Concern for Aliv's funding

EDITOR, The Tribune.

IN March 2017, ALIV raised an astonishing $60m from investors, twice the amount they were looking for. That they require more money now, less than a year later, suggests that something has gone badly wrong.

This sudden need for funds has likely caught management by surprise. At Cable Bahamas’ November AGM, both ALIV and Cable management declined to divulge ALIV’s average revenue per user (ARPU). That would have been needlessly secretive if they knew they were going to fully disclose ARPU in this month’s offering memorandum, anyway. More likely is that management had no intention of raising debt at that time but was caught off guard by a weaker than expected Christmas quarter. That would make the current capital raise one of necessity, not of convenience – a warning sign for investors.

Whether planned or not, what matters now is whether ALIV will be able to repay current and future debt holders. As one of only two mobile operators in the country, ALIV’s ultimate success still seems assured. After a year of badly missed forecasts, however, there is clearly more risk here than we believed in 2017.

Management’s best path to reassuring investors is to be honest about what went wrong and open about the assumptions underlying its current forecasts.

Unfortunately, ALIV’s offering memorandum misses that mark on both counts. First, with mobile number portability now in place for nine months and counting, blaming BTC and URCA for the stunning 28% shortfall in ARPU versus plan ($33 at the end of December 2017 versus $46 as originally forecast) is no longer a reasonable excuse.

Second, despite totalling 99 pages, the memorandum never addresses a key question: what can ALIV do to increase ARPU that it hasn’t already tried? While it is reasonable to expect some ARPU improvement as corporate users increase, the forecasted 70% jump from $33 now to $56 in 2021 requires much more justification than we are given.

The ARPU growth assumption is particularly important because of an important disclosure on page 52 of the memorandum: ALIV is also in talks to take on US$19.5m in bank debt.

Unlike preference share debt, bank debt comes with covenants, or “strings attached”, to protect the bank. In this case, the string that could unravel everything is that if total debt to EBITDA is above 5.2 by 2021, the bank would get first claim over ALIV’s assets and cash flows. This would not occur under ALIV’s current subscriber and ARPU assumptions.

However, if we stress management’s assumptions by just 8% - that is, if we assume 145,000 subscribers and $52 in ARPU instead of 158,000 and $56 – EBITDA would fall from $33mn to $17mn and total debt to EBITDA would hit 5.6 times, clearly breaching the covenant. That could result in suspension of payments to bond and preference share holders until the bank is satisfied. An 8% stress test is by no means aggressive; 10 to 20% is standard. If it is possible for ALIV to breach debt covenants at just 8% below plan, then this is neither an offering investors should be clamouring for nor one that advisors should be recommending. However, if ALIV does indeed raise an extra $35mn from this offering, as rumoured, it most likely can avoid using the bank debt. That would certainly be a relief for current investors.

Finally, ALIV’s disappointing performance is of paramount interest to Cable Bahamas’ common shareholders as well. Cable Bahamas points to ALIV as its future growth engine, and Cable management has said they would resume dividend payments to shareholders in fiscal year 2019. ALIV’s continuing losses raise significant doubts about their ability to do that. In fact, Cable will very likely post their sixth straight quarter of multi-million-dollar losses within the next few days. Perhaps this will be the trigger for shareholders to finally demand a full and frank accounting for the Florida and ALIV operations, including details of their recent bank debt renegotiation and realistic time lines for a return to profitability and dividend payments. If management provides this information, shareholders of both Cable Bahamas and ALIV will likely remain patient for a while longer. After all, there is nothing wrong in asking shareholders to “believe in best.” Just don’t ask them to believe in fairytales.

A CONCERNED INVESTOR

Nassau,

February 21, 2018.

Comments

sheeprunner12 says...

ALIV appears to be a sexy side-show to keep the heat on BTC ........ When will Government divest its 9% of BTC shares that Ingraham promised to sell????? ........... When will the Government tell us if it has the 2% that Perry allegedly took back????? ........ When will KPT update the Bahamian people on how much profit has been earned on that 2% for social projects????

The Family Islands desperately need some of this BTC largesse to be invested in schools, clinics, docks, roads, parks, green spaces and community centres ....... Watsayu??????

Posted 23 February 2018, 5:40 p.m. Suggest removal

realitycheck242 says...

The HAM administration will stand the credibility test on the BTC and Aliv share sale to the Bahamian investing public. Remember the HAI administration also promised to sell the gov portion of the Arawak cay port shares to the public, and a percentage of Bahamas food services shares when they were bought out by the american company "sysco Ltd, This sale was model after the commonwealth brewery sale to heineken the beer parent company.. Sysco was mandated in that sale agreement to sell a percentage of the shares to the Bahamian public. Todate nothing has happened. You would think that Gov would have completed the BTC share sale by now because there has been many tribune articles on that topic and the funds could be used to reduce some of the gov borrowing. Administrations make promise's but rarely deliver.

Posted 24 February 2018, 6:07 a.m. Suggest removal

observer2 says...

Dear “A concerned investor”

You have put together an excellent analysis of the risks involved with Aliv

I’m not a technician but from a high financial view point I would add the following issues.

1. Use of preference shares is inappropriate for a risky start up. As the company is bleeding red ink the pref dividend is being paid from funds put in by earlier ... the classic definition of a p***** s*****. This should be an equity issuance as a start up can’t pay dividends until it is profitable. right?

2. The Aliv financials are 6 months old. There is no disclosure of the unaudited results through December 2017. What terrible news will not be disclosed because this is not an equity issue and there is no requirement for quarterly reports. By the time the annual audit is done the pref dividend may have to be stopped.

3. Aliv is pushing that the issuance is for institutions and high net worth individuals whom they define as having $1 million in net worth. This is wrong, it should be $1 million in liquid assets.

4. The Board Of Directors and Management are nice people but there are no engineers or technicians. The parent, Cable, is spread thin, and they are outside of thier league with thier Florida opps.

5. What’s with the “free ride” 51.75% ownership by the Bahamas Government. Ahhh, finally a deep pocket ready for the coming bailout. Resolve will need much more than the recent $100 million just injected. Hey Bahamas? Anyone seen the resolve financials? Doesn’t look like KP brought anymore transparency than the previous characters.

I fear this will all end badly and swept under the rug like BoB, Bahamas Supermarkets, Baha Mar, Clico and Gulf Union. The government is to busy bringing on Oban.

Good luck to all.

Posted 23 February 2018, 7:07 p.m. Suggest removal

realitycheck242 says...

That is why the Offering memorandum ended with the high lighted statement **"The preference share issue is a private placement targeted at specific institutional investors and high net worth individuals. Members of the public should not seek to become involved"** ...The folks who invest in the Aliv offering probably have a diversified portfolio and can afford to loose what ever funds they have invested.. No one likes to loose money but if that eventually happens they are most likely the folks who would feel it less.

Posted 24 February 2018, 5:44 a.m. Suggest removal

Log in to comment