| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) 08:21 - Nov 27 with 5564 views | danehoop |
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34941119
Think this probably explains the previous pressures on our owners on their loans against the shares of Air Asia. To be honest it might actually be a good time to buy Air Asia shares as the negatives are priced in. The business model, aside from the long haul trial, is generally a proven one that does generate cash over the long term.
It does appear to make the decision to write off the Debt an even more generous gesture by the club. But also does underline their change of priority to get promoted back to Premiership as clearly the Tune Group cant keep pishing away money through QPR like it has. [Post edited 27 Nov 2015 8:22]
|  |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |  |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 08:31 - Nov 27 with 3409 views | Lblock |
I'd of thought the crash would've caused more of a loss to be honest.
Bungle needs to save face and fast. He'll be voted no confidence if bad news keeps following him around.
The upside of expecting a stronger 4th quarter feels purely sugar sprinkles on a turd. My company has recently done the same with their third quarter results but the City paid no attention and wiped 12% off the value in under 20 minutes. We do have suspicions on that as quite a few of us have a SAYE Share scheme maturing next Tuesday and we think the bad news, which didn't need to be released to the City just yet, was intentional to suppress the value and ensure not everyone sold as the shares were at a 3 year high.
Stocks and shares.... you gotta love 'em! |  |
| Cherish and enjoy life.... this ain't no dress rehearsal |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 08:36 - Nov 27 with 3399 views | ThGrimRanger |
lucky for them that fuel prices are at rock bottom otherwise they'd be in even bigger trouble |  |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 09:01 - Nov 27 with 3351 views | CroydonCaptJack |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 08:31 - Nov 27 by Lblock |
I'd of thought the crash would've caused more of a loss to be honest.
Bungle needs to save face and fast. He'll be voted no confidence if bad news keeps following him around.
The upside of expecting a stronger 4th quarter feels purely sugar sprinkles on a turd. My company has recently done the same with their third quarter results but the City paid no attention and wiped 12% off the value in under 20 minutes. We do have suspicions on that as quite a few of us have a SAYE Share scheme maturing next Tuesday and we think the bad news, which didn't need to be released to the City just yet, was intentional to suppress the value and ensure not everyone sold as the shares were at a 3 year high.
Stocks and shares.... you gotta love 'em! |
Yes, the wonderful world of shares eh mate?
Seems a bit odd that they wouldn't want the peice high to motivate the staff or was it to stop them heading off into the sunset with a large payout? |  | | |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 09:33 - Nov 27 with 3314 views | highleverhoopL |
Scrolling down to the bottom of that page on the BBC website to a
an old article:
17 March 2015 " Air Asia Chief confident on remaining profitable"
He really is full of s*** |  | | |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 09:41 - Nov 27 with 3294 views | Mvpeter |
With the debt, I'd hold off on praising their 'write off' at least for a while because it could very easily be preparing to borrow more from banks. | |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 10:31 - Nov 27 with 3213 views | danehoop |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 09:41 - Nov 27 by Mvpeter |
With the debt, I'd hold off on praising their 'write off' at least for a while because it could very easily be preparing to borrow more from banks. |
MyPeter,
not sure why we should hold of praising the write off. QPR is essentially debt free for the first time in a generation. That is difficult to not see anything but an upside in that.
It really is a massive step for those who remember the dodgy ABC loan it removes probably the largest of the many swords of damocles which hang over the club. That the debt balloned to such a size in the first place is though quite astonishing. | |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 11:17 - Nov 27 with 3165 views | Mvpeter |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 10:31 - Nov 27 by danehoop |
MyPeter,
not sure why we should hold of praising the write off. QPR is essentially debt free for the first time in a generation. That is difficult to not see anything but an upside in that.
It really is a massive step for those who remember the dodgy ABC loan it removes probably the largest of the many swords of damocles which hang over the club. That the debt balloned to such a size in the first place is though quite astonishing. |
We aren't debt free at all we have at least £27 million of debt on the stadium. Those are the debts that matter to us the fans because they are the one capable of harming us. Shareholder debt isn't.
I'd like to wait and see what the motivation was. I've a horrible feeling we might now try and borrow more. It's one of the main reasons for converting debt to equity and these guys are having financial problems and have shown no issue with leveraging debt against any asset.
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/cfmmanual/cfm11180.htm [Post edited 27 Nov 2015 11:18]
| |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 11:25 - Nov 27 with 3149 views | CroydonCaptJack |
Hardly the hindreds of miilions we had before though.
Praise is defintely due for the write off as we are certainly 200m better off than we were before it even if we aren't debt-free. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 11:38 - Nov 27 with 3118 views | Mvpeter |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 11:25 - Nov 27 by CroydonCaptJack |
Hardly the hindreds of miilions we had before though.
