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

Dover Downs Gaming & Entertainment Inc. Message Board

ich1banf40 106 posts  |  Last Activity: 1 hour 46 minutes ago Member since: Jan 10, 2013
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 1 hour 46 minutes ago Flag

    Rohas, it is impossible to know, and even as bullish as some people are here, you have to know that that position you took is extremely risky.

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 1 hour 48 minutes ago Flag

    We have to look at things relative to other cases.... in the vast majority of all C11 cases, an equity committee is set up in probably less than 10% of cases. We have a unique situation where assets are much higher than liabilities and management is allowed to write down a huge amount of PP&E b/c they are trying to say it is related to expansion of Hycroft and C11 Bankruptcy code says that a company is not allowed to expand operations, so imo, this is like a technicality that favors management and as soon as they get out of bankruptcy they are going to try and list the formally written off assets.

    With all that said we have a greater chance than the historical average. I'm not going to give any number b/c it is just impossible to know, but imo it is better than the 10% chance that history has shown.

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 19 hours ago Flag

    The lock-up was for management so they couldn't sell their shares.... re-read the 8k.

    Form of Lock-up Agreement, dated as of December 12, 2014, b/w
    Allied Nevada Gold Corp. and each of Robert Buchan, Carl Pescio, Randy
    Buffington and Stephen M. Jones

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 21 hours ago Flag

    What I would like to have happen is that the SEC gets involved and that we use their investigative technology to see if the 21.5 million shares that were sold on Dec 12th, 2014 were then sold by that same institution on Jan 21 when the "very positive" 8K was released.

    January 21, 2015 8:45 AM (pre-market)
    -ANV releases "very positive" 8K statement of increased production and continuation of Hycroft expansion, even after they knew in December they were not going to expand.

    ANV just happens to coincidentally release the "positive" 8K 1 day after the stock had rebounded 85% from its December 12th, 2014 low of $0.73? Really?

    ANV's share price rose to $1.43 (intraday) the day of the 8k announcement on Jan 21, 2015, a 6% increase over the high reached on Jan 20th (which was a 2 month high from the low).

    Interesting day to release the 8k.

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 22 hours ago Flag

    My questions are:

    1) If the Currency swap was going bad in February as posted by Bloomberg when the public was first notified were in talks with Moelis for restructuring, why didn't they let us know in December that they were in talks for restructuring which is when they say they first knew about it in Docket 16?

    2) Why release an 8K HIGHLIGHTING the increased production results in the middle of January of 16% increase in gold and 119% increase in silver production when there was no precedence of this in the past... why not just release this in the 10k? Was ANV trying to allow the insider who bought the 21.5$ million shares out by releasing this event onto the public and deceiving public shareholders in order to increase the share price as they knew this event would pop the stock and provide the seller with liquidity?

    3) On the SEC's website Item 2.06 "Material Impairment"

    "A company must disclose certain material write-downs (also called impairments) in an 8K. (If the company determines the impairment when routinely preparing its financial statements for its periodic report, the company may make the disclosure in the periodic report rather than in an 8K). A write-down may occur when a company significantly lowers its estimate of the value of certain assets..."

    -Now, in Docket 16 and in the 10K management explains that its major decision in doing a C11 was the $430 million impairment to PP&E... which they knew about before the 10K's release, why in the world would they be releasing a MISLEADING quote by Buffington on January 21, 2015 that highlights much higher production, and telling us that they should be well positioned for 2015, when they knew full well in December that they were already in talks with Creditors to restructure the debt?

    Summary, this is a serious violation of Sarbanes Oxley and I have strong suspicion that the release of the 8k on January 21, 2015, was solely done to allow whoever bought the 21.5 million shares out of their position.

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 28, 2015 2:18 AM Flag

    Thanks hblot... Talking points are to show that this company was put through c11 b/c of management's mishaps and not b/c liabilities dwarf assets.

    It is important to highlight at every moment of every day that the assets of this company as of Dec 31 2014, even by management's strongest attempts, are still higher by a significant degree than Total liabilities. This means we should be given a certain percentage of shares in the new equity without penalty (i.e. warrants).

    As you can see all the long term debt is placed under short term debt as of the 10K, this is b/c this is all going to get restructured and only part of it is going to get rolled over. The interest is likely going to be completely forgiven, and part of the debt is going to be wiped out.

    In exchange the debtholders will receive a significant portion of new equity. And since ANV could probably be priced at 4 or $5 in a new issuance with significantly reduced debt burdens, there is enough new equity to go around.

    This company is pushing EBITDA close to $100 mill a year.... this is not a small company. This is massive operation that is A) sustainable B) valuable and C) going through with expansion

  • Reply to

    too much risk!!!

    by gadzillionman Mar 18, 2015 12:44 PM
    ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 28, 2015 2:01 AM Flag

    You guys understand that is how returns are driven in REITs right? MPW main way to grow is through maximizing debt to equity. MPW will have 10 billion of debt in 10 years. This is how it is done in Real Estate and REITs.

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 27, 2015 8:34 PM Flag

    Master's in Finance... Bachelor's in Finance with Econ minor.

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 27, 2015 6:49 PM Flag

    This is what ANV's management is reporting... this isn't a number made up by me. They have intentions of reporting the lowest number they possible can... real book value is likely much higher. This gives us ammunition to get an EC set up.

    Everyone should contact Tiiara again and explain that the recent 10K is just more proof of value to be had by shareholders.

