Latest news with #debt
Associated Press
5 hours ago
- Business
- Associated Press
Clarification by Transat A.T. Inc. following injunction application by Financière Outremont Inc.
MONTREAL, June 27, 2025 /CNW/ - Transat A.T. Inc. ('Transat' or the 'Corporation') announces that on June 27, 2025, it was served with an application for an interlocutory injunction and permanent injunction (the 'Injunction Application') from Financière Outremont Inc. ('Financière Outremont'), a company controlled by Mr. Pierre Karl Péladeau, in connection with the announcement of the agreement in principle published on June 5, 2025, with Canada Enterprise Emergency Funding Corporation ('CEEFC') regarding the restructuring of the debt incurred by Transat under the Large Employer Emergency Funding Facility (LEEFF) program managed by CEEFC during the COVID-19 pandemic (the 'Transaction'). Since the announcement of the agreement in principle, the Corporation's share price has increased from $1.64 at market close on June 4, 2025, to $2.83 at market close on June 27, 2025, representing a 72% increase. As a reminder, upon completion of the Transaction, the outstanding debt with CEEFC will be written-off by nearly 50%, from $772M as at March 31, 2025, to $334M as follows: At no time will the exercise of Warrants or conversion of Preferred Shares result in CEEFC beneficially owning more than 19.9% of the common shares, and therefore, CEEFC will not exert control over the Corporation. The Injunction Application by Financière Outremont aims in particular to prevent the closing of the Transaction, beneficial for the Corporation, unless the Corporation obtains shareholder approval, which the Corporation deems not required. In this regard, the Corporation reiterates that it has rightfully relied on the formal valuation and minority approval exemptions contained in sections 5.5(g) and 5.7(1)(e) of Regulation 61-101 respecting Protection of Minority Security Holders in Special Transactions, given that the Transaction significantly strengthens the financial position of the issuer, which was becoming extremely precarious due to the size of its debt, as repeatedly disclosed in the Corporation's public filings. The Corporation believes the allegations made by Financière Outremont are unfounded and intends to contest them vigorously and seek dismissal of the Injunction Application. This application does not affect the Corporation's operations. The Corporation recalls that the announced Transaction is the result of discussions initiated over 18 months ago with CEEFC and the review of a range of alternatives conducted through a robust process with the assistance of a special advisory committee of the Board of Directors composed solely of independent directors, with a view to establishing an optimal long-term capital structure for the Corporation. The Transaction was unanimously approved by the Board of Directors on the recommendation of the special committee, which completed its work with the assistance of external financial and legal advisors. The usual conditional approval of the Toronto Stock Exchange was obtained regarding the Preferred Shares component. The Transaction is subject to the finalization of definitive agreements. The Corporation does not intend to comment further on the Injunction Application out of respect for the ongoing judicial process unless circumstances warrant otherwise. For more details on the Transaction, please refer to the press release issued by the Corporation on June 5, 2025, available on SEDAR+ at Caution Regarding Forward-Looking Information This news release contains certain forward-looking statements with respect to the Corporation. These forward-looking statements are identified by the use of terms and phrases such as 'anticipate' 'believe' 'could' 'estimate' 'expect' 'intend' 'may' 'plan' 'potential' 'predict' 'project' 'will' 'would', the negative of these terms and similar terminology, including references to assumptions. All such statements are made pursuant to applicable Canadian securities legislation. Such statements may involve but are not limited to comments with respect to strategies, expectations, planned operations or future actions. Forward-looking statements, by their nature, involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by these forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements may differ materially from actual results for a number of reasons, including without limitation, economic conditions, changes in demand due to the seasonal nature of the business, extreme weather conditions, climatic or geological disasters, war, political instability, measures taken, planned or contemplated by governments regarding the imposition of tariffs on exports and imports, real or perceived terrorism, outbreaks of epidemics or disease, consumer preferences and consumer habits, consumers' perceptions of the safety of destination services and aviation safety, demographic trends, disruptions to the air traffic control system, the cost of protective, safety and environmental measures, competition, maintain and grow its reputation and brand, the availability of funding in the future, the Corporation's ability to repay its debt from internally generated funds or otherwise, the Corporation's ability to adequately mitigate the Pratt & Whitney GTF engine issues, fluctuations in fuel prices and exchange rates and interest rates, the Corporation's dependence on key suppliers, the availability and fluctuation of costs related to our aircraft, information technology and telecommunications, cybersecurity risks, changes in legislation, regulatory developments or procedures, pending