PROtrading wrote: I totally get the GAAP versus non-GAAP thing and Canada has a history of harmonizing it's system with the US but there is still metric vs imperial and English vs American dictionaries.
I bet you that the majority of the US, you know, the Trump voters would argue that it's spelled "color" vs "colour" and "odor" vs "odour" and think the US won the war of 1812 feel they are right. And aren't the gringos really loud mouths and freaking bullies? You know me Eddy and bullies, I kinda go "Cohodes" on them which makes the "dynamics" here very interesting.
That's the thing about the US, they think they are ALWAYS right and that why they bought into the pipe dream of making America Great Again with logos printed on Chinese made swag! LMAO!!!! I know, I spend a good chunk of time there roughly. I have a love/hate relationship with the US.
But we're both traders here, and in looking back at this play, the GAAP vs non-GAAP thing has been going on for years. Now the game has changed since Mother Theresa Cohodes is giving BJs with falsehoods about the plane safety and fabricating nonsense about RegionalOne. Using false deragority terms like "chop shop" which is 100% false and misleading.
The plane safety is 100% speculative. He has NO PROOF. It's
100% vicious rumours (or vicious rumors for our US friends). The FACT is there's be zero groundings of EIF planes and the few accidents years ago were not EIF's fault. Spotless record in 13 years and now, suddently, there's this magician who predicts future failures. The guy has ZERO aviations credibiltity.
And in terms of plane safety, there's no joking around in the real world. Go on a plane and joke around a bomb and you get carted away. The same thing should happen here on the virtual world especially when there is market financial incentives involved. You can't do that in the US and shouldn't be able to do that in Canada. Cohodes might get arrested next time he comes to Canada. He's breaking Securities rules and is giving short sellers a bad name. Why can longs and shorts focus on facts?
The Canadian Transport Canada & Safety board tracks flights and plane safety. They track pilot hours and flight plans. I have a buddy that flies a plane and even non-commercial, the safety checks and pilot duties are clear. The BS that gets posted (and deleted off) Twitter is bad. And the dummy fandom takes it all in like a bunch of teenage girls drinking the KoolAid as if God was serving it. Pathetic man! Please pass me some puke bags! It makes clownhouse look great! Imagine THAT!!! LOL
Cohodes would do the world a favour (or favor for the yanks) by leaving the amusement props off stage and
focus on FACTS. And if I was Transport Canada or the Canadian government I would have
two task forces,
one to handle the big issues relating to financial accounting practices between the countries and the other to track short sellers who abuse the system with falsehoods and clown acrobatics. There are reason BNN didn't air the Cohodes interview last week and he is pissed, now he stroking
market clueless mainstream media as he pulls the puppet strings... That, my friend, is "scumbag material".
The bottom line here is I don't see a broken business model but I see
active market driven sabotaging going on. The big shorts like Cohodes and his fandom (some of them play with millions in dollars on their trades, trust me), can't turn on a dime. It's very, very telling why BNN hasn't aired Marc's rants but instead uses his arguments to grill the CEO instead. Well done, there is hope for BNN if they focus on getting the FACTS (good or bad) out.... LOL I'd volunteer to grill Cohodes since he's a handful.
From a market perspective, with the short thesis being so weak, if management is market savvy and works with a savvy brokerage firm, they can make small short minions squirm like they are doing on Breaking $BAD...
Always love to chat with you Mr. Market, especially when you don't try to sell me that Los Pollos Hermanos. I love organic eggs but HATE those tainted with birdpoop (which is the play here) but I'll pass on the fried chicken, I try to watch my weight....
Just wish Mother Theresa Cohodes would stop his self-stroking clown acrobatics and would jump on real discussions here. He's like a whippy kid in the playgrond with his pea shooter hiding in his garden surrounded by chicks. LOL
EddySantana wrote: His main point is that these charges are not discretionary and he's right, especially for an airline peculiarly named "Exchange Income Fund". There's a reason EBITDA is not recognized in US GAAP and FCF is king - one is Midas, one is Medusa. With $EIF it only works if every big shareholder/brokerage ignores it in favour of equity raises to fund the dividend, but once sentiment shifts and flaws are made public they all start quietly tiptoeing for the exit, so look out below.
All of the other issues he raises allegedly regarding safety and poor regulatory oversight are biproducts of this accounting structure. For something more relatable, look at Crescent Point and their divi structure, it depends on willful ignorance from top to bottom.
The trend with all of his #shortcanada targets goes right to the highest echelons of Canadian government, banks and regulatory bodies.
PROtrading wrote: That's my problem. I love a good short thesis and I don't see one here yet. As others have pointed out there, there's near criminal inference that there are maintenance issues but zero proof.
I've flown many small regional airlines in the past and, no, it's not like flying a new plane but guess what, you can't buy new planes because they don't exist and the business case would not support it. Ask poor flyers to remote communities if they would be willing to pay 2x or 3x for the flights?
Idiot fandom followers on twitter are just drinking the kool-aid without checking official sources and when the press, specifically Terence from the Financial Post checks official sources, he gets ridiculed by Pied Piper and his 2bit mob instead of engaging in a rational discussion.
There's "short and distort" on a number of points here because it doesn't seem that the FCF is a strong enough argument by itself! Did he find a smoking gun or is he gathering up a bunch of little twigs for his little weaner roast? LOL
We'll know soon enough if the charts behave like that "other one", hey puma1. Our old friend @dumpsterfire69 is staying far away, playing with horsies and making cute little cartoons for Marc.... If she goes short here, I follow her playing Muse.... LOL
puma1 wrote:
the issue raised is not new, it ha been on the table at least 2 times in the last 3 years. do you calculate free cash flow before or after this number. the Globe quotes IFRS, but they miss the point. if these capitalized maintenance amounts are discretionary, the free cash flow calculation has to exclude the amount. this is the position the company has taken. it should be easy for them to add transparency to this number, and if EIF does that, the argument dissolves and the shorts will need to pick on some new issue.