Member Info for Senator1

Im bored with this now. more rubbish in your last post. nav calculation is standard and as old as the hills. "informal performance indicator" lol

Before you were mixing NPV and NAV. Now you are saying it "seems" that NPV=NAV. You are wrong. What do you not understand about NAV equalling net asset value. There is no "seems". You are wrong and should not be expressing any views on this you clearly dont understand it.

As to the options positions of executives it is "beer money" compared to their carried interests.

How do you know they havent booked the full uplift. For ex, we know the total uplift over everything 110. We know their stake in Revolut uplift 95m, take off 25% CGT thats 71.25M, take off illiquidity adj, say 20% thats 1.5, leaves just under 70. That 70 is in the 110. Also auditors dont allow you to "smooth" the valuations. They are required to represent a true and fair view not a smoothed view. They will be required to follow their valuation policies which are clearly described in AR under the different categories. Ultimately, valuation to equity comes down to free cashflow to equity, not sales to equity or some other benchmark ratio. In the short term there will be lots of noise, including people making statements on stuff they do not understand. Molten handled the CEO departure in a very amateur way, kindergarden way. Surprise the market at your peril and in such an avoidable way, reflects badly on Board. Share price fall all of their own making not portfolio companies.

Wrong AGAIN. You are referring to net portfolio value as the presentation clearly states. Net portfolio value IS NOT the same as Nav, net asset value. Nav, 1 million percent includes cash and gross debt. There is no debate on that. You clearly have no understanding of accounting terms and you should stop making stuff up or erroneously quoting stuff you dont understand.

There is absolutely no evidence that they are inflating values. To the contrary, the Revolut detail shows the exact opposite in a meaningful way as does the -£10M

Realisations reducing nav

That's not true either. Including F/X the valuation effect was -£10M, nothing in scheme of things. The fact that Nav per share fell even though there is 2.5M in Treasury and therefore this amount less than in March is simply the external carry and tax effects. They will have to recognise higher deferred taxes due to CGT changes and of course the saga of the external carry. This is very hard to predict as it is deal by deal but it is the main way these guys get rich. They dont care whether sp is at a discount to nav as most of them have no meaningful stake. The external carry at over £100M is by far the main source of their wealth creation and its terms are never discussed on the results call in enough detail. This creates a major misalignment between shareholders and management.

Total rubbish. Net debt is included in Nav, excluded from GPV. Closing GPV at 30/9/24 you are told is £1344, cash 82, drawn debt 120 balancing figure to get to 6.44 nav per share is 105 external carry/def tax. This is down 4% on the 30/3/24 figure using the current outstanding shares, 2.68% on the reported at that time as there were more outstanding shares. The issue with Molten is the external carry, always has been, still is. They are the only ones who got rich on this share from IPO. If you dont understand the implication of this and how to calculate nav you shouldnt be in this share or just accept you are gambling blind. Ridiculous to suggest cash isnt in nav!

Apologies I went back and checked. The UK's accounts are indeed the 743M number but they have filed another consolidated set called Revolut Group with the £923 number with loss before tax of £25M. In 2022 they grew Rev 45%. Could they go to 100% in 2023. Probably but that would mostly be explained by the increased earnings on cash held (like Wise) but that will be short lived as they will be under pressure to return more interest to customers. Wise have said they want to be able to return 80% of interest earned but for now they need to invest more to do that. The point is for a Group making nothing in 2022 after operating costs what is the right valuation, £4bn, 8bn, £15bn, £20bn. If most of it comes from interest on cash balances thats not high quality. thats why Wise management play this way down on theirresults calls and told the market this is a short term benefit which is allowing them to invest more to bring costs down. Rates going from 0 to 5% had a big impact on the Wise numbers but they know it doesnt look good to keep most of the interest earned, its not their cash.

Revolut's Revenue in 2022 was £743,867,000. If you know what you are doing they are easy to find. There is no debate on that ACTUAL historic number. You need to stop getting your information from the internet and go to source documents and if you dont know how to do that, stay out of the markets.

Or maybe another way to look at it is; is Revolut worth twice Wise plc. In 2022, last accounts aqvailable for Revolut, Wise Rev was £560M (2022) and Revolut £743, thats 1.32x higher. Based on Wise's £8.5bn valuation that suggests £11.2bn. or 25% less than the £15bn. Plus Wise is public so theoretically should have a further liquidity premium. Will be interesting to see Revolu's growth when 2023 published.

Total rev up 56% driven by interest income up 246%. looks like market re-evaluating the PE ratio which I think is circa 34x 2024 outcome BUT with c. 50% profit growth the PEG is 0.69. As rates not going down this year and I expect Wise to lock in rates well in to 2025, I think market has this wrong for now.

Looks like 2024 Rev will come in at c. £400m up 7%. Is this a growth stock? My estimate of net without all the adjustments for 24 is £47M, up 12%. Thats c£14k per each of 3319 employees/contractors. Does it deserve a P/E of 22x or PEG of 1.53, thats the question really. RoE at 36% is very impressive so that would support those ratings, i would just like to see more growth and a higher contribution per employee.

Additionally they did not sell aggressively, they went from 6.9M shares to 4.9M shares. 2m shares at £2odd is nothing to AVI, couple of million quid. Its peanuts, means nothing. AVI has a market cap of £1bn. Im sure Bauemfreund's PA is authorised to handle decesions of that size.

Yes 4.9M shares is 2.6% as of their last report and as you say they are under 3% so NOBODY knows until the AVI semi is released where they are now. YOU SAID, they are "all out, confirmed by recent RNS". The recent report says they are at 2.6%. It does NOT SAY they are out. You dont know and I dont know what they did since then. As I said, stop guessing and spreading guesses as facts, deal in facts. The last fact is 4.7m shares or 2.6%, where they have gone from there is maybe done nothing since or are somewhere between 0 and 2.999%. NOBODY knows.

Rubbish, last report from AVI was 6/3/24 4.9m shares. FACT, there is no debate about that. You are just making rubbish up.

I suspect the reason such a straight forward set of accounts is in to the fourth month after year end has probably a lot to do with the going concern statement from the auditors which in turn is a function of the structure of the external bank debt, the £110M which was increased by £50M during the half year . £110M at 8% needs £9 m just to pay interest and whatever amortisations are required are extra. When you are doing only £20M of revenue in 6 months and prices are declining rapidly its a tough position to be in. National Grid better gets its act together. Ridiculous really that they could kill this important business initiative because of inefficiency. Never be reliant on Governments or civil servants until they are in crisis mode and then they are lambs to the slaughter.

Interesting article. If the price at end 23 is one third of where it was in 22 than my back of the envelope is too high for now and the share price could half again from here ie by not making the double assumption I did to see where the market was at. It doesn't mean it is out of business it is just a reflection of the poor cash returns from such a high accumulated capex spend at current pricing levels. As they only have £110M external bank debt as most of the debt is intercompany from the plc to the operating entities and they can capitalise this interest but that of course is the reason the div was cancelled and will be for 2024. They raised over £600M in equity and it generated £20M revenue or £13.8M ebitda in the first half of 2023. Think market valuing it at £230M odd is being nice. It could get much uglier. Think they should try and sell some of smaller units if they can get a reasonable price just to build their cash reserves. The £110M bank loan will want its interest in cash and so GRID don't want the lenders getting nervous. Think its led by Santander.

The underlying EBITDA is 13.8M for half year with external interest 4.4M that's 9.4M EBT. Take off tax at 25% and EAT is 7.05 for half year say 14M for FY. Double it for the capacity increases etc and all initiatives they are working on and for now value as a perpetuity at 12% and you get £235M, the current market cap. Until there is more information this basic DCF approach justifies where we are at albeit with a doubling of the underlying P&L account and the value of a perpetuity without further investment which is unreasonable. Market isn't being unreasonable just working with what it knows at moment in a high level way.

AVI did not get out at a profit. They are nursing a loss which the accounts clearly show. Plus they are not out