A small insider purchase by one of the new executives, Annica Witschard. I suspect, however, that this won’t be the only one of its kind.
4 Likes
I took a closer look at this Ålandsbanken analysis, which looks like they’ve just used a ruler to project numbers into the future. It gives a somewhat “rosy” picture of the company’s future. The text didn’t explain the company’s debt situation or refinancing needs at all.
According to the report, net debt to equity will drop this year from 408% –> 275%. Can anyone here explain how this would even be technically possible in Intrum’s case?
The company has made significant write-downs on the balance sheet in recent years, and there is nothing to suggest that write-downs won’t also be necessary in the future.
2 Likes
This table came to mind, showing that the 2027 bonds were close to 100 points while others were still lagging.
Then I checked Intrum’s own site using a time machine, and they had been buying back those '27 bonds.
|16.10.25 | 1.2.2025 |
|— | — | — | —|
|
I don’t know how often they update that site, but it’s worth keeping an eye on.
And other weak signals regarding those portfolio purchases (capital light), layoffs, and perhaps Ophelos launches or YouTube presentations.
I’m still not ready to throw in the towel, as the analyst front is finally quite favorable towards Intrum.
5 Likes
A flag is being waved, but it’s completely the “wrong” flag. NC has apparently stopped dumping shares and stayed put with a 10% stake. Why? The most eager are naturally speculating that it will be offloaded in its entirety to some new major owner, after which everything will change completely.
4 Likes
The new shareholder list for January is out. Professionally, with the wrong year at the end.
*NC hasn’t touched their stake, Caius seems to have increased, and as a new addition, the latest newcomer scooping up shares is Vist Holding AS.
7 Likes
Apparently: Vist Holding AS’s parent is Steneken Holding AB, which in turn is backed by the non-profit Vidarstiftelsen… if ChatGPT is to be believed, that stake would be ~20% of the foundation’s holdings. Completely shady business with the foundation’s money, if that’s the case.
3 Likes
