Member Info for mountainous

Absolutely @BlueBuxton and thank you @Bonkers for your kind words :)

One of my choices is to perhaps use a bit of leverage and trade CINE intraday for a little bit to offset some losses whilst still keeping my initial investment, or maybe some other stock of some sort. Now that I’ve been in CINE for over a year, you get a feel for how the stock will perform on a day-by-day basis.

After letting the results settle a bit over the weekend, I think I will stay with my current investment as it stands.

If we get back up to the 60s, I might top-slice a bit, but I do believe that the rather muted conference call last week is a tactical thing. CINE is showing that they don’t have cash on hand to pay this, and it leaves little choice for Cineplex. When a company is $5bn in debt, then the lenders may as well pay an extra $500-600m to help keep it afloat and CINE should be able to cover the remainder next year if 2022 all goes well.

Still a bit uneasy and thinking about other opportunities out there, but I don’t fancy leaving at a 36% loss considering how large of an investment CINE is in my portfolio. All’s well that ends well though :)

@FunInvestor, 100% down to preconceived expectations. I expected quite a lot and CINE didn’t deliver on that. The two main things I were looking for was some clarity on the Cineplex situation and a waiver on the June test, neither of which were forthcoming.

I still consider the fact that Polaris increased a few weeks ago, and that K2 is reducing their short. Also a chunky buy in the after hours.

I’ll see how things go in the coming weeks/months, perhaps my plan to sell will change. This share has taught me a lot either way :)

@Hexam that’s good, I guess it depends on where you set your expectations prior to the results.

I meant that instead of continuing on with projects already started, just place a pause on everything and save as much residual cash as possible.

Of course, 2022 has a fantastic line-up, so the Cineplex situation could be dealt with fairly easily. We will just have to see what happens in that regard.

@Alexp01 I think it was just for the period leading up to the results, they should be open for response now I think

Solid email Bonkers, please let us know if/what they reply with :)

I actually asked them a while ago (before the release of the judgement) about what would happen if the case was unsuccessful and they had a high amount to pay and they simply told me that ‘it’s not an outcome we are considering’. Let’s hope that this time they can come out with something a bit more informative and reassuring.

Hussart, thank you for all your contributions over the past year or so, it proved to be very helpful with your insights regarding the COVID situation when it was quite prevalent.

I wish you all the best in your future trading/investing endeavours :)

@Hexam, no doubt that numbers will return to higher levels. My only concern is the fact that despite such a large increase in admissions, CINE’s cash position is nearly the same as it was a year ago. If I was the CEO, I’d keep all of these big improvement projects and new cinema openings on pause and I’d focus on building up a strong liquidity position in case the appeal goes awry. No good improving the estate if it (heaven forbid) goes bankrupt because of Cineplex.

@KickThePuss, precisely my feeling. Yesterday felt quite cold and it feels like the BoD has lost touch with their private investors. The sentiment brought forward by @Alexp01 certainly could be the case, perhaps they’re overstating the reality of the situation to reduce the potential for a high award to Cineplex.

Personally, I’m making plans to sell off at least 80% of my investment.

I was disappointed with yesterday’s results. I didn’t not want to dampen the mood yesterday.

Indeed they showed solid progress, but the real reality of the Cineplex situation is clear to see. I thought that at least CINE would say we have some liquidity here and the rest may be negotiable with lenders.

There may be a silver lining in that Mooky may just be saying we have insufficient liquidity to limit the award that Cineplex could get. He may already have a plan in case the appeal fails. But taking him at face value, the difference between this company’s potential survival and going upside down ultimately lies in the hands of 3 people (the judges). For me, that is simply too much of a risk to bear.

I have always been a fervent supporter and believer of the company. I still believe in the company and it’s business model, and I still believe in the CEO, hence why I still plan to hold a few shares.

HNS, I think it would be along those lines :)

Imagine the price we’d be at now if she didn’t give that kind of sum. I’d imagine 60-80 easily.

Understood, that makes sense.

So it’s in everyone’s best interests to keep the company afloat, let’s hope Cineplex can see past all of this and find an out of court settlement.

I think I’m getting the idea. Effectively we own Cineplex this $1.2bn, but that debt isn’t backed up with any of CINE’s assets. So that’s where the idea of Cineplex being an unsecured creditor comes from.

And that’s why they would see next to nothing, because if we go bust I surmise that our secured creditors would be first in line to get some assets to cover the debt. Cineplex would be right at the back of the queue if it came to insolvency.

Is that all correct?

@KickThePuss and @HNS, thank you both for your fantastic responses.

So in a nutshell, if this court decision stands and CINE needs to pay this amount, Cineplex would see next to nothing because their debts aren’t collateralised or backed up with something?

So I take it that CINE is a secured debtor?

@tom thank you for your response.

What loan are you referring to? And what significance does Cineplex being an unsecured creditor have to this?

Pardon my ignorance, it’s my first time being in a stock with such a court case above it :)

‘In the event that the appeals process is not successful, it would not be possible to determine an appropriate settlement range as Cineplex is an unsecured creditor, and sufficient liquidity would not be available.’

What precisely does this mean? If the appeal is unsuccessful does that mean no further settlement will be possible with Cineplex?

So hence, they have effectively told us that we are finished if this appeal doesn’t go our way considering we have insufficient liquidity? That’s what I’ve understood from it, can someone elaborate?

Mooky was very selective in his language today in the report and especially in the conference call. The question from the Barclays analyst regarding what would occur if the appeal remained the same had an interesting answer. Nisan didn’t seem to want to answer it and Mooky was certainly hesitant.

They need to be EXTREMELY careful as to what they say regarding the case. They’re saying all this nice stuff about ‘we have faith in the Canadian justice system’ and ‘we hope to see it over soon because we expect a good result’ so that there are no accusations or anything regarding behaviour.

Of course, we can’t expect Mooky to reveal the entire legal strategy on the conference call, but the revelation that an additional legal firm has been employed who are experts in appeals (as Mooky put it) hopefully will give us a little edge.

Please can you use some alternative words to back up what you’re saying? If you’re going to speak nonsense here then you might as well earn me some points :)

@Vbig I’m waiting personally. As opposed to ULVR, I may go for a supermarket stock like TSCO or SBRY which may be even more recession proof than ULVR because of their ‘value’ products.

Or I may go for a mix of the two.

^thread regarding forecasting

I believe it was $1.9bn Cruis, I’ll find the thread and drop a post there and get it to the top of the page