Member Info for Hexam

Yes FlyingFax - they say net debt will be better, and better than previously forecast, at the end of the year due to outperformance so as you say the advanced bookings brings this part forward a bit. The quarterly loss doesn't reflect this though as profit is only recognised when the trips actually take place.

All told though a very encouraging set of results and outlook.

"None of you saw the RI coming"

We were told for months that it was coming so it would have been pretty hard to miss - except by you it seems.

“Can anyone explain the 2 billion lowering of net debt? New planes orders not processed? Forex? It’s a huge reduction.”

FlyingFax - it’s caused mainly by higher cash due to advanced bookings at this time of year as people pay for trips yet to be taken this spring/summer - as explained in the RNS:

“The Group's cash balance (defined as cash, cash equivalents and current interest-bearing deposits) of €11,369 million at March 31, 2023 was up €1,770 million on December 31, 2022, in line with the normal seasonal pattern of working capital movements. The Group's airlines typically experience a rise in deferred revenue in the first half of the year, linked to bookings for future travel, particularly leisure bookings for summer travel; deferred revenue then usually falls in the second half of the year.”

Wolf - At least Jeff wanted to understand whereas Ian, maid and a few others just seem to be on a different planet. I no longer think they believe anything they are saying themselves it’s so daft. If they do then it’s quite scary and they’d perhaps be better off investing in some common sense and a few reality pills.

“However if they count hodl value increase towards profit figures it's not really what I'm looking for”

AB - I don’t think any do (unless they sell them). The exception is ARB not that it will do them any good with just 80 odd BTC.

Stnz - agreed.

Fair enough but I don’t think they’ll be that close to being profitable for Q1 unless they’ve improved their running costs a lot since Q4. But we’ll see and will be happy if you’re right but as HC says, profitability can wait.

At the moment though I think Mara are succeeding through brute force with less emphasis on efficiency or profitability and that’s probably more than good enough for now.

I know you’ve laid out your case on Mara and I agree with a lot of it.

I’m just saying that until these impressive daily numbers translate into an impressive set of monthly numbers or quarterly financials then I think it’s inconclusive.

I also appreciate you’re not shy to admit when you don’t get things right which is refreshing but I just meant the daily commentary on mining numbers is like that we get from some on the sp or BTC (more so in the past admittedly).

As I said I’m in and bullish on Mara and will be more than happy if these big numbers do make everything else fall in place.

Agree to an extent HC but the more efficient you are the less cash you need or more quickly you can generate more of it and the quicker you can grow. I agree though that at the moment the more important thing is how well placed for growth companies are now with cash to hand or obtainable..

I posted as I’m simply bored of all this Mara hype. They do have a lot going for them and I’m more bullish on their sp (at least in the short term) than the rest but it’s not because of their efficiency - or fundamentals in general.

Yes, you’re right that BTC mined per EH is a single and imperfect measure but still an important part of the story. Like AB said, what efficiency boils down to is how much it costs in electricity (and other direct costs) in mining each BTC.

Mara has been dreadful on that basis, and profitability in general, and even worse than ARB but that’s based on Q4 data. The quarterlies will be out soon so we can see how they are doing more recently combining all the factors like underclocking, overclocking, price of electricity etc. and compare with others.

The daily numbers are impressive but unless they can do it consistently and/or cost effectively then it’s doesn’t mean much except it will certainly help spread fixed costs more if the numbers do stay high.

In the meantime you sound like a ramper who shouts when the sp is up but keeps quiet when it’s falling and you’re much better than that.

"up on KLL website, filed yesterday'' a very good worded read"

Seriously? All it does is show a lack of understanding just like all the letters before.

It suggests that the agreement heavily favours the senior lenders. Of course it does - they have first lien - it's what it means, they are first in the queue and sadly shareholders are at the back of the queue but some think they can magically jump it? Without DIP financing those lenders provided last year the company would already be dead and buried and we'd have nothing. Now this investor wants that financing to be used to set up a shareholder committee. Bizarre.

It also claims the terms of the agreement have not been made public. Two very long documents (the RSA document over 200 pages and the disclosure statement over 100 pages) would suggest otherwise.

Like it or not lenders are always in pole position in these kind of situations as they have first claim on the assets for the funding they provided and only provided it because that was the case. You can't move the goalposts now and if shareholders don't understand the risks involved when investing their money and where they stand if things go south then they shouldn't really be playing this game.

