,
It is the articles I think HNS mostly shared in that a few legals noted synergies was a novel way of making award.
Not stating wrong for Cineplex to be entitled to recompense, but that that method was rather unusual.
Been discussed here in the days and weeks after original court findings.

Whufc,
It could still be ruled that Cineplex followed "ordinary course" and that Cineworld pulled out of the deal without due cause.
However the method of calculating "damages" by the synergies they got awarded be deemed the wrong method and an award made using other means of calculation.

This is what Cineplex have (rightly) put in their cross appeal and pretty much what commentators on the subject have been saying.

Rusks, NO it is Cineplex doing what they see as right in the case they view Cineworld pulled out deal without due cause.
Same as any company would do when they felt other party broke legal agreement.

Oh yes, delays buy us time in the scenario that we do not exit this process with any improvement in ruling outcome.
No arguments there.

RS2002,
Their legal team would be absolutely negligent if they did not cover their bases at this or any stage.
You have to be prepared for outcomes other than what you want/expect.

Nothing, absolutely NOTHING in this update suggests Cineplex are panicking.
They have done EXACTLY as anyone would expect I feel.
Off course they would state that "IF" the current form of damages/award is ruled incorrect then they feel they could/should still be entitled to recompense in some measured format.

Synergies has always seemed "wrong' for a basis of award.

HOWEVER, if it is deemed they were the "wronged' party then some way of calculating and awarding damages is only correct.

"Only top three investment banks make profits."

Also just NOT true.