Discussion
The last accounts indicate a £9 million loan facility repaid in instalments, finishing April next year.
A £1.866 million loan facility repaid in instalments, finishing June this year.
A £10 million pound revolving facility finishing October next year.
A £5 million overdraft, subject to annual renewal.
All at 2.4% above LIBOR or Bank base rate.
All with HSBC.
We know it's all changed, I'm struggling to think you'd dump HSBC and go with a Russian if things were tickety boo.
A £1.866 million loan facility repaid in instalments, finishing June this year.
A £10 million pound revolving facility finishing October next year.
A £5 million overdraft, subject to annual renewal.
All at 2.4% above LIBOR or Bank base rate.
All with HSBC.
We know it's all changed, I'm struggling to think you'd dump HSBC and go with a Russian if things were tickety boo.
jsf said:
To be fair, i've been a grumpy bugger on this thread well before CV19 hit, i just don't like people kicking a team when they are down, i see it as destructive behaviour.
if they were down through no fault of their own many would be with you. However many see a team failing F1 and also one that deserves better than being quite literally kept alive to make up the numbers.We laugh at pay drive wheel shufflers and cringe at those living on past glories but drivers aren't the only ones to have a vanity project.
Not sure where I got Russian from.Williams discussed from about 19 minutes in. Not sure if anything new in there, could just be a discussion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyZVXy2pQao
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyZVXy2pQao
carinaman said:
Williams discussed from about 19 minutes in. Not sure if anything new in there, could just be a discussion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyZVXy2pQao
private video.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyZVXy2pQao
skwdenyer said:
The devil in the detail will be the terms. IIRC the HSBC finance was pretty short-term, creating an inflection point around maturity. If this is longer-dated that would be for the best.
Christain Syltt has been covering it in great detail on twitter and it appears everything is held as security against it. However the value of the goods securitised seems to be far in excess of the value of the loan, si its a bit puzzling to me. Leaving aside the fact I always suspect CS of having a dwner on F1, so is his interpretation correct.Chrisgr31 said:
Christain Syltt has been covering it in great detail on twitter and it appears everything is held as security against it. However the value of the goods securitised seems to be far in excess of the value of the loan, si its a bit puzzling to me. Leaving aside the fact I always suspect CS of having a dwner on F1, so is his interpretation correct.
Commercial security is no different to a residential mortgage sometimes - they want a decent LTV! There’s always a trade-off: the lender wants security at fire sale prices, the borrower wants that valuation much higher.Not only does this protect the lender against valuation risk; it also prevents the borrower from borrowing yet more from others to the detriment of the initial borrower (a more heavily indebted borrower is at greater risk of default).
skwdenyer said:
Commercial security is no different to a residential mortgage sometimes - they want a decent LTV! There’s always a trade-off: the lender wants security at fire sale prices, the borrower wants that valuation much higher.
Not only does this protect the lender against valuation risk; it also prevents the borrower from borrowing yet more from others to the detriment of the initial borrower (a more heavily indebted borrower is at greater risk of default).
The value they placed on those assets may also have been rather optimistic in places to enhance their balance sheet and mask real term monetary shortfalls. Same principle as you state above from the lenders pov.. treat such valuations with caution.Not only does this protect the lender against valuation risk; it also prevents the borrower from borrowing yet more from others to the detriment of the initial borrower (a more heavily indebted borrower is at greater risk of default).
Now.. what would actually happen if Williams defaulted on this new loan? Would the worth of the assets actually matter in the end? Or would the fact that their title transfers to Latifi be enough for him to take control of the team, one way or another? I'm not sure how much of the future fate of the team is still in Williams' hands now. A salami takeover? - one slice at a time..
I guess itemising the heritage assets stops Williams selling them.
I had a browse through the Mclaren group accounts. Whilst they are not comparable to Williams, they have fixed and floating charges on everything and are paying £65 million a year in interest payments alone.
To paraphrase Trump, I'm not an accountant in Mclaren but if they sell 5000 cars per year then each car sale has to fund £13,000 in interest payments. (I know they do other things than make cars, but arguably that makes it even worse).
