General : Coming soon to Virgin TV 2014

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Media Boy

No. But let say Virgin Media is owe £100 by sit-up* Virgin will only get £10 if they say Yes to that CVA proposal on March 18th.

*Shopping and Radio Channels need to pay to get on Virgin Media.

Oh right, I didn't know that they were in financial difficulties.

If you can say, were these the two channels the ones you said might be closing on VM, but were unable to disclose the names of?

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Have they gone bust?

If they are proposing a CVA they would certainly have a liquidity problem. A CVA usually involves staged repayments to creditors over a period of time, say 6 years. It isn't particularly attractive to offer 1% repayments to their creditors over a 6 year period, they would be lucky to get the approval of 75% of their creditors. It's also worth noting that, even if approved by the creditors, many CVAs fail within the repayment period.

[Media Boy UK]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Oh right, I didn't know that they were in financial difficulties.

If you can say, were these the two channels the ones you said might be closing on VM, but were unable to disclose the names of?

No. I was talking about other ones.

---------- Post added at 12:09 ---------- Previous post was at 11:52 ----------

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Just heard a rumour that price-drop (741) and bid (745) are going to be removed by VM.

Thanks for rumour.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by jj20x

If they are proposing a CVA they would certainly have a liquidity problem. A CVA usually involves staged repayments to creditors over a period of time, say 6 years. It isn't particularly attractive to offer 1% repayments to their creditors over a 6 year period, they would be lucky to get the approval of 75% of their creditors. It's also worth noting that, even if approved by the creditors, many CVAs fail within the repayment period.

I would have thought that they would have tried to sell the business for a nominal fee like £1, with the new owner taking on the debts or dissolved the company and replaced it with another to rid themselves of any debt.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I would have thought that they would have tried to sell the business for a nominal fee like £1, with the new owner taking on the debts or dissolved the company and replaced it with another to rid themselves of any debt.

That will still be an option if the CVA fails. It looks like the new investors don't want the debt as they have made the investment deal conditional on the CVA going ahead.

It probably doesn't make sense to take on the debt when the investors could simply start up a new company, possibly taking on the existing staff and allowing the existing company to fail.

Bad news for the creditors, however it goes.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I would have thought that they would have tried to sell the business for a nominal fee like £1, with the new owner taking on the debts or dissolved the company and replaced it with another to rid themselves of any debt.

Yes but the contracts would all cease with the receivership of the existing company, crucial when you are trying to operate a 24/7 broadcasting service. So amongst other things your EPG slots would all go and you would face other disruption and a resulting lack of customer confidence.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Yes but the contracts would all cease with the receivership of the existing company, crucial when you are trying to operate a 24/7 broadcasting service. So amongst other things your EPG slots would all go and you would face other disruption and a resulting lack of customer confidence.

Having the fact that the company is operating under a CVA listed on the website wouldn't do very much for customer confidence.

A phoenix company could buy the business names, EPG slots, licences, etc from the liquidator at knock down rates. New contracts would, most likely, be needed for a phoenix company to be carried on cable and possibly Freeview.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Yes but the contracts would all cease with the receivership of the existing company, crucial when you are trying to operate a 24/7 broadcasting service. So amongst other things your EPG slots would all go and you would face other disruption and a resulting lack of customer confidence.

That's a good point, they would have to bid for their own EPG slots on Sky or face the possibility* of having to use different numbers further up the EPG.

* I say possibly, as is there a possibility that, if they were quick, that they may find themselves allocated their old slot under the FRND rules?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jj20x

Having the fact that the company is operating under a CVA listed on the website wouldn't do very much for customer confidence.

A phoenix company could buy the business names, EPG slots, licences, etc from the liquidator at knock down rates. New contracts would, most likely, be needed for a phoenix company to be carried on cable and possibly Freeview.

Presumably the whole benefit of Bid TV and Price-Drop TV is their TV presence so most of its customers wouldn't see the website?
A new company could certainly buy some assets from the receivers including stock, brand name, web domain etc. However, the receiver has to sell to the highest bidder so there is a risk that someone else could come along and buy them. Furthermore, some contracts would simply end when the original company ended, certainly the Freview EPG numbers would almost certainly be lost and the company would have to use lower ones down the EPG assuming it was able to secure capacity. Hence its preference for a more stable CVA.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Presumably the whole benefit of Bid TV and Price-Drop TV is their TV presence so most of its customers wouldn't see the website?

Purchasing isn't done on the TV, it's done by phone or online. Customers choosing to pay online would obviously see the website.

A new company could certainly buy some assets from the receivers including stock, brand name, web domain etc. However, the receiver has to sell to the highest bidder so there is a risk that someone else could come along and buy them. Furthermore, some contracts would simply end when the original company ended, certainly the Freview EPG numbers would almost certainly be lost and the company would have to use lower ones down the EPG assuming it was able to secure capacity. Hence its preference for a more stable CVA.

A CVA is anything but stable. A company operating under a CVA generally has to pay for everything up front. Banks and suppliers would be foolish to take the risk of extending credit to a company with known liquidity problems. Assuming that the new investors are willing to put large amounts of cash upfront, that may not be a problem. As far as contracts are concerned, a good contract would have a clause making the agreement voidable if the company goes into administration or enters into an arrangement.

[WillPS]

I think the CVA proposal is a token gesture to pave the way for Administration. It could even end up being a 'pre-pack' Administration, where the sale of core assets are actually arranged in advance of the company going in to Administration. This happened in the case of La Senza, and meant that they didn't actually trade in administration at all.

Originally Posted by WillPS

I think the CVA proposal is a token gesture to pave the way for Administration. It could even end up being a 'pre-pack' Administration, where the sale of core assets are actually arranged in advance of the company going in to Administration. This happened in the case of La Senza, and meant that they didn't actually trade in administration at all.

Not a very good gesture as going into a CVA requires an up front payment to the insolvency practitioner, which could otherwise be paid to the creditors.

[vincerooney]

Morning all still seems all quiet on the Virgin Media front... perhaps spring will "spring" some surprises.

[Anypermitedroute]

morning Vince, feels like 2012 albeit with a few less channels outstanding

[WillPS]

Originally Posted by jj20x

Not a very good gesture as going into a CVA requires an up front payment to the insolvency practitioner, which could otherwise be paid to the creditors.

Well it hardly seems to have been crafted with plausibility in mind.