Member Info for Olpps

Do we know for sure they are talking about delwveraging the entire 5bn? Seeing a lot of calculations on raising 5 bn and that causing investor wipe out, and not saying that can't happen, just asking if there's a reason I'm missing they couldn't be planning to raise say 1bn in a Ddebt for equity swap to extend their runway and maybe have some money for a reduced cineplex settlement if it happens? NOT saying this is happening, just asking if there was something I missed that means any debt for equity will aim for whole 5bn rather than restructuring to reduce it to something a little more manegable?

Interesting key words there. Notice "significant dilution" was in the RNS but the rest haven't come from the company at all have they? They've been from speculative news articles and posters on here. There may be merit to them as concerns, they may even mean the company wipes out share holders, but let's not try to act like these "key words" are from some kind of authority. I know you didn't say that directly, but you implied it.
And who is talking about site closures? Again, not cine atm.

Being reported on numberous news sites now. Not sure what they are basing it on though as they all quote "rumours" https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11127265/Cineworld-cinema-chain-prepares-file-bankruptcy-weeks-amid-post-Covid-audience-slump.html

@big-blue. Not going to compare Afghanistan with Ukraine: obviously Afghanistan was a limited military incursion with precise goals including the removal of the taliban and bringing democracy to their people and Ukraine is a brutal and shameless land grab. Not getting into whether bringing democracy is a good reason to invade either. Also not disputing that targeting women and children is far worse than targeting military targets and accepting civilian casualties. But just to say you are incorrect that USA or other powers would be chewed out over intentional civilian deaths for years to come. USA had policy (revealed from military document leaks post Obama era) of counting any "fighting age male" killed by a drone strike as an enemy combatant, so long as at least 1 actual enemy combatant was believed to have been killed in the strike. That allowed them to massively manipulate civilian deaths and led to targeting of crowded market places to take out 1 local leader. Israel has bombed residential blocks as the block was home to a Hezbollah leader and during their last land incursion a tank shot a hospital because an enemy shot an ak from it towards the tank. They also struck a school designated by the UN as a sanctuary. In all cases there was media outcry which died down within days. NI yes, and alleged war crimes in Afghanistan by SAS back in headlines, but don't think the UK's self reflection amd policing extends to all of the west.

@big-blue, the costs, including maintenance, for lifetime use including the sourcing and extraction of resources, construction, maintenance and decommissioning are covered by the LCOE metric (levelised cost of electricity). This value is cheaper for renewables, and when you factor in carbon credits needed for fossil fuels but not renewables, it gets even cheaper still. to quote the research paper below: "The myth that renewables are ‘way too expensive’ has been debunked repeatedly, and the cost decline of wind and solar photovoltaic (PV) technologies have outpaced most industry expectations. The results of this research not only substantiate this trend, but also statistically display that all the G20 countries have the opportunity to decrease their energy costs significantly, between now and 2030." You may not accept that, but it doesn't stop it being true.

As for Saudi Arabia, as that article I linked mentioned "The kingdom recently increased its objective for renewable energy generation by 2024 from 9.5GW to 27.3GW." and they spend $320 million on it. You don't spend that money to just get carbon credits, and you don't get credits for having a solar farm, you get it for generating energy with that farm.

This will probably be my last response on this as I don't expect a response except "no it isn't, trust me", but just get tired of people buying into propaganda of big oil companies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_electricity

(13) (PDF) A comparative analysis of electricity generation costs from renewable, fossil fuel and nuclear sources in G20 countries for the period 2015-2030. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326524855_A_comparative_analysis_of_electricity_generation_costs_from_renewable_fossil_fuel_and_nuclear_sources_in_G20_countries_for_the_period_2015-2030 [accessed Jul 25 2022].

Don't know why people still think Oil, gas and coal are cheaper than renewables. This hasn't been true for years (see article from 2018), even before wholesale gas prices shot through the roof. Fossil fuels have other advantages such as being easier to throttle up or down as needed, and have certain applications where they are unlikely to be replaced for a while or where the lifetime emissions are still compared with fossil fuels so it doesn't make environmental sense to switch (e.g. electric cars), but cost is no longer one of them. If you forget the whole green lobby, and just want cheaper power generation, then go renewable. Why else would Saudia arabia have invested so heavily in solar sites when they have such plentiful fossil fuel reserves? They sell their expensive oil for a profit, then pay less per kWh because they use solar. If solar was more expensive, this would make zero sense.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dominicdudley/2019/05/29/renewable-energy-costs-tumble/
https://list.solar/plants/largest-plants/saudi-arabia/

Forget it big blue, you've got the right answer for the wrong reason. He isn't a Russian troll preaching it's America vs Russia, he's an American who thinks America is responsible for policing the world and Europe and everyone else are powerless with them. He isn't falling for Russian propoganda, he's falling for American exceptionalism propaganda. There's more Republican than Russian about him.

A good summary of the call I think. Personally I was relieved to hear that a rash fire-sale to restore stock price was not their plan. But hey, that's just my uninformed opinion. DYOR

Decision has not been taken to sell the Russian assets, so commenting on potential discounts, buyers, estimated value and what would be done with the money is all considered premature. ALL shareholders will need to be protected, including those who hold through NSD.
No Divi expected this year.

For those who haven't managed to join, clarifying atm that "disposal" of Russian assets doesn't necessarily mean sale but could also include spin-off. Also that long-term share holder value will remain central to decision making, including institutional share holders. The decision will not be made lightly.

Thanks Tygra, thought that was to unmute me! Hope I didn't miss much.

Shame the CIA don't have the same ability to scrub the internet and gather intelligence that board posters do.

@Novice. If the gold costs say $5 to get out then sells for $10 then that's a $5 profit, but if they can't sell it it's a $5 loss (as they spent money on wages, drills, gas etc.) so they need a loan to cover it, increasing debt. BUT they have $10 in assets, so when they sell it they will still realise the profit. Which I guess is why they expect the debt to go down when the gold is sold in Q3.

In 5 months the board has
Bought spare parts to keep business running
Adjusted investment plans to preserve capital
Assessed several options including splitting company and selling Russian assests
Decided selling Russian assets best move.

That seems like pretty good work to me. Hardly slow but rather diligent.

Thank you, you are quite right, I didn't read it properly. Now showing 220-230. Cheers, and sorry for any alarm!

Is everyone's spread mental or just Barclays? 170 sell, 270 buy! Was wondering why price wasn't moving much since open?

"The debt-for-equity swap will see the Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMCo) and Omers, the Canadian pension funds, relinquish their shareholdings.

They took control of Vue in 2013 in a deal worth close to £1bn and subsequently presided over a string of acquisitions which helped turn the group into Europe's largest cinema operator.

Advertisement
In 2019 - a record year for Vue - they began to explore a sale but did not conclude a deal before the COVID-19 crisis brought the leisure industry to its knees."

So they were looking for a buyer before covid and covid made it harder to sell, not easier, and they also don't have shares listed on stock market, so rights issue wasn't an option. Not quite as straightforward as "oh no we have debts, quick, let's swap it for equity and wipe out our shareholders".

So if people agree with you, there's a consensus you're right. And if we disagree with you, then you know you've "hit the nail on the head". How exactly could you figure out you were wrong then? If you're thoughts aren't falsifiable, they're not worth comparing with reality at all. Science 101, which you should know as you say you have a physics degree.
And for clarity, I wasn't one of the posters who emailed investor relations, but nor did I shout. Them down as obviously fake, as if I'm not investigating their claim, forming a set opinion either way would be premature.

Big blue, you won't trust people posting email replies from investor relations, even though their email is publically stated and we know these people do exist, because you think investor relations wouldn't post that. .. Yet you expect us to believe your rumours of unnamed dark forces orchestrating some one world master plan because...? Ffs, EU couldn't even organise a collective response to ordering PPE and vaccines during pandemic, yet according to you they have the foresight and political leverage to overthrow our PM and instate one of their choosing because of NI? Some consistency would be nice in a conspiracy for once, but I guess the fact you never email investor relations to see for yourself that they reply says it all: believe what you read, don't do anything that could disprove your beliefs.

World events are relevant, so discuss war on here or position of next chancellor or pm, sure, but rumours of dark forces aren't helpful. Bring some evidence, then we'll talk. Until then, maybe find somewhere else to share your non-evidence based, not directly poly-related conspiracies?

Not sure if forum films is owned by cine, that article seems to imply heavily that they are, but even if they are not, I'd have thought the resulting criminal charges against cineworld's CEO are worth commenting on by the company, if only to reassure the markets he won't be stepping down or facing jail time and that cine do not believe these charges reflect practice at cine. Markets are largely sentiment driven, and there is room for considerable speculation to change sentiment given the guilty verdict, so I'd hope for a public comment. Cineworld said they won't comment until the fine in October, so they will comment, just after leaving months of speculation to occur?