Coastline Retail Group Ltd, the cfo's chair: What do you take into Monday's meeting?

// DRILLS / ISSUE 07 / COASTLINE · CFO

ISSUE 07 · 2026-09-05 · 5 MIN READ

// ONE FILE, THREE CHAIRS

// THE LENDING CHAIR · ISSUE 07

Coastline Retail Group

Read from this chair →

// THE CFO'S CHAIR

The Monday After

You are here

// A SHAREHOLDER'S CHAIR

Results Day

Read from this chair →

The Monday After

COASTLINE, FROM THE CFO'S CHAIR

LISTED RETAIL · THE CFO'S CHAIR · DIFFICULTY 3/5

// THE SETUP

You are Coastline's CFO. Three weeks ago you signed off FY25: reported NPAT of US$14.2m, up 9%, in a year when the rest of the sector went backwards. Every line is defensible. The US$3.2m inventory provision release followed a clean stocktake, and the auditors signed it. Supplier rebates are now recognised on order placement, after a policy review. US$4.1m of store refits went to the balance sheet under the standard, where earlier years had expensed them as repairs. The audit opinion is unqualified. The board has approved lifting the payout policy from 60% to 75% of NPAT; the CEO's letter says "disciplined execution"; the AGM notice is at the printer.

On Friday evening the agent bank rang. One of the four club banks has declined consent to the payout change, and it has circulated its reasons to the whole club: the three footnotes set side by side, operating cash flow of US$11.8m, down 31%, cash conversion of 83% against 131% last year. And a cure, in writing: consent revisited when cash conversion holds above 90% for two consecutive halves. The other three banks, comfortable a week ago, have gone quiet.

The CEO wants a plan for Monday's executive meeting. The AGM timetable does not move.

Three defensible lines. One number you left out of the letter. What do you take into Monday's meeting?

// FY25 SNAPSHOT

SOURCE: THE AGENT BANK'S FRIDAY NOTE · FY25 RESULTS · COMPOSITE CASE — FICTIONAL

NPAT (REPORTED)

US$14.2m

▲ +9% YoY

OCF

US$11.8m

▼ −31% YoY

CASH CONVERSION

83%

▼ from 131%

PROVISION RELEASE

US$3.2m

▲ credited to P&L

PAYOUT PROPOSED

75%

▲ from 60%

Healthy listed retailers convert 90–110% of NPAT into operating cash across a cycle. The bank's cure is written in that currency, not in yours.

// YOUR JUDGMENT

What do you take into Monday's meeting?

[A]Call the other three banks first — three of four were comfortable; get that in writing before the fourth position hardens[B]Hold the payout at 60%, take the cure as the plan, and put the fourth bank's read in front of the board yourself[C]Bring the cash back — stretch supplier terms and pull collections forward so the next half's conversion clears 90%[D]Put the club out to tender — a lender that reads footnotes against you is a lender to replace

This drill needs JavaScript: the options above cannot be selected without it, and the senior banker's reading stays hidden. Turn JavaScript on and reload the page to take the drill.

// THE READING

Start with what the bank said, and what it did not. It did not say the accounts were wrong; it did not dispute a line. It said that profit is a narrative built from accounting policies and cash is what happened, and it declined to fund a bigger dividend on the narrative. Read that way, Friday's note is the cheapest advice you will receive this year: it came in writing, it came with a cure, and nobody outside the club has read it. The market will read the same three footnotes eventually. It will not attach a cure.

Why not A: club banks talk. A precise, documented read tends to raise the whole club's floor, and the banker who wrote this one knew that when it went round. Ring the three comfortable banks and you are asking them to reread the paper with the fourth bank's note in hand — campaigning for a vote on a document that has already changed the voters. And the prize, if you won it, is a dividend funded in a down year by the facility rather than by earnings, which is the exact thing the note is about.

Why not C or D. C is the same move in a different statement: the bank's point was that profit has policies and cash does not, and if you stretch your suppliers and pull collections forward, the cash acquires a policy too. The cure asks for two consecutive halves precisely so that a one-half fix unwinds in the second. D takes a year, and every new lender starts reading Coastline from the cash flow statement, then asks the agent why the last club withheld consent. You would be paying to move the read, not to remove it.

Which is why the senior banker's advice, sitting in the CFO's chair, is B. The cure is the plan: conversion above 90% for two halves is an achievable target for a real business having a soft year, and holding the payout at 60% costs you nothing you have actually earned. Then take the fourth bank's read to the board yourself, before the AGM, as the CFO who found it rather than the one it was found on. The three footnotes were each defensible, and the bank never argued otherwise. It added them up. Your job on Monday is to be the person in the room who has already done the sum.

Every line was defensible. The bank didn't dispute a line — it added them up. Walk into Monday as the person who has already done the sum.

// THE SAME FILE, FROM THE OTHER CHAIRS

Three people read this file in the same week. The lender's reading is the one the other two are reacting to.

// THE LENDING CHAIR · ISSUE 07

Coastline Retail Group

NPAT up 9%. Operating cash flow down 31%. The dividend consent request is on your desk.

Read from this chair →

// A SHAREHOLDER'S CHAIR

Results Day

Profit up 9%, dividend going up, cash down 31%. You hold the shares. You are not the bank.

Read from this chair →

// HOW READERS ANSWER

The senior banker's read is [B].

[A] · 39%

[B] · 27%

[C] · 21%

[D] · 13%

The tempting answer is A. The senior banker chose B. The reading explains why the fourth bank's note is the cheapest advice of the year, and why the three banks that were comfortable will not stay that way once they have read it.

← All drills Archive — every issue