RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:So I'm in for The FCF went poof - that is why they couldn't provide guidance. Ya, won't require too much "pateint" .... the bonds took a dive (didn't think they could go lower without restructuring) which tells us that even bondholders (or at least the unsecured tranche) does not believe that they will get paid. You just don't get a 40% yield for nothing - even Valeant bonds are not doing this badly.
Restructuring was given as an option by Oberman in the conference call. I see Chapter 11 restructuring in the next couple of months given their obligations cited in your post. Plus the legal fees on the class actions against the company and Thompson, deSaldnha, Kreppner and Edward Borkowski have to be in the millions and there will be a settlement they will have to make probably on this. Plus the continued hang of large fines on their international business by the Competition and Market Authority in the UK. They just have everything stacked against them...
TraderBen wrote: suitman87 wrote: I got it from comparisons of similar comapnies in similar fiscal situations. I think we are on a ship that isn't moving very quickly but its moving and we are fixing the engine. Will be pateint even if it takes years. i don't care about time.
There is no company (other than Valeant) that is leveraged like Concordia with the same business model of stuffing the channel. And you won't have to be "pateint" for long... We note that Concordia will have ~$270MM in interest payments, $40MM in amortization payments, and principal repayment of $34MM (Oct/17) this year. In combination with the ~ $100MM Feb/17 earn-out, we anticipate these expenses will consume Concordia's FCF. Details of our forecast revisions are in Exhibit 2.