Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Full Contact Research's avatar

Thanks for the write-up, very interesting situation.

I assume the $360m pro forma valuation quoted in the article is the $150m BC Partners cash investment divided by the 41.6% stake on a fully converted basis? From what I understand though the conversion of the BC Partners pref into common is at their election, so how are you thinking about the asymmetry between the two return profiles (pref vs. common)? When thinking about the outcome of the potential investment to be carried out by the venture, it appears BC partners have a significant margin of safety to make at least their money back plus an 8% pref, even if the underlying investment produces a negative return.

I guess what the company get in return is BC Partner's deal sourcing and execution capabilities. I'm not sure its worth the very significant asymmetry in returns though - while upside is shared equally, most of the downside is borne by the common shareholders.

Separately (and assuming $360m is the right way of thinking about the pro forma valuation, for argument's sake), why do you deduct only the $150m cash investment to get to the implied value of the NOLs? Following the BC partners investment, the company will have approx. $300m of cash, so that would mean $60m for the value ascribed to the NOLs?

Thanks!

Expand full comment
Duh wun's avatar

Thanks for the interesting write up. I’m confused about one aspect of the piece re: the covered call strategy. The price is currently right around $7. I’m wondering where the upside in the stock is if you’re selling the July $7c minus the $1.10-$1.30 premium you’re getting for the call. Is this a play just for the premium?

Thanks for any clarification.

Expand full comment
9 more comments...

No posts