BNB - Babcock & Brown

Logique · 7 January 2009

http://business.smh.com.au/business/bank-talks-delay-bampb-rescue-plan-20090106-7b57.html

Media report this morning that the rescue plan requires that the banking syndicate accept a debt-for-equity swap. BNB saying that if this eventuates, general shareholders equity would be significantly reduced.

joeyjoejoe · 7 January 2009

Logique said:
http://business.smh.com.au/business/bank-talks-delay-bampb-rescue-plan-20090106-7b57.html

Media report this morning that the rescue plan requires that the banking syndicate accept a debt-for-equity swap. BNB saying that if this eventuates, general shareholders equity would be significantly reduced.

does any1 else think this share will tank 2mrow on the open?

http://business.theage.com.au/busin...cts-substantial-writedowns-20090107-7bw5.html

dhukka · 7 January 2009

Given this after hours announcement you would have to think the shares would come under considerable pressure tomorrow:

UPDATE ON FORECAST 2008 FINAL RESULT
Babcock & Brown (ASX: BNB) today advises that further to the announcement
to the market on 19 November 2008, following progress on the asset
impairment review process for its 2008 full year accounts, it now believes that
asset impairment charges will be such that the Company will be in a substantial
negative net asset position at 31 December 2008.

Aussiejeff · 8 January 2009

dhukka said:
Given this after hours announcement you would have to think the shares would come under considerable pressure tomorrow:

LOL.

Nice "trading halt" tactic by BNB to halt the expected run on its SP. With an indicative open price of 20c in Commsec (down about 40%) no surprise really?

aj
(non-holder)

Bushman · 8 January 2009

dhukka said:
Given this after hours announcement you would have to think the shares would come under considerable pressure tomorrow:

They would've apart from the trading halt called pre-trade.

BNB have stated that they are 'technically insolvent'. Technically insolvent, huh? That is pure accounting spin. Either the Directors believe they can pay their future financial obligations as and when they fall due or they do not. It is fairly straight forward.

Banks are being weak as p*ss on BNB and that is because they cannot afford a write-down on BNB loan book at the moment. That is the only reason, IMO, that they have not called the administrators in and flogged off what they can.

Aussiejeff · 8 January 2009

Bushman said:
They would've apart from the trading halt called pre-trade.

BNB have stated that they are 'technically insolvent'. Technically insolvent, huh? That is pure accounting spin. Either the Directors believe they can pay their future financial obligations as and when they fall due or they do not. It is fairly straight forward.

Banks are being weak as p*ss on BNB and that is because they cannot afford a write-down on BNB loan book at the moment. That is the only reason, IMO, that they have not called the administrators in and flogged off what they can.

Well, I'm a little surprised they haven't figured they can afford to risk any write down of any magnitude, because as we well know, KRudd & Co. will guarantee the banks for as much as they want to risk?

Meh.

jackson8 · 8 January 2009

what i find completely illogical with a stock like this is the fact that over a seven day period the sp has rallied 200 percent only then to have said ann made which obviously will have a negative impact on sp
my question is or observations are

why did the share price rally so much

who were buying.. surely retail investors could not account for the large volumes traded

why would institutions be buying into this . surely they would have more insight into the deeper financial woes of this company

begs for understanding and gives me little confidence in how our free market operates

note .. i do not hold ...just concerned

gfresh · 8 January 2009

Bushman said:
Banks are being weak as p*ss on BNB and that is because they cannot afford a write-down on BNB loan book at the moment. That is the only reason, IMO, that they have not called the administrators in and flogged off what they can.

Seems to be the heading towards the same state as the others that have ended up in zombie mode...

Does anybody know which Aussie lending institutions have exposure to BNB ? edit: below (from a business spectator article from Nov)..

The Australian reported that Westpac Banking Group is believed to be owed $240 million, half of which is secured, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) and National Australia Bank (NAB) are owed $150 million each, and ANZ Banking Group (ANZ) $120 million. Those three loans are secured.

The AFR however reported it was estimated that Westpac was owed up to $250 million, CBA $200 million, ANZ and Suncorp $125 million, and NAB $100 million.

noirua · 8 January 2009

Babcock & Brown Ltd., needs to be partly nationalised. It's a major Aussie company that needs to survive. Probably would be bad luck for investors, still, Australia comes first.

benwex · 8 January 2009

jackson8 said:
what i find completely illogical with a stock like this is the fact that over a seven day period the sp has rallied 200 percent only then to have said ann made which obviously will have a negative impact on sp
my question is or observations are

why did the share price rally so much

who were buying.. surely retail investors could not account for the large volumes traded

why would institutions be buying into this . surely they would have more insight into the deeper financial woes of this company

begs for understanding and gives me little confidence in how our free market operates

note .. i do not hold ...just concerned

I think the sp run is due to shorts exiting theie positions and closing out...

any other suggestions??

benwex

dhukka · 9 January 2009

noirua said:
Babcock & Brown Ltd., needs to be partly nationalised. It's a major Aussie company that needs to survive. Probably would be bad luck for investors, still, Australia comes first.

If this is not a joke it would have to be one of the most ridiculous statements I've seen in the last 18 months, and that's saying something.

It's Snake Pliskin · 9 January 2009

noirua said:
Babcock & Brown Ltd., needs to be partly nationalised. It's a major Aussie company that needs to survive. Probably would be bad luck for investors, still, Australia comes first.

