Member Info for Hexam

"Unsure how many times I have to calculate this with links to prove what the actual company is stating."

What are you trying to show? If you are trying to suggest they have so much debt with the banks that the interest eats into their profits then 129.5m is not the right number to use as this includes the unwinding of the interest rate on lease liabilities which is an accounting adjustment under IFRS16. Why include this? Even if they repaid all their debt to the banks etc. there would still be a figure for this so long as they keep leasing planes etc.

I'm sorry but you've just lifted a number off a report without really understanding what it means, used it in an inappropriate context and are thus being very misleading in my opinion.

Net Interest on debt (i.e. from loans, overdrafts etc.) will be much less than €410-430m in 2023 as note 4 at the bottom of the slide says it:

"Includes non-cash interest; excludes impact of potential financing measures"

So the first part means it includes non-cash interest relating to lease liabilities rather than loans etc. (as another poster had already pointed out) and the second part presumably means it is before the impact of the debt repayments from cash raised in the RI?

In any event profit BEFORE tax and AFTER interest payments was €691m in 2019 - the last year reported before Covid.

The TERP figure is just a straightforward sum based on the number and price of new shares issued and the number of shares already existing and their price when the RI was first announced. The implicit assumption (and what makes it 'theoretical') is that the mcap is increased by exactly the amount of the new capital raised by the rights issue.

So it's just a guideline, based on that assumption being true, as to where you might expect the sp to end up after the RI completes and it doesn't need a big bucks genius or any alcoholic stimulation to work it out. Just a calculator and a few numbers that are all known and so it is a statement of fact not guesswork.

What threw a lot of people with this one though is that the sanctioned shares do not qualify for the RI and so no money is raised from them but most commentators didn't allow for this and so came up with a different answer to the one TUI did (which did allow for it).

Of course it would be pure chance anyway for the sp to end up at the TERP level as the price will move with sentiment including about the RI itself (usually poor with most RIs) and any major news after the announcement. There is also the added influence from the mechanics and common misunderstandings surrounding RIs which, coupled with usual poor sentiment, often means the sp drifts towards the RI issue price at least in the short term. Which is what we've been seeing here and may continue to see when the new shares hit the market. But nothing is certain so the shares may or may not get much cheaper in next week or so... and that's the game.

Agree Cruis but that’s my point, the audience is there but the number of films isn’t quite yet and the recovery is about a year behind where CINE expected and needed it to be.

As you say if this year’s releases had been last year’s the sp would be a lot healthier now and a good chance CINE could have dodged Ch11 altogether.

I presume the studio takes the same amount regardless of whether the film is viewed on an unlimited card or not and, if so, then would make sense perhaps for that to be the amount counted - but it’s only a guess.

Wolf - It's a lot more accurate than TV figures as can go from actual ticket sales with Box Office Mojo reporting numbers daily for the US, or more accurately North America (at the weekend they forecast the numbers early then update them later).

North American Box Office is still some way short of pre-pandemic levels but the gap is closing as the number of releases continues to increase and with the success of films like Mario.

In terms of this year US/Can Box Office compared to 2019 is:

Jan - 72%
Feb - 80%
Mar - 66% (2019 had Captain Marvel)

Individual months are obviously distorted by particular big releases so best to look quarterly at least.

April looks to be heading for around $800-$850m so about 80% of 2019 (which had Endgame).

Other thing to note is above figures are not inflation adjusted so even getting to 2019 levels won't be as good as 2019 actually was. Nevertheless the recovery is happening - just too slowly for CINE and especially for us shareholders as any uptick now is pretty academic for us.

Funny thing though Wolf is that these mindless idiots that accuse us of being shorters say it like it’s a bad thing. I just wish it were true as if it were then they should be congratulating us on our big winnings - but sadly not. Instead I’m nursing losses from over £1 and all the averaging down since. C’est la vie.

Though I did enjoy my day out in the sun. Thanks Retail :)

Thanks for the heads up HC, I won’t bother watching now which is a shame as I think he’s usually one of the better YouTubers.

Sounds like he’s fallen into the trap though of reading too much into ratios without understanding properly what is really behind them. Lazy.

HGN - I looked at THG a while ago as it’s always been a share that attracts a lot of interest but must admit I couldn’t get past the question of what do they actually do?! Probably more just a reflection on me though - but it means I never spent much time on it and certainly don’t know anything about their financial I’m afraid - including related to the recent events. GL if you’re involved though.

Wolf - I’d just give up if I were you. There’s none so blind as those that don’t want to see and if Retail, Poor, Sharebel, Maid, Magmanus etc. want to lead people off a cliff, either through their own lack of understanding or something more sinister, then that’s up to them. And if anybody is daft enough to follow then that’s their lookout.

