Member Info for Beamer21

Eggsinonebasket - this might help http://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/81/idiots-guide-to-the-london-stock-exchanges-setsmm-0379.html Essentially you need to think about there being two order books - one is the SETS electronic order book, trades that affect the electronic order books are marked A (AT) and these are the only trades that alter the price action in either way regardless of trade size and overall daily volume The market makers can trade within the spread on SETS which is why you see trades paid over/under the Bid/Ask - market maker trades are not part of the electronic order book and do not affect the price action - these are primarily O trades. Typically A trades are used to manipulate the price action and O trades are used to trade volume without affecting the share price. Crap I know but it is what it is........

Use the FCA spreadsheet - most services feed their data from this but it's subject to delays http://www.fca.org.uk/static/documents/short-positions-daily-update.xls Total position now 7%

Increased their short ever so slightly on 25/9 now 1.01% - net short positions can alter by changes to their long position, if they have one that is!

Chemistdude - no trick, just using the SETS trading platform to their full advantage

This might help - not everyone plays by the rules though http://www.fca.org.uk/firms/markets/international-markets/eu/short-selling-regulations/notifications-disclosures

Moljen - let's hope so. It's also possible that those that went short at circa 70p are buying back as part of their normal rinse and repeat cycle and are now getting ready to push this back to the 70/73p range The large buy trades are almost always O trades which do not affect the share price on the SETS trading platform whereas a single A trade can - this is how they move it up and down using minimal £££

Just to add, I am aware that invoice processing was supposed to be the loss leader that brought on the client base from which Tungsten could then profitably monetise primarily through their TEP product I am just concerned about its sustainable potential and feel that there are other ways to significantly increase revenues through the e invoicing platform I've been a follower of Tungsten for a long time and know several people who have negotiated and implemented large scale buying deals with Tungsten - implementation is difficult primarily due to the complexity of compliance but the end benefits are considerable in driving down costs and making the whole process more cohesive.

Manics - I fully understand what you are saying but I think the efficiencies that are created for suppliers transacting via the Tungsten network are great and are a significant improvement to what they experienced in a paper driven environment. For sure supply chain financing has its place, particularly during recessions. There are many government initiatives aimed at improving supplier payment terms for SME's with many of the large corporates already pledged to assist their SME suppliers with speedier payment terms Dynamic discounting is on the rise which cuts out the SCF intermediary and provides benefits to both buyer and supplier Don't get me wrong as I'm pro Tungsten but I'm concerned about the focus on TEP revenues.

My view is that Tungsten Early Payment will struggle and is unlikely to contribute materially to revenues - in many ways Tungsten have actually shot themselves in the foot as the whole e invoice process significantly benefits suppliers through cost and processing efficiencies which all result in earlier payment anyway at no additional cost to the supplier - so why pay for early payment? Given that the uptake to date for TEP is minimal then I can only assume that the majority of suppliers are already enjoying speedier payment and security as a result of trading on the Tungsten network and do not see any value in giving up some of their invoice value to get even speedier payment. Additionally as suppliers can obtain a transparent, realtime overview of monies outstanding this info could be used to provide comfort to their own bank if required. I'm not saying there is zero need for TEP but I do not see it as being integral - Tungsten only benefits buyers with significant volumes and these types of organisations, particularly those with strong governance typically refrain from purchasing any critical volume with small scale suppliers for fear that the buyer represents their primary source of revenue which if pulled could hugely detrimental to the supplier. It is not uncommon for large corporate/government buyers to continually credit check their suppliers as part of their ongoing governance process. The success of Tungsten is wholly dependant on getting buyers and suppliers transacting together with each party benefiting from the time and cost efficiencies - I believe that Tungsten should initially focus on revenues from buyers through licensing, analytics and sharing of cost savings. TEP should be the icing on the cake rather than Tungstens core business

The main focus imo should be getting suppliers onto the network as the likes of BT etc can only truly leverage the full benefits of Tungsten network/workflow and Analytics once the majority of their suppliers are on board Early payment is a nice option for smaller suppliers, however, I personally don't see it as being material to Tungstens success as the tungsten network provides time/cost efficiencies and insight to both supplier and buyer resulting in speedier supplier payment. TEP is not an all or nothing option with suppliers being able to select invoices that they wish to receive early payment on. This is an evolving business with huge growth potential. The B2G mandates that are growing globally will really accelerate the acceptance of e invoicing.

On the subject of cash - I assume that there is enough as they appear to be keeping Tungsten Bank. The new CEO will be announced once regulatory approval has been granted

those of a short persuasion are huddled together debating whether to go up or push it down further - Hubble, bubble, toil and trouble!

Nice thought but I don't think so, although with Tungsten anything can happen I'd like to think that the shorts have played enough for today and will shortly commence buying in earnest to lift the sp back to circa 72p so they can than re sell short and start the whole rinse/repeat for the umpteenth time!

Wonder who the new CEO is?

My understanding is that once on board their account management is excellent and that clients are kept well informed of the companies progress - both good and bad.

pivotal for TUNG - they must hone their on boarding efficiencies particularly as we are about to see a change in pace as more global e invoicing/commerce mandates come into play. B2G mandates are starting to fan the fire for widespread global adoption - the time and cost benefits are simply to great to ignore any longer. Latam was an early adopter and has reaped the benefits fuelled by B2G mandates E invoicing will be fully mandated for all B2G procurement within the EU by 2018 The current sp is a gift to those that can wait

Interesting case and one that may set a precedent for those suffering paralysis to access life enhancing technology offered by REX

boring day - let's have some action, please:)

Agreed, both new appointments add some further weight to the board. I hope that David Benello can open more doors on a global basis. He's obviously a smart cookie given his educational background! Pondering the AGM.....

you need to pay a fairly substantial premium to buy any significant volume