what a pile of schist, page-17

GPASAS,
1) I agree that the most common gearing ratio is debt to shareholders equity. It is not the only ratio used. Given that much of the Shareholders equity is in Schist I don't think it is particularly useful.

Shareholders equity is an accountant's theoretical number, market cap is hard fact. If as you say PSH has a better shareholders Equity gearing ratio now than at the time of listing that seems to me to show the irrelevancy of the ratio at this time for the company.

I think debt to market cap is more useful as the company may need more cash soon. This ratio illustrates the issues involved in sourcing more capital.

I have attached a reference from 'Infovestopedia' on the ratio.

2) I disagree that spend in recent years is a good guide to the appropriate spend on maintenance. I suggest that they have been underspending and that the cumulative effect of this underspend will be difficult or impossible to recover.
Consider for example that a plant can be depreciated over 20 years. This implies that unless restorative maintenance beyond running repairs is done then the plant will be useless in 20 years. Its how accounting deals with the fact that machinery wears out and steel rusts.
Consider a truck. If you are in that business you can either do restorative maintenance such as replacing the engine, diff and gearbox or after about 10 years it will be worthless.
If the PSH plant is worth $3000m then a fraction of this must be spent on restorative maintenance every year or its just being milked to death.
This logic has nothing to do with the fact that no one builds these very complex plants any more or that the accountants have written this one off.

3)I agree that sustainable cash flow has to exclude investment in new projects.

4)I think the people at PSH are doing a fine job keeping this plant going. I think its ability to keep employing them is all about cash flow.
It needs enough revenue to keep the plant in good order, paydown debt then resume dividends.
I am open to be convinced but I struggle to see how a company with about $140m of sales a year can afford to keep up the required expenditure on a huge, complex, corrosive, old plant.
It would be like me trying to keep up with the expenses on Paris Hilton, a Polo Pony, a 70ft launch,helicopter and a Ferrari.

Bacci

Long-Term Debt To Capitalization RatioWhat Does Long-Term Debt To Capitalization Ratio Mean?
A ratio showing the financial leverage of a firm, calculated by dividing long-term debt by the amount of capital available:

Investopedia explains Long-Term Debt To Capitalization Ratio
A variation of the traditional debt-to-equity ratio, this value computes the proportion of a company's long-term debt compared to its available capital. By using this ratio, investors can identify the amount of leverage utilized by a specific company and compare it to others to help analyze the company's risk exposure. Generally, companies that finance a greater portion of their capital via debt are considered riskier than those with lower leverage ratios.