Skil Ports & Lg Share Discussion Threads

[lefrene] 23/9/2016 17:11

hatey, I think we guessed that, but I too made the huge mistake of not reading through every set of accounts since this thing was launched! At face value and very simply, there seems to be £66m of physical assets (they won't be worth anything near that until they are earning money), plus £24 million of cash, thus a supposed £90m of assets. Against that there are borrowings of £28m with apparently another £24m available which makes £52m altogether, and yet I recall the credit facility being advertised at £48m (not £52m) not too long ago? So in a simplistic way one might wonder what the problem is? Lots of assets, and 24 millions in hand plus another £24m available to draw down, but of course there is an awful lot yet to be paid out before this thing cranks up. But 24 + 24 + 36(wanted) is £84m, what is it going on? There's 13.3m short term liabilities (so we can see that bit going out) from a total of 41.5m, by the time the other 24m of credit is drawn there will be 65.5m of liabilities. As clear as mud.

I don't see any state of the art dredgers there, just a wheezy crane with a drop bucket on a rusty barge. About the only thing that looks anywhere near recent kit is the concrete batching equipment and that will belong to ITD Cem, so where has the "equipment" money gone? Usual AiM story, money disappears, and obfuscation from the spenders.

[waterloo01] 23/9/2016 17:04

The Indian banks having lent £52m (with £23m still to draw) are likely to lend a significant portion of the stated £36m.

As for property and equipment, the accounts state "During the six months ended 30 June 2016, the Group progressed construction of the facility and the carrying amount at 30 June 2016 was GBP 65.82 million (31 December 2015: GBP 28.57 million)" It matches roughly the cash spent with ITD.

As for suspending the shares, if they were to do that it should have been last week when they put out the announcement. To do so now would be daft as with even a little news flow and some clarity, the share price could well recover to an extent and any dilution reduced.

[hatey] 23/9/2016 16:59

Koov managed a huge funding at 25p and once some of it was flipped it more or
less went in a straight line to 100p before the froth came off and it came back
sharply.

Koov are Indian btw.

[saikat] 23/9/2016 16:52

Probability is close to zero that they will be able to raise this finance in UK through debt or equity. A new UK Non-exec brought in at this stage is close to being immaterial.

They have to look towards Indian money for investment.

Minimally, they should halt trading in the shares until financing is sorted - this will drift away ever lower unless they take this step.

[hatey] 23/9/2016 16:36

But given the size of the funding needed can anybody see them getting a placing
away anything higher than 5p, other stocks struggle to get a fraction of this away
without big discounts so unless they find a moneybags investor they will struggle
and if it's flippers you have 1% chance it will be done around 10p

[hatey] 23/9/2016 16:34

lefrene

Tbh I made a amateur mistake of reading the bb and taking the word of another poster
rather than checking myself. Just being lazy.

[lefrene] 23/9/2016 16:29

hatey "debt" is not cash for distribution to shareholders! Their grasp on actual money seems vague at best, or it could be that the accounts whilst looking straight on paper seem at odds with the actual world. They suddenly have £66 millions worth of property and equipment when 12 months ago they had £19.7 millions worth. Perhaps a straight translation of money spent, into supposed value of the things it has been spent on, ie an awful lot of dirt and a bit of concrete.

Did they think that 'oh just another £36 million will come as easily as the first £76m?' This lot have been looking after themselves rather too well and repeatedly failing to meet any deadlines at all. No one believes anything they say, something has to be delivered in the form of an operating wharf and some clients, then perhaps there will be a willingness to put up more dosh to bring the thing up to speed.

[hatey] 23/9/2016 16:28

spooky/eezy

My mistake sorry you chaps are right.

[eezymunny] 23/9/2016 16:26

Really. If they stop trading today then they repay the bank and there's no cash left. Really really. Borrowings were £28m at 30 Jun. They may have a facility to increase that, but that's just more borrowings. I saddens me that people have so little idea what a balance sheet tells you!

[waterloo01] 23/9/2016 16:22

Really. They have £24m in cash and a further £23m of the bank loan still to draw as at 31st August.

