elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Feb 14, 2017 15:54:54 GMT
Having only just begrudgingly got into 4 figures for C***** at c102%, I'm looking forward to this at par!
Email today:
"We have a new one coming for an old customer, C*****. They are working with P****** S****** to provide modular buildings as the studio begins a £200 million expansion. The buildings are being supplied for ****** new blockbuster movie and are on lease to P******. The loan is for £750,000, we are just finalising all the details, but it should be on the platform at some stage tomorrow barring any last minute issues. We will, of course, send out another mail when we know the exact timing.
• Borrower: C****** • Amount: £750,000 Max - £250,000 Min. • Rate: TBA • Structure: Amortising (Capital and Interest paid monthly) • Term: 48 months • Security: 22 Modular Buildings on lease, Corporate Guarantee, Personal Guarantees"
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Feb 14, 2017 15:59:52 GMT
Thanks Elliottm. I seem to get no emails from Albrate and it helps to know what's coming. Maybe unwise for Ablrate to guarantee that the movie will be a 'blockbuster'. I have little C**f*** left.
|
|
littonowl
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 355
|
Post by littonowl on Feb 14, 2017 16:13:11 GMT
I wouldn't have thought it'd matter too much whether the movie's a blockbuster or not, I think what's more significant is the fact that they'll be leased to a blue chip company, so payments from them should be assured. I've had no prior involvement with C**f** so don't know about their history, but I'd presume the majority of the risk on this one would lie there..?
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Feb 14, 2017 17:06:58 GMT
I wouldn't have thought it'd matter too much whether the movie's a blockbuster or not, I think what's more significant is the fact that they'll be leased to a blue chip company, so payments from them should be assured. I've had no prior involvement with C**f** so don't know about their history, but I'd presume the majority of the risk on this one would lie there..? Glad to hear that our security is not dependent on the blockbusterability of the movie. Shall await the details. Personally I have felt confident in the c***f*** setup, but have been tempted to sell my holdings on the SM - not recently Elliotm.
Edit: Extra asterisks above appreciated, St*v*T.
|
|
littonowl
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 355
|
Post by littonowl on Feb 15, 2017 15:44:33 GMT
Shouldn't ask Mickey Mouse questions! @magenta14 Given the other loans are 13%, I am hoping for a match on that (likely sell on SS to fund if anyone wants the bits). 14% !
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Feb 15, 2017 16:13:39 GMT
The extra 1% if for the unreliability of portbale (sic) buildings as security?
|
|
|
Post by excalibur on Feb 15, 2017 16:32:35 GMT
Any concerns that C******S also have loans regarding D********* E******* R********** ?
|
|
nick
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,055
Likes: 825
|
Post by nick on Feb 15, 2017 17:27:08 GMT
ablrate / ablrateandyI've a couple of questions in respect of the new loan listed on the platform I'm hoping you can provide responses on: 1. Are you able to clarify the exact nature of the chattel mortgage on the units. Page 9 of the borrowing proposal states the chattel mortgage will be by way of an assignment of rental income. If this is the case, I assume that it will be an equitable rather than legal mortgage given that assignment relates to future rental debt that do not presently exist. Will the legal title of the units transfer to the lender to form a legal mortgage for the duration of the loan?2. Related to the above, will the chattel mortgage be registerable under the Companies Act 2006
3. What is the cost of the units which will be subject to mortgage. I'm just trying to understand the underlying economics for the borrower as well as alternative measure of value.
Thanks
Nick
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,873
Likes: 7,918
|
Post by SteveT on Feb 15, 2017 17:30:26 GMT
3. What is the cost of the units which will be subject to mortgage. I'm just trying to understand the underlying economics for the borrower as well as alternative measure of value. IIRC, the borrower (or a related group company) manufacturers the units, so I doubt the true marginal cost is something that will be revealed.
|
|
|
Post by d_saver on Feb 15, 2017 17:33:33 GMT
I'm just taking a look at this one.
Liked the initial sound of it, but not so sure now. One thing is that it's quite amazing the packages Able put together for us to view, vs some other platforms!
If I'm understanding correctly, the portacabins have actually already been supplied to another client (D*****) and perhaps are already on site? The loan will cover refurbing them and moving them so that the studio can use them for their own purposes.
It states an 'agreement' has been reached and that they are 'expected' to use them for up to 15 years. I wonder if an agreement (lease) has actually been signed?
Were they rented to D***** and thus are already assets of the borrower, or is the borrower seeking to buy them back off D***** and recon/supply them to P*******? I'm just a little fuzzy as to what the money will actually be used for.
|
|
nick
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,055
Likes: 825
|
Post by nick on Feb 15, 2017 18:05:52 GMT
I'm just taking a look at this one. Liked the initial sound of it, but not so sure now. One thing is that it's quite amazing the packages Able put together for us to view, vs some other platforms! If I'm understanding correctly, the portacabins have actually already been supplied to another client (D*****) and perhaps are already on site? The loan will cover refurbing them and moving them so that the studio can use them for their own purposes. It states an 'agreement' has been reached and that they are 'expected' to use them for up to 15 years. I wonder if an agreement (lease) has actually been signed? Were they rented to D***** and thus are already assets of the borrower, or is the borrower seeking to buy them back of D***** and recon/supply them to P*******? I'm just a little fuzzy as to what the money will actually be used for. ablrate / ablrateandy: are you able to provide comfort that the underlying lease agreement has been signed (or will be signed prior to drawdown) and confirm the minimum term under the lease and any break provisions which could affect the future rental stream.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,204
Likes: 6,011
|
Post by registerme on Feb 15, 2017 18:46:01 GMT
If I'm understanding correctly, the portacabins have actually already been supplied to another client (D*****) and perhaps are already on site? The loan will cover refurbing them and moving them so that the studio can use them for their own purposes. The way I read it (but yes, the tenses weren't as clear as they could be) was that a) they had yet to be installed and in fact probably needed to be purchased and refurbished (hence the talk of working capital), b) the customer was P* S*, who c) needed them to facilitate a project for D* whilst they presumably redevelop part of the existing site.......
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Feb 15, 2017 19:56:36 GMT
My immediate concerns are in relation to the finances of the borrower. 1. We only have P&L up to Dec 15. I'D like to see management accounts which are more uptodate, not just a draft BS up to July 16. 2. YE 2015 had substantial drop in t/o compared to prior year, and wafer thin net profit. I don't see - but have probably missed - commentary as to why. That makes me uncomfortable. 3. Nonetheless, I lent on one of their prior (School ?) so did I not spot this or was it covered more fully that time around, or is covered this time but I've not spotted. EDIT: and yes the tenses are very confusing. Security is over xxx located at yyy. Is it, or are they to be ? Agreement reached: fine, but is that a signed contract, and what is P* S* actual comittmed period etc. EDIT: ablrate: are u able to comment on any of the above ?
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Feb 15, 2017 21:52:01 GMT
Given the absolute garbage populating many of the other Platforms this Loan, at 14%, a Blue Chip Customer and amortising, is as good a bet as yer gonna get in this town. The only real downside for me was 4 years duration but I decided because it's amortising it was a "L'Oréal" (you know, " worth it")
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Feb 15, 2017 22:09:49 GMT
You should be able to sell it off gradually at a small premium if 4 years is too long.
|
|