criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Sept 20, 2020 13:28:59 GMT
My understanding is that the three venues are owned by subsidiary companies of the borrower, and that Ablrate lenders have a debenture over the borrower company and its subsidiaries. Through that there is a claim on the bricks and mortar assets of the venues, to the extent that those are realisable by the owning subsidiary. However, I think you are wise to evaluate it as you have because Ablrate lenders have no direct charge on the venues themselves as property. Sometimes this means that someone else does have such a charge and that the net value to the debenture is rather limited. At the time of the loan the borrower had £2.6M of debt - you could investigate how that was secured, I can't remember and I have never lent on this. (Is your red historical?) Ablrate has fixed & floating charges over the subsidiaries so AIUI will have direct charges over the venues as the floating charge will crystallise into a fixed charge at the point the security is enforced. It could only be superceded by a specific fixed charge being granted. The Ablrate loan of (currently £680k) up to £2.5m has the first charge. Can't see further tranches coming up in the foreseeable future under current circumstances, but they will rank equally; hence the apparent low LTV of 22% on the first two tranches. The existing £2.6m dept does not mention any security. The Company also has £2.5m of its owner’s debt.The owners debt ranks as unsecured and therefore junior to all Ablrate. I note Ablrate security also included 'any future assets'. So if anything has been spent since the loan start date it will be extra security. I am trying to convince myself to top up while prices are below par, especially with 15% interest. How they get over social distancing & lock downs is another matter.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,843
Likes: 11,069
|
Post by ilmoro on Sept 20, 2020 14:22:07 GMT
Ablrate has fixed & floating charges over the subsidiaries so AIUI will have direct charges over the venues as the floating charge will crystallise into a fixed charge at the point the security is enforced. It could only be superceded by a specific fixed charge being granted. The Ablrate loan of (currently £680k) up to £2.5m has the first charge. Can't see further tranches coming up in the foreseeable future under current circumstances, but they will rank equally; hence the apparent low LTV of 22% on the first two tranches. The existing £2.6m dept does not mention any security. The Company also has £2.5m of its owner’s debt.The owners debt ranks as unsecured and therefore junior to all Ablrate. I note Ablrate security also included 'any future assets'. So if anything has been spent since the loan start date it will be extra security. I am trying to convince myself to top up while prices are below par, especially with 15% interest. How they get over social distancing & lock downs is another matter. Under the specific risk factors section of the BP it says assets covered by first charge include 'ownership of the three venues' which certainly implies security. Bear in mind that the ownership of the group and the related finance company that is involved has changed so the info in the BP is not correct and the key individuals are different now. Manchester reopened last weekend, Birmingham yesterday, Nottingham July, big venues, table booking
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Sept 20, 2020 16:41:26 GMT
Ablrate. Would appreciate some help here.
Who owns the premises that B-------r operate out of ?
Does our security include any 'bricks & mortar' ?
Has there been any security enhancements since the loan was launched ?
Please advise.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Sept 20, 2020 20:06:40 GMT
My understanding is that the three venues are owned by subsidiary companies of the borrower, and that Ablrate lenders have a debenture over the borrower company and its subsidiaries. Through that there is a claim on the bricks and mortar assets of the venues, to the extent that those are realisable by the owning subsidiary. However, I think you are wise to evaluate it as you have because Ablrate lenders have no direct charge on the venues themselves as property. Sometimes this means that someone else does have such a charge and that the net value to the debenture is rather limited. At the time of the loan the borrower had £2.6M of debt - you could investigate how that was secured, I can't remember and I have never lent on this. (Is your red historical?) Ablrate has fixed & floating charges over the subsidiaries so AIUI will have direct charges over the venues as the floating charge will crystallise into a fixed charge at the point the security is enforced. It could only be superceded by a specific fixed charge being granted. Yes that's right, but do we know whether there are already specific fixed charges over the bricks and mortar, held by others? Yes ownership implies security value, but the value of ownership of a house may be reduced by a mortgage. It's the equity that gives value to the owner. Loan 41 was, I believe, a case where Ablrate lenders had the first charge and others, unfortunately for them, held only a debenture over the group.
|
|
sapphire
Member of DD Central
Posts: 483
Likes: 400
|
Post by sapphire on Sept 21, 2020 10:44:48 GMT
I think clarifications are needed on 2 aspects:
- Does any fixed charge exist *today* over the bricks and mortar on any of the 3 properties and, if so, the amount and the party benefiting from the charge.