Praise is defintely due for the write off as we are certainly 200m better off than we were before it even if we aren't debt-free. |
That's just it. We haven't changed anything. We're just calling the 'soft debt' shares now and if that leads to more 'hard debt' then it's a bad thing.
Effectively the change means that a new owner would have to pay 200 million for the club rather than a new owner having to spend 20 million on the club and 180 million to pay off the debt.
However debt against the stadium is dangerous regardless of owners. | |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 12:32 - Nov 27 with 3052 views | whittocksRs |
Debt for equity swaps almost always mask something else, be it lenders taking more control of someone's assets, or some kind of renegotiated debt deal. It's still not clear exactly how strong Fernandes' control of his assets is at the moment, which is why the debt swap bothers me. | | | |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 12:37 - Nov 27 with 3039 views | isawqpratwcity |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 11:38 - Nov 27 by Mvpeter |
That's just it. We haven't changed anything. We're just calling the 'soft debt' shares now and if that leads to more 'hard debt' then it's a bad thing.
Effectively the change means that a new owner would have to pay 200 million for the club rather than a new owner having to spend 20 million on the club and 180 million to pay off the debt.
However debt against the stadium is dangerous regardless of owners. |
There's nothing to say the new owner will "have" to pay 200 mill. When it sells, the club will go for what the owners can get for it - and that depends mainly on what league we're in, not how much the owners have put in. |  |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 12:37 - Nov 27 with 3038 views | Mvpeter |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 12:32 - Nov 27 by whittocksRs |
Debt for equity swaps almost always mask something else, be it lenders taking more control of someone's assets, or some kind of renegotiated debt deal. It's still not clear exactly how strong Fernandes' control of his assets is at the moment, which is why the debt swap bothers me. |
Exactly. Let's not assume that anything bad comes out of it but at the same time I'm not cheering.
Especially as they've lied about loading us up with external debt before. | |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 16:55 - Nov 27 with 2898 views | baz_qpr |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 08:36 - Nov 27 by ThGrimRanger |
lucky for them that fuel prices are at rock bottom otherwise they'd be in even bigger trouble |
Not really they hedged their fuel prices some time ago so they are paying 2013/14 prices |  | | |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 17:19 - Nov 27 with 2872 views | Jamie |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 11:38 - Nov 27 by Mvpeter |
That's just it. We haven't changed anything. We're just calling the 'soft debt' shares now and if that leads to more 'hard debt' then it's a bad thing.
Effectively the change means that a new owner would have to pay 200 million for the club rather than a new owner having to spend 20 million on the club and 180 million to pay off the debt.
However debt against the stadium is dangerous regardless of owners. |
It doesn't mean that at all.
The club now has £200m of share capital but that doesn't mean that any buyer would have to pay that.
The shares will be sold for whatever a buyer deems them worth. | | | |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 17:24 - Nov 27 with 2862 views | CroydonCaptJack |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 11:38 - Nov 27 by Mvpeter |
That's just it. We haven't changed anything. We're just calling the 'soft debt' shares now and if that leads to more 'hard debt' then it's a bad thing.
Effectively the change means that a new owner would have to pay 200 million for the club rather than a new owner having to spend 20 million on the club and 180 million to pay off the debt.
However debt against the stadium is dangerous regardless of owners. |
It changes things massively.
The debt is written off within the club so any new owner doesn't inherit it.
The debt to the existing shareholders might have been a point of negotiation but it is no longer there. | | | |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 09:02 - Nov 28 with 2673 views | Mvpeter |
And the share plus debt will be bought and sold at whatever the buyer seems acceptable. Which will be the same now as it was then. | |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 09:27 - Nov 28 with 2652 views | CroydonCaptJack |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 09:02 - Nov 28 by Mvpeter |
And the share plus debt will be bought and sold at whatever the buyer seems acceptable. Which will be the same now as it was then. |
Except the seller i.e. TF etc no longer have the money owed to them by the club as part of the negotiations. You may well end up at the same price for the club but that part of the debt has now gone from the club. I cannot see how that is bad news. | | | |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 10:37 - Nov 28 with 2619 views | isawqpratwcity |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 09:02 - Nov 28 by Mvpeter |
And the share plus debt will be bought and sold at whatever the buyer seems acceptable. Which will be the same now as it was then. |
What kind of Cloud Cuckoo Land do you live in?
They paid for a Premier club with the associated income stream and exposure. They now own a Championship club that they have spunked a mountain of money on. Without getting back into the Premier, they haven't a hope in hell of getting their money back. I know it, they know it, everybody here knows it, and if you don't know it, go back to wherever you got your vaunted business finance qualification and ask for a refund. | |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 08:28 - Nov 30 with 2497 views | Mvpeter |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 10:37 - Nov 28 by isawqpratwcity |
What kind of Cloud Cuckoo Land do you live in?
They paid for a Premier club with the associated income stream and exposure. They now own a Championship club that they have spunked a mountain of money on. Without getting back into the Premier, they haven't a hope in hell of getting their money back. I know it, they know it, everybody here knows it, and if you don't know it, go back to wherever you got your vaunted business finance qualification and ask for a refund. |
Why are you talking about how it was when they bought it? A complete irrelevance to this. | |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 12:30 - Nov 30 with 2444 views | isawqpratwcity |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 08:28 - Nov 30 by Mvpeter |
Why are you talking about how it was when they bought it? A complete irrelevance to this. |
Alright, but this is the last time...
They bought a Premier club. Premier clubs are worth more than Championship clubs, because they can make more money. That is why T&C sold when they did. It's called profit-taking. The new owners spent a huge amount of money to make the club more competitive. It didn't work. The club got relegated back into the Championship. That money they spent is gone. The club is now worth what the other clubs in the Championship are worth, give or take a bit. That's all. | |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 12:33 - Nov 30 with 2432 views | Jamie |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 08:28 - Nov 30 by Mvpeter |
Why are you talking about how it was when they bought it? A complete irrelevance to this. |
Almost as irrelevant as your posts on a subject that you clearly know less than zero about.. | | | |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 13:29 - Nov 30 with 2366 views | Mvpeter |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 12:30 - Nov 30 by isawqpratwcity |
Alright, but this is the last time...
They bought a Premier club. Premier clubs are worth more than Championship clubs, because they can make more money. That is why T&C sold when they did. It's called profit-taking. The new owners spent a huge amount of money to make the club more competitive. It didn't work. The club got relegated back into the Championship. That money they spent is gone. The club is now worth what the other clubs in the Championship are worth, give or take a bit. That's all. |
We are talking about book value here. You are talking about market value. We are talking about before and after the conversion of the debt. You are talking about before and after Tony's reign.
The amount that Tony is willing to sell the club for will not have changed due to this because the book value of his assets has not changed. It was the value of the club + debt and now it's the value of the club. These figures are the same. [Post edited 30 Nov 2015 13:36]
| |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 13:30 - Nov 30 with 2362 views | Mvpeter |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 12:33 - Nov 30 by Jamie |
Almost as irrelevant as your posts on a subject that you clearly know less than zero about.. |
I'd better quit my masters then eh? Surprising because these lecturers seem to understand what I'm saying.
Please explain how converting Tony's assets from say £20 million in assets and £180m in debt to £200m in assets will make him change how he judges the market value of those assets. [Post edited 30 Nov 2015 13:45]
| |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 14:43 - Nov 30 with 2301 views | isawqpratwcity |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 13:29 - Nov 30 by Mvpeter |
We are talking about book value here. You are talking about market value. We are talking about before and after the conversion of the debt. You are talking about before and after Tony's reign.
The amount that Tony is willing to sell the club for will not have changed due to this because the book value of his assets has not changed. It was the value of the club + debt and now it's the value of the club. These figures are the same. [Post edited 30 Nov 2015 13:36]
|
"Effectively the change means that a new owner would have to pay 200 million for the club rather than a new owner having to spend 20 million on the club and 180 million to pay off the debt."
That looks to me like you were talking about after Tony's reign, too. Do you reckon the club is now worth £200 million? Is that what a new owner would "have to pay"? Is that based on a £180 million debt? Or were you getting confused? | |
| |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 15:00 - Nov 30 with 2273 views | Jamie |
| More Air Asia bad news (in the short term at least) on 13:30 - Nov 30 by Mvpeter |
I'd better quit my masters then eh? Surprising because these lecturers seem to understand what I'm saying.
Please explain how converting Tony's assets from say £20 million in assets and £180m in debt to £200m in assets will make him change how he judges the market value of those assets. [Post edited 30 Nov 2015 13:45]
|
As we have been trying to tell you, what Tony values the club at is completely irrelevant. The owners will get whatever a buyer is willing to pay for the club, which they will be extremely lucky if it's the £50m they put in to buy it initially.
It's abundantly clear that the write off - coming days after the banks the board have leveraged their AA shares with had gotten twitchy - has been undertaken purely to try and attract a buyer, as they would've been lucky to get £1 for the club beforehand.
If they get back the money to settle with the banks and get their AA shares out of the banks grasp, they'll happily write the rest off as a learning epoerience gone wrong IMO. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
