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.
Another lousy display of leadership from Bundred & Johnson, who continue to prove (a) their complete lack of understanding about how the public markets operate and their complete disregard for their own investors. This Tau was hugely important in setting the right tone and restoring some faith in the management and board. It did neither! Bundred has to Look, once again operationally one can’t believe a word they say!
In the teeth of an existential crisis that entailed investors bailing out the company, Bundred & Johnson went on record repeatedly stating they were on target to hit £8.3m YE, blustering about Oct being best month ever at £1m.
Come today’s TU, they miss that target & give no apology or explanation, leaving us all wondering whether any forecasts they make can be trusted. Whilst 300k in lost production is small vs potential, it is the principal that is at stake here with 2 individuals who clearly just make stuff up!
If they can’t get these forecasting right god help us when we get to £75m potential capacity So they basically flat lined into year end, blithely missing their own target, waved 2 fingers at s/holders in the process .
As of that’s not enough, then there’s the weasly PR spinners wording around “No new technical problems have arisen in recent months ”, effectively signalling that existing technical problems persist as do “ potential points of failure” Johnson and new FD need to be hauled over the coals for this ….not good enough!!!!
Bottom line - despite all the s*** Bundred &Johnon have put s/holders thro in last 18 mnths they still cant to be trusted and that is why in the absence of any evidence eto the contrary, the share price will continue to languish.
Hi fevertreeman, as you know I'm not in the same place that you are in terms of calling for heads to roll but I do think it's interesting that sales were £1m average in Nov and Dec. People might say 'oh well it's the holidays so Dec wasn't a full month' but if I was Johnson, Maddock and Easton I'd have done pretty much whatever it took to hit £8.6m even if it meant incentivising staff to work over the holidays. This suggests to me that they couldn't produce at more than £1m per month rather than that they chose not to, and that is a concern.
Too bloody right! If I were Richard sneller, I'd be on the phone to our useless chairman demanding an explanation.
Bundred is not the man to chair this company as what is needed is some honest conversations and self-examination, and that is clearly not going to happen while he is chair supposedly overseeing strategy, holding KJ and Maddicks to account and properly representing owners' (i.e. shareholders ) interests.
I would imagine that lines of communication between the board and Richard Sneller are very much open if you look at (a) how much he was invested before the placing, and (b) how much he invested during the placing.
Clearly he was sufficiently satisfied to not only retain his holding but to increase it. He has a long-term view, likes what he sees, and doesn't need his hand held like a nervous PI on the Internet.
Well you'd imagine correctly (and less of the supercilious tone). I'd venture that Sneller like most of us was keen to average down, and been so heavily exposed it won't have been pleasant. Whilst he will be updated by management as a top 10 shareholder and was no doubt taken over the wall ahead of the placing, dont assume he is any better placed than the rest of us about the day to day management of the company.
Some useful Update information passed on I think
My main issue is this
" focus remains on delivering further operational improvements, capacity installation to remove potential single points of failure, upgrading internal manufacturing processes and further strengthening operational management and supervision."
and I say that because it shows to me there is still quite some work to be done to get things "firmly" on track ....but it does show that somewhere ..whether that is Sneller, other key investors or even the new COO ...individuals seem to have had to highlight a "to do" list which I don't believe Johnson would have been able to do himself
As has been said repeatedly the lack of that COO and the sense of firefighting for a while was a set back ..and I still don't think they are fully through sorting what needs to be done ... although they now clearly seem to know
Wise words, but what does that tell you about Johnson's ability to lead this company from the current valley to the sunny uplands and beyond.
What we've seen unfold most acutely over the last 18 months is that classic growth company situation with all the focus on winning customers, proving up the product, whilst hoping that they can successfully retrofit the systems and people needed (management, training & financial) without the wheels falling off or any one noticing. it didnt work and we are where we are. Add gnerous doses of bloody-mindedness , denial, and naivete from Bundred & Johnson and all the lements came together.
On a more optimistic note because I am a big believer in the tech, Board now has opportunity to reset things , clear the air, and get this company functioning as a grown-up plc. COO and CFO joining have started that process, but helluva long way to go frankly. If they can do this they have a fighting chance of remaining independent but I think odds are company gets taken out.....
Fevertreeman
As I said previously.I just think Johnson has had too much on his plate and things got missed ...and they were just not aware of how weak the overall team was,for what they need to achieve ...the scaling up is a big ask, overall.
" further strengthening operational management and supervision" shows they didn't have the depth of squad to win the Premier as it were ..which is what they need,given the potential for repeat orders and planned growth
Fevertreeman
Despite everything within 2023, I suspect it has been an incredibly valuable learning curve , providing a lot of what they now need.....so as you say a good opportunity to get properly functioning
what do you think the expense will be to
"delivering further operational improvements, capacity installation to remove potential single points of failure, upgrading internal manufacturing processes and further strengthening operational management and supervision "
any thoughts on a figure ?
You have kind of answered my point. Johnson being unaware of how just weak the ops management of the business was & how underpowered and miles off target the finance function was, goes right to the heart of the leadership issue. If he was unaware of these things he just cant be left in charge of the next crucial phase of development. And it is not as if he has mended his ways; the insistence they'd hit £8.6m and they didn't. I would love to be sitting in the boardroom and watching the interactions.
They stated they needed £8m, but any delays or further issues around ramp up ( which given the issues they've had have been just on the existing ops at the current site, before they are even at Phase 2 ) seems inevitable. How long do we think £m will last - I dont know, but look at the burn involved to sort out current issues and it isnt comforting analysis.