Member Info for lemonade311

And everything points to them having nailed planet coaster 2.

But yes, if it flops they are in serious trouble cause of their cash. However it's looking like it will exceed expectations given what I've seen of customer reactions on features and the game so far.

Thanks.

on point 2, F1M24 sales will have been half of F123, you can work this out yourself from the sales price of £30 and they had 1.6k reviews on steam.

F1M24 price was £60 on release so we can deduce that F123 sold 40% of F124, especially given it's bad reviews.

Anyway, none of this matters, the cash that both these titles generated was pathetically low and they should never have made F1M24 as it was just a distraction. The only thing that matters is the CMS games and how well they perform as that's where the FCF comes from.

Why this down today?

There's nothing in results that's bad afaik

BooHoo are doing awful, Looks like they are in terminal decline. They will probably need to sell their REVB stake at some point, depressing the share price. Will wait for that to happen.

Good idea from them to do a 95% sale on planet coaster 1, this will mean more users want to buy planet coaster 2 which is where the money is.

@BlackfoxTrading it is a big issue. I used to be a holder of Boo and sold out for a big loss.

It was a really stupid decision to continue the growth expansion in a time when interest rates are 5% and inflation is super high & competition is killing you.

This just dries up your cash pile and means expansion is super expensive. The CEO needs firing. A stock price drop of a few % here is not enough.

This company is now in terminal decline imo. They should have done this 2 years ago to shut down growth expansion stuff and preserve cash/margins etc

Well it very clearly says O'leary won't consider it until all growth options from his fleet are exhausted which is when all 350 planes are delivered from boeing and boeing is behind on deliveries right now so no, they are not going to 'take over'.

> Based on the information provided in the annual report, Ryanair has two major aircraft orders with Boeing:

Under the 2014 Boeing Contract, Ryanair ordered 210 Boeing 737-8200 "Gamechanger" aircraft. As of March 31, 2024, Ryanair had received 146 of these aircraft, with 64 remaining to be delivered by the end of fiscal year 2025.

Under the 2023 Boeing Contract, Ryanair ordered up to 300 Boeing 737-MAX-10 aircraft (150 firm orders and 150 options). These are scheduled for delivery between 2027 and 2033.

Combining these orders, Ryanair expects to receive all 350 aircraft (64 remaining from the 2014 contract plus at least 150 firm orders from the 2023 contract) by 2033, assuming Boeing is able to meet the delivery schedule and Ryanair exercises all options. However, the exact timeline for receiving all aircraft may be subject to change based on various factors, including potential delays in production or delivery.

Just had a re-read, the results are much better than they look on the surface. Significant cash flow generation from recovered margins + reduced inventory = £6m oper. cash flow and £5m free cash flow.

This is trading at an EV/FCF of 4x lol. With pippa's good leadership skills and a focus on ROIC this seems like a no brainer buy to me. a 4x multiple is quite ridiculous.

Does anyone know why franchise package revenue has dropped in 24/23?

They had same store openings this year as last, presumably this should have stayed the same or gone up due to inflation.

Also, why did they stop reporting franchise holding deposits?

The grenfell report recommended 2 actions that stuck out to me https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/grenfell-tower-inquiry-second-report-key-recommendations:

- Modifying 11m requirement to instead be based on a case-by-case basis based on 'the nature of its [the building’s] use' -> I don't see how this is possible, tenants come and go and having to go through 10k+ apartments in the UK and specify low/med/high risk seems silly to me. Maybe they will do it based on cladding type/staircase, no idea but to me it seems not feasible.

- Speed up the pace at which cladding is removed and replaced as Monty below said -> I also don't see how this is possible. There's a finite amount of labour + capital. You can't just set a deadline of 2 years to replace all cladding in all buildings, there just isn't enough experts to be able to certify and do all this AFAIK.

Probably why Kier refused to give a deadline when pressed by that dumb reporter asking him.

As far as I can see, watkin jones is already moving reasonably fast. £22m in provision this year is a big chunk of the cladding issues with £33m after that in the next 3 years.

Yes, that's correct, WJG will have cash outflow for 4 years related to provisions. It's not conservative to remove provision from tanginble net worth, it's the correct thing to do. It's a liability that has to be removed, the bank uses this to test the RCF covenant as well.

The answer to the forward funding market issues is Joint Ventures where WJG takes on more of the upside but finances the builds more, they require cash to fund this I think, hence the talk about funding.

You should sell if you don't think you have margin of safety, but the question is, why didn't you model these provisions before, they have been on the books for a year now. I modelled them as cash outflows over the next 4 years + building safety levy of 4% that builders now have to pay.

Anyway I worked out from their 23 FY Annual Report that WJG would have to go down to £50m tangible net worth to break the RCF of £50m covenant that the bank has. Currently their tangible net worth is £120m so a lot of headroom even in a large bear thesis.

However if WJG was to double this RCF back to £100m, I presume the covenant would increase. The RCF is secured against the land bank they hold, so even in a worse case scenario, it would make more sense to sell some land and forgoer some future revenue to clear the RCF than it would to do an equity raise as the equity raise destroys more value at these prices.

