Member Info for WaffenBurret

Surely the overarching factor is that the judge will now have to consider the whole issue of valuation, regardless of omission or imprecision. A high figure has been put forward imo in order to make the case clearly even if, in the end, a final value falls somewhere between.

The simple fact the the current (false imo) valuation has been constructed to support the creditors’ case and has not been properly tested. I am hoping that due diligence will now need to be done without this case appearing overly expedient.

And not least, we may get to see some REAL numbers and a believable forward growth curve.

Justice needs to be seen to be done and I imagine judge Marvin has to test any reservations around the existing RSA before ratifying it, for fear of getting it wrong, being duped, etc.

…fingers on buzzers….

Happy for you to expand on that, Hexam.

Please go ahead - articulate.

“Twice as many sells v buys.”

That strikes me as odd. Do people suspect an imminent placing of some kind?

Or they know already that it’s muddy?

Well, this is going to be interesting.

At the very least it opens a can of worms for the cabal.

It doesn’t take an ‘expert’ to realise here that there has been a strategy to undervalue Cineworld using figures from a frame of reference favourable to the creditors. Ie: the bottom of the cycle exacerbated by a pandemic and pip-squeezed for cash, in advance, for an ‘interesting’ dividend.

Hopefully, Judge Isgur will be under pressure to request competent audited figures for Q1 2023, and possibly even H1 2023. Ha! Yes, said figs aren’t ‘in the can’ yet but after potential additional delays to this case while further analysis is brought to bear, they soon could be.

Here’s hopin. There is potential for ‘scandal’ written on this.

Agree Bottled. I don’t want to keep coming on this board in order to find out the latest on PREM.

It’s ridiculous.

Well, your sophisticated assessment installs a lot of confidence in all this Jimmy.

But I decided to take a few percentage points off the table today to be safe. Felt it wise to stag them you see.

wish you the best old man.

ThNks for the instant response. Good to know you are glued to this.

“CINE - It's just like Brexit - you tell people it will be a nightmare but they still think it will succeed. Thick deranged economically illiterates.”

User, I understand. It’s so frustrating for you.

So, while we’re all waiting, Might as well kick out at someone, post something utterly irrelevant like, like American Psycho - You remind me of him?

Meanwhile, where are all those real facts and figures that aren’t being published ?

We are suffocating from the absence of meaningful information.

That’s why I’m invested and occasionally read the empty neggy comments on this board.

GLA.

Context: trading economics:

“Lithium carbonate prices were at the CNY 300,000 per tonne level in late May, the highest since March and holding the sharp rebound from the 19-month low of CNY 165,500 from April 24th amid a recovery in demand for electric vehicle batteries. The latest data showed that NEV sales and output in China both soared by 110% year-on-year in April, trimming concerns about poor demand levels at the start of the year. During the first quarter, the drop in demand coincided with a significant oversupply of batteries as producers took advantage of final inflows of government subsidies and ramped up production until the end of 2022, creating unsustainably high inventory levels. Robust expectations for longer-term demand also supported lithium prices, as government incentives to switch to EVs lead analysts to forecast that lithium demand by 2040 will be 16 times higher than present-day levels.”

16 times higher! LTHs. And that’s why people here are seeking to talk down to the lowest possible entry price during a teething period such as this.

Elvis, would be grateful if you could direct us to the docket and page whence you gleaned this statement:

“the lenders are under no obligation to continue to observe SEC or FCA regulations”

Thanks in anticipation.

Hexam, agree with some of what you say but not this:

“ Not so sure that reported, audited figures will help too much with any valuation.”

Why withhold them then? - which seems to be happening here.

All projections-based valuations begin with the most recent data available. Apparently not in this instance. The market for large scale cinema ownership has a very limited space from which to obtain fair value assessment. There are only a few big players who are capable of playing a hand financially and creatively which allows easy distortion and manipulation in the market. Withholding information doesn’t help arrive at a fair evaluation of Cineworld’s true current prospects either imv.

Still no audited figures reported. Why? How long do they legally have - I thought it was 5months LSE. Perhaps it’s six. Curious either way.

No actual figures, no reality just guesswork accounting for Cineworld’s real value here.

Poor judge if this isn’t picked up on.

Why no H2 2022 figs yet?

‘Alternative funding’ being the modus operandi.

Well said MNS.

I missed the buying op this morning although did so yesterday.

Currently my loose change is tied up in ITS. But Can’t complain as I like to spread the risk. Lol.

Bond Investments, Reardon95, PI, many thanks for your replies.

Glad I was persuaded at a minute to midnight, thr eleventh hour etc.

Now will be interesting to see what happens with the cash shell.

What value can it have, going forwards?

Ah, what a pleasant surprise. I’ll put the deckchairs away now that we have missed the iceberg.

You’d better get a few deck chairs ready.

No, staying put. See you on the other side. Lol.