Member Info for BigBiteNow

Morning bobbyaxelrod,

If you work to a group-wide 45%-50% product margin, then I believe you won't be far off. I have the group AOV running at c. £33.50 in March.

March at c. £1.755m in revenues would have been (near as damn it) operationally profitable but for refunds and interruptions.

What that says is that once we move beyond that level, then the margin made from each order after set costs for each order are deducted (delivery, transaction costs, marketing, packaging) should go directly to the bottom line.

That is because the warehouse picking costs and warehouse overheads (separate items) are already covered at March levels of revenue. As they grow beyond this point, the overall operating profit will grow and along with it, the percentage of operating profit compared to overall revenues.

Refunds need to be kept at normalised levels (trust pilot indicates this is now the case). It is also important to recognise that marketing is a flexible lever which can affect operating profit (new vs returning customers), but if Huddled can continue the trend towards existing customers returning then that coist will also reduce, enabling improved operating profit.

I hope I have helped and not hindered.

Sorry, just re-read your last post.

Yes, the way Huddled presents it is adjusted EBITDA per brand = operational profitability per brand.

That then leaves PLC costs = c. £1.2m (my figure only)

Just t be clear, that is 26 pallets for Discount Dragons only.

As you will appreciate, gross margin is brand-dependent, and so we can talk about individual or collective.

It is also heavily influenced by the AOV, but also by the number of orders, because the warehouse picking costs remain static. There will come a point when that cost will rise, but right now, Huddled has said it is growing its orders with the same warehouse staff levels.

Discount Dragons is the lowest in terms of product margin at c. 45%.

But even it should already be running well above 6% when processing at least 1,000 orders per month.

If you watch today's Huddled video, then right at the end, you will hear it stated that they are currently sending out 26 pallets a day, and I counted 60 standard boxes per pallet. Some pallets had smaller boxes, which means more orders per pallet, and some larger, which means fewer but likely larger AOVs attached. That says to me that they are already achieving 1,300 orders a day at DD. We need more official data, but that is what the pictures and wording tell us. As a comparison, by my calculations, DD achieved around 850 orders per day in Q1.

Huddled has two floors (3rd and 4th) in what I believe is an old mill. I don't know if the other floors are available. It is very cheap to rent, but I am not sure if they want to utilise more of it due to the lift constraints. I believe management has future plans in place beyond the current warehouse,e but what they involve is not yet known.

If you were to push me on it, I would say that they could be achieving +10% gross margin by early H2.

The broker says they achieve c. £24m in FY25. I think that is well short of what is possible and deliberately so.

The 1% is not gross margin, but the margin after all costs, except admin costs, have been accounted for.

What you are referring to (because that is the last official data point) is the historic position in 2024 when all of the brands were either still establishing themselves or still being acquired. The situation today is much different.

In very simple terms, Huddled stated in the most recent investor presentation that they have essentially reached operational profitability in March when monthly revenues were running at c. £1.75m.

Now here is the super important part.

There are two goals here: operational profitability and cash flow positivity.

If you refer to item 4 of the FY24 report "segmental information", you will see that adjusted administration expenses in 2024 were c. £3.2m

Note that "Adjusted administrative expenses exclude depreciation, amortisation, impairment and one-off costs."

However, all but £1.146m were admin costs directly attributable to each brand. The £1.146m is therefore the PLC costs or the head office overheads, as they are more commonly known.

Adjusted EBITDA (so operational profitability) is reached when the individual brand admin costs are covered. We know this because in the last presentation, we were told that having essentially reached operational profitability, the business could begin contributing towards the PLC costs.

Once the PLC costs are covered, then "depreciation, amortisation, impairment and one-off costs aside the business is effectively cash flow positive.

PLC overheads shouldn't change much in 2025 because one main director has left, but I have allowed £1.2m, which means £100,000 per month in overhead left to cover as of April. There will of course, be fluctuations as there are many moving parts, but growth is strong, and that is what matters the most.

You are absolutely correct that marketing spend has a big effect because new customer acquisitions cost so much more, but the last CEO update demonstrated that this is beginning ot turn in their favour. The more it does, the easier that cash flow positive state will be to reach. What should also be considered is just how many customers Huddlöed has attracted of late. Between Q4/Q1, over 100,000 new customers were acquired. So their database is much improved, which allows more targeted marketing etc.

I have attempted to explain all of this and more both on X and here, and nobody seems to appreciate what it all means.

The consensus seems to be that operational profitability is pre-all the admin costs stated in the accounts, but that simply isn't true, meaning the business is much closer to cash flow positivity than the market currently thinks.

Hope that helps.

The importance of this latest well result and what it means for the wider Rudyard play and Helix should not be underestimated. The market is busy working out what the first 3 wells mean, but what we should all be considering is what this team will do once sufficient risk is removed and they have a steady flow of cash coming in.

The broker talks of 8 wells by the end of 2026, at least 6 of which will exploit the 2P reserves, but it is surely just a marker. The speed with which Helix management has executed these first 3 wells does not support the notion that they will simply drill 5 more wells over the next 18 months and be done. That's not how they operate. The form says that if the demand is there, then the speed will be maintained and acquisitions will repeat themselves.

