A straw hat in winter, possibly..., page-18

I think that we are both singing from the same hymn sheet, but maybe I am singing Bass and you are singing Tenor. I put "borrow" in quotations marks to indicate that it was not a 1 for 1 relationship in my comment. The point I was making was that the FCF of the business was not enough to pay for CAPEX and the announced dividend and so they had to borrow money to top up. IMO, the normal capital allocation process is CAPEX for the business, then dividends. i.e. dividends are what gets paid from the balance of the FCF after sustaining and growing CAPEX is paid.

I view intangibles as "ugly" because very rarely are they worth what the balance sheet says they are. (look at SGH and the balance sheet and the intangibles). If VRT was ever to be liquidated, the assets as expressed on the balance sheet would IMO, not be realised. If a large proportion of the assets are intangibles, then it, IMO, presents a false view of the strength of the balance sheet. I am a firm believer in the balance sheet assets being a representation of what can be realised for cash.

HT1

sentiment should be "Hold" - not "Buy"