It’s amazing how many people invest in shares without any idea of the ways that companies actually operate or anything about financials.

It’s like me deciding to rewire my house without any knowledge or experience and telling an electrician how it should be done. Madness.

Some of the posts over the last few days have been truly cringeworthy and in many ways disheartening.

Agreed.

HGN - Don’t disagree with anything you say. A lot of the problems they’ve had were of their own making and your long list of mistakes isn’t even exhaustive (not selling BTC when high, focusing too much on Helios and operational ‘excellence’ whilst EH stood still for about a year, no plans to mitigate a downturn in BTC but instead doubling down with BTC backed and other loans, no chairman etc).

Some might argue (and have) that if BTC had continued rising their strategy would have been vindicated and we’d all be singing their praises.

But that rather misses the point of risk management and besides their poor execution/record (persistent poor efficiency, failure to get PPA as you mentioned, embarrassing leaks, RNS and other reporting howlers) all point to a badly run, amateurish outfit that would have likely not made the most of any luck in their strategy.

They have also had some really bad luck to be fair but I agree that most of the problems were avoidable or could have at least been mitigated somewhat.

However they are where they are and it will be interesting to see if the new BOD can make a better fist of it - though what they’ve been left with as a starting point is unenviable to say the least.

In this industry dilution is almost a given. It is hugely capital intensive just to stand still let alone grow and if you don’t invest enough to even stand still then it is at best a slow death (even a rising BTC will only help short term unless the rises keep well ahead of difficulty - including halvings).

Ultimately dilution pays off if earnings per share are increased because of the extra funding. That’s hard to judge in advance given the nature of the business and volatility of BTC. So in the meantime it comes down to sentiment and of late that has been clear - those that are seen to be in a position to grow, even if it driven mainly by regular dilution (like CLSK), have soared with recent BTC rises. Whereas ARB with little or no capacity for growth has seen its sp becalmed.

In fact I can’t think of a ‘successful’ miner that hasn’t relied primarily on dilution - or that has any option to do otherwise?

The better question perhaps is whether the industry as a whole is sustainable long term given the relationship between difficulty and BTC price, the short life of machines, the consequent hunger for capital, the constant dilution of shareholders who must at some point grow weary of it, the ever present risk of a(nother) BTC drop etc.

I have my doubts - especially if the heavy losses seen over the last year become a regular feature but only time will tell…

Yes, I would have preferred continued dilution to the approach they did take - raise, raise, raise then debt, debt, debt then the selling of BTC only when forced to (and after the price had crashed).

Better though would have been a more balanced approach, rather than lurching from one extreme to the other, with greater focus on equity raises but also regular selling of some BTC and some use of loans but such that it didn’t create undue risk.

Easy to say in hindsight but actually quite a few of us were saying at the time that there should be much better risk management - or any risk management!

Of course that didn’t go down with posters who see dilution as evil and selling any BTC as heresy.

Companies rarely listen to shareholders when it comes to strategy - unfortunately PW did.

To be fair Chuz they DID do an equity raise to fund Helios. In fact that did one for the land and another one (the Nasdaq IPO) to build it. Unfortunately shareholders then moaned so much about dilution and the company foolishly listened to them so it was the last one they did and they went the debt route instead after that.

“A plc is required to provide an update for material changes in financial expectations, in this case up.”

Not a shorter either and believe this share is very unloved and undervalued but this is more of a reassuring update and not one talking about an upwards material change in financial expectations - it even starts with “Unchanged Outlook”.

Nice update nonetheless.

If in doubt look at the UT as that sets the closing price - 1.47p

"both main market - in that case that's even worse."

Why? Both companies are still in business but with a rather large axe hovering over their heads. In neither case is the axe absolutely certain to fall but if they suspended the shares then trading would halt and holders like me would be stuck - and I wouldn't have been able recover some slither of my investment which I did just now when CINE went to 1.6. There are still plenty of people clearly willing to buy both stocks which is just casino gambling in my book but it's their choice just as backing an outsider in the National or Derby is.

What is disturbing is, I agree, if either rise is due to a leak of news as that's insider trading and the companies themselves should ask for suspension on 'pending news'.

Roxy - Both companies have been taken out of the FTSE indices but they are still LSE traded. Wouldn't have thought size is a criteria as involves a lot of different rules. Besides - there are some tiny mcap companies on LSE and some pretty large mcap ones on AIM.

I'm in both CINE and AMGO and the rises on both today are baffling (but a nice surprise). Sold some CINE in case it's a spike but we should soon find out if there is any substance behind either rise...

"but as usual AIM Regs just let it all happen"

Doubt it as neither CINE nor AMGO are on AIM. Both are main market.