Member Info for bazzatuk

That's the point I was making the other day. With that spread there's zero margin of safety the instant you buy, and with that update, it would be madness to take on that risk on such vast uncertainty.

Filtered.... not filleted... crickey.

Hopefully, I get the double filleted badge.

Although, it's starting to sound like coffee at this point! 😁

I don't owe you my life story Laura. This isn't the return of This Is Your Life.

But make it about me instead of the obvious pump you're attempting.

There's only one reason a pumper wants the board free.

In which case, there will be a better time to buy. Once they've proven themselves.

But now is not the time because that update showcased a business with huge issues, a sketchy order book, and a model that failed at the first hurdle.

Money can be made at 25p, 50p or £1. 100% gains are the same irrespective of the price you buy in. But risk is variable, and the risks here increased beyond my tolerance with an update that should terrify anyone holding this company.

There was no nasty or vitriolic posting.

Just sensible rational conversation about the prospects about this company. Which add they stand, were destroyed with a single company update.

But keep gaslighting Pedro.

The only thing I'm showing is the obvious pump attempt from you Laura.

Pedro tried the other day, then fell silent, then you've turned up.

By the way, I didn't hold RCFX at the fall. It was a company I was researching for potential, but had taken the view that I'd wait for further clarity on earnings/stability.

But nobody expected that apocalyptic update this week. It just couldn't get any worse. You'll lose money investing in this I'd you listen to Laura.

Laura you didn't answer my question, just deflected with nonsense.

Plus, anything you post about RCFX from before that update is invalid. That update changes everything.

But it's easy to spot rampers like you. They always appear the day after shares take a major rumble and flood the comments section with relative nonsense.

10-20? You mean you don't know the EXACT number? Do you track your failures with such inaccuracy?

They'd also need to spend between 2-3bn to achieve it.

@Truthfactory Exactly, Pedro doesn't appear to have read the update. It couldn't get any worse. It's also highly questionable the timing of the IPO, the extremely positive news, growth talk, then this update today which spells a disaster that didn't just appear in the last few weeks.

Pedro, writing FACT at the end of your opinions doesn't change them to reality.

I've said my piece on JD Sports about why I think the price is beaten down. It remains a wait and see for me. I still think it's got a lot of work to do to convince the market and people like me to buy. But it remains on my watchlist.

Pendragon and those technicals are nonsense. All technicals are nonsense. It all comes back to fundamentals in the long term, even if that doesn't seem to happen in the short term.

Pedro, they've destroyed trust in a single update.

Nobody sensible is backing this now. It's going to take a miracle for this share price to move where you want it.

It's a glorified project management and recruitment agency.

This is a small company, they shouldn't need to rejig the business model this early. This new team has come about because a founder failed to secure business and is now taking a break.

If the founders, arguably the greatest asset in a small startup, can't make it work, that's game over.

There's a difference between looking for positives and blatantly ignoring major issues.

A founder won't be involved and sounds like they are being replaced! What's the positive there?

They even go as far as to say that items booked as earnings for 25 will now move to 26. There's no guarantee that comes through at all.

Then there's little certainty at all which business will be secured if any.

If you buy today, you're rolling a dice. The spread alone means you lose the equivalent gains from 2 years in an S&P500 index fund.

It was risky before the update, now it's a lost cause with key staff's commitment wobbling.

Did you even READ the update. One of the founders is stepping away on a career break.

That's as red of a flag as you can get for this tiny company.

There's no need to look for problems when they're staring you in the face.

That's not beauty, that's an inconsistency.

If I'm a potential customer, who's worked with a particular associate before, and I'm requesting to do so again, but, that associate is working for another vendor, would I want to work with RC Fornax, or the other vendor?

Maybe I hire the associate directly for my organisation.

I don't see the model as that strong, especially after this update.

Pedro these associates you're listing as an asset can simply work for someone else.