We welcome article submissions from experts in the areas of coal, mining,
shipping, etc.
To Submit your article please click here.
|
|
|
Tuesday, 29 July 14
GENCO: DRY BULK SHIPPING VALUATIONS NO LONGER ANCHORED TO DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW METHOD - WEIL
 KNOWLEDGE TO ELEVATE
Discounted cash flow analysis is a mainstay among the valuation methodologies used by restructuring professionals and bankruptcy courts to determine the enterprise value of a distressed business. Despite its prevalence, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York recently concluded the DCF method was inappropriate for the valuation of “dry bulk” shipping companies. In re Genco Shipping & Trading Limited. Although the bankruptcy court merely applied existing law to the facts of the case, the decision in Genco could serve as precedent for the valuation of companies in other segments of the shipping industry, or other industries, that experience significant volatility in rates.
Genco and the Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization
Genco Shipping & Trading Limited is a leading provider of maritime transportation services for “dry bulk” cargoes, such as iron ore, coal, grain, and steel products. Through its subsidiaries, Genco owns and operates a fleet of 53 vessels, which it contracts out to third-parties under fixed-rate or spot-market time charters.
In April 2014, Genco and certain of its affiliates commenced cases under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code to implement a prepackaged plan of reorganization that would consensually restructure approximately $1.48 billion in secured and unsecured debt. The Genco plan provided the following key features:
- Approximately $1.2 billion of secured debt would be converted into equity in the reorganized company.
- New capital would be invested through a $100 million, fully backstopped rights offering.
- The maturities for two secured prepetition facilities would be extended.
- Allowed general unsecured claims would be reinstated and paid in the ordinary course of business.
- Existing equity holders would receive warrants for up to 6% of the equity in the reorganized company.
The plan garnered unanimous approval from Genco’s secured lenders and holders of its unsecured convertible notes.
The Genco plan was premised on an enterprise valuation between $1.36 billion and $1.44 billion. The debtors derived this range of values from a “Net Asset Valuation” analysis, a methodology commonly applied to shipping companies in non-bankruptcy contexts. An upcoming post will examine the bankruptcy court’s analysis of the NAV methodology in the bankruptcy context.
Equity Committee Contested Genco Plan Valuation
Less than three weeks into the bankruptcy, the U.S. Trustee appointed an equity committee, which was comprised of (i) Aurelius Capital Partners LP, (ii) Mohawk Capital LLC, and (iii) OZ Domestic Partners, LP (a/k/a Och Ziff).
The equity committee objected to confirmation of the Genco plan. It argued, among other things, that the debtors’ enterprise value was actually between $1.54 billion and $1.91 billion. The equity committee argued that, because the debtors were solvent under its valuation, existing equity holders were entitled to greater recoveries than those provided under the Genco plan. The equity committee derived its range of values from a weighted average of its DCF, comparable company, precedent transaction, and NAV analyses, with each weighted at 37.5%, 37.5%, 10%, and 15%, respectively
Bankruptcy Court Rejected DCF Methodology for Dry Bulk Shippers
To determine whether Genco’s enterprise value exceeded $1.48 billion, the amount at which existing equity holders would be entitled to any recovery, the bankruptcy court examined the testimony presented with respect to each of the four valuation methodologies. The bankruptcy court concluded that there were “many good reasons that the DCF method should not be applied here” and considered only the remaining three methodologies, ultimately determining that the debtors’ value did not exceed $1.48 billion.
The bankruptcy court began its analysis of the DCF methodology by explaining it briefly, as follows:
A discounted cash flow analysis entails estimating the periodic cash flow that a company will generate over a discrete time period, determining the ‘terminal value’ of the company at the end of the period, and discounting each of the cash flows and terminal value to determine the total value as of the relevant date.
Thus, even though a DCF analysis is a “traditional methodology,” it is of limited use when based on projections of future cash flows that are unreliable or difficult to ascertain. The bankruptcy court found that accurate cash flow projections did not exist for Genco, and it observed that the parties agreed on this point. In fact, the equity committee’s financial adviser testified that “shipping rates are volatile and the industry can be characterized as cyclical ….” In addition, the committee’s expert witness conceded that “[i]t is difficult to accurately forecast freight rates in drybulk shipping …. [and that] the drybulk market is dynamic and volatile.”