  • As reported in ANV's 2014 annual 10K report:

    -assets are $941.2 million
    -Total Liabilities are $663.7 million

    -Total Stockholder Equity = $277.6 million ... this represents book value of $2.20 a share

    2014 EBITDA = $79 million

    2014 EBIT = $20.5 million

    2014 Adjusted Net Income = -$13.5 million or -$0.10 a share. This is hardly the picture ANV management is trying to paint with reported 10K Net income of -$4.90!!!!

  • As reported in the 10K:

    -assets are $941.2 million
    -Total Liabilities are $663.7 million

    -Total Stockholder Equity = $277.6 million ... this represents book value of $2.20 a share

    2014 EBITDA = $79 million

    2014 EBIT = $20.5 million

    2014 Adjusted Net Income = -$13.5 million or -$0.10 a share ... hardly the picture ANV management is trying to paint with reported 10K Net income of -$4.90

  • Reply to

    10-k just released....

    by hblotus Mar 27, 2015 4:25 PM
    ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 27, 2015 6:07 PM Flag

    hblot.... what are you smoking? There is still a big opportunity for an EC. Net assets are reported as massively positive.

  • Reply to

    10-k just released....

    by hblotus Mar 27, 2015 4:25 PM
    ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 27, 2015 5:59 PM Flag

    You guys seem not to understand that you don't need positive earnings for an EC... you need POSITIVE NET ASSETS.

  • Reply to

    10-k just released....

    by hblotus Mar 27, 2015 4:25 PM
    ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 27, 2015 5:58 PM Flag

    Hblotus.... that is not a cash loss lol... you can't react to accounting tricks. If we take out the write down of PPE which is non-cash expense of 429 and the write-down of inventory of 70 million (another non-cash expense) we end up with a positive EBIT of 20 million (including depreciation) for the year of 2014. 20 million! ANV had an adjusted net income of only -$13.5 million or -$0.10 a share, not the -$4.90 you are seeing.... that includes massive write downs which don't reflect the true health of the company.

    And again, ASSETS ARE LARGER THAN LIABILITIES.... net income doesn't factor into us getting equity or not. What does factor is if assets are larger than liabilities.

    You guys also act like management is painting a truthful picture here. The write down of the assets is the lowest number they could possibly find and is not even based on market rates b/c there is no such thing as a similar asset in the entire universe to compare ANV to. This is their way of making things look a lot worse than it really is.

    ANV had +78.6 Million EBITDA in 2014... not bad... and I would love to see how they got away with depreciating

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 27, 2015 2:00 PM Flag

    That's the whole point. We are currently going to be given 10% in warrants.

    If we successfully get an EC going to establish and show that assets are greater than liabilities... i.e. book value is significant, then we can argue that we should be given a much better deal.

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 27, 2015 1:12 PM Flag

    Yes we do... but we need people to contact US Trustee everyday about this issue to remind them that this is an obvious theft of equity from current shareholders in an attempt to wipe out interest payments and give the debtholders new equity issuance.... it's a pretty obvious sham job and the fact that the debtholders didn't force liquidation is another fact that backs our claims, b/c they understand the value of expanding the hycroft and how much they can earn in the future if they don't force c7.

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 27, 2015 1:09 PM Flag

    Bj... they have to re-issue equity. It's how the process works. That is the only way debtholders can recoup their lost interest.

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 27, 2015 1:06 PM Flag

    Yes, but when I suggested we should strive for a last drive on the 19th of March, I was shot down by typical groupthink lethargic thought. It's that same thought process that just down-voted my last post.

    My idea was a winning strategy, now, there is very little interest on the boards, barely anyone posts here anymore as people have prematurely come out and said that the EC will be formed, when they were talking without actually knowing anything at all except what some one said at the trustee's office which means absolutely nothing.

  • ich1banf40 by ich1banf40 Mar 27, 2015 1:03 PM Flag

    Does anyone recall when management exactly made the call to do this? Was there ever justification b/c when something like this is implemented there has to be serious justification to do so on public record.

    The only thing I can find on their 10Qs and Ks is that they just announce they have entered into a Currency swap without explaining why getting involved in something so complex was ever justified in the first place. I understand what a c swap is and how it works and the fact that they were trying to shave off a few points of interest.... but holy helI, we are in the midst of one of the largest Currency Manipulation cycles the world has ever seen during the last 8 years.... why in the world would they ever implement such a drastic measure in the middle of the highest uncertainty in currencies? It really calls into question their competence as they never explained justification for entering the swap in the first place, and this leaves the door open for suing them.

    They pretty much explained in that 8k Corp Pres. that the reason they filed C11 was b/c of the swap. The swap was forcing them to post up to 72 million in collateral this year had they not filed C11. The writer of the SA article was right about the swap being the main reason this all happened in the first place.

    And since this is true, this means that it isn't an imbalance of assets and liabilities but rather a liquidity drain that forced them, meaning there is a lot of value here for shareholders to claim, as I have written extensively on previously.

  • ich1banf40 ich1banf40 Mar 27, 2015 12:56 PM Flag

    No lol... this is just for creditors. EC has to be approved by US Trustee. Best bet is to contact her asap through email/mail. I made a thread titled "Last push to Contact US Trustee" but everyone thought it was asinine to show her how serious we are, it's going to end up biting us. Thanks to groupthink.

1.15+0.02(+1.77%)Mar 27 4:00 PMEDT