13-08-2014, 01:27 PM
Thanks for your lengthy analysis.
I have blind faith in someone with 88% stake in a company. When he can't get off a supposedly run away train, he will have to navigate the train eventually to the destination.
I m happy to risk my money with someone that owns the company substantially.
To each his own, I take calculated risks hopefully with the right driver at least better some folks that blindly steering into a "disaster" zone.
Vested
GG
I have blind faith in someone with 88% stake in a company. When he can't get off a supposedly run away train, he will have to navigate the train eventually to the destination.
I m happy to risk my money with someone that owns the company substantially.
To each his own, I take calculated risks hopefully with the right driver at least better some folks that blindly steering into a "disaster" zone.
Vested
GG
(13-08-2014, 12:07 PM)specuvestor Wrote:(12-08-2014, 08:28 PM)freedom Wrote: Give me one reason that TCC has to pay back his credit card. I don't see bankers are chasing TCC for debt repayment. Now is not a distress moment. If I am his banker, I will not ask for the money back as he is good for the credit and I get paid from the fee and the bank enjoin interest income from the loan.
No business owner just buy a business to sell it in pieces. That's what speculators or private equity does.
I don't know the bankers nor the covenant of this bridging loan. Never had I said it is a distressed situation. FNN was not distressed. The catalyst for the whole drama was when OCBC sold their stake to TCC. Bottomline is whether u believe it is LBO based on the anecdotal evidence.
My point is that it is most likely an LBO which I had explained. It is not that difficult to piece the puzzle together with so much activity, whereas thoughts we can only guess. (There is no lack of threads where people are guessing what the towkays are thinking)
For sure the towkay is a business owner but I think he is also 1) Opportunist 2) Empire builder. He struck deal and turn around sold APB remember? He effectively vetoed the FNN capital reduction for his own personal agenda. He "restructured" FNN soon after in breakneck speed, which I have commented in other threads that the only other player comparable was OUE. You are not new to the market, how many times have you seen towkays so willingly to share the spoils so quickly? Not sure how you define "selling off in pieces" but control is definitely important for him due to 2)
You have been watching ThaiBev closely and you would know how levered it was to go through the FNN deal. I wouldn't be surprised that TCC has similar capital structure as ThaiBev back then. Most of the time, if there is alternatives, a listed entity is used for M&A because of using their shares as currency. IIRC ThaiBev didn't issue shares for the FNN deal. Why would TCC need ThaiBev to lever up to do the deal with them? OTOH do u see "bankers chasing ThaiBev to return loans?" I think it is obvious that it is also in ThaiBev's interest to delever.
In the same vein why didn't TCC with Aussie interest, not do the ALZ deal directly if it is cash rich? We have thus yet to see how FCL is going to use its "currency"
Thereafter the FNN deal , we see rapidly fire of corp actions of 2 capital returns and 1 spin-off within the space of 8 months, which also directly reduced ThaiBev gearing. We have discussed that in the FNN thread. FNN is also no longer net cash. And if Towkay has so big plans for FCL, why bother to do the capital reduction in the 1st place?
Follow the cash flow and the gravy and you can see how the towkay is repositioning. That's why I think FNN and ThaiBev will continue to pay the bills of acquisition. And as of now I don't see the final act of FNN and FCL share swap unfeasible. In fact if FCL did do a cash call, my guess is the swap will happen soon AFTER the call is done. But that's probably too simplistic and I suspect the towkay might have more imagination to juggle the cash around.
If GG wants to dance with the empire-builder he needs to know what is the towkay's motivation. Most of the time their motivation is not enhancing shareholders' value. In the past 2 years it has only been so because we were anticipating how his actions will benefit OPMI. That's why I am waiting for the final act, just as discussed 1.5 years ago.