Member Info for LLucan

The shareholders still own the company when you are stating the assets will be sold off, (notably Coltraine) he can object as all the shareholders can to the assets being sold off.
This is not a creditors winding up. There are no petitions to the court.
No debts have yet been unpaid!
The shareholders Coltraine can decide what happens to the company.

Fate.
If the group PLC is the holding company and it goes into administration, all of its subsidiaries also go into administration. These are assets of the holding company.
You can liquidate a subsidiary but not the holding company without the whole group being in administration.

Given there is enough money at the adminstration date to pay off liabilities other than secured lenders who are carried over to new co, the only people that get shafted by this pre-pack would be the current shareholders.
This really smacks of a stitch up top me.

I am concerned about this share as well.
Losing the FOBT income will knock the cash flow hard in 2019. Winding up 1000 bookies will be expensive
Paying the Interest on £2 billion of debt will be a £100 million or so.
The directors bailing in the way they have suggest to me they have little confidence in the company.
Am I missing something?

There must be a debt looming or has loomed that Interserve cannot pay otherwise a pre-pack would not be an available option. All may not be lost for suppliers since there may be enough cash in the bank and money coming in from debtors to pay at the date of the administration to pay off the creditors. In which case only the shareholders lose out!

Correct.
If it did go to a pre-pack some supliers will not supply the new co since they have not been paid. But the new co will just go to another supplier. The new co is not allowed to pay off the debts of old co.

If you supply something that is crucial to the company like a tool which the company cannot function without or a supply of material that the new co cannot buy else where. It puts you in a strong position.
What happens is that the supplier doubles the price for example to get back the money they are owed from the old co. By charging the new co more.

If you are owed money by Interserve i would push to get paid this week. As a supplier who is owed money you can cause a big stir at the administrators meeting.

The only reason the BOD could put Interserve into a pre-pack is that the company cannot pay its debts. If it is viable and can pay its debts from normal trading then the administrator would not agree to a pre-pack.

Coltraine will not take this well he could well object to the pre-pack assuming the company can pay its debts.

If the company does go into a pre-pack there is an order in which creditors are paid from any money that teh company was sold for:

1) Administrators fees.
2) Secured creditors, likley lots of these debts would be carried over to the new co in full.
3) Tax owing eg NI and PAYE VAT etc
4) Unsecured creditors, basically trade creditors
5) Shareholders. Always the vert last

Only the secured debts are carried over. Eg the banks. All the other debt, supplier monies owing and unsecured loans including tax is not paid.
The company then carries on trading having shafted everybody.
The only people that benefit are the employees and the BOD. And the secured lenders if they ever get their money back. All employees carry on under the same contract.

It would be illegal for the company to pay a supplier any money owing since they have to treat all creditors in the same manner. Cannot show preference.

I would say Glyn Barker and Debbie White are the two directors who have misled shareholder s the most.

Often in a pre-pack it is the shareholders that buy the company. The administrator still has to market the company and get the best offer. But in a very short space of time.

If Mitie for example offered more than the secured creditors or shareholders the administrator would have to chose the offer with the best prospects and highest price.

My understanding is that Ladbrookes has the biggest exposure in the UK to a cut to £2 FOBT stake. I do not know the cost of shutting thousands of bookies. GVC is also the most invested in the USA market with the MGM deal. I get the impression the company is betting everything on the USA market and has abandoned any growth in the UK or Europe.
Looking at the balance sheet its current liabilities exceed its current assets. It has 2.2 billion of debt against a 6.1 billion intangible asset. Mostly Ladbrookes I suspect whose value has almost certainly fallen.
Although it made a reported loss last year it is highly cash generative.

Directors do not sell in a depressed market like this unless they know something is not right. Obviously they did not see the price going up to £10 a share in the near future at all. My guess is that they have knowledge that the USA is backtracking on its commitment to open up the gambling sector. This with the heavy debts of GVC and the £2 FOBT could be catastrophic.

Bill Winters has to go. These results are shockingly bad. Net profit fallen to appox £600 million. The market was expecting £2.2 billion! He has been in position for 4 years and the share price has halved in his time! Absolutely appalling.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/interserve-lenders-sweeten-terms-500m-120300820.html

On the 8 Jan 2018 the SP was £4.40.
An incredible fall for FTSE 100 company.
The BOD maintain they have an increasing dividend policy. Obviously no one believes they can pay out at an increasing rate.
It seems to me the market is pricing in a 50% cut in the dividend.
The BOD are unusually quiet given the big fall in the SP.

I suspect that some are more in the know on this company than us mere mortals. These strange shareholdings do not fit with a company about to head to the wall. Given that so many of the shares are held by major corporate entities small investors piddling around at 30p is largely irrelevant to them. All will be clear by the end of March. "Do you feel lucky punk" comes to mind?

Oops:

https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/commercial-services/lse-irv/interserve-shares/news/who-are-the-largest-shareholders-in-interserve-plc-lonirv/

Institutional Ownership IRV’s 61.05% institutional ownership seems enough to cause large share price movements in the case of significant share sell-off or acquisitions by institutions, particularly when there is a low level of public shares available on the market to trade.

https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/commercial-services/lse-irv/interserve-shares/news/who-are-the-largest-shareholders-in-interserve-plc-lonirv/<br /><br />

No. But it is a quite likely scenario.
Personally I think a likely outcome is the company will de list and go privately owned.
Only 30% of the stock is available to trade anyway. 70% is held by the 3 major lending organisations.

The company cannot do much about the low share price. I am sure they do not mind since they can buy back more shares than originally planned. If the company reports an improvement in funds under management and maintains or improves the divi at 23p a year the shares will recover very quickly indeed. I think investors are pricing in a fall in the divi and a fall in funds under management for 2018.

There is a lot of scaremongering on this board. This company is not like Clln.
Appreciate that for every seller of shares there is a buyer. Appox 12 million shares have been traded in the last two days. Of the 45 million available that is nigh on 30%. Obviously a lot of panic selling.
The board cannot come out with a statement such as yesterday if it it is not true. There are only 45 days until the year end. They will have a good idea of what the results are likely to be already.
The banks do not control or underwrite this company. In affect it is the three principal shareholders who own 70% of the company.
I for one will hold on at least until the 2018 results.

Metamorphosis84
You really do hate this company don't you!