Member Info for WaffenBurret

Edit * Story number one requires lowest market cap (gutter price) to convince lenders and Judge that a growing business and recovery might be a better outcome, (provided that story number two kicks in on time).

Two (or three) media stories out there:

1. “We’ll never make it, wipeout predicted, etc (pressure on lenders to renegotiate rather than take a hit lowest price possible).

2. “Future is booming”, structural rethinking across the industry, importance of theatre. Box office, etc. (pressure on lenders to consider better alternative of restructuring debt arrangements going forwards rather than taking HUGE haircut) .

The second story has yet to be vindicated by numbers but:

Story number one requires lowest market cap (gutter price) to convince lenders and Judge that a growing business and recovery might be a better outcome.

Story number two requires the cavalry to arrive in the form of rapidly improving box office.

Story number three: Clues to be found in media that might support a stronger bid for the business (can take many forms).

AIMHO GLA .

While due diligence, protocols and market regs (AGMs) are attended to, and while we await further legal announcements regarding restructuring, bids, and/or deals from ‘the court that matters’, it’s still valuable to look at what is actually happening out there as an important indicator. This article offers a few clues:

https://deadline.com/2023/03/apple-theatrical-commitment-amazon-killers-of-the-flower-moon-1235308733/

“ Major studios from Warner Bros to Disney are also pushing theatrical now more than they have since Covid and streaming. It’s all good news for theater chains which were floored by Covid and as recently as the fourth quarter suffered – from AMC to Cinemark to Imax — from a lack of big wide releases. That’s picked up this year. “

“ It’s all part of a broad rethink of streaming strategy and a recognition of the punched-up awareness that’s possible with a big theatrical release for these streamers. Apple’s CODA was barely in theaters before going on to win the Oscar for best picture last year, along with the feeling that Apple left quite some cash on the table with that.

Apologies if already posted.

@Mr Kioto: “then what is the point of this meeting?”

This is a statutory requirement of the companies act 2006.

“ its Directors are required, pursuant to section 656 of the Act, to convene a general meeting of the Company for the purpose of allowing shareholders to consider whether any, and if so what, steps should be taken to deal with the situation. Accordingly, the Board is calling the General Meeting to ensure that this matter is addressed as required by the Act. The Board welcomes dialogue with the Company's shareholders, and the General Meeting will provide a forum for such discussions to take place, but no resolutions will be proposed at the General Meeting.”

I doubt it will have any affect upon the outcome of c11 restructuring talks, although sentiment may be passed on to the Judge, The Honorable Marvin Isgur or one of the parties should an angle develop that favours a courtroom strategy.

@Elvis Rocks. - “ but under either a sale or a reorganisation plan, shareholders will get nothing …”

Of course you are omnipotent so you are certain of this, lol.

With regard to forward-looking statements elsewhere in the RNS, eg: “Expect” (a favourite of shorters) , It is not worth the paper it is written on: “By their nature, forward-looking statements involve risk and uncertainty….”

No change therefore. I await bid conclusion and/or a debt restructuring plan to be announced (currently April/May). Which could easily get extended to August, almost around the time for H1 2023 revenues & bumper(?) box take ;-))

RNS 24/02/23:
“ Based on the current status of these discussions, Cineworld now expects to emerge from the Chapter 11 cases during the first half of 2023. Although any sale transaction resulting from the Marketing Process, among other things, may delay emergence beyond the first half of 2023,”

GLA

Good point Hexam, lol.
Therefore, looking like four months at a glance - until end of April.

Correction: Aim rule 18.

Aim rule 40~ allows up to three months (ie: end of March) for financial accounts, audited or otherwise). Can’t find any dispensations regarding US rules, c11, etc.

So: Coming soon, to a monitor near you, as it were.

@fulmar, what happened to Tesco?
Cannot find any of its posts now.

Hexam:

“ Will be interesting though if your (or my) view changes when the full year audited results do come out as it sounds like we will both trust those!”

Agreed, however the dynamic will only really become apparent with H1 2023, though there may be a hint of this in H2 2022. Certainly more useful to compare to docket figures of the same period. The fog of war.

Anyway, I still. Glean as much as I dare from the ongoing mediated, unaudited estimates that circulate online. I’m not averse to accepting some realism. Still confident of a good outcome overall at present.

Appreciate your understanding. All best.

“ I think the viability of this going forward requires the film industry to adjust and adapt from the current franchise model to bring back some originality in the content in order to bring in a wider crowd past Marvel fans.”

Yes, and no. We need both mainstream blockbusters, but also some creative socially relevant subject matter that taps into the developing global zeitgeist. The family movie coupled with the franchise has proved to be highly lucrative and will remain so. But I’m confident that the studios will rise to that challenge if the demand is there from both audiences and cultural/political requirements, to produce more social realism for niche and general audiences, both young and old. The demographics wil be important, I’m sure.

I am reminded of just how important, historically, cinema has been during darker times, during global recessions and war, perish that thought.

“I agree that cinema goes through waves of popularity, but I think everything points to a downward trend..”

Myoh Really? And your recent evidence for this is - where?

“ The learning curve has improved substantially following the information gathered from the suspended well MOU-2.”

Hindsight dear boy, hindsight.

@TT-T, Therefore not “10% dilution today”.
NB. Beware: forward looking statements v facts.

Travel card: Why, after all the promotional material from all camps, would there be any sudden change in direction?

….”short extension of the exclusivity period to 31 March 2023 to allow for final internal approvals and signing of the definitive Joint Venture Agreement and ancillary documents.”

10% dilution?

Previous number of total voting rights: 385,794,903
New figure: 401,294,903

“The total number of voting rights in the Company is therefore increased by 15,500,000 to 401,294,903.”

