Woodford Patient Capital Share Discussion Threads

[daffyjones] 23/10/2019 14:34

Can't see RUTH just giving up on the £32.5m of funding. They know they won't get that from anyone else. Nothing to lose by calling in the money while WIM is still up and running. Not their problem how WIM pays up. Won't affect them if WIM goes out of business now rather than in 11 weeks time so why not ask for the cash and see what they can extract?

[einsensei] 23/10/2019 13:02

Re RUTH (PPI) & Woodford CommitmentI believe £32.5m of the WIM/RUTH Commitment is outstanding (£47.5m having been drawn). I think RUTH have reached the conclusion that they won't see the rest of the £32.5m ever. WPCT and WEIF ATMs are no longer at NW's disposal and there's no worth in WIM. I doubt there's any mileage in pursuing the director's personally. So RUTH BOD has smelt the coffee and taken out a secured £20m debt facility that has security rights over anything and everything owned by RUTH - land&property, medical equipment, IP, brands, etc, etc. In a business downturn the value left for the equity will be severely diminished after debt-holders take their top slice.

[spectoacc] 23/10/2019 10:35

@Pug - worth a look how much trading goes in in RUTH (approx equivalent to number of threads on it).

[pugugly] 23/10/2019 10:33

jonwig> Too true - I was too possibly too polite in 11067!!

[jonwig] 23/10/2019 10:31

PUG - possibly anyone who'd want to buy RUTH would know it was seriously over-valued and shorting is, I expect, impossible. Another non-tradeable quoted share!

[williamcooper104] 23/10/2019 10:28

They will roll so long as the fund goes into wind-down/asset disposal Far better a solvent liquidation than an administration

[pugugly] 23/10/2019 10:25

Gentlemen - Interesting that there is no BB thread for RUTH or for Proton (the former identity) - Lack of interest maybe sends it's own message about prospects and investability - Thoughts?

[spectoacc] 23/10/2019 10:22

Exactly @CC2014. But Rutherford would have to be pretty damned sure about "no point" under company law. As there's a slight chance of IFF or WPCT supplying the cash (they won't, but then he did use WEIF last time), I say they have to call. Doesn't mean they'll then necessarily put WIM into liquidation mind.

[cc2014] 23/10/2019 10:18

RUTH call has to come from WIM so either WIFF, WEIF or WPCT.

It can't come from WEIF as WIM were removed as investment manager in the last two weeks

WIM still manages WIFF and WPCT for the next 11 weeks or so.

It can't come from WPCT due to the investment restriction imposed by the lender. Or more precisely it could come from WPCT but only if WPCT manages to raise enough cash to get the bank off their back and then another lump for RUTH. One could make a guess at how much cash would be required to get the bank off WPCT's back but since at the last count the bank debt was £117m I'd be guessing the bank want it down to £50m. Technically possible but only in the manner of exploring maths rather than what can be done in the real world.

It could be done from WIFF by again selling other stuff by RUTH is so far removed from the investment objectives of WIFF, I would see the Board intervening.


Which leaves the call on WIM as a company which they can't afford as most of the cash is taken out every year.

All a bit of a puzzle unless RUTH conclude their no point in asking for any more as the likely outcome is WIM enters administration and that would lead to publicity.

[cousin jack] 23/10/2019 09:24

Loughton: agree - he writes about finance in one of the most read national papers, so his naivety regarding Woodford is very worrying. I can see why he writes for the Mail rather than the FT !

[spectoacc] 23/10/2019 08:27

@Dr B - I like Rutherford. I've always said that if Woody's investors were going to lose money - which they have - then great that it's spent on something socially useful like cancer care.

However - this Rutherford call is a major issue. WIM have to last at least 3 more months (the notice period) to have any chance of effecting a solvent winding-up. If Rutherford do call, and it can't be paid, and they put WIM into administration, it creates massive problems for Neil.

As for "...Asset not a liability..", I don't follow. The Call is a liability on WIM, though perhaps only if it's made?

As for "..Sold at fire sale prices.." - that's happening, and is now out of Neil's control. Being sold from WEIF in size. It's largely irrelevant what the (technically unlisted) former Proton Partners trades (or doesn't trade!) at when it comes to them raising more money in future. If they're lucky, they'll get an investment at half the valuation like Benevolent did.

Rutherford directors are legally obliged to act in the best interests of the company they run - can they do without the £30m, raised at such an advantageous price? Do they have any other sources of funding?

Could they claim there's zero chance of getting it, and so not worth the legals to pursue? Perhaps - but they'd have to show they'd taken steps to confirm that.

[dr biotech] 23/10/2019 08:21

I think we have lost a bit of realism here - WIM has promised to invest c£30m to Rutherford, that is not a debt that needs to be paid back. If WIM can't pay Rutherford would not be able to claim against in an insolvency case - the Rutherford holding is an asset rather than a liability. The last thing that Rutherford would do would be to put their funder and major shareholder into liquidation, that would mean that the stake would be sold at fire sale prices and they would have little to no chance of further funding.

Did see and advert for them in a service station yesterday. They say they do all types of cancer care as well as proton beam - would be a benefit to society if they succeed.

