Just move them all to Asaleo's stock thread. AHY.
Just move them all to Asaleo's stock thread. AHY.From where Luutze first appeared on the scene at post 11 showing with his first line that he hadn't understood the prior P/E conversation - the rest of this thread should be moved/renamed! To what though I'm not sure???
I forgot to mention there's another $25m of free cash flow in the first half of 2016 that you need to financially engineer to make this look like a company this is secretly going bust.
In fact, by the end of 2016, there will probably be another $40m-50m of free cash flow on top of that.
There's only so much GST or additional tax they can pay before the ATO starts sending their cheques back.
ATO is in on it.
From where Luutze first appeared on the scene at post 11 showing with his first line that he hadn't understood the prior P/E conversation - the rest of this thread should be moved out of the beginners lounge/renamed! To what though I'm not sure???
Let's get that spreadsheet out and start doing the analysis with first, a 2 stage DCF model; then a 5 stage I'm paid by the hour to pretend I am smart...
So Luutze, small steps let look at the first incorrect statement you make – Oh look there it is on the first line.
The 96M shares are made up of consideration to SCA of 71.7M for the SCAHH subsidiary and 24.3M for the non-cash component of the SCAHHPL subsidiary. Both originally paid as promissory notes but settled for equity by the joint Venture PEPSCA
The 114M shares are made up of 20.4M brand assets for SCAHH and 93.6M of brand assets for SCAHHPL.
Total shares issued to SCA 210M
PEP then acquired 50% of the existing ordinary shares of the joint venture company from SCA (makes sense for a joint venture doesn’t it?) for $105M plus there was a completion settlement agreement where PEP would have paid SCA another 7.3M on the 105M shares.
So both parties hold an initially 105M shares each.
There was a latter split where the equity was split according to existing holdings and you can see they both had equal numbers of shares at the IPO.
It’s all spelt out multiple times in all the reports.
Nobody here is saying AHY is necessarily a great company or that the business during its transformation to an IPO ready business under private equity wasn’t highly leveraged. Nobody is saying that capital extracted from the business prior to the IPO wasn’t maximised and nobody is saying that the fees paid to advisors were justifiable.
We are just trying to point out the mistakes in your facts that undermine your arguement.
If you really want to do a good analyse – first get the facts straight. Look at things from the perspective of Funds employed. Forget just concentrating on what the joint partners made out of the process.
Then ask the questions:
IF PEP as the private equity partner made a windfall gain was it because SCA sold the 50% to them cheaply to get a partner on board who could shape the business for an IPO?
Does the underlying business improvements during the transformation period justify the profits achieved?
Or did the public pay too much for the IPO.
If you want to label it the next DSH – make the case based on post IPO financial structure and asset economic value - that's what has the potential to kill it - not just that it shared a similar heritage.
Luutzu
You misinterpreted and misrepresented that discussion and the same here.
Enough - you are an arrogant ********.
From where Luutze first appeared on the scene at post 11 showing with his first line that he hadn't understood the prior P/E conversation - the rest of this thread should be moved out of the beginners lounge/renamed! To what though I'm not sure???
I have a few suggestions:
- Problem with trying to have a discussion on the internet around facts?
- Read first: before engaging debate with Luutze
- A guide to winning every internet discussion: never admit being wrong
- Understanding company financial statements: the toilet paper methodology
- The importance of stop loss when posting on stock forums
I have a few suggestions:
- Problem with trying to have a discussion on the internet around facts?
- Read first: before engaging debate with Luutze
- A guide to winning every internet discussion: never admit being wrong
- Understanding company financial statements: the toilet paper methodology
- The importance of stop loss when posting on stock forums
I have a few suggestions:
- The importance of stop loss when posting on stock forums
I love that one, dont use them when investing, but when posting on the internet, well stop losses would have saved me several hours of my life I will never get back!!
I guess you can't really make $500m+ in two years without meeting a few highly paid maroon.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?