MyTravel bondholders agree to extend maturity
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: around
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MyTravel bondholders agree to extend maturity
LONDON, Sept 15 (Reuters) - British holiday firm MyTravel said on Monday its bondholders had voted in favour of a proposal to extend the maturity of 300 million pounds ($481.4 million) worth of subordinated convertible bonds due in 2004.
The extension, to the end of 2006, followed an agreement with creditors to refinance 1.3 billion pounds in debt.
MyTravel wanted the extension to give it more time to implement its strategy to turn around its business, which shed its chairman, chief executive and finance director after three profit warnings and accounting errors sent its shares into free fall. The business, like its rivals, was also hit by the war in Iraq and the SARS virus outbreak.
Good news for a change!!! Now lets hope they can turn things around.
Regards
The extension, to the end of 2006, followed an agreement with creditors to refinance 1.3 billion pounds in debt.
MyTravel wanted the extension to give it more time to implement its strategy to turn around its business, which shed its chairman, chief executive and finance director after three profit warnings and accounting errors sent its shares into free fall. The business, like its rivals, was also hit by the war in Iraq and the SARS virus outbreak.
Good news for a change!!! Now lets hope they can turn things around.
Regards
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Sussex
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excellent news for the whole industry.
Brilliant news for everybody concerned.
I am sure the Daily Mail will come up with some negative comments or perhaps the Guardian!
Just wait.
Brilliant news for everybody concerned.
I am sure the Daily Mail will come up with some negative comments or perhaps the Guardian!
Just wait.
Last edited by Viscount Sussex; 17th Sep 2003 at 04:35.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The mail said that only 61% of bondholders intended to vote to extend,short of the 75% required.In fact over 99% did.The mail clearly has an agenda to brief against myt for some reason,it is hardly balanced reporting from an otherwise good newspaper.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: england
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
heard recently that the Mail's bias extends from an incident a few years ago when Airtours successfully sued a Daily Mail Journo. His colleagues have been at this caper ever since..supposedly. Does anyone know the full story?
If true it says a lot for the state of British journalism. There must be some truth in it as the Mail certainly has a very big axe to grind.
If true it says a lot for the state of British journalism. There must be some truth in it as the Mail certainly has a very big axe to grind.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Daily Mail, a "GOOD" newspaper, there's a form of words you don't see very often. I have no objection to the tabloids (comics for adults), very little objection to any of the broadsheets (they have their own political viewpoints, but are usually carefully and intelligently argued) - but the Mail and the Express are very dangerous - unpleasant, extreme right wing tabloids that regard themselves as broadsheets.
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did the bond holders really have a choice?
No they didn't, if they'd all exercised their rights at the appropriate time MYT would have gone into liquidation almost immediately.
I have absolutely no desire to see MYT go down the pan, or anyone lose their jobs in the aviation industry, but I can't help feeling that MYT are in an extremely precarious postion, and when interest rates do rise again, the knock on effect will hit them first.
It's astonishing that DTI rules allow any company in the UK to continue trading with such large debts (yes I know it's not exclusive to aviation by any means), but I guess that its a simple case of "if you owe the bank a £1000, it's your problem, but if you owe them £100,000, it's theirs.
No they didn't, if they'd all exercised their rights at the appropriate time MYT would have gone into liquidation almost immediately.
I have absolutely no desire to see MYT go down the pan, or anyone lose their jobs in the aviation industry, but I can't help feeling that MYT are in an extremely precarious postion, and when interest rates do rise again, the knock on effect will hit them first.
It's astonishing that DTI rules allow any company in the UK to continue trading with such large debts (yes I know it's not exclusive to aviation by any means), but I guess that its a simple case of "if you owe the bank a £1000, it's your problem, but if you owe them £100,000, it's theirs.
Ut Sementem Feeceris
Nik Nak,
I agree that MYT position is still precarious but the Bond holders did have a choice. They could have got back about 50% of the money now but they have decided to wait because they obvioulsly believe that in the longer term they will get more back. The vote was something like 150 million for and 500,000 against - pretty conclusive.
As for the DTi allowing companies to operate - what's the current UK deficit ?
Most tour operators are in the sh1t at the moment - I think TUI's debt (€6billion ?) makes MYT's look paltry - and TUI's core market/economy (Germany) is absolutely on its knees.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Tough times for ALL ahead. MYT are scaling back (DC10's retire shortly), Oasis lakes sold in Florida, more disposals / "streamlining" to come. Whilst morale is down within MYT, I do believe there is an underlying determination to get things sorted.
Fly safe.
A4
I agree that MYT position is still precarious but the Bond holders did have a choice. They could have got back about 50% of the money now but they have decided to wait because they obvioulsly believe that in the longer term they will get more back. The vote was something like 150 million for and 500,000 against - pretty conclusive.
As for the DTi allowing companies to operate - what's the current UK deficit ?
Most tour operators are in the sh1t at the moment - I think TUI's debt (€6billion ?) makes MYT's look paltry - and TUI's core market/economy (Germany) is absolutely on its knees. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Tough times for ALL ahead. MYT are scaling back (DC10's retire shortly), Oasis lakes sold in Florida, more disposals / "streamlining" to come. Whilst morale is down within MYT, I do believe there is an underlying determination to get things sorted.
Fly safe.
A4
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Cheltenham Spa
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello,
It does seem to be these days that the more you owe, the less likely the Banks will collect.
MYT owes nothing compared to some giant motor companies.
Ford owes about 900 billion dollars (yes that 900 billion!) and Daewoo( there's not enough numbers!).
I once worked for Airtours, I thoroughly enjoyed it, Good people with a good product. I'm sure they'll pull through.
The Daily Hate, should be burnt to the ground and the Journo's shot. Even better they should re-locate to North Korea, where biased/ waltdisney reporting is encouraged.
Is there a "Ihatethedailymail.com" site, yet?
Goodluck MYT
It does seem to be these days that the more you owe, the less likely the Banks will collect.
MYT owes nothing compared to some giant motor companies.
Ford owes about 900 billion dollars (yes that 900 billion!) and Daewoo( there's not enough numbers!).
I once worked for Airtours, I thoroughly enjoyed it, Good people with a good product. I'm sure they'll pull through.
The Daily Hate, should be burnt to the ground and the Journo's shot. Even better they should re-locate to North Korea, where biased/ waltdisney reporting is encouraged.
Is there a "Ihatethedailymail.com" site, yet?
Goodluck MYT
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southern england
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Han special, I know it seems fashionable to knock the "Mail", but when did they say
I believe this may have been in an article earlier this year, when they incorrectly predicted that the bondholders were against the re-financing proposition. However, in recent articles, they have reported
and
and in "Evening Standard" (same house?)
There is another thread on this, complete with "Mail" bashers! - http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hreadid=102616
that only 61% of bondholders intended to vote to extend, short of the 75% required
The plans were backed by 99.7% of those bondholders to vote - way above the required figure of 75% - 15/9/03
To get there MyTravel needs consent from its bondholders. Now it says it is 'confident' a deal will be struck. – 22/07/03
TROUBLED tour operator MyTravel looks set to secure its financial survival next month after revealing today two-thirds of its bondholders will back its restructuring. - 18/08/03
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Transylvania
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Newswatcher:
Thanks for finding some positive quotes from the Daily Mail.
Just as a matter of interest, how many negative quotes on the subject of MyTravel could you find by The Mail and Financial Mail?
I bet it's more than three!
And I bet most of them were inaccurate!
PS. You MyTravel people have a lifeline to turn things around; I sincerely hope you do, you're a good bunch.
Thanks for finding some positive quotes from the Daily Mail.
Just as a matter of interest, how many negative quotes on the subject of MyTravel could you find by The Mail and Financial Mail?
I bet it's more than three!
And I bet most of them were inaccurate!
PS. You MyTravel people have a lifeline to turn things around; I sincerely hope you do, you're a good bunch.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southern england
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PofD, actually I didn't have to "find" anything, these were from the last few articles relating to MyTravel. What makes you think that the rest of the article was "positive"?
As you must be aware, it is difficult to quote from the "Mail", since they don't have an online edition.
Perhaps you should read what MyTravel have said in their own press releases over the last 18 months. For example, on the "bond" deal - 6/6/03
and on trading - 6/6/03
yet only 2 months later - 1/8/03
As you must be aware, it is difficult to quote from the "Mail", since they don't have an online edition.