I had a browse through the Mclaren group accounts. Whilst they are not comparable to Williams, they have fixed and floating charges on everything and are paying £65 million a year in interest payments alone.
To paraphrase Trump, I'm not an accountant in Mclaren but if they sell 5000 cars per year then each car sale has to fund £13,000 in interest payments. (I know they do other things than make cars, but arguably that makes it even worse).
C Lee Farquar said:
I guess itemising the heritage assets stops Williams selling them.
I had a browse through the Mclaren group accounts. Whilst they are not comparable to Williams, they have fixed and floating charges on everything and are paying £65 million a year in interest payments alone.
To paraphrase Trump, I'm not an accountant in Mclaren but if they sell 5000 cars per year then each car sale has to fund £13,000 in interest payments. (I know they do other things than make cars, but arguably that makes it even worse).
Is the McLaren debt interest-paying, or rolled up at the end? If the latter than “all” they have to do is to keep growing fast enough to be able to refinance...I had a browse through the Mclaren group accounts. Whilst they are not comparable to Williams, they have fixed and floating charges on everything and are paying £65 million a year in interest payments alone.
To paraphrase Trump, I'm not an accountant in Mclaren but if they sell 5000 cars per year then each car sale has to fund £13,000 in interest payments. (I know they do other things than make cars, but arguably that makes it even worse).
C Lee Farquar said:
I had a browse through the Mclaren group accounts. Whilst they are not comparable to Williams, they have fixed and floating charges on everything and are paying £65 million a year in interest payments alone.
They sucked up a $100m fine in 2007 before they even started "mainstream" car production. skwdenyer said:
Is the McLaren debt interest-paying, or rolled up at the end? If the latter than “all” they have to do is to keep growing fast enough to be able to refinance...
From what I can see/understand they have £35 million is shareholder loans at 5.3%, rolled up. Last year they issued new shares amounting 10% of the Group, sold to Latifi for £203 million. That leaves Bahrain with about 50% ownership, I think.The Group losses pretty much match the interest payments so perhaps it's the most efficient tax efficient way to run the Company for the owners?
At last some positive news - just hope he is not too late, but pre season practice looked sort of OK with department heads in the lead.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/williams-appoin...
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/williams-appoin...
rdjohn said:
At last some positive news - just hope he is not too late, but pre season practice looked sort of OK with department heads in the lead.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/williams-appoin...
He'll have no real input on the car side of things until the new tech regs in 22 now, especially with the cars mostly being carried over into next season as they are now.https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/williams-appoin...
DanielSan said:
rdjohn said:
At last some positive news - just hope he is not too late, but pre season practice looked sort of OK with department heads in the lead.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/williams-appoin...
He'll have no real input on the car side of things until the new tech regs in 22 now, especially with the cars mostly being carried over into next season as they are now.https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/williams-appoin...
Williams considering selling F1 team
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/williams-consid...
and terminating sponsorship deal with Rokit.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/williams-consid...
and terminating sponsorship deal with Rokit.
Williams is considering a partial or full sale of its F1 team -
A statement from the team said: “The WGPH board is undertaking a review of all the various strategic options available to the Company. Options being considered include, but are not limited to, raising new capital for the business, a divestment of a minority stake in WGPH, or a divestment of a majority stake in WGPH including a potential sale of the whole Company.
Whilst no decisions have been made regarding the optimal outcome yet, to facilitate discussions with interested parties, the Company announces the commencement of a "formal sale process" (as referred to in Note 2 on Rule 2.6 of the Takeover Code).”
A statement from the team said: “The WGPH board is undertaking a review of all the various strategic options available to the Company. Options being considered include, but are not limited to, raising new capital for the business, a divestment of a minority stake in WGPH, or a divestment of a majority stake in WGPH including a potential sale of the whole Company.
Whilst no decisions have been made regarding the optimal outcome yet, to facilitate discussions with interested parties, the Company announces the commencement of a "formal sale process" (as referred to in Note 2 on Rule 2.6 of the Takeover Code).”
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff