15225 replies to this topic

[Investment novice]

To sort this entire mess out steinhoff will have to agree a few market acceptable moves... They can buy out existing shareholders for r3. 50 as an example. Any shareholder with a legal claim will then be entitled to the allocated shares unlisted.

The main value of snh has been eroded by the fear of litigation and by the share dumping...

Cw would be paid out and received shares... In the unlisted which would be of a significant value following settlement and relisting.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

[DayTraderDad]

Any chance steinhoff delists by buying out the current shareholders at a deflated value it is currently. And hands over the full entity as settlement to shareholders that have initiated the lawsuit. And perhaps relisting in three years time. Sounds crazy....?

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

Any chance steinhoff delists by buying out the current shareholders at a deflated value it is currently. And hands over the full entity as settlement to shareholders that have initiated the lawsuit. And perhaps relisting in three years time. Sounds crazy....?

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

Hi IN sounds like you had a nice braai!!! Hahaha well I had a nice braai with lots of green beer!!

Well that is a interesting scenario but again they would have to pay CW over R2.45 because that was the average he bought in September 2018.

PIC and CW still big holders why would they sell their shares to get them back with a company with less money because do believe cash is not
something that SNH is full off???

I have been thinking why the share dropped to this level and I think found the answer and that is if you take the balance sheet of H1 2018 and
adjusted to the latest FY 2019 I land up with a NAV for shareholders of E0.13 or about R2.08 which if one takes into account the impairments to
come for Conforama alone will take the Nav to where the price is now E0.094 ot R1.46.
So my take Mr Market already taking in the bad new for FY 2018.
The good news however is if you take the MF out of the balance sheet due to equity reporting things change considerably in two possibilities:
1 - Is all the debt is taken over by MF and SNH is free then NAV should jump to around E2.20
2 - Is the debt is taken to the MF balance sheet but SNH still responsible i.e. MF has to pay SNH and SNH has to pay the creditors then Nav is
about E1.0 or R16.06
If one takes then Conforama also to be reported as equity then NAV jumps up by another (about) 0.38 so my guess with rough calculation looking
at a NAV for FY2019 of E1.37 or R22.

Please note the figures are my calculations and as I am not an accountant waiting on accountants to confirm my thoughts!!

[Investment novice]

Any chance steinhoff delists by buying out the current shareholders at a deflated value it is currently. And hands over the full entity as settlement to shareholders that have initiated the lawsuit. And perhaps relisting in three years time. Sounds crazy....?

Sent from my SM-G950F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

[DayTraderDad]

After reading the article I have good news for the CW claims judge " No need for Disprin is a simple case!!!"

[DayTraderDad]

I remember this time very well. 
 
I did not own Steinhoff at the time (I only acquired Steinhoff around 2018 - the time that management got some degree of acceptance from the lenders regarding the LUA), There were however, many other portfolio managers in my circle of friends who did own Steinhoff.  We would get together every so often (family barbecues, kids parties, that sort of thing), and the talk invariably turned to work. 
 
A common subject was Steinhoff.  I remember even the pro-Steinhoff guys being shocked at the MF acquisition.  I wasn't so much the MF company performance - profit-wise MF was not the perfect pitch for a swing slog to outfield - it was the price paid.  The 115% premium to the share price (which in itself was already on the high PE side) was mind boggling.  
 
However, almost everyone said that MJ and CW were among the shrewdest businessmen on the planet.  If anyone had a plan, it was those two.  The talk at the time was that Steinhoff had paid the premium to acquire the MF logistics channel and Distribution centres that this was the underlying value. They also really talked up the revenue and store footprint, the strong cash-flow, the management experience.
 
My mates felt that it represented the final frontier for Steinhoff (who did not operate in either of the Americas).
 
Of course after the Jooste-gate scandal all the worms in the woodwork were revealed. 
 
Steinhoff have now given up 40% of the business for no cost.  CW has absolutely no excuses regarding this business.  He may funded it through a massive share acquisition in a Steinhoff share offering.  But that is just the mechanism or currency he used to pay for MF.  It does not absolve him of making an enormous error in buying MF - both from a strategic position as well as the price. 
 
Regards
Captainfrom82

Very interesting indeed this is like a Ships Captain telling the helmsman hard a starboard and the ship goes into the rooks and then Captain
blames the helmsman for the ship going aground and wants to be compensated for being involved in a grounding.
For me what happen here is unacceptable/reckless investing and this was for sure what broke SNH and CW was the Captain on the bridge!!!

[Captainfrom82]

Interesting apparently SNH bought MF after a 5 day due diligence.
If it is true sure then the board of Steinhoff was managed very poorly at the time.
For me this is SHOCKING to say the least!!! No bother to even see the amount of shorting on the MF share!!!

https://www.bloomber...mattress-stores

Highlight:

"Besides amassing $1.3 billion of net debt, Mattress Firm was also on the hook for $2.7 billion in off-balance sheet lease
liabilities related to its sprawling store chain, according to the last accounts it filed. Steinhoff didn’t mention those
leases, which are similar to debt, in the text of an investor presentation outlining the deal terms.

It’s not clear how much time it spent analyzing them itself. Steinhoff spent only five days conducting on-site due diligence
at Mattress Firm, according to this regulatory filing. Both companies declined to comment for this piece.

In hindsight, its haste seems surprising. People had already begun to query why Mattress Firm had so many stores when other
retailers were busy closing theirs because of the rise of online competitors. There were about 235 Mattress Firm stores in
the Chicago area, for example, often close to one another. The shares were heavily shorted"

 

I remember this time very well. 

 

I did not own Steinhoff at the time (I only acquired Steinhoff around 2018 - the time that management got some degree of acceptance from the lenders regarding the LUA), There were however, many other portfolio managers in my circle of friends who did own Steinhoff.  We would get together every so often (family barbecues, kids parties, that sort of thing), and the talk invariably turned to work. 

 

A common subject was Steinhoff.  I remember even the pro-Steinhoff guys being shocked at the MF acquisition.  I wasn't so much the MF company performance - profit-wise MF was not the perfect pitch for a swing slog to outfield - it was the price paid.  The 115% premium to the share price (which in itself was already on the high PE side) was mind boggling.  

 

However, almost everyone said that MJ and CW were among the shrewdest businessmen on the planet.  If anyone had a plan, it was those two.  The talk at the time was that Steinhoff had paid the premium to acquire the MF logistics channel and Distribution centres that this was the underlying value. They also really talked up the revenue and store footprint, the strong cash-flow, the management experience.

 

My mates felt that it represented the final frontier for Steinhoff (who did not operate in either of the Americas).

 

Of course after the Jooste-gate scandal all the worms in the woodwork were revealed. 

 

Steinhoff have now given up 40% of the business for no cost.  CW has absolutely no excuses regarding this business.  He may funded it through a massive share acquisition in a Steinhoff share offering.  But that is just the mechanism or currency he used to pay for MF.  It does not absolve him of making an enormous error in buying MF - both from a strategic position as well as the price. 

 

Regards

Captainfrom82

[DayTraderDad]

Interesting apparently SNH bought MF after a 5 day due diligence.
If it is true sure then the board of Steinhoff was managed very poorly at the time.
For me this is SHOCKING to say the least!!! No bother to even see the amount of shorting on the MF share!!!

https://www.bloomber...mattress-stores

Highlight:

"Besides amassing $1.3 billion of net debt, Mattress Firm was also on the hook for $2.7 billion in off-balance sheet lease
liabilities related to its sprawling store chain, according to the last accounts it filed. Steinhoff didn’t mention those
leases, which are similar to debt, in the text of an investor presentation outlining the deal terms.

It’s not clear how much time it spent analyzing them itself. Steinhoff spent only five days conducting on-site due diligence
at Mattress Firm, according to this regulatory filing. Both companies declined to comment for this piece.

In hindsight, its haste seems surprising. People had already begun to query why Mattress Firm had so many stores when other
retailers were busy closing theirs because of the rise of online competitors. There were about 235 Mattress Firm stores in
the Chicago area, for example, often close to one another. The shares were heavily shorted"

[Midas1]

Ps you did say any advice..clearly didn't like answer 😂

[Midas1]

Entirely up yourself..and everyone else..good luck..eyes wide open

[DayTraderDad]

Hi DTD,
 
Maybe we are speaking across each other, buddy - I will message you offline if you want to discuss further.  My point is that the E905 actually includes the E775.
 
My other point is that Steinhoff took a big loss on the Kika Leiner PropCos disposal - which will reflect on the Income Statement.  I therefore do not believe that they will get the E415 for properties worth E324. 
 
Regards
Captainfrom82

Hi Captain yes we are talking the same thing the 775 is included on the 905.

If you recall the evaluation done was without taking rental income into the evaluation but if one sells a property in time
(i.e. not a fire sale) one can get more because the rental income has value.
Either way there will be a impairment in the FY 2019

[new john]

Going butt in here..im not invested but mo mad to buy a share falling like this...id put my money in something going up....quick money is a dream seldom a reality...you likely double down on your loss...ask proper financial advisor if good idea buy snh right now..i know answer....sorry mates but really

I appreciate your opinion thanks, honestly. Do you really think I / the rest of investors aren’t aware of the risk involved? (Rhetoric, but go ahead and answer if you’re so inclined) As for your advice of putting my money on something going up, and excuse my gross use of sarcasm, but I’ll seriously consider that!!

No beef, but sometimes it’s best to just allow others to do what they want, I take for granted we’re all adults here; no one has to be a savior here, rescuing anyone from potential bad investments. It’s called due diligence. And sometimes, just sometimes, it’s a throw of the dice. Maybe I’ll lose, and that’s okay. But maybe.....

[Captainfrom82]

Hi Captain,

Link to the prtesentation: http://www.steinhoff..._Public VFF.pdf
In page 24 there is the breakdownof Hemisphere debt.

This link is for the Hemesphere information: http://www.steinhoff...tate update.pdf

DTD: "Off which 380 was to pay part of the 775 so outstanding there should be 775 - 380 = 395".

CF82: I do not follow this - the E380 has already been used up in the calcs above, which we agreed reduced Hemisphere debt to E415.

DTD: According to the presentation E380 mil was used to pay part of the term load which due to the value must have been the 775 because all other loans are much less. Thus the 775-380
-----------------------------------
DTD: I imagine that the outstanding value of E324.1 mil for property with E29.6 mil rental should be able to be sold for the outstanding E415
which I remember reading somewhere before they were looking at selling it for E400 mil.

CF82: I do not follow this. CBRE valuation prior to and after the sales show that there was Loss on Capital Item of approximately E295.9. This loss should reflect on either the FY2018 (unlikely) or FY2019 (probable) depending on the date of the sale.

DTD: See insert from presentation:
"Prior to the sale of the PropCos the Hemisphere property portfolio was valued by CBRE(1) at €1.0bn. The CBRE
valuation(1) of the remaining property portfolio is €324.1m"

The value of the property sold should have been E1 bil - E324.1 = E675.9 but they sold it for E490 mil so there must be a impairment of E185. Note this is just using the information from the presentations.

 

Hi DTD,

 

Maybe we are speaking across each other, buddy - I will message you offline if you want to discuss further.  My point is that the E905 actually includes the E775.

 

My other point is that Steinhoff took a big loss on the Kika Leiner PropCos disposal - which will reflect on the Income Statement.  I therefore do not believe that they will get the E415 for properties worth E324. 

 

Regards

Captainfrom82

[Midas1]

Going butt in here..im not invested but mo mad to buy a share falling like this...id put my money in something going up....quick money is a dream seldom a reality...you likely double down on your loss...ask proper financial advisor if good idea buy snh right now..i know answer....sorry mates but really

[new john]

Hi All,

R2.43 is my average purchase price...
I'm contemplating buying more shares at R1.60 to drop my average down...

Any Advice?

I have exams and haven't been paying much attention to my portfolio...

Sent from my SM-N960F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

Suppose it would depend how deep in you’re already in, and what you’d be willing to invest. If your proposed cost averaging will only be a negligible one, then ask yourself “is it worth the risk”?

What kind of drop are you looking at? I went from 2.02 to 1.84 by doubling down which brings my “super duper high risk” allocation of portfolio to 7% (not entirely made up of SNH)

[DayTraderDad]

Hi Captain,

Link to the prtesentation: http://www.steinhoff..._Public VFF.pdf
In page 24 there is the breakdownof Hemisphere debt.

This link is for the Hemesphere information: http://www.steinhoff...tate update.pdf

DTD: "Off which 380 was to pay part of the 775 so outstanding there should be 775 - 380 = 395".

CF82: I do not follow this - the E380 has already been used up in the calcs above, which we agreed reduced Hemisphere debt to E415.

DTD: According to the presentation E380 mil was used to pay part of the term load which due to the value must have been the 775 because all other loans are much less. Thus the 775-380
-----------------------------------
DTD: I imagine that the outstanding value of E324.1 mil for property with E29.6 mil rental should be able to be sold for the outstanding E415
which I remember reading somewhere before they were looking at selling it for E400 mil.

CF82: I do not follow this. CBRE valuation prior to and after the sales show that there was Loss on Capital Item of approximately E295.9. This loss should reflect on either the FY2018 (unlikely) or FY2019 (probable) depending on the date of the sale.

DTD: See insert from presentation:
"Prior to the sale of the PropCos the Hemisphere property portfolio was valued by CBRE(1) at €1.0bn. The CBRE
valuation(1) of the remaining property portfolio is €324.1m"

The value of the property sold should have been E1 bil - E324.1 = E675.9 but they sold it for E490 mil so there must be a impairment of E185. Note this is just using the information from the presentations.

Edited by DayTraderDad, 11 May 2019 - 04:43 PM.

[Bubble]

Overall MJ Fraud.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

[Motivated]

Hi All,

R2.43 is my average purchase price...
I'm contemplating buying more shares at R1.60 to drop my average down...

Any Advice?

I have exams and haven't been paying much attention to my portfolio...

Sent from my SM-N960F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

[Captainfrom82]

Hi Captain,

According to presentation to lender in 20 Sep 2018 Hemisphere debt was 905 mil namely:

Term loan facility 750
Term loan 37
Property loans 47
Finance Leases 71
Total : 905

In 6 Sep 2018 Sens the implementation of the restructure of the E775 mil.

On the 15 Oct 2018 a presentation was issued that stated the following:

Further to the announcement on 15 October 2018 from Steinhoff International Holdings N.V. regarding the
completion of the sale of the Kika-Leiner property companies (“PropCos”) to Signa Group, Hemisphere
International Properties B.V. ("Hemisphere") can confirm the following terms of the sale:
• The consideration for the PropCos is based on an enterprise value of around €490m and is subject to certain
balance sheet adjustments as at the date of closing which will be based on completion accounts. The
completion accounts are to be finalised within 45 business days of completion
• The sale is expected to result in a repayment of around €380m from the term loan owed by Hemisphere
Prior to the sale of the PropCos the Hemisphere property portfolio was valued by CBRE (1) at €1.0bn. The CBRE
valuation (1) of the remaining property portfolio is €324.1m
Total rental income, including the PropCos, was €82.9m and the rental income for the remaining property portfolio
following the sale of the PropCos is €29.6m (2)"

So the total debt for the loan should have reduced 905 - 490 = 415

Off which 380 was to pay part of the 775 so outstanding there should be 775 - 380 = 395

I imagine that the outstanding value of E324.1 mil for property with E29.6 mil rental should be able to be sold for the outstanding E415
which I remember reading somewhere before they were looking at selling it for E400 mil.

Am I missing something here??

Regards,
DTD

 

Wow DTD, talk about a comprehensive response well articulated using valid a traceable reference points.  I am curious.  Where did you get the Hemisphere breakdown of the E905m debt?  The facts that you have provided are probably 100% correct (I have done a quick check), but we do differ on the interpretation of the outcome.

 

DTD: "So the total debt for the loan should have reduced 905 - 490 = 415". 

CF82: The E490 is the enterprise value that the sale was valued at.  It turns out that the actual money received (the proceeds was actually E380), which is what the debt should be paired by (not the full E490). But, since the debt E110 debt is now not owing by Steinhoff, after you subtract that E110 you get back to your E415.  So this is correct.

DTD: "Off which 380 was to pay part of the 775 so outstanding there should be 775 - 380 = 395". 

CF82: I do not follow this - the E380 has already been used up in the calcs above, which we agreed reduced Hemisphere debt to E415.

DTD: I imagine that the outstanding value of E324.1 mil for property with E29.6 mil rental should be able to be sold for the outstanding E415
which I remember reading somewhere before they were looking at selling it for E400 mil.

CF82:  I do not follow this.  CBRE valuation prior to and after the sales show that there was Loss on Capital Item of approximately E295.9.  This loss should reflect on either the FY2018 (unlikely) or FY2019 (probable) depending on the date of the sale.

 

There is another check that we could use based on the rental return on property both before (8.3%)  and after (9.1%) the Kika Leiner disposal.  We could even use an average of 8.7% to decide the actual value of the property disposed so that we could have a check value for the Loss on Capital Item.

 

Regards

Captainfrom82

Edited by Captainfrom82, 11 May 2019 - 03:45 PM.

[DayTraderDad]

Haha I am going to start to pray for the judge that is going to deal with the court case of the CW claims!!
Certainly going to need lots of Disprin!!!

[Captainfrom82]

He is not going away. I think I posted this before, STB Mafia rumour, CW did not know but his Son did.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Sharenet Sharechat mobile app

 

Hi Bubble,

 

Clarify please.  What did Wiese not know but his son knew? 

 

Are you speaking of the overall MJ fraud, or the related part transactions involving Lancaster and Upington Investments that have "suddenly" been reported on?

 

Regards

Captainfrom82