litigation and third-party lawsuits, the ability to reduce operating costs through the Elevation program initiatives, among other things, the Corporation's ability to attract and retain skilled resources, labour relations, collective bargaining and labour disputes, pension issues, maintaining insurance coverage at favourable levels and conditions and at an acceptable cost, and other risks detailed in the Risks and Uncertainties section of the MD&A included in our 2024 Annual Report. The reader is cautioned that the foregoing list of factors is not exhaustive of the factors that may affect any of the Corporation's forward-looking statements. The reader is also cautioned to consider these and other factors carefully and not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. The Corporation considers that the assumptions on which these forward-looking statements are based are reasonable. These statements reflect current expectations regarding future events and operating performance, speak only as of the date this news release is issued, and represent the Corporation's expectations as of that date. For additional information with respect to these and other factors, see the MD&A for the quarter ended April 30, 2025 filed with the Canadian securities commissions and available on SEDAR+ at The Corporation disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as required by applicable securities legislation. About Transat A.T. Inc. Founded in Montreal 37 years ago, Transat has achieved worldwide recognition as a provider of leisure travel particularly as an airline under the Air Transat brand. Voted 2025 World's Best Leisure Airline by passengers at the Skytrax World Airline Awards, it flies to international destinations. Air Transat's fleet includes some of the most energy-efficient aircraft in their category. (TSX: TRZ) Media: Alex-Anne Carrier Senior Advisor, Communications and Public Affairs [email protected] Media site: Financial analysts: Jean-François Pruneau Chief Financial Officer [email protected] SOURCE Transat A.T. Inc.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Automotive
- Yahoo
What happened to NIO stock and is it still worth considering?
NIO (NYSE:NIO) stock, once a darling of the electric vehicle (EV) boom, has slumped over the past two years. After peaking during the pandemic-era EV frenzy, NIO shares have continued to tumble. Even now, it's trading towards the lower end of its 52-week average. So what's happened? Well, the reasons behind this decline are multifaceted, with both company-specific and sector-wide challenges weighing on sentiment. The primary factor is persistent losses and a delayed path to profitability. NIO's not expected to turn a profit until 2028, according to consensus analyst estimates. That's three years from now. In 2028, the price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio would be 19 times earnings. That's a little demanding for three years' time, but this figure can plummet in the early years of profitability. This prolonged loss-making status is a red flag for many investors, especially as competition in the EV sector intensifies. NIO's recent earnings reports have disappointed. While sales volumes are rising, average selling prices have fallen, and costs in the sector remain stubbornly high. The company's net debt position has also become a concern, as it continues to fund operations and expansion through borrowing. That puts pressure on its balance sheet and raises questions about future dilution or refinancing risks. Despite the gloom, NIO's top-line growth remains robust. Consensus estimates call for annual EPS growth of 28% in 2025, accelerating to over 40% by 2027. Yet, with net losses persisting and debt mounting, the market's patience is wearing thin. Investors should also be wary that NIO has missed targets before. I'd also argue that NIO's battery-swapping technology is becoming less valuable. A few years ago, the idea that you could swap your battery in a matter of minutes rather than charging a car for an hour seemed like a great idea. However, building battery-swapping station is a massive logistical cost. Meanwhile, conventional charging times have plummeted. Another dynamic shaping the sector is the growing focus on autonomous driving. Markets are becoming less enamoured with pure-play EV makers and more interested in companies with credible self-driving technology. In fact, Elon Musk told us years ago that there was no money in cars. While NIO's made investments in smart driving features, it faces stiff competition from both domestic rivals and global giants like Tesla, who are pouring billions into autonomous systems. The ability to differentiate on software and self-driving capabilities may ultimately determine who wins in the next phase of automotive disruption. For risk-tolerant investors, NIO could be a passable opportunity as average share price targets suggest it could recover. However, with persistent losses, a heavy debt load, and intensifying competition, the risks are substantial. Until NIO demonstrates a clear path to profitability and stronger financial discipline, its shares may remain under pressure. Personally, I don't think the stock's worth considering. The post What happened to NIO stock and is it still worth considering? appeared first on The Motley Fool UK. More reading 5 Stocks For Trying To Build Wealth After 50 One Top Growth Stock from the Motley Fool James Fox has no position in any of the shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has recommended Tesla. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. Motley Fool UK 2025 Sign in to access your portfolio
Telegraph
7 hours ago
- Business
- Telegraph
Entrepreneurs should be terrified by Starmer's benefits about-turn
Officials at the Treasury will be fretting over how they are going to fill the latest 'black hole' to open up in the public finances. Economists at the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) will be worrying over how long they will have to forecast the impact on debt. And the Bank of England will be worrying about how the UK can possibly sell £100bn or more of gilts backed only by the promises of a government that has clearly lost control of the public finances. There are plenty of people with good reasons to feel worried about Sir Keir Starmer's latest reversal on welfare cuts. But it is Britain's entrepreneurs who should be most afraid. Why? Because one way or another, they will have to pay for it all. It remains to be seen whether the Prime Minister has done enough to get his welfare reforms through Parliament, or whether he will have to offer the rebels on his backbenches even more concessions by next week. One point is already absolutely clear, however. This is an expensive about-turn. According to the Resolution Foundation, an impeccably Left-of-centre think tank, the changes will cost at least £3bn, and of course, the real total could be a lot higher. It comes on top of the concessions on the winter fuel allowance to pensioners, the above-inflation pay rises for the public sector, and the big rises in defence spending planned for the next few years. Add it all up, and the extra spending runs to tens of billions, for a government that was already racking up record debt. We all know what is going to happen next. In the autumn, Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor – or Yvette Cooper, if the Home Secretary has already taken over by then – will be forced to announce another punishing round of tax rises. It may well need to be more than the £40bn that the Chancellor squeezed out of the economy last time around. Where is the money going to come from? The Starmer Government promised at the election not to raise any of the three main taxes: income tax, VAT or National Insurance (NI). It has already twisted that by claiming that the increase in NI for employers was not included in the pledge, and given the catastrophic impact on jobs of the last increase, it will be reluctant to raise that again. It will almost certainly freeze thresholds beyond 2028, but while that will flatter the OBR forecasts, it won't raise extra money immediately. There is only one target left to raise any serious cash. Small businesses and entrepreneurs will have to end up paying the bill. There are four big ways the Chancellor can target anyone who has started or owns a business. First, we can expect another big increase in the capital gains tax (CGT). In her first Budget, a major increase in CGT was widely forecast. In the end, the increases were relatively modest, with the lower rate of CGT pushed up from 10pc to 18pc, and the main rate from 20pc to 24pc. With money so tight, we can't expect the Treasury to pussyfoot around with a few tweaks to the system. The obvious move is to equalise CGT with income tax, so that a 40pc rate will be imposed on any gain of more than £50,000, and 45pc on any gain over £125,000. It can be levied overnight, so that business owners and investors won't have the option of selling out before it comes into effect. Next, we can expect a big rise in dividend taxes. The tax-free allowance for dividends has already been reduced to a meagre £500, and after that they are taxed at 8.75pc for basic rate taxpayers, and 33pc and 38pc for the high rate. The difference with income tax is meant to reflect the fact that corporation tax has already been paid on that money. But why not just equalise it with income tax, and get rid of the allowance completely, as has already been proposed by Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, who is increasingly the backseat driver in charge of the Treasury. It can be spun as 'simpler' and 'fairer', and will raise serious money. Thirdly, expect a temporary 'surcharge' on corporation tax. The French have helpfully pioneered this wheeze for the Treasury, with last year's 'solidarity levy' on companies with an extra 20pc or 40pc added to existing tax bills depending on the size of the business. It raised some serious cash, with the luxury goods giant LVMH expected to pay an additional €800m (£684m) as a result, and the infrastructure giant Vinci €400m. It is hard for companies and entrepreneurs to get around that, and of course, ministers can deny, just about plausibly, that it is a tax on 'working people'. Finally, the Chancellor will be painfully aware that many of the country's wealthiest people are leaving the country. So why not impose an exit tax? Germany, Norway and Belgium have already imposed levies of up to 45pc on anyone leaving the country for somewhere a little less punishing, so there is nothing to stop the UK doing the same. Either they stay and pay the corporation tax surcharge? Or do they pay the exit tax? Either way, the Treasury gets to collect a lot of money. The important point is this. Reeves already had very little fiscal room left. Her tax rises are collecting less money than forecast, and spending has started to spin wildly out of control. Taxes will have to go up, and the only way that can be done is by hitting the UK's dwindling band of business owners and entrepreneurs. There is nowhere else to go. True, it will be terrible for confidence, and will damage investment even more. But that doesn't mean it won't happen – and everyone in the firing line should be terrified of the latest about-turn.
