Sun, Feb 1, 2015, 12:36 PM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Maxcom Telecomunicaciones S.A.B. de C.V. Message Board

  • investorgold2002 investorgold2002 Jun 16, 2003 11:50 PM Flag

    HLSH Numbers - Disappointing

    I made some quick number crunching:

    We all know for healthsouth to continue Maximum DEBT/EBIDTA = 3.5. If you do not agree, there is a business week article if you search in google.


    (earnings before minority ints,
    depreciation(REPORTED),
    interest expense,
    interest income)
    ---------------------------------------
    1999
    EBITDA =
    ACTUAL = -191 + 374 + 176 -10 = 349
    REPORTED= 229 + "" + "" - "" = 769
    TOTAL DEBT: 3114
    ACTUAL DEBT/EBIDTA: 8.92
    REPORTED DEBT/EBIDTA: 4.04
    ---------------------------------------
    2000
    EBITDA :
    ACTUAL = 194 + 360 + 221 - 9 = 766
    REPORTED=559 + "" + "" - "" = 1131
    TOTAL DEBT: 3212
    ACTUAL DEBT/EBIDTA: 4.19
    REPORTED DEBT/EBIDTA: 2.83
    ---------------------------------------
    2001
    EBITDA :
    ACTUAL = 9 + 375 + 218 - 7 = 595
    REPORTED=433 + "" + "" - "" = 1019
    TOTAL DEBT: 3026
    ACTUAL DEBT/EBIDTA: 5.08
    REPORTED DEBT/EBIDTA: 2.97
    ---------------------------------------

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Thinking again about the amount of work, I feel it is not worth for company like HLSH;-) The overall picture seems too good to go into deep research like that ...

      One question, when you check the debt, which number do you look at? For example, HLSH has $1.5B debt due 2003-2004. Is that the number you would use? Or $4.4B which is the long term debt?

      I also noticed that the $1.5B debt is over 2003-2004. While the amount for 2005-2006 is 0.5B only. Makes the situation even better, since no one is really interested to pursue BK and the picture over the next 4 years is brighter.

      JMHO,

      Ronnie

    • Sorry I'm not going to do your DD for you. But I will tell you some expamples of what I'm talking about...when accounting for goodwill rules changed, many companies decided the right thing to do was to take big intangible write-offs. This forced many of these companies to breach loan covenants that might have been based on GAAP income or EBITDA. ICPT is an example of a company that did not meet loan covenant requirements because of their 2002 performance. I am approaching a 100% return on that stock this year.

      But I will tell you this (numbers exclude the fraud because we don't know how bad the fraud is):

      HLSH's LT debt to equity = .72 versus industry average of .90

      HLSH's Total debt to equity = .81 versus industry average of .96

      Debt levels are slightly lower than peers.

      Do you even know how much of their debt is affected by this covenant? (hint - don't include bonds)

    • "For starters try getting these facts if you want people to believe in you."

      Show me the post where mkt_caster said to the masses "you shall believe in me"...

      Everyone here ponys up an opinion...if you choose to believe in any one person its because of some perceived credibility NOT infallibility, and Mkt_caster has amply announced his fallibility which, ironically, enhances his credibility.

      I for one have never heard him claim infallibility...the rest is the problem of the receiver of the message, not the transmitter of messages on what is widely known and understood to be a forum for OPINIONS.

    • or the MXT message board? enough already.

      please move discussion to the HLSH board.

      thanks.

    • Caster, I can't find 2002 results. could you send me the link. I want to fill in the below table as 2002 is most appropriate year for things to come.

      2002(yes annualized)

      (earnings before minority ints,
      depreciation(REPORTED),
      interest expense,
      interest income)

      EBITDA =
      ACTUAL = ? + ? + ? + ? = ?
      REPORTED= ? + "" + "" + "" = ?
      TOTAL DEBT: 3.3 bil
      ACTUAL DEBT/EBIDTA: ?
      REPORTED DEBT/EBIDTA: ?

    • http://www.businessweek.com/investor/content/mar2003/pi2003036_7617_pi036.htm

      Look at those 1999, 2000, 2001 debt/EBIDTA ratios. They are in absolute NON-compliance with the above agreement of keeping this ration within 3.5

      I am not a basher. Actually I was going to be a long...but thank god... i work hard for my money....i got down to calculated these numbers. found out what creditors are looking for. and made the best decision of my life.

      • 1 Reply to investorgold2002
      • "The terms of a possible bank facility amendment sought by the company will be an important factor in assessing its liquidity. The amendment, expected to be completed by the end of March according to the company, should include revised financial covenants."

        It's quite obvious you're just bashing to buy in cheaper bud. Nobody spends the time bashing because they *were* going to buy in but decided not to...a better decision would be to quit bashing before you start to look REALLY inept...

    • Why don't you go to the HRC board and bash the company?

      Actually, never mind I forgot most people over there put you on ignore.

      Bottom line is that they need 600 million in EBITDA to be able to service the debt and avoid BK. I believe they have it, especially after recent cost cuts. You'll see by their performance from 2000 and forward they are doing fine. 1999 is too old for an accurate picture of what they are doing NOW, not to mention there were some large one time non-cash write-offs in 1999 that distorts the EBITDA in 1999.

      No I don't believe that maximum debt/ebitda must = 3.5...Post the article text here if you can. Regardless, I would rather believe what the guy running the company says as opposed to a business week article.

      • 1 Reply to mkt_caster
      • Caster-
        As always, you have done a yeoman's work breaking down HLSH. Once again, you have my appreciation.

        I know that you were intentionally taking a conservative stance in rebutting Investorgold's (idiotic and self-serving) arguments, but this statement might even be a bit too conservative, imho:

        <Bottom line is that they need 600 million in EBITDA to be able to service the debt and avoid BK.>

        AS you've noted, Marsal said they would "be fine" at 600. But he also said that 500 would be "iffy." Personally, I tend to think that HRC would probably avoid BK if the number is 550. I think that their chances would be around 50-50 if the number was 500. I base this conclusion largely upon my belief that BK is in NO-ONE's interest here. Therefore, I think that all interested parties will bend over backward to avoid it.
        Meister

    • Mkt_caster has been conspicious in absence to any replies to the numbers i posted here.

 

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.