- If no current fixed charge, is there any undertaking prohibiting the borrower/subsidiary from setting up any superceding fixed charge over any of the 3 properties *in the future*, without it first being approved by ablrate lenders.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Sept 21, 2020 12:18:42 GMT
Exactly right imo, Sapphire. We should remember that when 131 was launched its purpose included the rescue of four other Ablrate loans which were associated with the BN debacle, three pubs and a brewery. In that context I think the opportunity for imposing tight conditions on these other three pubs, never before Ablrate security, was probably limited. The rescue of the other pubs, over which Ablrate does have a first charge, was dumped, leaving the three now being discussed, which I believe the borrower bought out of the BN administration.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Sept 22, 2020 11:39:50 GMT
Ablrate. Would appreciate some help here. Who owns the premises that B-------r operate out of ? Does our security include any 'bricks & mortar' ? Has there been any security enhancements since the loan was launched ? Please advise. Ablrate. Just checking you are looking into the above for us.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,843
Likes: 11,069
|
Post by ilmoro on Sept 22, 2020 15:24:10 GMT
Ablrate. Would appreciate some help here. Who owns the premises that B-------r operate out of ? Does our security include any 'bricks & mortar' ? Has there been any security enhancements since the loan was launched ? Please advise. Ablrate. Just checking you are looking into the above for us. Tagging them might help ablrate
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Sept 22, 2020 15:31:08 GMT
I have seen tagging mentioned before, but no idea what I have to do.
Or have you done it already.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,843
Likes: 11,069
|
Post by ilmoro on Sept 22, 2020 16:14:32 GMT
I have seen tagging mentioned before, but no idea what I have to do. Or have you done it already. Either type @ then the username(not always the same as the display name so hover over the display name to find the user name) eg @ ilmoro (but without the space) or click on the tag button on the tool bar (the one with @ next to a person), start entering the user name or display name (both work here) and select the one you want. Tagging prompts the person to take a look at a specific post, with an onscreen notification (those little white numbered bubbles on profiles) and an email if they have that set. Ive tagged ablrate.
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Sept 22, 2020 16:29:20 GMT
I have seen tagging mentioned before, but no idea what I have to do. Or have you done it already. He was online 2 hours ago, so is almost certainly working on it right now. Unless he was checking out what the 'opposition' is up to.
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Sept 22, 2020 16:54:29 GMT
I have seen tagging mentioned before, but no idea what I have to do. Or have you done it already. Seriously? You just spelled their name which would rely solely on them reading your post to notice. Either stick an @ in front of what you think their username is with no spaces or use the button and search for then select their name in the pop-up search bar. If you tag them - criston and they have tagging notifications on they will receive a notification or even an email that someone has mentioned (tagged) them! Be careful using @ '@ stardust' will tag me '@ star dust' will not (all @'s need to be without spaces before the username).
HTH
|
|
|
Post by ablrate on Sept 23, 2020 9:53:52 GMT
We have an update coming on these loans so will make sure the security side of things is clarified.
|
|
TitoPuente
Member of DD Central
Posts: 623
Likes: 655
|
Post by TitoPuente on Oct 3, 2020 9:36:17 GMT
Why 131 allows the creation of bids and offers ("Create your own bids and offers now!" box) and 134 doesn't? 126 is also not showing the box.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Oct 20, 2020 10:42:12 GMT
We have an update coming on these loans so will make sure the security side of things is clarified. When will we be enlightened ? Although I do note the addendum goes into detail to some length, suggesting we have 3 fit outs that could have cost £6m. With fit out assets said to be worth over £3m the LTV appears to between 20% & 25%. Does security for 134 rank equally to 131; I cannot find any reference to this in the documents, although I note 134 SM is selling off cheaper than 131.
|
|