What a ridiculous statement. Are we going communist now? Let the market sort it out.

nomore4s · 9 January 2009

jackson8 said:
what i find completely illogical with a stock like this is the fact that over a seven day period the sp has rallied 200 percent only then to have said ann made which obviously will have a negative impact on sp
my question is or observations are

why did the share price rally so much

who were buying.. surely retail investors could not account for the large volumes traded

why would institutions be buying into this . surely they would have more insight into the deeper financial woes of this company

begs for understanding and gives me little confidence in how our free market operates

note .. i do not hold ...just concerned

Pretty good sell off the day before the trading halt, maybe it was just a good old pump and dump.

noirua said:
Babcock & Brown Ltd., needs to be partly nationalised. It's a major Aussie company that needs to survive. Probably would be bad luck for investors, still, Australia comes first.

How would nationalising BNB help Aust?
I'm not really sure it needs to survive, only people it helped were the greedy management and directors imo.
Better off trying to sort out the ABC mess (keep more centres open) as at least that would have a some sort of effect on peoples everyday lives.

totoro_chan · 9 January 2009

jackson8 said:
what i find completely illogical with a stock like this is the fact that over a seven day period the sp has rallied 200 percent only then to have said ann made which obviously will have a negative impact on sp
my question is or observations are

why did the share price rally so much

who were buying.. surely retail investors could not account for the large volumes traded

why would institutions be buying into this . surely they would have more insight into the deeper financial woes of this company

begs for understanding and gives me little confidence in how our free market operates

note .. i do not hold ...just concerned

isnt it because there was some hedge fund was buying in BNB to close their short position (from a year ago)? other probably in same situation.

otherwise, i also cant explain y ppl still stick to this stock.

Moreover i dont really understand their situation atm. They said BNB is "technically insolvent" so wat difference will the banks' acceptance make?

Julia · 9 January 2009

noirua said:
Babcock & Brown Ltd., needs to be partly nationalised. It's a major Aussie company that needs to survive. Probably would be bad luck for investors, still, Australia comes first.

So should every other company in trouble similarly be nationalised?
I don't see that BNB has any particular claim to having the taxpayer support the incompetence of its management.

You might be happy for your taxes to rise to fund all the government's spending, Noirua, but I'm not. We will already be getting the bill for the 'spend, spend, spend' handout as the deficit deepens. Do you think Rudd & Co are going to feel just okey dokey about going to the next election with a massive deficit? What great ammunition for the opposition who will have no qualms in pointing out that at some stage it has to be paid for.

But, I've just remembered: aren't you living in the UK at present?
Not paying tax in Oz?
No worries, then.

gfresh · 23 January 2009

Well, b&b puts the final screw into shareholders .. What a collapse, from $35, to $0 in 18 months. That's right up there with the best of them.

Embattled investment firm, Babcock and Brown Ltd, says there will be no value for equity holders under its revised business plan and little, or no, value for holders of its subordinated notes.

"The board believes that in the current market environment and based on continuing discussions with the banking syndicate there will be no value for equity holders under the revised business plan and balance sheet restructure of Babcock & Brown International Pty Ltd and negligible or no value for holders of the company’s subordinated notes," Babcock and Brown said in a statement to the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX).

Dezza · 23 January 2009

Can't believe Centro outlasted them...disappointing for shareholders. When are they coming off suspension (if at all)?

investorpaul · 23 January 2009

noirua said:
Babcock & Brown Ltd., needs to be partly nationalised. It's a major Aussie company that needs to survive. Probably would be bad luck for investors, still, Australia comes first.

Nationalised..... Major Company???? I would hardly class them as a company of national significance.

They bought a hole heap of assets that they paid to much for and when the market corrected they found themselves up a creek without a paddle.

The step they have taken is probably the best outcome for the company althrough creating zero value for the shareholders the company continues to operate and some assets are retained avoiding a further fire sale, the other alternative would have included a sale of all assets and winding up the business which would result in a short fall against the debt.

There would be no point in nationalising B&B. If B&B was to fail the assets would just be sold off to another company and the world would continue to go round.

noirua · 23 January 2009

Julia said:
So should every other company in trouble similarly be nationalised?
I don't see that BNB has any particular claim to having the taxpayer support the incompetence of its management.

You might be happy for your taxes to rise to fund all the government's spending, Noirua, but I'm not. We will already be getting the bill for the 'spend, spend, spend' handout as the deficit deepens. Do you think Rudd & Co are going to feel just okey dokey about going to the next election with a massive deficit? What great ammunition for the opposition who will have no qualms in pointing out that at some stage it has to be paid for.

But, I've just remembered: aren't you living in the UK at present?
Not paying tax in Oz?
No worries, then.

I do pay some tax in Aus though not as much as I once did. There are tax agreements in place these days.
If a lot of Aussies found jobs abroad and sent some money back home, the unemployment figure might stay near 4.3% - I should get an award.

If Rudd & Co succeed in making a majority think that they're the only ones competent enough to save the country, then they'll get back in deficit or not.
Come to think of it, most other countries will have a deficit as well.

Anyway, if the Aussie$ stays low, perhaps 59c to US$1, the export industry will be helped.

Growing more food on your own plot would help, and of course, guarding passion fruit etc.,

sails · 23 January 2009

noirua said:
I...Growing more food on your own plot would help, and of course, guarding passion fruit etc.,

Noirua, what do you mean about guarding passion fruit? Do you mean they are good for export? Sorry if I've missed something...

BNB - Babcock & Brown

Logique

Investor

joeyjoejoe

dhukka

Aussiejeff

Bushman

Aussiejeff

jackson8

gfresh

noirua

benwex

dhukka

It's Snake Pliskin

nomore4s

Commonsense isn't that common

totoro_chan

Julia

In Memoriam

gfresh

Dezza

investorpaul

noirua

sails

Similar threads

BNB - Babcock & Brown

Investor

Commonsense isn't that common

In Memoriam

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency