What's happening in CHC?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
Nowherespecial, I hear you and you make an argument. However during the first decade of this Century, winning work in Aberdeen seemed a relative easy proposition as there was so much of it.
If you knew me then you would know I tried hard to support the management and see the bigger picture although often the bigger picture was usually quite difficult to see.
It's hard to make an argument that CHC was not mismanaged. How can it have gone so bad so quickly. Maybe the long leases on aircraft had something to do with it or maybe simply choosing not to own anything l left them unable to raise capital when the squeeze hit.
Organising a helicopter contract should surely entail the amortisation of the assets involved so you end up owning the asset. A bit like the simple idea of leasing a house instead of buying one.
I suspect the deals and structure of how Chc were set up and what caused their failure to absorb the downturn will never be fully understood by mortals like me.
However Nowherespecial, a lot of people appear to have walked away with a lot of money in the process. Emotive though it may be, the price paid for that money is often met by the people in the immersion suits you seem yourself to have little or no respect for. Ask the families of the recent fatal accidents how they would feel about your comments.
If you believe the Chc management performed well then let's here it and your reasons why. I am willing to listen.
If you believe spending some of the new capital on logos and paint schemes is a sensible priority let's hear that too. I am willing to listen.
Also I invested in the Company I worked for believing it was a sensible thing to do. I did not want much of a return. Just a feeling I was backing a horse that was being well feed and kept healthy. I am left with the strong inpression that they actually gave me a Pony....and then rode it hard till it croaked. Did you invest. Did you care that much? Or are you like the rest of the management types who are all talk and no substance.
If you are also trying to spin a yarn that voluntary Chapter 11 meant everyone got paid......then why need Chapter 11 in the first place? I think you have listened to too many town hall briefs and you have started to believe. Just like I did.
Finally I notice in your public profile absolutely nothing about you. What you got to hide?
DB
If you knew me then you would know I tried hard to support the management and see the bigger picture although often the bigger picture was usually quite difficult to see.
It's hard to make an argument that CHC was not mismanaged. How can it have gone so bad so quickly. Maybe the long leases on aircraft had something to do with it or maybe simply choosing not to own anything l left them unable to raise capital when the squeeze hit.
Organising a helicopter contract should surely entail the amortisation of the assets involved so you end up owning the asset. A bit like the simple idea of leasing a house instead of buying one.
I suspect the deals and structure of how Chc were set up and what caused their failure to absorb the downturn will never be fully understood by mortals like me.
However Nowherespecial, a lot of people appear to have walked away with a lot of money in the process. Emotive though it may be, the price paid for that money is often met by the people in the immersion suits you seem yourself to have little or no respect for. Ask the families of the recent fatal accidents how they would feel about your comments.
If you believe the Chc management performed well then let's here it and your reasons why. I am willing to listen.
If you believe spending some of the new capital on logos and paint schemes is a sensible priority let's hear that too. I am willing to listen.
Also I invested in the Company I worked for believing it was a sensible thing to do. I did not want much of a return. Just a feeling I was backing a horse that was being well feed and kept healthy. I am left with the strong inpression that they actually gave me a Pony....and then rode it hard till it croaked. Did you invest. Did you care that much? Or are you like the rest of the management types who are all talk and no substance.
If you are also trying to spin a yarn that voluntary Chapter 11 meant everyone got paid......then why need Chapter 11 in the first place? I think you have listened to too many town hall briefs and you have started to believe. Just like I did.
Finally I notice in your public profile absolutely nothing about you. What you got to hide?
DB
Last edited by DOUBLE BOGEY; 10th Mar 2017 at 10:22.
Okay then..... lets all step away from the grudges, morale high ground and let go of some bitterness.
Billy the Vandal and his team of laptop salesmen took a wrecking ball to the company and did an indescribable amount of harm; I don't think anyone disputes that.
Karl took over an indebted company, at the bottom of the market, with a fleet of aircraft which the market didn't want (L2's, and later 225's), and in many cases, employees who hadn't realised the world had changed from $140 a barrel oil.
The company now has a clean balance sheet, investment, a right sized fleet and less risk of being left paying lease charges, storage and planned maintenance on aircraft nobody wants/needs (which would have still happened under your amortisation scheme). The company has been dragged into the 21st century, and the employees realigned with understanding the customer and challenged to innovate.
I think much of your hate is justified, Billy the Vandal earned it. But he's gone and the current team have had to work hard to pick up the pieces, and don't resemble your description which I think is based pre-2015?
As for the paint job and logo's - CHC is emerging from a hard and challenging process, but with a much more promising offer to customers. You tell me whether it's worth it?
Billy the Vandal and his team of laptop salesmen took a wrecking ball to the company and did an indescribable amount of harm; I don't think anyone disputes that.
Karl took over an indebted company, at the bottom of the market, with a fleet of aircraft which the market didn't want (L2's, and later 225's), and in many cases, employees who hadn't realised the world had changed from $140 a barrel oil.
The company now has a clean balance sheet, investment, a right sized fleet and less risk of being left paying lease charges, storage and planned maintenance on aircraft nobody wants/needs (which would have still happened under your amortisation scheme). The company has been dragged into the 21st century, and the employees realigned with understanding the customer and challenged to innovate.
I think much of your hate is justified, Billy the Vandal earned it. But he's gone and the current team have had to work hard to pick up the pieces, and don't resemble your description which I think is based pre-2015?
As for the paint job and logo's - CHC is emerging from a hard and challenging process, but with a much more promising offer to customers. You tell me whether it's worth it?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
Minigindiplomat, maybe I was hard on Karl which is unjustified because I do not know him so I am wrong to tar him with the same brush.
I hope the core message in your post is correct because I want all Helicopter people to succeed. Not just CHC.
I am not fully convinced that rebranding will improve their chances having been through that a few times before. However maybe time will tell.
Good luck too all at CHC. Lots of good people.
I hope the core message in your post is correct because I want all Helicopter people to succeed. Not just CHC.
I am not fully convinced that rebranding will improve their chances having been through that a few times before. However maybe time will tell.
Good luck too all at CHC. Lots of good people.
DB, CHC has been in business for 70 years. Taking your entire point of view from seeing how easy it was to win work in ABZ in the noughties doesnt seem really a representative sample does it?
You make some valid points but seem to deliberately ignore some. For example, not everyone wants to own their aircraft. Every time you buy something that goes down in value, in accounting terms you lose money. Leasing gets these values off your books which makes the numbers better. It also means you don't have to have $30m sat around to buy an ac, let alone several hundred. And, once they are finished, you end up with loads of idle assets sat on your books which you cant 'make commercial use of anymore (look at the 225). Again, much better to make that someone else's problem. Having some owned assets is def good and (as you'll see elsewhere in my posts) I agree CHC went down the line of far too many leased but a balance is important.
I believe that Fast Bill and his team of clowns were exactly that, a team of clowns. They are gone now, how long do you blame CHC for the mistakes of people who were in place for 5 years and left 2 years ago. You think that the average person in the Safety or Sales Team had a say over how the company works? It's not a commune, there is only 1 person at the top and for "the suits" - get on board or you find yourself job hunting, fast. Also - are you jealous that the people who run billion dollar companies get well paid? Why don't you have a go and see how long you last? It's a tough gig and it's capitalism. The same forces which took CHC to the brink of not existing anymore also are the ones who allow CEOs to get paid hugely. Was Bill overpaid, yes for level of talent but it's the capitalist system, not just CHC to be angry with here.
Spending about $200k tops (maybe less, thanks 212man) on telling the world we are long done with the legacy of Fast Bill seems like money well spent to me. I think we'll just have to disagree on this point. Talk to the oil company people at HAI what their impression of CHC is today vs 12 months ago and I suspect the answer will be "CHC is back''. That in itself helps CHC win more. If you don't see the connection I don't know how else to explain it.
I invested very carefully and quickly, hit my objectives (elsewhere in this thread) and got out. To quote Wall Street 'Don't get emotional about stock'. It's just money.
On your final point I'm not entirely sure what you are driving at. You must split equity and debt. No equity (share) holders will get paid when CHC emerges. Not one. The debt holders have been paid in equity in the new business.
CHC is not out of the woods yet - they still have no strategy and are still losing tenders they would rather win. But financially they are now very strong and in much better shape than before, and quite frankly in better shape than most of the rest of the industry.
You make some valid points but seem to deliberately ignore some. For example, not everyone wants to own their aircraft. Every time you buy something that goes down in value, in accounting terms you lose money. Leasing gets these values off your books which makes the numbers better. It also means you don't have to have $30m sat around to buy an ac, let alone several hundred. And, once they are finished, you end up with loads of idle assets sat on your books which you cant 'make commercial use of anymore (look at the 225). Again, much better to make that someone else's problem. Having some owned assets is def good and (as you'll see elsewhere in my posts) I agree CHC went down the line of far too many leased but a balance is important.
I believe that Fast Bill and his team of clowns were exactly that, a team of clowns. They are gone now, how long do you blame CHC for the mistakes of people who were in place for 5 years and left 2 years ago. You think that the average person in the Safety or Sales Team had a say over how the company works? It's not a commune, there is only 1 person at the top and for "the suits" - get on board or you find yourself job hunting, fast. Also - are you jealous that the people who run billion dollar companies get well paid? Why don't you have a go and see how long you last? It's a tough gig and it's capitalism. The same forces which took CHC to the brink of not existing anymore also are the ones who allow CEOs to get paid hugely. Was Bill overpaid, yes for level of talent but it's the capitalist system, not just CHC to be angry with here.
Spending about $200k tops (maybe less, thanks 212man) on telling the world we are long done with the legacy of Fast Bill seems like money well spent to me. I think we'll just have to disagree on this point. Talk to the oil company people at HAI what their impression of CHC is today vs 12 months ago and I suspect the answer will be "CHC is back''. That in itself helps CHC win more. If you don't see the connection I don't know how else to explain it.
I invested very carefully and quickly, hit my objectives (elsewhere in this thread) and got out. To quote Wall Street 'Don't get emotional about stock'. It's just money.
On your final point I'm not entirely sure what you are driving at. You must split equity and debt. No equity (share) holders will get paid when CHC emerges. Not one. The debt holders have been paid in equity in the new business.
CHC is not out of the woods yet - they still have no strategy and are still losing tenders they would rather win. But financially they are now very strong and in much better shape than before, and quite frankly in better shape than most of the rest of the industry.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
Nowherespecial. What do you mean "no equity shareholders will get paid"?
Are you saying my shares are worthless. Which would be odd cos the share price is still being posted.
I am not emotional about the investment. I have no regrets. I did what I thought was a good thing. To invest in the Company I worked for. I would have been less shocked if the shares got hit during the downturn maybe even by 50%. As it is my 10k became $100 quite quickly. I think we have both agreed that was hideous mismanagement by the people who ran CHC at the time.
I disagree with your amortisation concept. The ideal is to amortise over the period of the contract as much as possible. The EC225 issue is separate.
I do not share your view that capitalism in such a brazen cause of financial rape is acceptable or should be tolerated. I accept that making sensible rules to stop this is very difficult. I started with BIH and big bad Bob stole our pensions (for some time). At least Little Bill never got his stickies on it this time around although I am sure he would have done so if he had the opportunity.
I hope Karl is all you claim him to be. However, he's got some convincing to do for a lot of people.
Are you saying my shares are worthless. Which would be odd cos the share price is still being posted.
I am not emotional about the investment. I have no regrets. I did what I thought was a good thing. To invest in the Company I worked for. I would have been less shocked if the shares got hit during the downturn maybe even by 50%. As it is my 10k became $100 quite quickly. I think we have both agreed that was hideous mismanagement by the people who ran CHC at the time.
I disagree with your amortisation concept. The ideal is to amortise over the period of the contract as much as possible. The EC225 issue is separate.
I do not share your view that capitalism in such a brazen cause of financial rape is acceptable or should be tolerated. I accept that making sensible rules to stop this is very difficult. I started with BIH and big bad Bob stole our pensions (for some time). At least Little Bill never got his stickies on it this time around although I am sure he would have done so if he had the opportunity.
I hope Karl is all you claim him to be. However, he's got some convincing to do for a lot of people.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: here and there
Age: 67
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
helimutt: What contracts are you referring to that HNZ took from CHC? I don´t know of any. CHC Canada bid the contract in Halifax along with Cougar. I would say HNZ took the contract from Cougar who are currently on that contract.
Cougar won the Statoil contract in St. Johns does that mean they took the contract from HNZ and CHC who bid on it????
Cougar won the Statoil contract in St. Johns does that mean they took the contract from HNZ and CHC who bid on it????
DB, sorry for the delay - weekend and all that.
People who owned shares in the 'old' CHC will get no shares or money from the restructure. Not sure exactly where you are but in the UK there was a phrase when advertising financial products 'The value of your investment may go down as well as up' - this is why.
The plan of emergence means equity only for the major debt holders. All the equity (share) holders from before are being wiped out and replaced with the old debt holders. In theory, if CHC had the ability to pay off it's debts under the restructure, some money could be available to equity holders from before, but the money is not there.
People who owned shares in the 'old' CHC will get no shares or money from the restructure. Not sure exactly where you are but in the UK there was a phrase when advertising financial products 'The value of your investment may go down as well as up' - this is why.
The plan of emergence means equity only for the major debt holders. All the equity (share) holders from before are being wiped out and replaced with the old debt holders. In theory, if CHC had the ability to pay off it's debts under the restructure, some money could be available to equity holders from before, but the money is not there.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: LOS
Age: 67
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People who owned shares in the 'old' CHC will get no shares or money from the restructure.
I don't understand what you mean. I had 10,000 shares of HELI ( old CHC) in my portfolio. I now have 333 shares of HELIQ ( worth a whole $466 by the way)
Outwest,
HELIQ is the code for the old CHC under the stock exchange listing. The Q denotes it is under court supervision (Ch 11). Sorry to say but when CHC exits Ch 11 and becomes a private company again, those shares will cease to exist and you will get letters to that effect from CHC's lawyers.