= 4.01%.

PGs additional transfer of shares does not increase the total number of existing shares.

The numbers, as you righty say Wolf, are behind the curve.
My point to you and Hexham, and Bonkers, is that there is no conclusion to be drawn from them or indeed the bits and bobs available through dockets, other than dates set for disclosure.

So how do I decide my case for being invested here?

As already mentioned in a my posts, this is a high risk / high reward gamble and
I have slightly more invesred here than I should but my INSTINCT is derived from my understanding of the generalities of the movie business:
- cinema business cycle, like all cycles, goes through waves historically. Currently a renewed up cycle in the making.
-uncontested Sunset Clause / vertical integration: greater investment opportunities in the most lucrative creative industry of 20th Century (The Golden Age).
(In effect this is already happening as (new/old)studios own streaming platforms).
- onset of new tech, often the harbinger of fresh boons to box office - deep fake / AI / 3D imax. Continued camera tech and runtime resolution and acoustic improvement potential.
…coming to a premium theatre near you, eventually.
- large scale ownership of exhibiting oultlets leading to greater bargaining power regarding box office percentages. Onus on Regal/Cineplex to do a deal. Break up of Cineworld would diminish this advantage.
- Griendigger long term experience of Cinema ownership. Mooky has proved, he is a survivor and has a plan, interrupted by Covid, but still there though delayed. More positive points to my scoresheet.

I am willing to accept that I might lose but I’ve calculated my risk view. I am not going to be duped by the ‘numbers game’ being used as a crutch for your decisions. Box-Office mojo is a case in point, only as good as the numbers supplied, often massaged by interested parties imo. Figures on a mojo are not legally binding in the way that registered audited accounts have to be - and what that means specifically for Cineworld’s business model.

The lenders, in my view are perfectly capable of doing multiple/hybrid deals and will be looking at 3 to 5 year business cycles. They will be as influenced by trajectories and projections as any mature, sensible investor can be. As with any other business, including banks - Lol . If they are convinced of potential turn-around they are quite likely to consider a renegotiated survival package, if they can agree upon anything.

- remit of The Judge: will be taking into account, not just the interests of the lenders but all involved, not least all the employees and the many businesses tied in. Then there is the National Interest with regard to the health of the American Film Industry.

As I repeat, nobody can assess this complexity until a result is declared. I am open to the loss I might undertake but my instinct favours a good outcome for my avg (I bought a few more yesterday @2.36p).

Currently a waiting game.

GLA.

*…better foothold.

Bonkers, good evening. I apologise for not responding to your stated investment history, an account you gave in response to my question a month ago when I asked: “what is your wish here?”

My question remains, to draw out your intention here. Currently, imv your posts seem highly emotional. We all know there are immeasurable risks with our investments here which is why the current price is in the maybe-a-bargain bucket, maybe a dead parrot (views, depending upon how one sees the potential futures for cinema, for these negotiations, the interested parties, bidders, the judge’s legal interpretation, , etc, etc.

I use the word ‘immeasurable’ as none of us knows for certain what is going on behind closed NDA doors. No amount of analysing the figures, or attorney invoices, expense requests, etc is going to provide a definitive conclusion, other than to feed alternative fantasies and provide a lot of click-fodder

Your recent assertions: “ …continued cash burn , increased debt , and no buyer in sight… “ are narratives. We don’t know, after any possible agreement, what the cash-burn, interest payments, restructured debt, sales, what have you, what those figures ultimately will turn out to have been do we?
Currently, We only have official figures to June 2022.

Therefore I, and others here, have reached a position based upon the likelihood of survival of CINE based on other data, in a form that gives greater value to the sp than a single-digit figure. Depending upon one’s understanding and history of the industry, one will form a view about potential outcomes of a complex situation. The negotiation is shrouded in secrecy and open to many influences and ‘unknown unknowns’ .

Therefore, yes, this is a gamble, but one, it would seem, that most posting here consider to be favourable.

Some, mistakenly, think they can learn from the dockets, or the ‘rough numbers’ to support a definitive case. Of course, that is ridiculous: a little ‘knowledge’ is a dangerous thing . We know , also, that with bankruptcy protection examples, the dealings are rarely definitive. Against all the apparent odds, companies can come out of apparently critical c11 protection smelling of solvency.

If you are certain the show is over then, fine, take your leave, sell up and stick the remnants of your investment into something you have more faith in. Something less risky with which you are comfortable and able to contribute to in a positive way. You will feel a lot better for it.

The big outcome here with CINE will be in the price long before you have a chance to open your trading platform. So weigh up your decision and stick to it. Don’t be fooled by the narratives and agendas whipped up both here on this board, and in the attornies’ offices.

Tell me, why would you remain invested in something you think will go bust? Unless , like a few vulgar trader/posters, you are, (perhaps slightly more subtly in your case), attempting to gain a better f

So there will be c.2.5%, whatever, additional shares in the company. Not 20% as today’s happy nickel traders and price drop would have it.
Money raised, puts paid to all the angsty tosh of the last few days.
The target remains the same - to access vast potential gas reserves.
COS remains the same as yesterday. The gas, if there, will still be there.
You all put money in that you can afford to lose. Right?
You haven’t lost it until you chose to sell. Sit tight.
The lack of comms and resultant bickering simply plays into the hands of short-term traders, perhaps that’s what you all are here today.

Get over it and focus on the main goal. If you don’t like it, simply sell up and politely leave.
Remain focused on the positives and ignore the short-term tattle.
And pls, do not operate off margin, or with money you need 1st April.

The raise is done, with the money now in place, on we go - looking forward to the next practical steps as ever. Is that gas I can smell?