Member Info for londoner7

rag, I agree, between currency movements and part year acquisition, it is difficult to make comparisons. But in presenting actual and constant currency changes across each region Cineworld are giving good insight into each market. The format of this trading update is exactly what I was expecting. As I said previously we were never going to get the level of detail the US companies reported in their Q3 updates, so we don't, for example, know the breakdown between tickets pricing etc.

In comparing one period with another I always focus on the CC numbers. The actual number includes the effect of currency movements which can mislead.

You quoted CC revenue growth for first two perioda but actual for the 3rd - CC revenue should read 6.7% to 10.8% and 10.2%.

I'm not nervous about the expectations comment, although a number would be nice. Some companies make this clear, most don't. Perhaps Cineworld gave a number in a previous update - I haven't seen it.

Good question on the full year revenue expectation. Here's my stab at it. In 2017 Regal reported $3.163B. For pro-forma I'm going to take a simple 10 months / 12 months giving $2.633B. Add in Cineworlds 2017 revenue of £891m and translate to $ at 1.3 rate adds $1.158B for total of $3.791 pro forma 2017. Assuming 11.6% growth in 2018 leads to $4.23 beating your consensus of $4.1B. At 1.3 rate the 2018 number is £3,254m.

The FT concensus (9 analysts) is £3,150m and high is £3,660m. Barclays consensus is similar at £3,140m, but interesting to note that this consensus is up 8.6% from the consensus number 6 months ago.

On US admissions revenue I can't do a direct comparison with Cinemark numbers because of the different periods, but Cinemark was inline with mojo numbers (market) at the 6m and 9m stage, 9.7% v 10% and 8.8% v 8.7%, respectively. Whereas Cineworld is ahead of the market at the 6m and 11 Nov stage, 14.3% v 10% and 12.4% v 10.8%.

However, it's clear that the gap to market has reduced, which suggests Cineworld underperformed the market in this recent period.

Looking at the other markets the UK has remained just above the flat line, whie the ROW has recovered from -3.2% at the 6m stage to +1.2%.

Comparing to this time last year and just focusing on the total revenue the pre Regal business is +2.1% (constant currency versus +6.5% last year. Add back the Regal business and total revenue YTD is +11.6%. The timing of the Regal acquisition was good.

Looking at today's trading the SP was initially up a penny then quickly fell away 6%. Looks like this was driven by AT trades with no significant non AT trades until after the drop. If I was designing a trade algorithm I'd have focused on the US admissions revenue gap to market I described above so I'm not surprised the trade this morning is down.

But I'm not a trader, I'm an investor, and I was sufficiently encouraged to add to my position this morning.

On the 25th Sept I posted the following

"I would be very surprised if Mosman announced a further investment in Arkoma. I think alongside or following the decision on Arkoma due in the next week or so will be an announcement on Stanley 2.
There is still the question of whether any announcement comes with an equity placing. In my assessment yesterday I concluded that a placing isn't strictly required to cover a same again (cost wise) Stanley 2 drilling. But there are project costs in the background, I suspect OZ and Welch workovers being the main ones, and developing other projects with Baja in the near term will not be covered by additional cash flow from Stanley 1 & 2 in the near to medium term (6 months). So I see two possible paths, one is wait and see how the Stanley wells perform and reinvest returns into other projects 6-9 months from now, or accelerate the program with a placing on any favourable Stanley news."

I find the timing of this placing prior to the BOD exiting their close period (2 weeks away) odd. My conclusion, as other posters have speculated, is that the timing has been driven by Baja. Mosman are a minority partner in the Stanley project. We don't know the terms of the original strategic agreement but they are likely to extend beyond Stanley 1 and if Mosman can't put up their share of the cash perhaps there are other players that will. I've had confirmation that the Mosman's 22% cost and 16.5% working interest arrangement extends through Stanley 2, 3&4.

The 'hope' that JB had that future Baja projects would be funded by Stanley 1 &2 - quickly translated to a certainty by some posters here - has been dashed by a 'gas cap' in Stanley 1, shut in and repairs at Welch and the recent decline in WTI. Perhaps there will be favourable Stanley news in the next couple of months but I guess the timing of this placement isn't entirely in JB's hands.

