We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
I think the revenue issue is whether the sales were a/ actual sales (revenue - not billings...) in which case the 2019 revenue is probably ok; b/ refundable deposits in which case revenue is debatable as it might need paid back; c / deferred sales in which case revenue shifts to future year recovery. None of this requires a 'formal investigation' imo - its not that complicated. I have said for some time my worry is the $1m headline is a potential smokescreen - in the scheme of things it is minor - the issue which needs addressing is when was this known; did we issue reports and investor meetings knowing this had occurred; what role did our Chief Financial Officer, Chief Revenue Officer and Financial Controller have in this (plus B. Disher and Mazars who audited 2019 accounts); was a cover up attempted - and if so - why given it is not material? Why would our chairman get involved; and why are we left waiting for an update. If this is all speculation and damaging the companies position - issue an update and reassure us that we are reading too much into the current position. SB
bottom line for me is are sales/revenue still there going forwards. If they have been bad boys then that is easily sorted.
they might have misappropriated the $1m but they did have the 2000 sales, or is that a lie? Going forwards as long as we get the sales, all will be sorted. The important thing for me is that there is a market for these things going forward.
The problem is bakky - and this is based on assumption not fact - we may have screwed up already with the 2000 sales at the end of 2019 if the $1m is adultblock. That would hardly be confidence inspiring. SB
Ablock registrars might not be active just yet. so no news on that front. I suppose it's still relatively early in proceedings and we don't want them to feck this up too!
Trouble is I am choking on the food. Yes, A block is probably our only hope of revenue growth in 2020 and 2021, won't know about this until early next year , having said that if it is going well one might expect the company to see merit in telling the s/h's and the market about it.
We need to know the relative monetary quality of our current sales against the circa 500K VIP deletes so we have a handle on the defacto revenue,
We need to see our costs come down
We need this financial irregularity to be put to bed by RNS asap, uncertainty is the worst thing for investors, even if its just a minor thing the company should head off speculation.
The worst thing is I don't think the company are going to give answers to any of the above and shockingly I would struggle to believe the answers they give, very frustrated seeing my investment evaporate before my very eyes ......................Huckster
We need to know how the company plan to get the sp moving north
The longer it takes the more I suspect someone was up to no good and not just asleep or incapable. If there is anything underhanded the police will need to be brought in. Unlikely but the longer it takes the more suspicion that will be needed.
The delay is also bad for the reputation of the CFO, Sales and CEO. This stuff sticks.
I think so bakky. The worse case is defined and should not happen.
The investigation delay is concerning unless their are mistruths involved rather than incompetence. Mistruths are my only real concern as that's like a cancer in an org, it spreads and only radical action gets rid of that type of culture.
well we've been told that worst case is $1m. Surely they would have got that sorted rgds anything else in the cupboard before the rns?
If we stop to pause and reflect - its been pretty much downhill since the conclusion of the strategic review. Purchasing ICM was meant to be "......earnings enhancing in the current year and believe it will deliver scale, strong recurring revenues and positive working capital to the Company in 2018 and future years. Further, it will strengthen the quality of our revenues, both accelerating MMX's already fast-growing renewal base and improving the geographic make-up of our sales, given ICM's revenues are primarily derived from the US and Europe. We see this transaction as a major step forward in our ambition to introduce a progressive dividend policy over the next 18 months."
How could it go so wrong 3 years into the acquisition? We were also told directly by SJL mmx was one of several offers for the business - some all cash - but he saw value in a cash and share deal, albeit this did not work out the way he figured - although his reasons for selling were more about the financial markets than the company itself (good call SJL). I guess the point is - we have assets which we know are attractive (and that's without the adultblock upside - potentially) – perhaps we should consider divesting on the basis there is simply no value recognition for this part of our business. With adultblock – the adult portfolio could be worth more than the entire company valuation at present. I would prefer a sale of the entire business; but that may not suit our board at present, although you have to think all avenues are being considered at present given the share price.
On other matters - the more the investigation drags on without an update the more concerning the outcome imo. SB