Interestingly, the bankruptcy court concluded not just that accurate projections were unobtainable in the case of Genco, specifically, but also for dry bulk shippers, generally. The bankruptcy court observed that the DCF method is inappropriate for the dry bulk shipping market because it is volatile and highly fragmented, has low barriers to entry, and little differentiation exists among competitors, causing charter rates to fluctuate with supply and demand and making revenues unpredictable. The bankruptcy court further noted that its market-wide concerns were exacerbated in the case of Genco because its longer-term charters are set to expire by October 2014, leaving the company entirely exposed to market volatility through spot-rate charters.
Equity Committee’s DCF Analysis Unpersuasive for Additional Reasons
Although the bankruptcy court found that “the volatility of the [dry bulk] industry is a sufficient basis by itself to reject a DCF analysis,” it proceeded to identify a number of particular problems with the equity committee’s DCF analysis that made it unpersuasive.
First, the bankruptcy court noted that the equity committee’s heavy reliance on its DCF analysis was internally inconsistent because the assumptions about future industry performance underlying the analysis were based on reports from equity analysts, most of whom did not utilize the DCF method in reaching their conclusions. Second, in written materials presented to Och Ziff prior to the bankruptcy filing, the financial adviser to the equity committee noted that the DCF method was not commonly used to value companies in the shipping industry.
The bankruptcy court also noted that, before being retained by the equity committee, the financial adviser to the equity committee prepared pitch materials for debtors in which it estimated a shortfall in Genco’s collateral value. The bankruptcy court made clear that it did not rely on this fact in reaching its decision, but mentioned it and other, similar statements that undermined the credibility of the testimony presented by the financial adviser to the equity committee. Third, the equity committee’s argument that DCF analyses were used in fairness opinions issued in connection with certain maritime M&A transactions was not compelling because other evidence suggested that those transactions focused more on the NAV methodology for purposes of valuation, and there was conflicting testimony on the usefulness of fairness opinions in the context of a contested hearing on valuation.
Finally, the bankruptcy court found that the testimony presented by the equity committee’s expert witness regarding shipping rate forecasts was “unpersuasive and less credible than that” presented by the debtors’ expert.
Lessons Learned
The prospective nature of the DCF method often allows parties to advocate for higher valuations on subjective and/or intangible grounds. The Genco decision is significant because it establishes a clear precedent rejecting the DCF method when determining the enterprise value of dry bulk shipping companies in bankruptcy. This precedent may reduce the leverage of parties, such as equity holders, that would benefit from a higher valuation of a dry bulk shipper.
The decision, however, will likely have farther-reaching consequences. Dry bulk is just one segment of the larger shipping industry, and many other segments share the characteristics that the bankruptcy court cited to support its conclusion that accurate projections were unobtainable. Similarly, shipping is not the only industry with notable volatility; other industries may soon be the next port of call for the Genco decision.
Source: Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, Gabriel A. Morgan / Hellenic Shipping
If you believe an article violates your rights or the rights of others, please contact us.
|
|
Sunday, 19 October 14
LOW DEMAND PUSHES DOWN COAL FREIGHT RATES; VOLATILITY CONTINUES
COALspot.com: This week all the segments softened including BDI except for Panamax index.
The BDI was down by1.70 pct and clsoed at 944 points ...
Friday, 17 October 14
INTERNATIONAL COAL PRICES ARE AT LOWEST LEVEL; COAL STOCKS AT INDIAN POWER PLANTS ARE ALSO AT LOWEST LEVEL
International coal prices as well as coal freights are falling and reaching to its lowest levels. According to PTI, fuel stockpiles at the thermal ...
Friday, 17 October 14
U.S. COAL PRODUCTION UP BY 3.6% WEEK - ON - WEEK
COALspot.com – United States the world's one of largest coal producers, produced approximately 19.20 million short tons (mmst) of coal in ...
Friday, 17 October 14
DRY BULK SHIPPING'S OUTLOOK NOW SHIFTING TO A LESS PROMISING ONE, SHIP PRICES EXPECTED TO FOLLOW SOON - NIKOS ROUSSANOGLOU, HELLENIC SHIPPING
China’s and other Asian countries’ return to the dry bulk market last week, didn’t trigger the hoped support towards the dry bulk ...
Thursday, 16 October 14
KOREA MIDLAND POWER TO BUY 490K MT OF LCV COAL FOR 1Q 2015
COALspot.com : Korea Midland Power Co., Ltd. has invited bids through International open bidding for 490,000 Metric Tons (MT) of LCV (Sub) Bitumino ...
|
|
|
Showing 3421 to 3425 news of total 6871 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
- Economic Council, Georgia
- Globalindo Alam Lestari - Indonesia
- Sarangani Energy Corporation, Philippines
- Siam City Cement - Thailand
- Sakthi Sugars Limited - India
- Bhushan Steel Limited - India
- Maheswari Brothers Coal Limited - India
- McConnell Dowell - Australia
- GAC Shipping (India) Pvt Ltd
- Larsen & Toubro Limited - India
- Sindya Power Generating Company Private Ltd
- Billiton Holdings Pty Ltd - Australia
- Essar Steel Hazira Ltd - India
- Ministry of Finance - Indonesia
- Petron Corporation, Philippines
- Salva Resources Pvt Ltd - India
- Miang Besar Coal Terminal - Indonesia
- Parry Sugars Refinery, India
- MS Steel International - UAE
- Tata Chemicals Ltd - India
- Medco Energi Mining Internasional
- Oldendorff Carriers - Singapore
- Directorate General of MIneral and Coal - Indonesia
- Savvy Resources Ltd - HongKong
- Standard Chartered Bank - UAE
- Mercator Lines Limited - India
- AsiaOL BioFuels Corp., Philippines
- Lanco Infratech Ltd - India
- Romanian Commodities Exchange
- Malabar Cements Ltd - India
- Indo Tambangraya Megah - Indonesia
- Kumho Petrochemical, South Korea
- Bharathi Cement Corporation - India
- Energy Link Ltd, New Zealand
- Edison Trading Spa - Italy
- Interocean Group of Companies - India
- Coal and Oil Company - UAE
- TNB Fuel Sdn Bhd - Malaysia
- Indonesian Coal Mining Association
- Semirara Mining and Power Corporation, Philippines
- ASAPP Information Group - India
- Uttam Galva Steels Limited - India
- Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd
- Marubeni Corporation - India
- Deloitte Consulting - India
- Baramulti Group, Indonesia
- Aboitiz Power Corporation - Philippines
- Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd - India
- Vedanta Resources Plc - India
- Truba Alam Manunggal Engineering.Tbk - Indonesia
- Global Green Power PLC Corporation, Philippines
- SMG Consultants - Indonesia
- GMR Energy Limited - India
- Mercuria Energy - Indonesia
- Metalloyd Limited - United Kingdom
- Alfred C Toepfer International GmbH - Germany
- Singapore Mercantile Exchange
- Makarim & Taira - Indonesia
- Star Paper Mills Limited - India
- Independent Power Producers Association of India
- Chamber of Mines of South Africa
- Pendopo Energi Batubara - Indonesia
- Neyveli Lignite Corporation Ltd, - India
- Heidelberg Cement - Germany
- Global Business Power Corporation, Philippines
- Ministry of Mines - Canada
- South Luzon Thermal Energy Corporation
- GN Power Mariveles Coal Plant, Philippines
- Cigading International Bulk Terminal - Indonesia
- Sical Logistics Limited - India
- Samtan Co., Ltd - South Korea
- Goldman Sachs - Singapore
- Power Finance Corporation Ltd., India
- Meenaskhi Energy Private Limited - India
- Kideco Jaya Agung - Indonesia
- Pipit Mutiara Jaya. PT, Indonesia
- Iligan Light & Power Inc, Philippines
- Mintek Dendrill Indonesia
- Altura Mining Limited, Indonesia
- Latin American Coal - Colombia
- Krishnapatnam Port Company Ltd. - India
- Cement Manufacturers Association - India
- Coastal Gujarat Power Limited - India
- Orica Mining Services - Indonesia
- Gujarat Sidhee Cement - India
- OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd - India
- Posco Energy - South Korea
- Xindia Steels Limited - India
- Timah Investasi Mineral - Indoneisa
- Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
- London Commodity Brokers - England
- Port Waratah Coal Services - Australia
- European Bulk Services B.V. - Netherlands
- Toyota Tsusho Corporation, Japan
- Petrochimia International Co. Ltd.- Taiwan
- Simpson Spence & Young - Indonesia
- ICICI Bank Limited - India
- Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence - India
- Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd - Australia
- Ministry of Transport, Egypt
- Kobexindo Tractors - Indoneisa
- Bahari Cakrawala Sebuku - Indonesia
- Ambuja Cements Ltd - India
- The Treasury - Australian Government
- India Bulls Power Limited - India
- Bhoruka Overseas - Indonesia
- Riau Bara Harum - Indonesia
- Borneo Indobara - Indonesia
- Semirara Mining Corp, Philippines
- Videocon Industries ltd - India
- Dalmia Cement Bharat India
- Jaiprakash Power Ventures ltd
- Bangladesh Power Developement Board
- White Energy Company Limited
- Orica Australia Pty. Ltd.
- Indogreen Group - Indonesia
- PTC India Limited - India
- Central Electricity Authority - India
- Georgia Ports Authority, United States
- New Zealand Coal & Carbon
- TeaM Sual Corporation - Philippines
- Vijayanagar Sugar Pvt Ltd - India
- Grasim Industreis Ltd - India
- Australian Commodity Traders Exchange
- Binh Thuan Hamico - Vietnam
- Dong Bac Coal Mineral Investment Coporation - Vietnam
- The University of Queensland
- Wood Mackenzie - Singapore
- Indian Oil Corporation Limited
- Tamil Nadu electricity Board
- Mjunction Services Limited - India
- Ind-Barath Power Infra Limited - India
- SN Aboitiz Power Inc, Philippines
- Sree Jayajothi Cements Limited - India
- PowerSource Philippines DevCo
- Intertek Mineral Services - Indonesia
- Electricity Authority, New Zealand
- Banpu Public Company Limited - Thailand
- Rio Tinto Coal - Australia
- PetroVietnam Power Coal Import and Supply Company
- Planning Commission, India
- Australian Coal Association
- Commonwealth Bank - Australia
- Siam City Cement PLC, Thailand
- PNOC Exploration Corporation - Philippines
- Holcim Trading Pte Ltd - Singapore
- SMC Global Power, Philippines
- Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited - India
- Kalimantan Lumbung Energi - Indonesia
- Meralco Power Generation, Philippines
- Bukit Asam (Persero) Tbk - Indonesia
- Ceylon Electricity Board - Sri Lanka
- The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd
- Trasteel International SA, Italy
- Asmin Koalindo Tuhup - Indonesia
- Merrill Lynch Commodities Europe
- Sojitz Corporation - Japan
- Manunggal Multi Energi - Indonesia
- Vizag Seaport Private Limited - India
- Kapuas Tunggal Persada - Indonesia
- Kepco SPC Power Corporation, Philippines
- Attock Cement Pakistan Limited
- GVK Power & Infra Limited - India
- Asia Pacific Energy Resources Ventures Inc, Philippines
- Wilmar Investment Holdings
- Formosa Plastics Group - Taiwan
- Bhatia International Limited - India
- San Jose City I Power Corp, Philippines
- Offshore Bulk Terminal Pte Ltd, Singapore
- Barasentosa Lestari - Indonesia
- Bukit Baiduri Energy - Indonesia
- Carbofer General Trading SA - India
- Eastern Energy - Thailand
- Filglen & Citicon Mining (HK) Ltd - Hong Kong
- Sinarmas Energy and Mining - Indonesia
- Anglo American - United Kingdom
- Gujarat Mineral Development Corp Ltd - India
- Kartika Selabumi Mining - Indonesia
- Karaikal Port Pvt Ltd - India
- Indian Energy Exchange, India
- Indika Energy - Indonesia
- Jindal Steel & Power Ltd - India
- Bulk Trading Sa - Switzerland
- Kohat Cement Company Ltd. - Pakistan
- Jorong Barutama Greston.PT - Indonesia
- VISA Power Limited - India
- Minerals Council of Australia
- Karbindo Abesyapradhi - Indoneisa
- IHS Mccloskey Coal Group - USA
- Agrawal Coal Company - India
- Madhucon Powers Ltd - India
- Coalindo Energy - Indonesia
- CIMB Investment Bank - Malaysia
- IEA Clean Coal Centre - UK
- Dr Ramakrishna Prasad Power Pvt Ltd - India
- Thiess Contractors Indonesia
- Renaissance Capital - South Africa
- Global Coal Blending Company Limited - Australia
- LBH Netherlands Bv - Netherlands
- Thai Mozambique Logistica
- Parliament of New Zealand
- Antam Resourcindo - Indonesia
- Straits Asia Resources Limited - Singapore
- Price Waterhouse Coopers - Russia
- Eastern Coal Council - USA
- CNBM International Corporation - China
- Therma Luzon, Inc, Philippines
- Africa Commodities Group - South Africa
- Energy Development Corp, Philippines
- Central Java Power - Indonesia
- International Coal Ventures Pvt Ltd - India
- Kaltim Prima Coal - Indonesia
- Aditya Birla Group - India
- Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission - India
- Bayan Resources Tbk. - Indonesia
- Bukit Makmur.PT - Indonesia
|
| |
| |
|