HELIQ is the code for the old CHC under the stock exchange listing. The Q denotes it is under court supervision (Ch 11). Sorry to say but when CHC exits Ch 11 and becomes a private company again, those shares will cease to exist and you will get letters to that effect from CHC's lawyers.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK and MALTA
Age: 61
Posts: 1,297
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes
on
4 Posts
Nowhere special. How come you onow so much. I have Helif shares and they are trading as we speak. spouting rubbish with no explanation just boils my blood.
I think you are confusing equity borrowing for share ownership. They are two different things. CHC owes me nothing. I just hold shares in a very low capitulated company.
I think you are confusing equity borrowing for share ownership. They are two different things. CHC owes me nothing. I just hold shares in a very low capitulated company.
DB - it trades but its an OTC stock (which means as a retail punter - i.e. the average Joe blow who isn't a professional - will struggle to get involved anyway) that said todays traded volume is circa 35k shares - or around $50k worth. Frankly if you own that name take whatever is worth and enjoy a dinner on it, but its done.
I don't disagree some of your sentiment re; the way the Co. has been run but I think part of aviations issue (all sectors) is a race to the bottom, margin erosion and maybe a feeling that very often everyone outside of the aircrew is a nob. That doesn't make for much of a business.
As for the EC225 may well be the finest helicopter ever but recent events can not have helped and the management of the various issues have been utterly dismal. However that said the relative collapse of the oil price has been the major driver in issues at CHC.
I don't disagree some of your sentiment re; the way the Co. has been run but I think part of aviations issue (all sectors) is a race to the bottom, margin erosion and maybe a feeling that very often everyone outside of the aircrew is a nob. That doesn't make for much of a business.
As for the EC225 may well be the finest helicopter ever but recent events can not have helped and the management of the various issues have been utterly dismal. However that said the relative collapse of the oil price has been the major driver in issues at CHC.
Nowhere special. How come you onow so much. I have Helif shares and they are trading as we speak. spouting rubbish with no explanation just boils my blood.
I think you are confusing equity borrowing for share ownership. They are two different things. CHC owes me nothing. I just hold shares in a very low capitulated company.
I think you are confusing equity borrowing for share ownership. They are two different things. CHC owes me nothing. I just hold shares in a very low capitulated company.
The SEC description is very similar to his:
https://www.sec.gov/fast-answers/answersqaddedhtm.html
I feel sorry for you DB
quote from CHC site:
http://www.chcheli.com/sites/default...ne_Release.pdf
The Plan does not provide for any distribution to holders of the Company’s existing equity securities, including its ordinary shares and preferred shares. Following the effective date of the Plan, the Company will apply to the Registrar of Companies in the Cayman Islands for a voluntary striking off of the Company. Upon a striking off of the Company, the Company will be dissolved (subject to certain reinstatement rights of the holders of the existing equity) and the existing equity holders will receive no distribution.
SLB
http://www.chcheli.com/sites/default...ne_Release.pdf
The Plan does not provide for any distribution to holders of the Company’s existing equity securities, including its ordinary shares and preferred shares. Following the effective date of the Plan, the Company will apply to the Registrar of Companies in the Cayman Islands for a voluntary striking off of the Company. Upon a striking off of the Company, the Company will be dissolved (subject to certain reinstatement rights of the holders of the existing equity) and the existing equity holders will receive no distribution.
SLB
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: LOS
Age: 67
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Outwest,
HELIQ is the code for the old CHC under the stock exchange listing. The Q denotes it is under court supervision (Ch 11). Sorry to say but when CHC exits Ch 11 and becomes a private company again, those shares will cease to exist and you will get letters to that effect from CHC's lawyers.
HELIQ is the code for the old CHC under the stock exchange listing. The Q denotes it is under court supervision (Ch 11). Sorry to say but when CHC exits Ch 11 and becomes a private company again, those shares will cease to exist and you will get letters to that effect from CHC's lawyers.
Meanwhile on the legal hot air front on what really keeps a helicopter airborne we have:
The proposed solution was for a subsidiary of CHC (who was owed money by CHC) to file a creditor's winding-up petition, followed by CHC's directors causing CHC to apply for RPL Proceedings.
https://www.maplesandcalder.com/news...ucturing-1444/
https://www.maplesandcalder.com/news...ucturing-1444/
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: LOS
Age: 67
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Outwest, give it a try. In not very long that option will not be available to you.
There of course is an element whereby you need to stay on top of the investment you've made. I assume you have a broker and the equity you own is held in a nominee account - in which case it's usual for the broker to give notification of any corporate actions.