In September I said that there's a new crew in town - Baja - and that their involvement improves the investment case in Mosman. This placing doesn't change my opinion.

Today (or at least post placing) shareholders in Thursday's Mosman entity now own a 71.4% share of that business plus £500K cash. (I'm assuming the BOD follow up on their intent to participate in the placing and ignoring the warrants, which if exercised would represent Stanley success - an additional £363K of cash albeit with a further 15% dilution.)

Good luck to Baja with the Stanley project and let's hope JB and AC can exercise good cost control at Welch. I think maintaining 40 bopd net average at Welch would be a good goal.

rag, your welcome.

I produce these summaries as part of my own analysis. While thoughts occur to me as I listen to calls or read reports I find that I get better clarity when I put them down on paper. Posting them helps keep me honest to myself. And I'm always happy to respond to an opposite opinion. It keeps any bullishness I may have in check. History has taught me that I sometimes miss an angle.

GFRD went ex dividend yesterday. 49p per share will be paid 5th Dec.

Just took a look at Cinemark's Q3 concession number. It was up 14.5%, so they beat AMC there too.

With Cinemark, the number 3 player in the US market, inline with the market, and AMC the number 1 player falling back, it bodes well for Cineworld (Regal) as the number 2 player to pick up the pieces - unless there's a newby out there somewhere storming through the field.

Last night I listened into AMC's Q3 conference call. Boy does the CEO like to talk - to be frank I found it a bit disconcerting. Everything is 'great' and he gets techy to any critcism - reminds me of someone but can't place him, on the tip of my tongue, oohh it will come to me.

Anyway to numbers. I didn't think the AMC US numbers were that great. Last week Cinemark reported US admission revenues at 6.7% inline with the market as reported by mojo. AMC reported Q3 numbers US revenue numbers up 1.5%. Admission were up some 8% but the ticket price collapsed 6.6% compared to 2017 Q3. AMC put this fall down to a significant reduction in Imax and 3G formats in recent releases, which suggests they put a significant ticket premium on these formats. Last week Cinemark related format to ticket price in their Q&A commentary but their fall in Q3 ticket price was only 0.8% against the 2017 Q3.

As a Cineworld shareholder the question is, what is the read across?

To be honest I'm not sure. No doubt Cineworld are also subject to the fomat to price relationship, but their performance at the Q2 point was ahead of both Cinemark and AMC, so I'm inclined to think the impact they see on pricing in Q3 will be closer to Cinemarks performance than AMC's.

Of course what AMC lost on ticket pricing they made up, to a degree, with 11.5% on food and drinks from the higher admissions. But another bit of detail from the very talkative CEO confused me. He said that F&D sales to pass holders was 20% down on the spending by non pass holders. He put this down to the fact that pass holders are attending 2.5 - 3 times per month so are probably sick of popcorn. I'm not sure he put it exactly like that but that's essentially what he said. It was a long call but it had it's moments.

Conversly, Cinemark said that inspite of a 20% discount on F&D its pass holders were spending the same on F&D as its non pass holders.

Clearly there are lots of moving parts in this industry.

We get a trading update from Cineworld next Thurs (15th). It will not have the detail of the American companies but should tell us enough. I'm looking forward to it.

Metamorphosis84, re share the pain, I agree!

It smacks of the usual rotation of very well paid executives.

I've never used the report buttom and don't plan to but I did wonder how and why these posts are removed. Unlike most posters here I post on many share discussions and don't remember seeing any deletions on other chats.

It is becoming very common on MSMN. I did some research. I don't know if it requires a certain number of reports before it goes to admin but when investigated related posts are also removed. it's hard to imagine a more tiresome job than dealing with these reports so I suspect little time is spent examining related posts so perhaps the thread after the affected post is simply deleted.

That said I saw nothing in the recent threads that warranted deletion, so I suspect there is something else going on.

Posters are able to delete their own posts by emailing admin. I noted a couple of recent posts that the poster might have wanted to retract, so I suspect we have a poster(s) making full use of this fuctionality. Look out for it.

In the meantime you might help yourselves by adding a new thread header when posting fresh content.

It was very brief so I think it was essentially put out as an offset to the update on AWPR. As was the contract news.