Perhaps you should read what MyTravel have said in their own press releases over the last 18 months. For example, on the "bond" deal - 6/6/03
There remains some uncertainty over whether this extension to the maturity date of the Convertible Bonds can be achieved in the time
I expect the summer performance to be better than last year
The Company now believes that operating profit for the second half of the current financial year will be similar to the results for the second half of last year
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The daily moaner will do anything to get the dirt,even as far as drinking a bottle of wine in the morning in front of Besty after his latest fall out with his wife to see if he would give in to the tempation,only to find out that the journo was from his homeland
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since their problems first began, I've watched MYT's progress in this forum with interest. Those who promote them so ardently seem to have used a variety of defenses, such as (more or less in order of use): -
1. There is no problem, this is just scaremongering by competitors and the Media. We can resolve it.
2. There is a problem, but it is small, and being grossly exaggerated by competitors and the media. We can resolve it
3. There is a big problem, and competitors and the media are taking unjust advantage of a temporary situation, which is making it difficult for us to resolve.
4. If you think our problems are bad, you should see how badly our competitors are doing. Can they resolve them?
5. There was a problem, now we have resolved it, but our competitors and the media are trying to pretend that we haven't.
It seems to me that we ought to be able to agree on some points at least, without being accused of MYT bashing, namely: -
* Those who work for MYT are generally good, competent and efficient workers, who deserve better than they have received from their Board of Directors. They are NOT the cause of the recent and continuing problems at MYT.
* The Board of Directors have proved themselves in the past year to be largely incompetent, mendacious and greedy and almost criminally negligent towards the welfare of those that they employ. They ARE the cause of the problems at MYT.
* Competitors will seek to take commercial advantage of the weekness in MYT's position. That is normal, and MYT would do precisely the same were the circumstances reversed.
* The media may sometimes publish negative stories about MYT: That is also normal. The media have no responsibility whatsoever to write favourable comment about any company. If they are negative, so what? Deal with it.
MYT are now going to have to work very hard for several years to ensure that they can pay the bondholders, and to reassure investors. I hope they succeed, but would be encouraged if the bleating stopped and some PPrune posters showed a better understanding of how they got to be in this situation, and what it will take to get out of it (this thread is more balanced than most)
1. There is no problem, this is just scaremongering by competitors and the Media. We can resolve it.
2. There is a problem, but it is small, and being grossly exaggerated by competitors and the media. We can resolve it
3. There is a big problem, and competitors and the media are taking unjust advantage of a temporary situation, which is making it difficult for us to resolve.
4. If you think our problems are bad, you should see how badly our competitors are doing. Can they resolve them?
5. There was a problem, now we have resolved it, but our competitors and the media are trying to pretend that we haven't.
It seems to me that we ought to be able to agree on some points at least, without being accused of MYT bashing, namely: -
* Those who work for MYT are generally good, competent and efficient workers, who deserve better than they have received from their Board of Directors. They are NOT the cause of the recent and continuing problems at MYT.
* The Board of Directors have proved themselves in the past year to be largely incompetent, mendacious and greedy and almost criminally negligent towards the welfare of those that they employ. They ARE the cause of the problems at MYT.
* Competitors will seek to take commercial advantage of the weekness in MYT's position. That is normal, and MYT would do precisely the same were the circumstances reversed.
* The media may sometimes publish negative stories about MYT: That is also normal. The media have no responsibility whatsoever to write favourable comment about any company. If they are negative, so what? Deal with it.
MYT are now going to have to work very hard for several years to ensure that they can pay the bondholders, and to reassure investors. I hope they succeed, but would be encouraged if the bleating stopped and some PPrune posters showed a better understanding of how they got to be in this situation, and what it will take to get out of it (this thread is more balanced than most)
Ut Sementem Feeceris
It was however, not suprising, that the day BEFORE the vote the Mail on Sunday had a prominent article about how the banks were bailing out of MYT and there was no support for the company etc. No other publication ran a similar story.
Then the vote occurs - 150 million for and 500,000 against.
The next day the DM had literally 3 lines of a tiny column about the market in general regarding the result of the vote. Probably no more than 20 words. Most other publications ran positive(ish) stories about time to now get it in order etc.
Now call me a cynic but don't you think that's kind of odd when you consider the history of DM and MYT reporting ..
