Nikec...
To be quick on your question, read this whole post and please look on this calculation example on this image (increase in accounts receivable = minus cash!!):
Please take some lessons of financial basics.. I don't wanna teaching people who claim that they know everything but later on they can't even see the difference between a direct and indirect cashflow calculation.. I have done so many cashflow statements for companies... so you can believe me that I am absolutely right.
1. You have 2 ways to calculate the cash (direct and indirect method)
2. for the indirect method you should know the net profit figure and the depreciation!
3. if a company mentions an "
increase on accounts receivable" they state clearly that they use the
indirect cash method otherwise that makes no sense!
An example..
Beginning cash is 1000$. Later we
invoice 1000$ to clients and have
costs (invoices receipt) of 500$ from suppliers (balance sheet=1000$ increase on acc. rec. and on the other side 500$ incr. on acc. pay.). Now the client isn't paying the 1000$ in the actual period but we are paying the fully costs of 500$ to the supplier.
Cashflow:
+500 net profit (p&l=1000ar -500ap)
-1000 inc. ar (new outg. inv. not paid so far)
+/-0 inc. ap (bec. incr. pay and already paid same amount in period=no change on ap)
-500 operating cash
1000 beg. cash
-500 oper. cash
=500 cash e.o. period
On my cashflow statement earlier I assumed a Profit (EBITDA) of "0" (after admin and other extraord. costs) for q4 on which the calculation is based on (which ofc is not correct atm. but for now impossible to calculate w/o the full balance sheet and pl!) because we have not the full infos about the in- and outflows (payments/costs) and we also have a 3.5mn difference on senior facilities because of the capitalisation of interests (not mentioned in the report)!
Sen. facility:
q3.16 ~ 143mn
q4.16 ~166mn
= increase of 23mn but on the Q3.16 report we just read 19.5mn drawdown. IMO this is because of the 3.5mn capitalized interests which are added to the sen. facility why they are now 166mn instead of 162.5!
Also you cant see a cash payment for the drc bank on the report. But if you compare drc bank q3 vs q4 you will also see that they have made a paydown of 1.1mn (from 23.9 to now 22.8mn!)
So because we don't know all the exactly numbers to calculate an accurate cashflow, I assumed a "0" EBITDA lvl for the indirect cashflow method.. Because if you accumulate all the outstanding in and outgoing payments which are not already mentioned in the report we would have about 0 or ~1mn EBITDA not much more.. (bad quarterly with too many extraordinary costs imo!)!
If we have the full year 2016 report we are maybe able to get a better view on the EBITDA and net profit lvl.. but with quarterlies it's quite difficult to find out all the exact details! But believe me how to handle a direct and indirect cashflow statements.. as you can see on the picture above - I am right!
