TRA - Turners Automotive Group [previously TNR - Turners Limited]

[Beagle]

Looks as though he wants $3.05....lol.

Ouch...poor Winner...that's a little harsh...

[percy]

Was a bit.
Apologies W69.

[couta1]

Ouch...poor Winner...that's a little harsh...

I reckon winner has a big enough sense of humour to cover it.

[winner69]

I love you guys ......really good of you propping up the shareprice at the moment

Hoping like anything rest of week will be better

Got to stop checking the price as often as I do

[sb9]

Someone seem to keep reloading more on offer around 2.97 and 2.98 level.

Could that be Milford or some other big fund?

[winner69]

Not for TRA .....jeez 1.4% for the NZX is some sort of day‏

@MarkListerNZ
The NZX 50 finished up 1.4% today, hitting fresh all-time highs in the strongest trading session for two and a half months.

[Snoopy]

Snoops, it’s pretty clever how that Trust has a bond issue (which Turners take up) to pay for 8% of the debt securitised. (Bank funds the other 92%)

Winner, I may have read this the wrong way. But after I read the March 2018 newsletter in which Todd said on p1

"To help fund growth in our finance book, we have been diversifying our funding and now utilise bank funding, bonds and equity. We are looking to extend the securitisation we put in place last year to $250m and are close to finalising a new banking syndication (since achieved)"

I had assumed the only bonds being referred to were the TRAHB bonds that are NZDX listed. I had assumed it was these bonds that Turners referred to as funding part of the securitised debt under the "Turners Marque Warehouse Trust 1".

As at 31st March 2017 balance date, the BNZ part of the Trust funding was for a facility of $150m. But the carrying value of financial receivables in the Trust was only $73m. So why did Turners 'top up' the funding of the Trust via a bond issue, when there was so much underutilised BNZ funding still available? I can't make much sense of it all. The only possible answer I can offer is that if there was no co-funding by a party other than the bank, then "The Trust' would be little more than just another lump of bank debt, indistinguishable from the company's term bank debt. And another lump of bank debt is not "funding diversification".

SNOOPY

[Fox]

As at 31st March 2017 balance date, the BNZ part of the Trust funding was for a facility of $150m. But the carrying value of financial receivables in the Trust was only $73m. So why did Turners 'top up' the funding of the Trust via a bond issue, when there was so much underutilised BNZ funding still available? I can't make much sense of it all. The only possible answer I can offer is that if there was no co-funding by a party other than the bank, then "The Trust' would be little more than just another lump of bank debt, indistinguishable from the company's term bank debt. And another lump of bank debt is not "funding diversification".
SNOOPY

Subordinated notes are held as security against the securitisation warehouse (beyond that of the asset back securities), which allows Turner's to earn their 8% of waterfall distributions before the trust/SPV. Further bonds were issued to pledge more security against the facility to enable an increase in the facility limit for further growth when required.

[percy]

Today's announcement, director Paul Byrnes, buying 100,000 shares on market,taking his holding to 3,414,860 is positive.
Directors have a lot of skin on the line,which again is very positive.

[Beagle]

Today's announcement, director Paul Byrnes, buying 100,000 shares on market,taking his holding to 3,414,860 is positive.
Directors have a lot of skin on the line,which again is very positive.

Agreed - link http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-websit...973/280540.pdf