5 July S&P downgraded GFH to CC. This should come as no surprise as they had said that if GFH needed to restructure again they would do so.
More importantly, GFH requested that S&P no longer rate them. S&P has complied. It's website shows NR for the rating. To add insult to injury - but not without cause - S&P expressed a negative view at this ratings action.
GFH's termination of the ratings relationship is more telling than the rating action itself. It is clear that they do not see near term potential for an upgrade.
Asa Fitch over at The National observes:
The move may mark a reversal for what has been one of the region’s most remarkable turnaround stories during the financial crisis. Since being brought in last year, Ted Pretty, GFH’s Australian chief executive, has aggressively marked down the company’s assets, restructured debts and announced plans to sell stakes in property projects and banking subsidiaries to raise cash. Under Mr Pretty, GFH posted $728m of losses for last year and revealed plans to raise $250m this year from asset sales.
- The cold hard fact is that debts are repaid by cold hard cash. Not "pretty" words or unrealistic scenarios. GFH's recovery, if any, will come when it is able to generate sufficient cash to service its debt and pay operating expenses.
- On that score it does not have a functioning business model and there has been no real cash generation from operations for over a year now. It's also unclear whether the new model - at this point only an undeveloped plot - is any more viable.
- That leaves asset realisations, largely sales to repay debt. But make no mistake asset sales - particularly at the levels required in this particular case - do not build businesses. They dismantle them. Few if any companies have shrunk their way to greatness. Not more than a few months ago, GFH told quite a "fish" story of US$420 million in asset sales. And often as happens in such stories the "big one" got away. That reflects not only the state of the markets as well the quality of the assets on offer.
- As a case in point, you may also remember the "remarkable story" of GFH's US$262 million asset "sale" of its interests in Bahrain Financial Harbour Company to Emar Bahrain. A sale which garnered only US$40 million in cash. The remainder of the sale proceeds were land in the neighborhood of the BFH which will be "sold later" or so the story goes. Interesting to speculate whether the land was owned by BFHC or perhaps by a local royal personage.
- A close scrutiny of other assets reveals the majority of the Company's liquidity is pledged for stalled projects. Perhaps, itself less than a happy indication of GFH's ability to sell the project related "assets". Besides the blocked liquidity, there is the real danger that GFH will have to recognize some rather substantial losses when and if it extricates itself from these projects. Not a cash drain, but something that would definitely cripple its balance sheet. Possibly cause a breach of its Sukuk covenant to maintain a minimum US$400 million in equity and, thus, a potential acceleration of US$138 million. Drive its Capital Adequacy Ratio below 12%.
- Liabilities are in little better shape. GFH's talent for rescheduling also appears to be another work of "remarkable" fiction. The US$100 million stub on the US$300 million West LB syndicate was "rescheduled" for the lengthy period of six months. Either because GFH's creditors wanted to keep it on a short leash. Or because someone believed in an asset sales story which in light of asset quality and market conditions may make Dotcom irrational exuberance look like sober thinking. Last February it was clear that barring a miracle there was no way that GFH was going to be able to make that payment. Yet, quite a different story was spun. And one has to really wonder about the use of precious liquidity to buy treasury shares and buyback portions of the Sukuk whose maturity is in terms of GFH's life span the equivalent of a decade away.
Credibility is a very key asset at any time for a financial institution. During a restructuring it is even more so. A cardinal rule of the restructuring process is for the debtor to never promise more than it can deliver as its credibility with creditors, shareholders, regulators and other market participants is eroded.
At some point even the most credulous audience will see through repeated tale tales and yarns. When that day comes the debtor is in a much worse position that if it had stuck to reality.
As always, we'll be up bright and early to read GFH's disclosure of this piece of material information to its shareholders and other market parties via its website and announcements on the various exchanges it is listed on. Based on past performance, I'm sure we won't be disappointed.