RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Buy backCapharnaum wrote:
EBITDA by itself is just a measures of the total EV value (using a multiple), it doesn't mean the company can't run into financial problems and doesn't make the business activities more liquid. Investors should never use EBITDA as their only metric. Debt interest coverage should also be looked at, as well as cashflow generation and capacity to raise money that's not dilutive to shareholders.
oh you're right - it shouldn't be the ONLY metric evaluated by any means. my point is that bandit69 just likes to make EBITDA/Adj EBITDA look like it's something fictitious or somehow fraudulently dreamed up by WELL's management. whether he likes it or not, EBITDA it is a key metric used across M&A evaluation in all shapes and sizes of businesses, a key metric for bank covenants, etc. it's appropriate here, in my view, given all of the reasons I've outlined.
the gating bank covenants are likely debt service coverage and funded debt:cashflow, both of which WELL is in compliance with. if business slows down, these covenants will trip and the market will know about it. bandit69's assertions that a near-term capital raise is necessary are completely unfounded and without merit.