Member Info for Hexam

Sorry Oke - try again,

As I started to say - I'm struggling to see where your numbers come from.

I can see the pre-tax loss of £90.7m but not your other numbers.

The breakdown I think of the £90.7m is:

Revenue: £1,768.7m

less COGS: £873.5m

less Distribution Costs: £447.9m (not £114m or is your figure just for part of the business?)

less Administration Expenses : £529.7m

plus Other Income: £0.2m

plus Finance Income: £3.5m

less Finance Expense: 12m

This come to the -£90.7m pre-tax loss.

Tax is -£15.1 (not £0.4m)

So net earnings is -£75.6m (not -£90.7m)

Included in the above are:

Impairments of £27.7m (not £31m). Also these relate to PPE, right of use assets and financial assets)

Sheffield Automation Disruption Costs: £8.4m

Redundancy Costs: £4.1m

USA Warehouse Set Up Costs: £2.4m

UK Warehouse Restructuring Costs: £2.4m

Amortisation of Intangibles: £12.2m

Share Based Payment Charges: £32.0m

The above costs come to £89.2m and removing these give the quoted adjusted loss before tax of £1.6m.

So I'm not sure of the starting point for your musings so hard to comment on them. I'm also not sure what your conclusions actually are exactly?

Apologies that this is even heavier than your post and if it comes across as a bit of a 'red pen' job - I'm just trying to understand better what you are trying to say and the numbers you've used in saying it.

Hi Oke,

Tried to look at the numbers but struggling to see where the

Good numbers I agree but not record breaking profits which is the bit I was querying.

“on top of all the recent record breaking result's posted by many companies.”

Really? Who exactly? I presume by results you mean profits and there are still a lot of companies struggling to make any let alone record ones - including BOO.

I am very hopeful though of BOO’s next set of results but obviously not all shorters share that confidence. MA is also clearly confident in the sector.

So there are mixed views out there and whilst I’m happy to be long on BOO there’s no guarantee I’m on the right side and shorters could have the last laugh.

We’ll know soon enough anyway but in the meantime this X knows more than Y discussion is all getting a bit silly but if you want to follow somebody else’s judgement (whoever that is) more than your own then that’s obviously your choice.

Not sure what your question is exactly Jeffrey but someone selling approaching 2% of the company's shares is likely to impact the sp by much more than 2% (additional, heavy selling pressure plus then the poorer sentiment this news may create). Exactly how much who knows but it certainly seems to explain at least a decent chunk of the recent decline.

Yes, might explain some of the fall and the RNS itself might spook others as well but, like you, I don't understand the shorting reference.

My apologies too Stupmy as I've consistently got your name wrong as well. Just shows the brain sees what it expects to - and why many call me Hexham :-)

CINE had over $5bn net debt (excl lease liabilities) and negative cash flow. TUI has no net debt (excl lease liabilities) and a positive cash flow. No comparison.

Agree @hash

Cheers Savage.

Not sure what you are complaining about OSG. Most of the chat on this thread has been positive. @hash and I may have reached the same conclusion in different ways but we both feel the company is in a much healthier financial position than the reported net debt figure suggests.

I don't know exactly why the sp has fallen so much but pretty sure it has little to do with "those making the market and those manipulating the prices" - that's just the predictable and lazy excuse of rampers who can't accept the market disagrees with them.

Instead I think it is much more due to the continued uncertainties facing the industry (and the hangover of the RI for TUI in particular) - and it doesn't take a lot to spook investors at the moment in the current economic climate. However, I'm not too concerned with the current drop in price as I believe the fundamentals/financials are far better than the sp suggests and these things win through eventually. Just my view though and been wrong before - and could well be here too especially if there is some unexpected nasty waiting just around the corner. Hopefully no more surprises though!

"they are really in a net cash position of €0.6bn" - sorry, that should have been €0.7bn i.e. $2.2bn reported net debt with the €2.9bn lease liability removed.

"2.5% and 5% sound low. What I then can't understand is why they pay 101m Euros a quarter on cash interest."

