Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video 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.
Rumour has it that the two main holders are very close to 30%...if they attain that they have to make an offer. could be between 10p and 13p. What if they both attain 30%+ holding at the same ...would that be interesting? and could the price go to "auction" ??
Looks like a battle for control in play here.
The CEO stressed in the IP that there is no concert party between the major holders so a take out at a premium is a fair bet imv
was thinking the same as a possibility and the staff and their families buying today etc.(pure speculation and guess on my part...with no substance)..never the less...I gambled £1,500.....The earnings top line have improved by 31%...albeit a fraction of the past....but with new management shuffle etc. could be in for a turnaround...so if I have to hold...I am happy to...with this amount of investment.
been watching this, the seller got bought at 4.8p by the 29% holder must be going for a take over
Net Asset Value 11p? Directors and controlling cos. bought well into January placement@12p.... £18.75m...did I read that right?
Current price to buy 6.7p.......has to be worth a punt surely....!
Thu, 8th Sep 2022 17:25
RNS Number : 8405Y
Fulcrum Utility Services Ltd
08 September 2022
8 September 2022
Fulcrum Utility Services Limited
("Fulcrum" or the "Company")
Director/PDMR Dealings
The Company announces the following dealing by Bayford Group, a shareholder in the Company in which Jonathan Turner, Non-Executive Director, has a controlling interest. Bayford Group today purchased 9,447,173 ordinary shares of 0.1 pence each in the capital of the Company ("Ordinary Shares") at a price of 4.8p per share.
Following this purchase, Bayford Group and its connected parties (controlled by Jonathan Turner) are beneficially interested in 116,212,821 Ordinary Shares, representing approximately 29.1 per cent. of the Company's issued share capital.
Should be an interesting Investor Meet Company presentation later today. I exited my small investment last December after deciding not to participate in the placing (thank god) but it seems since January there has been a changing of the guard with a view to turning this business around. I watched a presentation a year ago and was not impressed by Terry/Jenny at all as they didn’t inspire me and were somewhat cagey on some of the probing questions that were asked by PIs. Hopefully a more open and engaging approach today.
Hope those directors are still believing in the future of the company as they all have chipped in heavily during the last placing (Jan 2022)
===============================
Traded Action Notifier Price Amount Value
2022-01-10 Placing Jeremy Brade 12.00p 83,333,336 £10,000,000.10
2022-01-10 Placing Jonathan Turner 12.00p 72,416,664 £8,689,999.49
2022-01-10 Placing Terry Dugdale 12.00p 166,667 £20,000.04
2022-01-10 Placing Jennifer Babington 12.00p 166,667 £20,000.04
2022-01-10 Placing Dominic Lavelle 12.00p 166,667 £20,000.04
Traded Action Notifier Price Amount Value
2022-01-10 Placing Jeremy Brade 12.00p 83,333,336 £10,000,000.10
2022-01-10 Placing Jonathan Turner 12.00p 72,416,664 £8,689,999.49
2022-01-10 Placing Terry Dugdale 12.00p 166,667 £20,000.04
2022-01-10 Placing Jennifer Babington 12.00p 166,667 £20,000.04
2022-01-10 Placing Dominic Lavelle 12.00p 166,667 £20,000.04
I had high hopes for this company as one to benefit from the post covid build back better phase. But it just keeps disappointing… where does the bottom come?
Pip
Phs nexus
U were not invested 10 yrs ago
Without knowledge - I guess with low inflation fixed price contracts got the nod.
No idea how Nexus works - and dont care.
E Smart e meters EV - not sustainable FGS
NEXUS (NEXS) represents a good like for like comparison because it has a similar profile to FCRM. NEXS also design and deliver multi-utilities (subdivision - tri-connex), EV charging networks (E-Smart) and civil engineering (Tamdown). All divisions are in profit and the company has a net cash balance and returns a dividend. The SP has fallen back but that's hardly a surprise in the current climate. E-Smart is so successful they are talking of spinning it off as a separate entity - which is what you might expect given the supposed demand for EV charging.
Compare with FCRM and it is like chalk and cheese. Same fundamental business activity but the outcomes and results are completely different. Difficult not to conclude that something is fundamentally broken in FCRM.
It seems that all the fundamentals are there and it is a good business, it just seems the BoD made bad decisions which has made the company less desirable.
Im going to hold on as imo this sector is the future
Absolutely it is. Primarily because it has all the licenses and acumen to design, build and deliver complex power utility systems. If they can be focussed on being the best and most competitive in that domain then they are well worth a look. However anyone giving it the eye will have to spend considerable energy stripping out the waste and dismissing the BoD.
At the current price its there for the taking but oh what a lot of baggage it brings with it! It might be better to see it go under and then buy up the scraps in a fire sale.
SP could be driven down with an eye for a takeover . The thing is , is it worth taking over ?.
The real question isn't "how did this happen?" because that is history and there is sufficient evidence to pick through in the RNS's to find the answer.
The real question is "how much further will FCRM fall and is it investable?" A much more difficult proposition. The income from asset sales and fund raise has been burned through... we think (results will confirm), the venture into domestic meters turned toxic. The balance of power in the BoD sits with two distinct parties at loggerheads.
The EOY results will be interesting. Not for what's happened in the past but for how they see the future and the path back to profitability. Any inclusion of a verbose statement about government plans for 'net zero' setting conditions for FCRM (as in past years) will be a smoke screen with the distinct odour of BS.
None I guess
prats too interested in the dumaris bit EV wise - core bus was fixed priced contracts.
Prats can so easily ruin the bus
Guess - just guess.
see you in 20 mins or so!!
Is that a rhetorical question or are you genuinely asking a question. If it is the latter I suggest you spend 20 minutes looking back at the last 18 months of chatter on this thread. If its the former then it should come with a mighty exclamation mark and a look of disbelief and frustration.
how has a company that seems to have a bright future in a developing industry, have a sp dropping like this?
wow 6p
pits
It could just be imcompetance , if so that should not excuse drawing good money for doing very little .
Smart meters benefit no one but the supplier.
The supply contract was via Dir
Really do not understand how the Coy wasted what it had and had to rely on sale of pipeline assets
Nomiungo - I Disagree. The last fund raise at 12p was not well received by the city and for good reasons. The company has lost its way and, as a consequence, it is not profitable.
FCRM was spun out of National Grid with the precise function of designing, planning, building and delivering complex power infrastructures. Initially electricity and later gas. The company has all the credentials needed for supporting the governments 'Net Zero' vision. Extending into EV infrastructure made sense but pottering about replacing domestic meters did not. Installing digital meters into homes is a sideshow that has consumed too much of the companies resources/energy and, as the recent RNS has shown, returned nothing - Let's not forget that 1 member of the BoD owns the energy supplier that contracted FCRM to install the domestic meters at a knock down rate! Prior to his arrival FCRM had no engagement in that activity.
In the same vein the company is totally opaque. Late reporting (last year), a fund raise to facilitate acquisitions that have not materialised, BoD musical chairs, threats to delist and the more recent RNS describing events tantamount to strategic failure. Arguably these events should have been declared much earlier.... were the failed contracts described in todays RNS in jeopardy when the company was fundraising. If they were then those buying in at 12p might not have forked out their cash and have a right to ask some serious questions.
Until FCRM gets back to it's core function in a meaningful way, demonstrated that the BoD game of musical chairs has stopped for good and taken steps to ensure greater transparency toward the share holders then there is no chance of further fundraising being successful.
Clearly just my own views. But there is enough history in the RNSs and the SP to back it up.
Sounds like code for a big placing possible... maybe management should take a pay cut and concentrate on what is left of the company.