Annolyse
BriefingsCompaniesInsightsPrinciplesCompareChatWatchlist

Explore

  • Briefings
  • Companies
  • Insights
  • Compare

Resources

  • Search
  • Methodology

© 2026 Annolyse.

ChartsAnalysisChatData
  1. Charts
  2. Analysis
  3. Chat
  4. Data
  5. Sources
←Back to briefings
SkyCity Entertainment Group (SKC) / HY25

Operating cash flow collapsed 97.8% as leverage rose to 5.2x EBITDA

EBITDA rose 12.0% to $113.1m but cash conversion fell to 1.7%, net debt climbed to $589.5m, and the interim dividend was suspended.

Consumer / Gaming and tourism

SKC revenue trajectory

Revenue context before the current result.

↗
Loading chart...
HY26 was $406.5m, versus $821.3m in FY25.

SKC EBITDA margin

EBITDA margin across covered periods.

↗
Loading chart...
HY26 was 17.7%, versus 26.3% in FY25.

SKC operating cash flow

Operating cash flow across covered periods.

↗
Loading chart...
HY26 was $56.1m, versus $45.2m in FY25.

SKC working-capital movement

Operating working-capital absorption or release by reporting period.

↗
Loading chart...
HY26 was -$0.1m, versus -$4m in FY25.
Release date
20 February 2025
Published
23 April 2026
Ask about this result
Sections⌄
  1. Charts
  2. Analysis
  3. Chat
  4. Data
  5. Sources

Key metrics

Numbers worth scanning first

HY25 vs HY24

Revenue

$420.8m

-4.5% ↓ vs $440.4m

EBITDA

$113.1m

+12.0% ↑ vs $101m

Net profit after tax

$6.1m

-72.9% ↓ vs $22.5m

Net cash inflow from operating activities

$1.9m

Suppressed: metric quality flags mark this value as unsuitable for normal comparison.

Declared dividend per share

—

— vs 5.3c

Operating profit

$67.8m

+19.4% ↑ vs $56.7m

Profit before tax

$28.1m

-41.5% ↓ vs $48m

Cash and cash equivalents

$88.6m

-52.9% ↓ vs $188.2m

What changed

The most material development is a near-total collapse in cash generation

Operating cash flow fell 97.8% to $1.9m from $87.5m, even as EBITDA rose 12.0% to $113.1m. Cash conversion (OCF / EBITDA) dropped from 86.6% to 1.7%, and free cash flow pre-lease swung from +$10.1m to -$74.2m after $76.1m of capex.

Headline earnings split sharply. Revenue declined 4.5% to $420.8m, but EBITDA improved on a stronger Adelaide contribution. Below EBITDA, depreciation and interest absorbed the gain: PBT fell 41.5% to $28.1m and NPAT fell 72.9% to $6.1m, with the effective tax rate jumping to 78.4% from 53.1%.

The balance sheet absorbed the pressure. Cash fell to $88.6m from $188.2m, gross borrowings rose 19.0% to $678.2m, net debt climbed to $589.5m, and leverage moved from 3.8x to 5.2x EBITDA. No interim dividend was declared (HY24: 5.25cps).

What matters

Cash conversion is the dominant issue

Generating $1.9m of operating cash on $113.1m of EBITDA is not a working-capital story — operating working capital moved only $0.1m. The gap sits in cash interest, cash tax and other operating cash items, which means the headline EBITDA recovery did not translate into funding capacity. Combined with $76.1m of capex (18.1% of revenue), the half consumed cash rather than producing it.

Leverage has stepped up materially. Net debt rose by $208.1m to $589.5m and net debt / EBITDA reached 5.2x. The dividend suspension is consistent with that trajectory and the prior NPAT payout ratio of 175.0%, which was already unsustainable. Capacity for further capex, regulatory provisions or an Adelaide setback is now narrower.

Operating earnings are also weaker than EBITDA implies. PBT down 41.5% is the cleaner read because the tax line is distorted (78.4% effective rate vs 53.1%). Even on PBT, depreciation and interest grew faster than EBITDA, and the segment recovery was concentrated in Adelaide, which swung from a –$30.5m result to +$15.2m. Auckland revenue (–9.1% to $258.3m) and Online (segment result –$1.1m vs +$3.0m) remain pressure points.