That's because it also includes interest in respect of lease liabilities (€2.9bn - see previous post) not just the loans. No interest is actually paid on these it's just the part of the total lease payments which is shown under interest for accounting purposes.

"so what i am trying to say is that TUI bank debt is very low......"

@hash - If that is your conclusion then I agree with it - just not with the way that you reached it (in particular the reference to advance cash payments and the net cash figure of €2.3bn if you allow for them which is not correct).

Instead, as you rightly mention, the main part of the debt (included within net debt) is lease liabilities of €2.9bn.

So in my view they are really in a net cash position of €0.6bn as lease liabilities are not a debt in the same way as loans as they haven't borrowed the €2.9bn, instead it is simply the estimated value of future lease payments on planes etc. that they have leased rather than own outright. (Many other companies do actually quote a net debt figure without lease liabilities.)

I think the mention of advance payments just confuses things. They do help net debt if they are high as they are reflected in a higher cash figure but they do not affect the debt side directly (they are included elsewhere in the liabilities, not here). So your comment "This [debt] will increase post September as the advance from customers would decrease" is not true unless they need to draw down some RCF as a result.

So if your conclusion is that debt is not nearly as big an issue as some people make out then I completely agree with you - you just threw me by focusing on touristic advance payments. In fact I think debt is no longer an issue at all as it is now well within manageable levels.

@hash - I'm not sure what you are trying to say as the net debt position of €2.2bn reported as of Jun 30 2023 already includes the advance payments so you can't add them on as that would double count them. So although Q4 should show a healthy EBIT (€1bn+) the cash flow from operations will be much lower, possibly even negative. This just reflects that revenue, and hence profit, is only recognised when holidays are actually taken but cash reflects when they are paid for (obviously several months before typically).

Apologies if I've misunderstood what you were trying to say but if you are suggesting they really have €2.3bn net cash because of the advance payments then that is not the case I'm afraid.

Hi Oke,

From what I can see though (and as the quote suggests) with Shein you can return your items free so long as you return all the items you don’t want in the order together. It’s only if you return things separately that you’ll be charged (after the first).

Would have thought for most this would mean free returns.

Also I think the charge in the UK for SHEIN is £2.50.

Personally I’m not sure which is the better model for the business as obviously it’s a trade-off between recovery of costs and potentially lower revenues. Time will tell I guess and if there is a clear ‘winner’ then the ‘losers’ will just come into line?

Hi unhooked - the reason I think it is 'different' this time is simply that the mcap looks very low given the likely level of annual profit that will be declared in the Q4 numbers. Underlying EBIT should be around €800m-1000m and overall net earnings perhaps a bit less than half that. Earnings are growing too as the company continues to the covid recovery.

To me that makes an mcap of around €3bn look very light - unless there is something significant coming around the corner that we can't see (and admittedly the market may have wind of something given the recent falls)?

So for me the financials are suggesting it is undervalued unless I'm missing something whereas before it was in a position of losses, increasing debt and a lots more uncertainty. Unfortunately I think there is still quite a bit of uncertainty holding the sp back whilst the nature and size of the rights issue may still be causing a hangover.

One way or another though the Q4 results should make things clearer - and hopefully better. Shocking day though!

Lack of volume just means lack of interest generally. I'm sure it will perk up on news or rumour (one way or the other). Besides, looking at historical volumes these sort of levels seem about normal to me (excluding around the 'news days') so not sure what the fuss is about. There are certainly a lot of other shares with much lower interest.

Also volume doesn't drive the direction of price movement anyway - it's the relative pressure between buyers and sellers that does that though volume may accelerate that movement I suppose - in whichever direction it is.

"Difficulty going up will only increase the value, so that is good."

What!???

“Can't help but feel those topping up just don't understand this.”

In many cases I think this is true as a lot of posters across these board seem to apply the same logic. The price is lower than it was so it must be a bargain. The price is a lot lower than it was so it must be a huge bargain.

Maybe a bit more time understanding why a company is trading so low in the first place rather than just looking at the shape of the graph would be time well spent?