As expected the close out of the AWPR project has been put back to Dec and as suspected the costs have increased by a further £20m. The SP dived on the release but there wasn't any significant dealing at that level and the price quickly recovered. I can imgine buyers will have held off until a cost number was put on the delays - today we had it. As a shareholder I'd really like to see the line drawn under this project, but a Dec close out call is less vague than the guidance we'vd had in the past so maybe I'll get a xmas present.

The BOD have talked before about claims but this seems the most strongly worded, "The final impact on the Galliford Try's financial results will be determined more importantly by the result of the Group's significant claim, in respect of which the Board continues to pursue constructive discussions with the client."

I suspect I'll have a long wait for that present, but it will be appreciated.

I still expect a bit more detail on numbers in an AGM statement this Friday.

With mkt cap now below £2m I took a look at other companies in this 'bin'.

Latest numbers from AIM show there are 58 companies below £2m with an average cap of £1m. Two other companies are oil producers/explorers.

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/statistics/markets/aim/aim.htm

Spitfire is another aussi explorer but I didn't see any reported production.

Mx Oil is an interesting comparison with Mosman. It produces 165 bopd net in Nigeria, but at reported loss. I leave other factors for anyone interested to examine.

rag, one investor's concerns can be another investor's opportunity.

I trust it comes as no surprise to any investor here that CINE has a $4.1bn debt on floating rates. I'm not sure that the US interest rate regime has changed much in recent months, but CINE has well paid people managing treasury functions to hedge against adverse interest rate movements.

Consider the numbers. I estimate the current run rate on the loan interest charge at $180m pa. Set this against EBITDA of >$1bn for this year and around $1.4bn for next year. Other charges on cash are $200m pa for the dividend, $75m for tax pa and $230m pa for cap ex, which leaves a big chunk of cash over 2018 and 2019 to pay down the debt.

A point on debt repayment worth highlighting is the benefit of having a very good year one, which 2018 will be. Higher debt repayment in the first year lowers the debt interest charge in subsequent years.

Of course every investment has its risks, key here is the film slate for 2019, however Cinemark rated it good in today's call. Within my portfolio this share is probably the least exposed to trade wars and Brexit, and I like the $ hedge.

All told, I'm happy to hold here having topped up on Barclays recent downgrade.

Expectations are for profit growth this year (year to Jun 2019), but a consequence of the rights issue late in the previous financial year is that EPS may struggle to remain flat due to the extra shares in issue. Current concensus forecasts are for 140p EPS. On a 2x dividend cover that would equate to a 70p dividend, a small year on year reduction but still an 8% yield on the current share price.

We should see some numbers next Friday in the AGM statement. These would represent the first 4 months of the current year so should impact sentiment - fot better or worse.

Meanwhile the AWPR project drags on and no doubt is adding to recent volatility in the share price. Project completion is held up by remedial works to the River Don bridge - talk of Dec completion. Interestingly, this bridge is part of a phase which includes a 30 mile section which has been completed but the contractors, GFRD and Balfour, are not releasing this section until the entire phase can be closed out. The local politicians are not happy but it sounds like GFRD are holding out for compensation to split this phase. As they say a 'contract is a contract', that's business not politics.

Cinemark Q3 numbers and call seem to be helping the Cineworld share price today.

I've looked at the numbers and listened to the call and it seems to bode well for Cineworld's US performance. Like Cineworld Cinemark also has an international element. For Cinemark it is latin america, which is dragging on group performance - it seems they were not big fans of 'Crazy rich asians' or 'Mama Mia'.

I like to follow the calls of Cineworld's competitors because the read across is much stronger than in any other induxtry I can think of. Hollywood supply the 'widgets' and each of the distributors competes to sell them to the market. I found the Q&A session of this call particularly informative. Too much detail to list here.

At the headline Cinemark US bos office revenues are performing inline with the market, much as they were at the 6 month stage. Cineworld were ahead of the market at the 6 month stage with 14.3% box office revenue against 10% for the market. The fact that Cinemark is still only in line at Q3 suggests Cineworld are maintaing that lead in growth. Bodes well for the trading update later this month.

