Member Info for Stackhigh

Funny to read amateurs posting about debt covenants when they've clearly not experienced a stiff test of a profitable company (or are pretending not to have done to keep attention on a negative sounding headline).

They willfully overlook the central truth to lending - that a loan is an asset to the lender. Bi-annual measures of earnings are a safety net for the lender, but are written and acted upon by the lender. If you're confused - consider this very simple thought experiment:

You are a lender. You have been chosen by Cineworld BoD as the source of cash to fund Regal takeover, refurbishments etc. You're delighted, as the interest on these credit lines will make you amd your investers a good profit, with little risk. Cineworld generates plenty of cash, through active and passive revenue streams. They have never had a liquidity problem, and the addition of Regal makes this more true than ever. You set earning/debt ratios to stop discourage cineworld overstretching itself in its ambition to grow. Then Covid strikes. Income disappears, and cash is burnt to keep the business afloat. Is cineworld still a good business? Yes, once it reopens it will be fine. Is it still paying interest? Absolutely. Great. Would you be out of your f'ing mind to recall the loan in Dec 20 or June 21 so they find their finance elsewhere? Too right! Covenants are ripped up on a daily basis in response to changes in circumstances. Cineworld's creditors know they are onto a good thing and there is absolutely no way they would call in this debt owing to Covid, save for a catastrophic year, at which point Cineworld's future would be least of anyone's concerns! Anyone who tells you otherwise is thick af or attention seeking. A little bit of thinking and understanding will confirm this.

Swing and a miss again, Herbie. Flu is caused by the influenza virus, which is not an example of a coronavirus. Some colds, absolutely, but again that's not what you posted. I'm sure we're all sad to hear of your illness earlier in the year, but please don't post poorly researched nonsense - it doesn't help anyone. As I say, just check the things your about to post are actually facts - it's better for all. Okay? Thanks.

Gosh, that was a long post with some total nonsense. As much as one would always encourage people to 'DYOR', you can help by doing a quick fact check before posting here. Bubonic plague is definitely not a 'lurker virus', given that it isn't a virus, and it is curable in the vast, vast majority of cases. Please, don't post until you've had a good check of you facts. Thanks.

I'd nearly forgotten 'nearly all businesses will go bust', which he then tried to chalk up to a typo! Classic...

Good week all - have a nice break.

That's 3 postings of the same link. How many will you deem sufficient? Are you aiming to make double figures?! :')

Have a rest, sport- others will dtor and you have no influence. Neither does anyone else here. Just relax.

Think this link has already been posted here. So we'll move the count to '2' on the score board.

You going for a record today, champ?

Could you post it again? I think someone might have joined in the last hour, since you last posted it, and missed it?! Maybe again a couple of times before open tomorrow? Ffs...

Oh, it's charitable, what you do? I always thought DYOR meant do research, not read repeat-posted and oft-tired links on amateur message boards. I mistakenly believed it meant go to the source, understand the fundamentals, avoid other's influence and make calculations based on your own findings?

Thanks. I've effectively just delivered a Turing Test. If he's real, intelligent and has any integrity, he'll learn how to use the message board. If it is a not, it will keep replying and trying to justify its unending repetition.

Neat, n'est pas?!

No no, that's it. It is done. It's on here. No need for a 'read receipt'. No need to 'check in'. Don't seek validation for your posts. Don't wait for a 'house point' or a virtual 'slap on the back' .

Just post anything you feel relevant, once, and then.... Nothing. Just.... Nothing. Leave it there. Understand?

Great stuff... Now, what did we learn? You've posted that now, so you can consider it read. It's on the chalk board. Your point has landed.

Please, for the sake of any utility this board might hope to retain, make that your last post on the matter. Only post again if you have something new and as-yet-unsaid to offer. If everyone does that, we're golden. Understand?

Okay, you started off doing okay but now your lack of comprehension is starting to show through. I won't use all caps, though it's tempting. I am well aware of the article to which you refer, as is everyone who reads this board from time to time, as you've posted it a great many times... My point thoughout is that it's speculation. It was useful the first time we read it. Pasting it in every day is not useful.

Do you see? Has your understanding of the financing position of Cine been improved by re-posting it several times? Do you believe anyone else's understanding has been aided by your re-posting? How many times will you have to paste it in before you consider it 'taken as read'? Am I getting through?!? Jeez...

That's impressive.. You can calculate their profitability based on no data? Jeez, that's a skill. They may well, thanks to the position they negotiated earlier in the year, be able to turn a bigger profit on small audience figures...the point is that you don't have the foggiest, and neither does anyone else. So, if we all agree to stop throwing grass in the air to see how it lands, or swirling tea leaves, this group can be used for sharing news... And that's been my point for days!

In

Thanks. That seems like a typically well-reasoned point of view. Please continue to share your deep wisdom - I'll read it as I'm folding up my new tin foil hat...

Sorry to push you on this, but 'nearly all' and 'many' are significantly different... Did you mean 'a few'?

:')

Again, and I really am appreciative; thank you for making my point. At present there is no indication that the liquidity position has worsened, or that there is need for significantly improved turnover in order to service existing finance commitments. On current trajectory, one can expect a withholding of the dividend for the foreseeable, and a focus on cost reduction. A vaccine would push things towards previous revenue levels, and a second wave would likely necessitate a re-issue.

That is true of nearly EVERY business on the index, with the exception of the 10% best suited to weathering a situation like this. So, as I've now said several times, there is no story here. So please, stop copying and pasting your same comments about the need for a financial re-jig... Its utter nonsense at this stage, and if you are genuine and smart, you'd know that. Otherwise, feel free to keep pasting it... I could set my AP by it's arrival...

So not 'nearly all'? Was that autocorrect for 'a few'?

I particularly enjoyed the use of 'nearly all' companies will not survive. This post-apocalyptic landscape they are describing will be fascinating!

Gosh, seemed to have upset the board's most frequent copy/paste-ers...

You've made my point beautifully, thank you (though not, perhaps, as articulately as one might have hoped). Until the results are released and digested next month, we'll have no further inside into the liquidity situation than we currently have. Anything further is unhelpful or misleading speculation. Saying, for example, that the company is likely to need to look at refinancing is misleading. There is an equal, or perhaps greater, chance that the liquidity situation has been improved through judicious use of government aid packages in respective territories.

Honestly, I'm coming to the same conclusion as others. That you're either not that bright, that you're desperate for attention, or that you genuinely believe your posts here are as or more effective than the transparent dreamers. Take care.