[eezymunny] 23/9/2016 16:17

£23m net current assets and £28m debt. Unless they sell the half finished port to someone there is no chance at all of a wind up and cash return.

[waterloo01] 23/9/2016 15:24

No they haven't. They have bank debt and that is not fully spent.

[spooky] 23/9/2016 14:49

They don't have five times the market cap. in free cash, take a look at the balance sheet, they've spent it all.

[hatey] 23/9/2016 14:40

If it was truly ran in shareholders interest they would stop right now admit it's a dud and return all that cash.

But if they want to milk their salaries etc etc they will take the placing route.

I just wonder which route they will take.........

[waterloo01] 23/9/2016 14:07

With 5 times the current market cap in cash, I wonder if Flight might pull something out the bag? It's not going bust anyhow, so seems like a decent buying opportunity, even with the current management still in place.

[lefrene] 23/9/2016 09:38

vfast, I suspect that Lord Flight was imposed on them by insti holders. Yes it's all down to whether the thing can be saved by a well executed fund raising.

[yasx] 23/9/2016 08:36

yasX17 Sep '16 - 10:50 - 8390 of 8542

Well, tuck in to some NSCI, let them run for a year and I rather suspect you will be in a position so to do.
---------------------------------------------------

Hope you chaps got some - had a good run since, but we are at the foothills yet. My target is over £5, and possibly much more.

Investec last year produced a note with a sum of the parts of £25 a share. The business has since changed considerably, and in my view has a much better pathway to monetise the assets, as evidenced by the announcement today. Thinly traded, Neil Woodford took more than 45pc of the Company at 120p and above.

[marvelman] 22/9/2016 19:04

"(the VAT lot are not afternoon tea at the vicarage!)"

Had to smile lefrene.....know exactly where you are coming from.....I had three afternoon teas myself and had indigestion after each one :-))

[vfast] 22/9/2016 18:53

lefrene, I believe Lord Flight will be behind any fund raising exercise and that is what he has been brought in for.

But I don't know at what price or how that will effect present shareholders (major dilution).

There is one thing I am sure about that is Nikhil Gandhi & Pavan Bakhshi haven't got the credibility to raise £36.00 let alone £36,000,000.

If Flight can raise the money then there is still hope and I just might buy back in but at this stage I prefer to stop on the sidelines.

[lefrene] 22/9/2016 17:06

I don't blame you vfast, and I concur re the value of anything said by the BoD. I am going to stick with it a bit longer to see what they cook up for further funds, I'm hoping that Lord Flight is sufficiently jealous of his reputation that he will persuade this bunch of dissemblers to get with the programme. We need to have clients lined up, and see some traffic begin to pass through on that small 100yds of wharf which is now supposed to be complete. But where are the pictures to prove this?

[vfast] 22/9/2016 15:32

The real problem is you can't believe a word that comes out of the BoD's mouths.

I'm out with a considerable loss!

Good luck to the ones that still hold.

[diku] 22/9/2016 14:16

Nearly back to where it started this morning....exit doors shut....

[lefrene] 22/9/2016 13:32

Thanks for that Guernseymoney, but I suspect that it can get just a bit too cosy with long term auditors and, that a shake up every three years should keep people on their toes. Fresh eyes and a fresh attitude looking for mistakes by the previous incumbents, should keep people on their toes.

Unfortunately my personal experience of accountants when running my own quite sizeable business was rather poor. Not only when they tried to interfere in the business with wrong minded suggestions, but also costing me many £1000's due to their negligence. (the VAT lot are not afternoon tea at the vicarage!)

[guernseymoney] 22/9/2016 13:13

Not sure what a change in auditors would do - as an ex-auditor, the big corporate scandals aside, even the rubbish colleagues I used to work with, did their jobs to a relatively good degree.

There would have to be some serious professional negligence by GT (or nefarious fraud on SPL's part), for the uncovering of "truths" in SPL's books. Never say never, but when I read SPL's accounts, I take comfort that they are free from material error.

[jailbird] 22/9/2016 12:28

azalea/ someulose,

your trade looking desperate plus the rest