If it falls into Chapter 7 then that’s definitely the end for shareholders as there would be absolutely no chance of us getting anything back. If it’s broken up there isn’t enough by way of assets to pay off the debts and if somebody buys it for a penny then they will be the new shareholder - not us - all we’d have is the penny. Besides, they may be buying it for a penny but it will be costing them $6bn as they’d be taking on all the debt so I don’t think they’ll be any takers - unless they can do some kind of deal with the lenders (in which case we’d still be left empty-handed).

So we won’t get to ‘live another day’ that way.

"Some argue ‘it could go to £1.50’. I’m not sure how they’ve arrived at that conclusion and I haven’t seen any calculations that convince me. At £1.50 per share, market cap + net debt = £572m. I can’t see it, but once net debt is reduced to nil, cash flow has improved (no interest on borrowings to pay or borrowings to pay off) and the growth strategy is properly underway, sure, this is certainly achievable imo, if not, likely."

I was one of those I think you are referring to saying 'it could go to £1.50' but I think we're agreeing as by the end of the paragraph you say the same i.e. that it is certainly achievable, if not, likely, so I'm a little confused by your comment? Basically I agree with pretty much all of your analysis (though I think there is less downside risk) and I'm certainly not suggesting it will get to £1.50 very soon. I do think though it has a pretty solid chance of getting there with a modest growth of profits, and reduced debt, within the next couple of years - like you seem to think as well?

For me that's worth keeping my investment in (though I will continue to top-slice if/as it goes up) but I can understand your different perspective of that not being attractive enough and so looking elsewhere, especially if you feel it could well drop in the meantime. GL though wherever you do decide to put your money from this next.

"Hexam, Argobull have you guys ever thought of the fact that Mara are underclocking as part of risk management?"

That would make sense if they are not covering their variable costs but with BTC well over $25k all month it can't be the only reason surely? Would their electricity costs per BTC mined really be that close to $25k BTC for over a quarter of the month to warrant shutting down for all that time?

Even ARB had average variable costs well under $15k per BTC mined before the hosting agreement.

Blimey…you’re even more of an idiot than I thought.

I’m positive on Card and my average is 48p so am sitting very pretty - helps offset some of my more questionable choices. I’ll top slice some more at 125p but confident it will get to 150p+.

I just don’t have much time for mindless rampers or those that blame everything on others - and you seem to fit nicely into both categories, and sadly you’re far from alone on these boards.

@Golitha - I just try to keep it simple. What sort of earnings do I think TUI can generate in the next few years? It looks to me they could get to as much as £400m or so for FY23 and there own 'mid-term ambition' for 2025/26 is to get beyond pre-pandemic EBIT levels of €1.2m (which translates to getting beyond net earnings of around £600m).

Those sort of earnings (and more) are inconsistent with a current mcap of £2.6bn.

Of course lots could potentially happen to derail things (we've had plenty of examples in the last few years) but hopefully there are no more nasty surprises - and maybe even some nice ones for a change!

That's because the plan that would wipe out CINE shareholders just got one step closer.

Meanwhile on MARA there is lots to like but their efficiency is still poor. Around 75% I think for April, similar to ARB's kind of levels, whereas BITF were around 95% for April.

Still confident in MARA overall but the quarterly financials may help show whether their big headline numbers are translating into earnings. The inefficiency suggests they may be struggling a bit to do this.

The TERP is 808p but it's theoretical based on the assumption that the €1.8bn raised improves the real value (i.e. value of future earnings) of the company by €1.8bn. That's open for debate and certainly the market doesn't think so at the moment.

The more I look at the financials though the more confident I am that things are looking much healthier for TUI and that we will get back to the TERP and beyond but the TERP itself is just a theoretical benchmark - the sp has no inordinate 'right' to get back to that, it depends on actual and expected performance going forwards.

In the meantime I just think the market (i.e. investors) are behaving as they usually do after an RI and the price is being driven more towards the rights issue price than the TERP. This will reverse IF the company delivers which as I say I am personally very confident of - but that's just my own view.

I'm certainly not defending MMs - they're no angels. Just tired of idiots like you who every time an sp doesn't go up like they think it should do makes up some nonsense about what the MMs are doing and blames them instead of their own misguided expectations.

If an sp goes up it simply means demand for shares is outstripping supply, if it falls then the opposite is happening. It's simply a market doing what markets do.

@Eusebius - Ah...now I get it ;-)

Apologies Eusebius for not spotting the irony - and fully agree. It's one of the most tiring things about these boards (along with the more blatant ramping and de-ramping that are both often seen).