Then the vote occurs - 150 million for and 500,000 against.
The next day the DM had literally 3 lines of a tiny column about the market in general regarding the result of the vote. Probably no more than 20 words. Most other publications ran positive(ish) stories about time to now get it in order etc.
Now call me a cynic but don't you think that's kind of odd when you consider the history of DM and MYT reporting ..
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southern england
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A4, you say
yet from an article in the "Daily Telegraph" - 16/9/03
You also say
The DM could not possibly have had a comment about the bondholders decision on the day it was made, since they are a morning paper! I think the 3 lines you mention, were probably from the Evening Standard, and were remarkably upbeat
and Orvil 
where on earth did you get this nugget from? The actual figure is about $165bn, according to their own qrtly report, released in June this year! Their total liabilities are around $300bn!
No other publication ran a similar story.
City bankers warned, however, that MyTravel remained precariously financed. The bonds were trading last night at just 26.5p in the pound, up 1p, while its bank debt has recently been changing hands for as little as 20p in the pound. One banker said: "In my view, this just buys time. They will need another refinancing."
The next day the DM had literally 3 lines of a tiny column
On the upside, MyTravel jumped 3 1/2p to 20 3/4p after announcing that its bondholders have voted in favour of an extension to its £221.6m debt repayment by three years until 2007.
Ford owes about 900 billion dollars (yes that 900 billion!)
Last edited by newswatcher; 24th Sep 2003 at 15:48.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok, after having read the back issues of 40 articles,most of them predicting imminient collapse and that no deals will be done etc, I think it is safe to conclude that the reporting is inaccurateand that there certainly is a negative agenda towards the company. if they were sued for libel in the past this would explain their attitude.
Ut Sementem Feeceris
OK Newswatcher, I bow to your superior knowledge reflected in your title. BUT, the DT article sounds exactly the same as the MoS article - syndicated / rehashed?
As for the Mail not being able to report it the same day - I didn't say that;
Quote from me;
"Then the vote occurs - 150 million for and 500,000 against. The next day the DM had literally 3 lines of a tiny column ....." QED.
So Ford owes ONLY $165 billion not $900 billion. Isn't it all a bit academic after the first $10 -20 billion ?
A4
As for the Mail not being able to report it the same day - I didn't say that;
Quote from me;
"Then the vote occurs - 150 million for and 500,000 against. The next day the DM had literally 3 lines of a tiny column ....." QED.
So Ford owes ONLY $165 billion not $900 billion. Isn't it all a bit academic after the first $10 -20 billion ?
A4
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southern england
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A4 thanks for your reply. I was merely responding to your assertion that "No other publication ran a similar story". The DT is certainly NOT in the same "house" as the DM, in fact they are often "daggers drawn", so funny that they published the same info, as you say probably syndicated. You could say that the MoS were on the ball, in that they published 2 days earlier!
Apologies for misreading your "next day" reference, I thought you meant the day after the MoS article. Wasn't the bit I quoted the same as appeared in the DM? It''s the only online reference I can find from either the MoS or DM.
The size of the "debt" is particularly relevant, when considering "debts" against "assets". If my figures are correct, MyTravel has a balance sheet "debt" of £718m against "assets" of £829m. Fords have a balance sheet "debt" of $165bn against "assets" of $306bn. Having a debt of $900bn against "assets" of $306bn, might have caused ructions on Wall Street!!
At least we know their "debts", it always amazes me when companies like Enron collapse with such mega-debts, and no-one seemed to know about this beforehand! Those auditors certainly have something to answer for!
Apologies for misreading your "next day" reference, I thought you meant the day after the MoS article. Wasn't the bit I quoted the same as appeared in the DM? It''s the only online reference I can find from either the MoS or DM.
The size of the "debt" is particularly relevant, when considering "debts" against "assets". If my figures are correct, MyTravel has a balance sheet "debt" of £718m against "assets" of £829m. Fords have a balance sheet "debt" of $165bn against "assets" of $306bn. Having a debt of $900bn against "assets" of $306bn, might have caused ructions on Wall Street!!
At least we know their "debts", it always amazes me when companies like Enron collapse with such mega-debts, and no-one seemed to know about this beforehand! Those auditors certainly have something to answer for!