Member Info for Quiggers52

I would advise investors to read the balance sheet; particularly working capital (life blood of any business)
Put simply, the amounts payable within the next 12-months (current liabilities) as against the amount of current assets to meet those short-term liabilities, there is a shortfall - per month - of $85.7mn.
Current Liabilities: $1,561,600,000
Current Assets: $533,200,000
Delta: $1,028,400,000
per month: $85,700,000
Without cash to meet that gap, there is only debt (and interest on that debt). Which compounds the issue rather than solving it.
Additionally, of the non-current assets, goodwill and intangibles makes up 54%.
I have not examined the largest chunk of that, the PPE. Do CW actually own the freeholds to any of the properties? If they don`t then, what is there? Screens... and pop corn machines... and seats.
No capital equipment.
However, I`m just speculating without looking further.

It is unclear how 163.5m in annual lost synergies becomes 1.246bn as neither the time line nor the discount rate are disclosed. Calculated as a perpetuity, the discount rate is about 13.22% : 163.5/0.1322 = 1.236 bn) but that assumes annual synergies for ever.
If it was DCF, over how many years? At standard 10-year, to get to 1.236bn, the discount rate is about 5.4% by my calcs. I read in the CW A/R they use 14.5% which brings the NPV down to 880m on a 10-year timeline.
But this is all very subjective: it all depends on how far out the DCF pushes the cash flows, the terminal value which I presume is n/a and of course the discount rate/cost of capital.
The accountants amongst you will no doubt have a better grasp of this than I do.

"Good morning,
The above noted appeal is scheduled to be heard on October 12 and 13, 2022."
(email from the Court... a fyi, for LTHs.)
GLA

Done a bag...yep, a few bags no doubt... of popcorn maybe a nice handbag for the missus.
Because that is all the stake would be worth; who puts anything more than a few quid into a (95) % stock at 0.0195??
(Now of course, all the cajones show up bragging about putting it 10k lol) Well good luck if you did this is casino time!

There is also the opportunity cost. If you hold e.g. 1,000 units, avarage 0.20 and sell for 0.03692 - T212 - that is 163 lost and 37 which might be put into a better opportunity: energy for example.
Alternatively leave the 37 in in the hope it will climb higher. There ate those who will try to convince you this is another AMC meme stock with short squeeze but that is clearly false imho.
Based on the balance sheet, there is no reason to expect a huge recovery except one: momentum/ hope.
GL

I just read the Cineplex v. Cineworld, 2021 ONSC 8016 judgement and my view is there is nil chance that this will go to appeal if it does Cine lose. There is a possibility of an amendment to the quantum of damages - $1.23 billion plus loose change of $5.5m but that is the limit of what is possible.
Simply put, no way an Appeal Court will overturn a lower Court`s findings of fact. It is also very clear that the judge did not think the CEO a credible witness, in other words, he did not believe his evidence - at least in part. And there has been no error in law nor apparent bias. It comes down to a simple case of contract interpretation and Cine trying to evade a risk which they assumed under the agreement.
I have no axe to grind here, not a ramper or deramper. Held in the past but only for trading. Former commercial lawyer, now retired.
So, I note the 1.23bn has not been included in the latest Annual Report. Expect Cineplex then I suggest to be added to the list of creditors. But if people were holding on awaiting this as an outcome for a decision, do yourself a favour, read the judgement, it is very clear.
I wish you all (sincerely) the best of luck.
https://cdn-res.keymedia.com/cms/files/ca/126/0395_637837419166060123.pdf

For every sale, there must be a buyer on the other end of the transaction and vice versa so how can there be more sells than buys?

I would be wary of listening to so-called experts. So I hear Goldman Sachs this and GS that etc. They are sharks and know as little or as much as you or I i.e. a person who is prepared to do a bit of reading of the Annual Report with a grasp of accounts and/or financial analysis.
They make their money on M&A. They value businesses using DCF – discounted cash flow valuation. To do this they take baseline Year 0 cash flow (actual or forecast) and they guess a growth rate for future years cash flows (up to 10 years). They then discount these cash flows back to net present value (NPV) at the WACC. That is the weighted average cost of capital. That is the split between the cost of debt (might be 6%) and the cost of equity (might be 12%) to give a WACC of 18%. The higher the WACC, the lower the NPV of the business and vice versa.
The cost of debt is easy to calculate. The cost of equity is harder. The practice is to use the CAPM: the capital asset pricing model. In 2004 two well-respected professors -Fama and French – produced a paper called “The Capital Asset Pricing Model: Theory and Evidence”.
After looking at historical performance their view: “the empirical record of the [CAPM] is poor—poor enough to invalidate the way it is used in applications” and “we also warn students that despite its seductive simplicity, the CAPM’s empirical problems probably invalidate its use in applications”
In other words, it is invalid. It does not work in practice. It is still used because there is nothing better. If the CAPM is invalid the valuations are invalid. And this is in the context of GS paid M`s of $ - to product invalid valuations which make themselves and the buyer/seller directors` rich.
DYOR indeed but do not rely of “experts” … Your gut feel is probably as valid!

WoW yep.
see page 79 of AR 2021
Share capital and control
The Company has only one class of share capital formed of ordinary shares. All shares forming part of the ordinary share capital have the same rights and each carries one vote.

Many mining/metals stocks have low PE - see THS at 3, SSW at 5.7 , FXPO at 4, RIO at 6.
The stand out is JLP at 11.
I see RH is up slightly today after being flat for a week - now at around the $14k mark.
I`m happy to take a dividend and look forward to the presentation next week.

It (probably) indicates they have closed their positions having got what they wanted.
LTHs may wish to read this:
https://www.sec.gov/reportspubs/investor-publications/investorpubsbankrupthtm.html
GLA

I accept and agree that Covid and historical earnings are relevant to future performance if market has not changed materially. But that assumption is highly questionable and such macros enable a skipping over of the balance sheet being geared to breaking point.
(Dick Fuld of Lehman Bros did the same: extreme risk-taking without margin-of-safety.)

it is like my mate Bob he asks me to lend him a fiver pay me back in a week. A week later he comes knocking and instead of repaying his debt he asks for a further tenner. A week later instead of paying me back 15, he wants a twenty and another month to pay. When he sees me looking a bit doubtful he replies he is holding all the cards because if I refuse I get nothing. I ask him how he got here. He tells me on his £10 bike. I say to him he will be walking back cos now that bike is mine. I flog it for a tenner and cut my losses. The idea that he has me over a barrel, he must be smoking something if he think I will be stupid enough to advance him even more credit lol

Tegop: Lastly, the execs do not have fiduciary duty to the shareholders. That is a fallacy. They only need to listen to the smaller shareholders but do not need to heed them.

see section 172 Companies Act 2006

"members" means shareholders

172 Duty to promote the success of the company
(1)A director of a company must act in the way he considers, in good faith, would be most likely to promote the success of the company for the benefit of its members as a whole, and in doing so have regard (amongst other matters) to—
(a)the likely consequences of any decision in the long term,
(b)the interests of the company's employees,
(c)the need to foster the company's business relationships with suppliers, customers and others,
(d)the impact of the company's operations on the community and the environment,
(e)the desirability of the company maintaining a reputation for high standards of business conduct, and
(f)the need to act fairly as between members of the company.
(2)Where or to the extent that the purposes of the company consist of or include purposes other than the benefit of its members, subsection (1) has effect as if the reference to promoting the success of the company for the benefit of its members were to achieving those purposes.
(3)The duty imposed by this section has effect subject to any enactment or rule of law requiring directors, in certain circumstances, to consider or act in the interests of CREDITORS OF THE company.

(my emphasis)

Whilst it is true that directors have duty to act in shareholders` best interests, that assumption lies in respect of a solvent company and changes when the pendulum swings towards insolvency... at which point, the directors must consider the interests of creditors too. Here in UK the equivalent position is administration. Interestingly there is a case before the UKSC on this very point and has been for the last 15 months. The decision has still not been handed down.
I read the missed payment due - $170m - as a fact, as that is what is stated.
FT, WSJ are respected. These aren't redtops after all.
My guess is a new company will rise phoenix -like from the ashes. I hope all who are LTHs get something from the proceeds of the disposals.
Best of luck to all.

"Who "controls" the company then? What are the steps?"

Any creditor past a threshold amount of debt can issue a winding-up petition by application to Court ( and upon court order, an insolvency practitioner is then appointed to take control of the company`s affairs. Assets put up for sale, debts restructured etc.

This really does look like the end-game for CINE.

interest cover in 2019 was 4.2x.
24 months later it has dropped to 2.4x

2019 2021
interest paid 147 227
cash from ops 632 555
4.299319728 2.444933921
GL to LTHs

That £500 would be the equivalent of the profit on a 50% return on a £1,000 outlay. (Excluding charges.)
You have not put in 1k
It is doubtful that this will climb 50% but if it does you make £250. That potential return is off set by the risk that it doesnt move in your direction. On this news and with this momentum which of the two directions make most sense: North or South?
I`d set a stop loss if I were you.

Another 3,000 top up .
Gift.

Gap up!