You should probably read pages 104/105/106 of FY23 annual report in detail.

tangible net worth of wjg given that their rcf has a covenant based on it:

> watkin jones tangible net worth history

date total assets intangible assets total liabilities tangible net worth % of total assets31 march 2024 £343,638,000£11,326,000£211,626,000£120,686,00035.1%30 sept 2023 £371,516,000£11,606,000£241,511,000£118,399,00031.9%31 march 2023 £380,826,000£11,885,000£215,787,000£153,154,00040.2%30 sept 2022 £386,959,000£12,165,000£210,006,000£164,788,00042.6%

ask chatgpt to format it, this **** website cannot format properly.

I found that they had £100m revolving credit facility in their FY 22 year.

They reduced that to £50m in FY 23 given the lower land transactions (correct move given that you have to pay for unutilized reolving credit facilities and the market had stalled at that time.)

So the most likely meaning of 'Funding Options to exploit land market opportunities' should be an extension of the revolving credit facility to £100m again so WJG can do JV deals on these new land opportunities.

22 Report:

> The Group’s revolving credit facility (RCF)

is committed and has a five-year term to

May 2025. All financial covenants under

this facility were met at 30 September 2022

and are forecast to be met throughout the

period to 31 January 2024. This facility can

be accessed to fund land acquisitions.

23 Report:

> Strong liquidity has been maintained

through the first quarter of the year ending

30 September 2024, providing the Group

with a good level of cash and available

banking facilities for the year ahead.

The Group’s revolving credit facility (RCF)

is committed and has recently been

extended to November 2025 to give

flexibility to a renewal given the current

market conditions. The total facility

was reduced during the year, given the

anticipated volume of land acquisitions,

and to benefit from lower non-utilisation

fees. All financial covenants under this

facility were met at 30 September 2023

and are forecast to be met throughout the

period to 31 January 2025.

So the obvious answer the above funding to me is making their revolving credit facility go from £50m to £100m again, that's what RCF is for as well.

Yes I understand that.

I don't really care about short term price movements either. I'm not a trader.

Anyway, watkin jones is essentially trading for below the net asset value of it's properties only.

Taking only the tangible assets that can be liquidated for quick cash from march balance sheet:

Investment Property (leased) + PPE + Inventory & work in progress + Contract assets + Trade receivables + Reinbursment assets + Cash - Liabilities = £94m.

Shares outstanding = 256m

= £0.36 per share just in the above.

So unless the market was to think fire cladding provision was to materially change much higher or they go bankrupt then I don't see why WJG should ever be trading under £0.36 in an efficient market given that is currently it's liquidation value (presuming no huge discounts on any fire sales in liquidation). Especially given that the above assets have already been impaired given the new property values after interest rate spikes and such.

If I was another company builder with spare cash I'd be trying to buy WJG outright as it's a ridiculous price imo.

Well I phoned up watkin jones a week ago, they referred me to peel hunt to answer any questions.

Basically the peel hunt guy (who didn't draft the RNS language) said it was specifically done that way to be ambigious.

However he referred me to LSE:VID RNS as a comparison which has a much clearer tone that they needed an equity raise: https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/VID/videndum-plc-2023-interim-results-lf5654f1g14bzdk.html

> The Group has put additional mitigation plans in place to further reduce costs and conserve cash, and is proactively working to reduce leverage and recapitalise the business, which may require an equity raise

So, again, I personally think an equity raise is unlikely and would make no sense so best to take advantage of a cheap share price imo, there's no scenario I can get anywhere close to 27p per share intrinsically, even if cladding provision was to go up.

The market is pricing in a terminal decline at this point which I don't see how that's possible given BTR and Student acommodation is the future (I live in a BTR).

I came to the conclusion that management will be taking on more debt and not doing an equity raise.

An equity raise at this price destroys the intrinsic value by 20% whereas taking on more debt (which includes asset backed financing or revolving credit facility etc) only destroys 4% of the intrinsic value.

It's very clear that debt is the clear winner here, especially for short term liquidity issues. I'm hopeful that the CEO Alex, being an ex-finance and investment director understands this as well and has come to the same conclusion.

Market cap of £67m is pretty insane imo. Reminds me of jet2 going from £20 to £1.5 in a few weeks. Just continued panic.

No idea if it's the Grenfell report or what. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see how this isn't a screaming buy. I though it was cheap at 50p too.

Had to buy again at this price...

The main value creation is driven from unwinding of inventory to allow more free cash flow.

They are struggling to release that inventory to cash, even with discounts. A large reason seems to be the huge glut of wine globally supressing prices that will last till next year too given China issues.

I expect more write-offs on their inventory and a slower turnover of their inventory. This is just back to being a watch-and-see given the global wine issues.

Their gamescon and reddit threads seem to be full of buzz. I think planet coaster 2 will be an 8/10 or 9/10 on steam ratings and do well in sales.

They have implemented everything the community was asking for I think. The only thing I saw that was missing was better interior lighting but that's due to their own CMS engine probably cause good lighting in engine code is insanely difficult.

They have better pathing, slides going to non-ending pools, turn tables, switch tracks etc.

All green flags for a successful launch right now.

Https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8er93k051xo

Obviously this is not new news at this point but hopefully it doesn't result in the government forcing any new measures or something that affects watkin jones given the cladding.

I don't think it should but still