Expectations

No forward targets are supplied in the release excerpts, and FY24 is not a usable shape anchor: HY24 represented 73.1% of FY24 EBITDA and –15.7% of FY24 NPAT, because FY24 NPAT was a –$143.3m full-year loss skewed by second-half charges

Annualising HY25 revenue gives $841.6m, modestly below FY24's $861.0m.

What the release supports is that Adelaide has turned at the segment-result level and Auckland EBITDA held up despite revenue decline. What it does not support is a clean read on full-year cash generation, dividend timing, or the trajectory of regulatory and compliance costs flagged in commentary about lower-risk operating models. Those gaps matter because leverage at 5.2x leaves limited room for negative surprises.

Quality of result

The 12.0% EBITDA improvement is real but narrowly sourced

The Adelaide segment result improved by roughly $45m year-on-year, dominating the group uplift, while Auckland revenue continues to shrink and Online has turned loss-making. That makes the EBITDA recovery dependent on a single property's normalisation rather than broad operating momentum.

The bigger quality concern is that almost none of the EBITDA reached operating cash flow. With operating working capital essentially flat, the deterioration is structural to the cost base — interest, tax and other cash operating items — not a timing reversal that should naturally unwind. Capex remained at FY24-comparable intensity (18.1% of revenue vs 17.5%), so the cash drain was funded by drawing cash balances and increasing borrowings rather than by operating performance. On that basis, the headline EBITDA growth overstates the durable improvement, and ROE of 0.5% (vs 1.5% prior) is a more honest measure of the period's economic return.

Unresolved

Open questions

What specifically drove operating cash flow to $1.9m on $113.1m of EBITDA, given working capital was effectively flat?
Why did the effective tax rate rise to 78.4%, and is this expected to persist?
What leverage threshold and cash-conversion recovery are required before the dividend can be reinstated?
How sustainable is the Adelaide segment-result turnaround, and what underpins it?
What is the funding plan for FY25 capex and regulatory remediation if cash conversion does not normalise in the second half?

This briefing cannot assess the specific cash-flow line items beneath operating cash flow, the regulatory cost trajectory, or covenant headroom on the expanded debt stack.

Chat

Ask about SKC HY25

Ask follow-up questions about SkyCity Entertainment Group's HY25 result.

Informational only. No buy, sell, hold, price-target, or personal financial advice.

Ask about SKC HY25

Informational only. No buy, sell, hold, price-target, or personal financial advice.

Sign in to chat

Sign in to ask questions about SkyCity Entertainment Group's HY25 result.

What specifically drove operating cash flow to $1.9m on $113.1m of EBITDA, given working capital was effectively flat?Why does "Cash conversion is the dominant issue" matter?How strong was the cash and earnings quality in HY25?What should I watch next for SKC after HY25?

Checking account...

Data appendix

Show segment detail

Open to load segment breakdown.

Show analytical metrics

Open to load analytical metrics.

Show key metrics table

Open to load key metrics.

Sources

Current period

Financial Statements

HY25 / financial report↗

Investor Presentation

HY25 / results presentation↗

Market Release

HY25 / results release↗

Results Announcement

HY25 / results announcement↗

Prior comparable period

Financial Statements

HY24 / financial report↗

Market Release

HY24 / results release↗

Results Announcement

HY24 / results announcement↗

Full-year context

Annual Report

FY24 / financial report↗

Market Release

FY24 / results release↗

Results Announcement

FY24 / results announcement↗

Release context

Annual Meeting Presentation

HY25 / commentary↗

Annual Meeting Results

HY25 / commentary↗

Related insights

Cross-company views selected from the metrics in this briefing.

Cash conversion quality

This result converted 1.7% of EBITDA to operating cash flow, -84.9pp versus the prior comparable period.

→

Earnings quality and statutory distortions

PBT and NPAT growth diverged by 31.4pp, with a distortion flag in the result.

→

Leverage and balance-sheet risk

Net debt / EBITDA is 5.21x, +1.44x versus the prior comparable period.

→

Revenue growth context

Revenue growth was -4.5% for this reporting period.

→
This briefing is based on available company filings and standard Annolyse calculations. It is general information only and does not constitute financial advice. The analysis may contain errors. Always read the original company filings and consult a licensed financial adviser before making investment decisions.

Get notified when SKC publishes next

Get the next SkyCity Entertainment Group briefing and related NZX reporting-season updates by email.