Irish Times
7 hours ago
- Business
- Irish Times
Paul Coulson faces last stand in battle to retain control of Ardagh
Ten years ago last month, Dublin businessman Paul Coulson walked away from a €3 billion deal to buy a glass-bottle business being sold by French building materials group Saint-Gobain. It seemed a rare moment of restraint for a man in a hurry, having spent the previous 15 years turning a once sleepy Irish bottle company into a multibillion-euro packaging giant – Ardagh Group – through a series of purchases funded by debt raised in the high-cost, junk-bond market. It would not last long. Less than a year later, Coulson unveiled a similar-sized transaction, but one that would catapult Ardagh into the business of making cans for beers and fizzy drinks. Today, that business – Ardagh Metal Packaging (AMP), whose customers range from Coca-Cola and Heineken to Nestlé – has surfaced as a prized asset as Coulson and holders of some of wider group's $12.5 billion (€10.7 billion) of borrowings scramble to salvage what they can from an empire saddled with too much debt. Coulson effectively owns 36 per cent of Ardagh Group. READ MORE Ardagh Group has acknowledged for more than a year that it needs to reduce its liabilities, after both its glass and beverage cans businesses had been hit since the Covid-19 pandemic by inflation, soaring interest rates, and soft consumer demand on both sides of the Atlantic. The heavily-indebted business proposed in March that a group of senior unsecured bondholders write off much of the $2.32 billion they are owed in exchange for taking full ownership of the glass containers part of the business. The plan also envisaged Ardagh Group spinning its shares in AMP into new company (NewCo). This would be 80 per cent owned by Coulson and other existing Ardagh Group shareholders – with the unsecured creditors receiving the remaining 20 per cent. Holders of a further $1.79 billion of the group's riskiest debt, so-called payment-in-kind bonds issued by a holding company at the top of the Ardagh corporate tree, know they're toast, with these notes trading below 5 per cent of their original value. Talks with the unsecured creditors broke down in May after they pitched a proposal that would see them take 40 per cent, rather than 20 per cent, of AMP, which has seen its prospects improve in recent quarters, even as the glass containers arm of the group continues to grapple with weak demand. The unsecured creditors also wanted the $784 million of preference shares they were being offered in the NewCo to be increased to $1.07 billion. AMP, in which Ardagh Group has a 76 per cent stake, is listed on Wall Street, where investors have also recently come to appreciate the improving outlook for this business – even as the glass side struggles. The market value of AMP, which has $3.98 billion of ring-fenced borrowings, has jumped more than 45 per cent to $2.59 billion so far this year. This was driven by a spike in April when its chief, Oliver Graham, signalled that the business had 'turned a corner', helped by a rebound in demand for energy drinks, sparkling water and health segments. The value of Coulson's indirect 27 per cent stake in AMP has increased as a result to more than $700 million. This is well off the $1.7 billion it was worth when the stock debuted on the New York Stock Exchange almost four years ago. It is also a fraction of the now 73-year-old's €2.4 billion interest in the wider Ardagh Group when it peaked in April 2021 – before the group delisted and floated its beverage cans unit. It emerged last week that certain bondholders have offered Coulson – who remains on the board of the group, having retired as chairman in late 2023 – and other investors in Ardagh Group $250 million to hand over total control of the empire to creditors and walk away. Shareholders include management and investors that remained on board a tiny version of the current group that was listed in Dublin more than two decades ago. The bondholders clearly do not feel the need to keep Coulson on after a restructuring. This differs from the case of fellow former junk-bond darling, Denis O'Brien , when his overindebted Digicel mobile phone company ran out of road two years ago. Digicel had no equity value when its bondholders took control in a subsequent debt-for-equity swap. However, the creditors left O'Brien with a 10 per cent stake and stock warrants that would entitle him to a further 10 per cent, subject to the company meeting certain targets, knowing they needed him to maintain key relationships with regulators and politicians across its 25 emerging and, in some cases, frontier markets. The problem for Ardagh Group bondholders is the corporate web structure – including a company set up in April 2022, at a time when interest rates were soaring globally, under the group to hold its 76 per cent stake in AMP. This was designated a so-called unrestricted subsidiary, putting its assets out of reach of group creditors. The directors of that subsidiary sought fit last year to set up another unit to hold the prized asset. Bondholders thinking they can wave off Coulson and a small number of legacy investors in Ardagh Group with a $250 million check had better have the bottle for a battle.
Bloomberg
12 hours ago
- Business
- Bloomberg
Ex-Nielsen Unit Files for US IPO That Could Target Up to $1.25 Billion
NIQ Global Intelligence Plc filed for an initial public offering, earmarking the proceeds to pare its debt load. The private equity-backed former consumer intelligence unit of Nielsen Holdings had a net loss of $73.7 million on revenue of $966 million in the three months ended March 31, compared with a net loss of $174 million on revenue of $962 million in the same period a year earlier, according to its filing Friday with the US Securities and Exchange Commission.
