Very doubtful. The Lopez family (minority owners) are deeply involved in running the combined operations. Doubt they would sell.
Ms. Frangou & assoc. seem to be sucking up tonnage in all three public vehicles as fast as they can. I assume that they have a view on the prospects for tonnage value, rates, ete. that si driving this activity. If so, I would love to hear it on a conference call.
Not that I heard. I suspect that the JV was chosen in order to get better deal flow and reduce capital requirements for NM.
NSALI has been a sleeper for NM for a long time. Their results looked extremely robust and I think the company could do 65 to 70MM in EBITDA this year. It looks to me like NM will allow NSALI to keep growing as a subsidiary for as long as makes sense and until the capital markets would be receptive. Allowing it to grow for another few years will not hurt its value any.
To be honest, the junk market scares the willies out of me right now. Spreads have fallen tremendously, covenant packages are quite weak, and issuers are leveraging up and extending maturities as fast as they can. I believe that this is not an attractive time to be in the junk market, and as my bonds have either been getting called or to prices where I am happy to sell I have been putting the proceeds in other asset classes, such as equities, CDs, merger arbitrage funds and the like.
Are you #$%$? Tender and wait a few weeks and you would have gotten 110.
Nope, it is 110:
"The Total Consideration for each $1,000 principal amount of 2017 Senior Notes validly tendered and not validly withdrawn prior to the Withdrawal Deadline is $1,100.11, which includes a consent payment of $30.00 per $1,000 principal amount of 2017 Senior Notes. "
I still own a few of the STON bonds and I plan on taking the early tender offer at 110 cents on the dollar. I suggest that all retail bondholders do the same. Why? Very simply, the way that these tenders are structured includes both a carrot and a stick. Yes, if you tender early you get a nice premium for agreeing to the tender. However, if you do not accept the tender offer and most bondholders (largely institutional) do accept it, the covenants and other protections in the bonds you insist on keeping will be waived under the terms of the bond indenture and the subsequent tender offer. All of a sudden you will find yourself subordinated to the newly issued bonds that STON is out in the market with, which is a bad idea. Take the 110.
Double digit increase n cargo volumes, much bigger harvest for Paraguayan soybeans, and rate increases to boot. The drought down there is over and the money seems to be flowing again, too.
To be clear, this was not a downgrade. A downgrade means very specifically that the rating is moved lower by one or more notches. What Moody's did was change the outlook for the rating from stable to negative. This indicates to the market that trends are negative for credit quality, although not to the extent that would mean an iminent downward move for the rating. Instead, it implies that there is a chance the rating could be moved down in the next 12 to 18 months.
With the very strong report, the bullish outlook for the sector, the recent JV deal and increased volume, I am really kind of surprised that the price of the shares has not shown much mojo.
After a bit of a dry spell before earnings, volume has been off the charts for this thing yesterday and so far today. Surprisingly has done little for the share price thus far, but clearly someone big is interested in this name.
They did already grab the cash with the follow on bond offering.
I think they will be careful with the timing of an NSALI float because A) there is no rush to raise capital unless they have found something new down there, and B) this is the only NM asset that is not hocked to the bondholders.
I'd bet heavily that TW screwed the pooch once again, clueless rumor-mongers that they are.
I expect NSALI to be IPOd at some point, but where is the rationale for doing so right now? The business appears to have ample capital on hand after the recent follow-on bond deal. Unless they have some sort of blockbuster investment opprtunity, I would expect NM to just let NSALI keep growing as it has been. This presumes that an IPO is newly created (dilutive) sharesthat would be an equity raise for NSALI, not an outright sale of some of NM's shares.
FWIW, as an SEC filer I believe that NSALI could IPO relatively easily once they got their registration statement approved by the SEC. This thing has been teed up for a long time.
This is for product tankers for shuttle work to be owned by NSALI (a sub of NM). Nothing to do with NNA.
Agree. If PB financed 75% of the value of their orders (would not be uncommon during the boom), they would have been wiped out as vessel values fell, especially if they had not been aggressively paying down the debt with earnings. Probably a repo action by the lenders and resolution via sale to NNA.