Member Info for GoldenI

Tiger,

A point well made regarding the 10p Fixed Conversion Price - but do not forget the possibility of the Floating Conversion Price being chosen, if lower: 100% of the average for the three lowest closing bid prices in the 40 days immediately preceding conversion ("Floating Conversion Price")

IMHO, DYOR, etc.,etc.

If the RNS has correctly followed convention, then GBP is Great British Pounds, whereas GBp would be British Pence.

The quoted £6bn annual revenue included about £2bn in respect of the Projects business, which we understand is in the process of being restated as a result of the Deloitte review. How much of this number needs to be written off?

At times of market uncertainty Banks tend to tighten their conditions - and restrict lending.

These 2 factors might start to explain why their appear to be few options open to the company?

IMHO

It is really difficult to be certain how long a suspension will last whilst accounts are completed.

We can hope it will be a few weeks, or 1 month, or 2 or 3, but it is not possible to be completely sure it will not be a little longer.

That said, you would hope that the accountants would want to get this done quickly for a client of the size (and remuneration to accountants) of Wood Group.

Acottyyyyyy

Whilst some posters are quoting the expectation of a higher share price, it is often driven by responding to those who quote a lower share price.

Your message does contain a skewed view - inferring that the Wood share price has recovered less than most today is clearly inaccurate at this moment in time.

Looking more closely at the 2023 AA, and the recent RNS, the problem appears to be that we await numbers in respect of "Material restatements are expected for adjusted EBITDA and adjusted EBIT for FY22 and FY23" - resulting in historic covenant breaches.

"Net debt excluding leases to adjusted EBITDA (excluding the impact of IFRS 16) at 31 December (2023) was 2.08 times on a covenant basis (2022: 1.3 times) against our covenants of 3.5 times". I am no accountant, but it looks like there will be a substantial reduction in EBITDA figure :- (Page 175) "The Group has a large number of fixed price long-term contracts which are accounted for in accordance with IFRS 15 and require estimates to be made for contract revenue. Fixed price contracts revenue from continuing operations amounted to $1,195.3m in 2023 (2022: $1,179.8m), and is comprised of several hundred relatively low value contracts which are ongoing at any one point in time and these often span reporting periods and include small short duration consultancy contracts. They are all at varying stages of completion and carry their own unique risks. Hence, with the exception of the Aegis contract, which is described further in note 2, it is impracticable to provide any meaningful disclosure on the key sensitivities that would impact on revenue recognition, such as those outlined below." I assume this will impact the Projects business income and EBIT figures, and drag the totals down so that the covenants were breached - and will doubtless mean an increase in margin for interest already paid - to be paid at a higher number than previously (the 2023 AA refer to a lower margin being paid that year!). How much of this number was in respect of Projects?

Also, "The increase in the tax charge in 2023 is largely a result of the exceptional tax charge of $18.0 million (2022: $41.6 million credit) on deferred tax assets as a result of actuarial movements on the UK pension scheme".

I am hoping that these changes will not substantially affect SIDARA's view of the value of the business going forward.

IMHO

I hope that the fundamentals will support the restating of previously provided EBITDA figures.

Looking at the published Projects v Total EBITDA figures for FY22, FY23 and H1/24 shows in USD millions : FY22 169/385; FY23 177/423; H1/24 96/219 - so about 42% to 44% of the total.

Looks like we need to see how much of a revision will need to be made before having the full picture, but hoping this is now all in the past.

Any idea why there was a hiccup in the share price yesterday?

Seems to have put the cat amongst the pigeons - insider knowledge or trouble-making?

Put down ... not when there is still plenty of life in the old dog.

Does anybody think that the Deloitte review may have been instigated at the 'request' of the lending syndicate? Maybe they were getting nervous of missed targets and wanted some additional comfort.

IMHO

Slacker,

Looking at your posting history, do you have anything positive to say about any share?

Kong, so dismissive.

Maybe not enough investors, but the earlier RNS stated "and the Board is pleased with the level of firm commitments received to date."

The RNS seems to indicate that the Dutch Auction was pulled because of newer information coming to light week beginning 13 January 2025. So we may never know if it could have proven successful. Looks like the only winners here will be solicitors bringing in fee income. Have all of the skeletons been taken out of the cupboards? Now the only hope seems to be a single investor who might be willing to invest - is that for real, or a smoke screen? If a smoke screen, what is the value in delaying matters further with a false hope?

IMHO

If the BOD have the final say, they are obliged to ensure that they accept the best deal (if this exists) for the shareholders - they cannot merely do what they please.

They can only issue shares upto the available headroom as determined by previous shareholder meetings, and can only exceed it subject to further shareholder approval. The amount raised is determined by the offer price the company are able to issue those additional shares at - which is in theory determined by "the market", albeit the company's advisors normally provide a view on what they believe the market will accept. Unusual to see an auction of this nature, but hopefully that could be a good sign - determining on how many of the shares get issued and at what price. IMHO.

MyIPA

Page 53, Note 4.1.

Ssccss

I looked at the March23 AA from a companies house search - did they have 1000 leases? Could take some untangling if there are more than a few with issues!

So when the RNS stated the following, was the deal subject to any conditions precedent/subsequent? What was the Due Diligence performed by GV, and what did it show?

More questions than answers now we have the RNS today.

Extract from earlier RNS:

"Pennpetro announced on the 17 July 2024, that both parties were aiming to complete the transaction by month end. This was achieved yesterday evening with the signing of the SPA by both parties and with the SPA dated 31-07-2024 and being signed after UK business hours."

Recalibrate88- you really have got a downer on this share - every time it drops slightly you comment on heading lower....