Incidentally, the Mojo YTD numbers for US box office revenues are +11.2%. Two months still to go but it's looking like a great year. 2nd UK numbers have also been good.

easyp, thanks for passing on the comments from Berenberg. Did they make any comment on a partial award?

I view this judgement as yes or no. Either the Indian tax authorities actions were against the rules or they are allowed. So it's a full award of the $1.3bn or nothing - perhaps there will be a seperate ruling on costs.

I interpreted the fall in the share price towards the closure of the tribunal as a sign by the market that it didn't go well for Cairn. In that sense perhaps there isn't now an award win in the share price. Time will tell.

Barclay downgrading to equal weight seems to be behind today's 3% drop.

Very good box office numbers from the US - YTD is up 10.8% on last years revenues. It was running at 10% at the interims.

What to do?

An even larger vote of confidence. As a director of the Cement business Jude Lagan will qualilfy for the annual bonus and LLT awards normally issued each March. He may already have an entitlement in the package he received on joining Breedon in April. Regardless, putting his hand in his pocket now for a £260K investment is encouraging.

I just want to qualify my use of the 1P and 3P numbers.

These can't be directly translated to initial flow rates as I've presented them. They represent the likely reserves that may be recovered over the periods in question, so the flow rates I presented are an average on that basis. In practice the EPS may produce at 17K bopd, but only time will tell in the total oil produced is closer to the 1P or 3P number. That said, after a short period of production HUR would be able to refine those numbers.

MO, thanks for the link - I'd lost it. Of interest is the level of variability from one month to the next for the Stella field, but a constant seems to be the 30% oil ratio, some way of the original estimate.

I ran out of space in my last post. Just to add.

Within my porfolio if one share was to double over the next 12 months I'd expect it to be HUR. But if one share was to half, I'd also expect it to be HUR.

I invest accordingly.

Just to add my tuppenny worth.

I was invested in Ithaca, whose field Stella held out great hope. Expectations were for 30K boepd gross, 16K boepd net. The oil to gas ratio was expected to be 50:50. In addition there were the usual reports of test flows being constrained by surface equipment. As I recall, in total, the test flows added up to 45K boepd with oil at a >50% of the mix. It was all looking so good.

In the event we were bought out by Delek, saved would be more accurate, because the resulting Stella oil flows proved to be very disappointing. I haven't seen the DECC numbers for a while but as I recall they were recently averaging around 6K bopd (oil) with a greater gas ratio. Recently, the Harrier field has been brought on stream and combined with Stella is now fully utilising the gas processing facilities of the floating platform which is about 15K beopd gas. Based on the comment I guess they are still short on 15K bopd oil capacity. A posted article referred to problems around infield commisioning which inpacted Stella but isn't a factor with Hurricane's EPS. Good news but I'd guess that isn't a factor in the fully commissioned flow rate.

Hurricane has presented a nominal 20Kbopd with 17Kbopd averaged over the year due to downtime. But as I understand it this is the 2P (50%) figure. The 1P (90%) and 3P (10%) figures are roughly (varies over the periods) 12K bopd to 24K bopd. I guess if the number comes out at the higher end then the flow can be constrained to remain within the system limitations (I believe there's something around the gas flows).

Incidentally, I never saw 1P or 3P numbers for Stella.

On other North Sea fields, I understand Kraken hasn't performed as expected, although this may be an extended commissioning issue, while Catcher has performed ahead of expectation.

In conclusion, what are the risks around the Lancaster EPS? When the taps are opened I'm sure oil will flow. HUR has presented plenty of data on field pressure etc which suggests the 17K bopd target will be achieved. I'd guess the market isn't entirely convinced, but I think it's fair to say that management would be very embarrassed if the target isn't achieved. Then the field performance will be monitored over a 6-12 month period to assess the field's ability to support an extension of the developemnt beyond 17K bopd - for me that's the risky part of the investment.

I don't follow this board every day so this may have been speculated on but I wonder how the RNS news flow will play out in 2019 H1.

First oil has been achieved. Perhaps one well initially, flowing at ?? bopd.
Say a month or two later, both wells are connected and the flow rate has been stabilsed at 20K bopd.
Six months later, field performance has met (exceeded) expectations and we are assessing development options.

That would be a good news flow.