Member Info for Hexam

"I do not think they will lie on court documents."

Nor do I - they would be in a lot of hot water if they did (to put it mildly). All I'm saying is that the presentation of numbers (i.e. what is included in profit) was different in January to earlier months (they state clearly that these reports are neither full nor necessarily accurate) - whilst all the figures I quoted on cash were directly from the Jan 4 presentation.

As you say the books are open to both lenders and potential buyers so they should be seeing a lot more than we can and have a true view of the finances.

Also, like you, I'd be very surprised if YE results come out this week.

Hi Tegop - They were $31m ahead of forecast on cash on an operational basis but overall they were $17m behind (due to additional DIP fees and reorganisation costs). In addition, of the $31m operational upside $173m was due to things like delaying payment of bills and deferring other spend - so most of this will catch up at some point. The $24m loss in January is also misleading as for some reason they missed out all the lease related costs.

So overall they are behind where they expected to be and are falling further behind each month - but hopefully March will see the reversal of that trend begin.

Nope - majority is variable (but with a fixed element).

Avatar 2 did $401m US Box Office in December - more than the Rise of Skywalker did in December 2019 ($390m). The problem is all that the other films supporting Avatar only did $270m. In December 2019 the films supporting Rise of Skywalker did over $750m. Depth is the problem - not the headline act or a general lack of audience enthusiasm.

So no surprise CINE couldn't turn a profit as Avatar had to carry the Box Office virtually on its own. The good news is that March is the first month since the pandemic with a big release every week - plus there are other wide releases too. As that becomes more the norm, rather than the exception, then CINE should move back to profitable ways soon and without the need for an Avatar sized blockbuster each month.

The UK shares are also the US shares - the difference is simply that they are traded OTC in the US.

So whatever happens both UK and US shareholders will be affected in a similar way. If Vue buys some or all of the UK assets then shareholders (wherever they trade) will still own whatever remains and that could still mean good news, bad news or something in between.

Was too much I suppose to ask for an intelligent comment - or even for anything at all about CINE. Oh well.

Nope. Do you?

Btw - 'calling someone out' and making baseless accusations are too different things.

Why not try for once posting a comment that makes an intelligent point about CINE - either positive or negative?

Or, if you take issue with anything I have said how about a coherent argument as to why you disagree?

I 'get involved' as you put it now and again as I just lose patience sometimes with ignorant, childish posters like you.

My bad.

Tegop - As mentioned earlier they appear not to have deducted any costs in respect of the leases which would explain why the $24m loss they are showing is so much lower than earlier months. Looks like an error or at the very least that the numbers are not comparable.

AllKap - CINE did not publish monthly numbers pre Ch11 so I suspect he just estimated it somehow from the interim accounts.

I don't "side with the derampers" - if I side with anybody it is simply with those who don't talk nonsense. I don't distinguish between those that simply make stuff up to knock the stock (like JohnNth, 77black, Chaching or Sharebel) and those just make stuff up to ramp the stock (like maidit, Ianharding, Chaching or Sharebel).

And then there are plenty like Nanogold who just attack other posters and go on in a childish and pathetic way about 'agendas' simply because their uber-optimistic view is not shared.

If I see any good news about CINE I'm happy to recognise it (like the improving slate) but to me there is precious little around at the moment to cheer about and in my view none of the more positive posters are coming up with any convincing arguments to the contrary.

Hi Allkap - I'm not sure where you are getting Jan 2022 numbers from as I don't think any monthly accounts were published then.

Lease costs shouldn't vary much each month because of the way they are treated which is such as to deliberately ensure that they don't (the actual rent paid can vary a lot month to month but this is not how it is accounted for in profit figures).

Of course the lease rejections and renegotiations will reduce lease costs but the problem with the numbers they've just released in the dockets is that they've missed them out altogether.

"This is why this board has lost a lot of the good posters as the same old comments are posted in and out or attempt to waste their time refuting FUD from multiple alias posters."

Disagree - I think many good posters avoid the board now not just because of any trolls (there actually used to be many more on here) but more because of the number of new posters it's attracted that are out for a quick buck and continually ramp the stock without the slightest clue what they are talking about. To me as an underwater LTH that's just annoying and insulting.

Yes, Wolf is pessimistic but so am I - that's because like it or not CINE is in an awful position financially and they have said that any sale AND any restructuring plan is not expected to give anything back to shareholders. They have been very explicit on this and our only hope is that they are being overcautious for whatever reason. But yes, that hope does still remain.

Personally though I'd rather hear what Wolf (and some others with similar messages - but not the obvious trolls) have to say as he knows what he is talking about - compared to those who just spout cheerleading nonsense to shout their own book or their only contribution is just to slate other posters.

"Would appreciate your view of the accounts now they are out.."

@LTHAmigo - yes, the January accounts are out but they appear to have missed out any costs related to leases.

The revenue shown for January is lower than November and December but whereas those months showed losses over $100m, the loss for January is only $24m. If you add back a typical amount that should be there for lease related costs this would get back much closer to the $100m losses of previous months. I don't know why lease related costs have been omitted and although these reports don't pretend be fully accurate excluding them is a very big omission.

So in my view the profitability looks to have improved in January but not by nearly as much as the figures suggest and either way still show around $600m of accumulated losses since going into Chapter 11.

…or BTC goes up…a lot

"Could make a profit 1st or 2nd q"

Really can't see that happening unless they have some chunky, positive one-off items?

maidit - you really don't understand this $800m do you? If it happens it is additional money being put in by the lenders, just in the form of new shares not loans. Absolutely nothing to do with current worth of equity but simply additional money to support newco which if it goes ahead will have a valuation in the billions (only our share of it will probably just be a few percent at most).

That $800m was mentioned previously as a rights offer (not a convertible bond) open only to existing lenders and only AFTER a D4E. So basically under that particular idea lenders would take most/all of the equity (in exchange for a sizable chunk of the debt) then put a bit more in (as further equity) to keep the company afloat until profits return or they can sell it.

Please, there is no option whereby we just retain our existing share of equity or even a large part of it. We're way beyond that stage now. It's a pipe dream. Hopefully we'll keep something, and enough to be worth much more than today's sp, but we won't keep everything.

Feels like I'm being set homework AB! :)

That's an awful lot of reading on something I must admit I'm not that interested in personally but from a quick look I think you're right. The 47.8m shares appear to be related to the 2022 incentive plan and looks like the maximum they can award:

"the Company may not grant an Award if that grant would result in the total number of Dilutive Shares exceeding 10% of the issued share capital of the Company."

I don't know whether this is just the registration of the new shares to be (possibly or certainly?) awarded later or are the awards themselves or something else but would have thought an RNS would clarify at some point.

Whatever else Seif is focused on it looks like giving out rewards to employees (including himself) is near the top of his priorities as he gets his feet under the table. Not sure it's a red flag particularly, given it's an industry rampant with share awards anyway and it's implementation of what we already know. However, that's really for others to decide depending on how strongly they feel about such things and how they interpret it themselves - preferably by looking at it more closely than I have done.

Just hope he gives as much attention to other pressing matters like growth strategy etc.

Indeed, but that's only Regal. Picturehouse is docket 1298 and rest of UK is 1297. January numbers should be out soon.

“If the price of Cine shares was to grow then surely this would put the business out of the range of companies coming in for us when they take on the debt as well leaving CINE to claw its way out over the next few years”

The current share price is absolutely irrelevant as as far as any interested party is concerned as this is not a share sale. Being allowed to ‘trade their way out of it’ is not a realistic option either.