[diku] 23/10/2019 08:17

In light of the last paragraph below...anybody think the way the Stock Exchange (shares)trade and what the company is doing there seems to be a disconnect between the two across the market...investors/punters wealth can evaporate in a jiffy...




jonwig
23 Oct '19 - 06:31 - 11052 of 11059
0   0  0



I caught up with the BBC programme last night. Woodford - a little man in a black puffer jacket scurrying into his office like a frightened rabbit.

The real target was the FCA, and the BBC should cover this more thoroughly at some future date. The FCA woman interviewed admitted they were feeble, and the retired investor woman just had no protection from anyone.

[spectoacc] 23/10/2019 08:12

@Jonwig - the only directors loans mentioned are one for £3m, repaid to zero during the year.

Actually, the c.£4.5m is half clear - VAT, accruals, social security. But that still leaves over £2m in "Trade Payables". Commissions owed for bringing in business perhaps?

Small in the scheme of things. But fact remains that WIM doesn't appear to have much in the way of cash or assets - single-figure millions - with profits over the years having been (legitimately) removed to Neil and Craig's bank accounts. And the possibility of a c.£30m call on WIM from Rutherford.

Redundancy costs, winding-up costs, no longer much in the way of income to pay wages. Tho presumably a large tax rebate due on a final year of big losses.

And Neil.so short of cash earlier this year that he had to slot WPCT? Could his personal wealth genuinely be trapped in WEIF? Arrogant enough.

[jonwig] 23/10/2019 08:01

Spec - I haven't looked again at the WIM accs, but the payables sound like director loans.

One thing about that tax bill of his - it won't be CGT, for sure!

[spectoacc] 23/10/2019 07:36

I'd love to know the terms of the commitment - when Rutherford calls it, does WIM have a certain number of days to come up with it? If so, Rutherford could themselves wind up WIM, which would be a major problem.

No evidence they've asked for it yet.

WIM may have assets, but I doubt it has much cash. Wonder if any directors loans due for repayment...

Edit - having another read through the 2018 accounts (filed Jan 2019). £78m revenue for y/e March 18. £33m profit. £36m paid in dividends to Neil & Craig, with 8 figures also taken out in wages, presumably mainly by Neil.

And yet - he was so short of cash in 2019 he had to quietly slot the majority of his WPCT holding? I accept that his tax bill, even a POA, will have been huge, but really! He hasn't seriously spent the rest on his £6.5m holiday home & the equestrian complex?

WIM's property looks small in the scheme of things - c.£2m - and although c.£5m in the bank in 2018, doubt there was any by 2019.

Struggling with Note 15 to the accounts - Trade and Other Payables. Multi millions. "Trade payables are unsecured, interest free and payable in the short term". What are they? It's an investment (mis)management business.

No, I think if Rutherford call, and Woody doesn't have the brass neck to meet it from one of the funds he's serving notice on, I don't see how WIM can afford to pay it. The 2019 accounts are going to look worse, the 2020's dreadful.

Woody has surely had ample years of tens of millions - notwithstanding a lot will have been in his funds! - but WIM looks shaky for a solvent winding-up if Rutherford were to call.

[jonwig] 23/10/2019 07:14

When WIM is wound-up it will have plenty of assets: the freehold included, I think. So RUTH might join the queue of creditors and get some of the 30/40m.

[spectoacc] 23/10/2019 07:06

I thought it was £40m left but yes - as per above, if I were Rutherford I'd be requesting it ASAP, before WIM gets wound up.

Technically, could only come from WPCT now? Or is WIM going to take a personal holding? :)

[jonwig] 23/10/2019 07:02

The DT has an interesting article about the effect on start-ups of Woodford's collapse.
This one could be significant - WIM on the hook for £30m?

NEX-listed proton beam therapy business Rutherford Health, for example, has a commitment from Woodford Investment Management to receive £80m in cash, of which around £50m is thought to have already been received.

The Telegraph understands that agreement is still in place, and that it could request further cash if it so wished.

[1oughton] 23/10/2019 07:01

The DM guy was a naive muppet. Most astute investors knew something was wrong as early as 2016

[spectoacc] 23/10/2019 06:59

"Protecting" being not taxpayer recompense for making losses, but protecting the public against lies (the WEIF Top 10, the supposed "income" fund; the breaching of limits on unlisteds) and non-advice advice from companies with vested interests - HL, STJ.

I didn't see all the Panorama but glad Kent CC got a mention.

[jonwig] 23/10/2019 06:31

I caught up with the BBC programme last night. Woodford - a little man in a black puffer jacket scurrying into his office like a frightened rabbit.

The real target was the FCA, and the BBC should cover this more thoroughly at some future date. The FCA woman interviewed admitted they were feeble, and the retired investor woman just had no protection from anyone.

[chucko1] 22/10/2019 23:38

There is no chance at all, in my opinion, that NT will roll the loan. What is in it for them? Nothing.

The longer they procrastinate, the more cash will be leaking out and, absent of God’s benevolence, the asset value will continue to fall, making the loan even riskier.

[topvest] 22/10/2019 21:05

When the loan gets called I would suggest this will get suspended. Lets face it the auditor is going to struggle to sign-off the Dec 2019 accounts, even if they get that far. Price target 0p. The other question to ask is how much are the Board throwing down the toilet on all the legal work and investigations going on? Cash crunch looming and fast.