For me, 8 wells and Rudyard as the only operating asset is a guide and no more.

Well, I've added another 350k of shares to my pot.. Money where your mouth is and all that.

My eyes aren't on today or next week, but the next +2 years and against those timelines post what Linda is demonstrating Rudyard can deliver, I feel very comfortable.

This is a great result which should start to open investors' eyes to just how big a deal Rudyard should now become.

With Weil #1 already tested and base grades established, this is now effectively a 3-well hub producer that could, if it wished, push the production of at least two of its wells well beyond the current c.$4m per annum pre-cash flows

Assured U.S.-based tariff-free helium production is not to be underestimated.

Well done, Helix.

https://x.com/BigBiteNow/status/1925436806826180817

Huddled has challenged Boop management to sell 2,000 bottles of fragrance a week. To do that, you need a greater range. Fragrances are a great and easy way to drive the AOV higher.

I would think that he is also the only competent and sufficiently qualified person within the organisation who can deliver the resource report to the required standard. A service which would be much more expensive and take longer if completed by an external company. It is therefore good timing that he was brought in when he was. Anyone would think that ECR might have a plan.

ECR must produce a resource report/estimate for their mining lease application. That requires further trenching. Whilst this trenching is taking place, 1,000 tons of material can be processed and any gold found sold into the market. But the revenues from these sales must be spent on the project.

This will enable a decision on a second processing plant and its location.

Some are so blinded by their desire to attack the management team that they forget or simply don't want to recognise that there are regulatory processes involved, which require a certain level of thoroughness and time to execute.

We were told that ECR would be back on site at Blue Mountain before the end of Q2. So that is the next milestone.

Here's my current forecasts (for fun).

Note - This is what I posted on 15th April. "I have Q1 running at (give to take) c. £4.5m and Q2 at £6m based on 180,000 orders." Actual outcome £4.4m, so not bad.

We now know March was c.£1.755m (17% more revenue than Feb, which was £1.5m). We already knew that Boop delivered £332,000 in March, and after yesterday's update, we know that Nutricircle delivered £435,000.

That means that DD achieved c. £985,000.

It was stated that March orders were 10% higher than February, which were just below 48,000. Let's say 47,750. A 10% lift increases orders to c. 52,500 (c. 1,690 per day). What that then allows is the group AOV to be calculated = c. £33.40

That is the starting basis for Q2.

Since then, we know that April was tracking to at least £1.9m and delivered several days of +2,000 orders, including 1x +2,400.

That has me expecting something around 57,000 orders with respect given to the fact that it is a 30-day month. 57,000 orders is 1,900 per day, which isn't a stretch given the insight on +2,000 orders being hit.

Yesterday's update told us DD is tracking at close to 30% new customers, which I believe is slightly lower than April. Nutricircle was 52.6% in March and is trending below 50% in May, meaning it was somewhere in the middle in April.

Boop was 63.7% in March and below 60% in April.

That means that the AOV (even without the other AOV marketing drivers in play - mentioned yesterday) will be rising. I have it pushing £34 in April. That says the actual result in April is closer to £1.94m.

This places Q2 on a c. £5.8m trajectory before further growth in all metrics is applied, including the new warehouse space supported by increased advertising.

Right now, without going too much further into the numbers, I have Q2 tracking between £6.2m - £6.6m. Such a figure doesn't demand much more of the warehouse even before further gains on the AOV also come through.

That places H1 between £10.6m - £11m.

Further out is more difficult to forecast, but my numbers currently show Q3 at c. £7.5m and Q4 at +£9m.

Such an outcome would see FY25 revenues at around £27m.

I am happy to be challenged and also be wrong, but I feel good about my conclusions. Of course the more data Huddled shares, the more it can be adjusted/pinned down.

What cannot be dismissed are the figures up until April, which are already showing a very decent growth trajectory.

Anyway, that's more than enough from me today. Have a good weekend,d those that are here.

This business is all about numbers.

I am confident I am not far off on the retained marketing cost.

It is not about needing to get carried away. It is more the case that a warts-and-all approach in a risk-off market requires sufficient enthusiasm and positivity to balance the messaging out. Otherwise, investors just hear the words challenges and tempered growth and fail to appreciate the bigger message. That being that all metrics that matter are trending towards where Huddled needs them to be, which in turn means that tempered growth doesn't truly matter. But one has to be prepared to run the numbers to appreciate this, and the attention span in the current market simply isn't there.

None of this matters so long as HUD don't require more funds, which I don't believe they do. But it is best to cover all bases until you are sure.

According to the broker note, new customer acquisitions run at £10 per order, whereas retained marketing spend is a "fraction" of that figure. Let's say it is c. £1 per returning order.

As an example, if Discount Dragons achieved 30,000 orders per month and 50% were new, then the total marketing cost = £165,000.

Adjust that to 30% new, and the marketing cost reduces to £111,000. That is a significant saving compared to the FY24 PLC overhead of c. £95,000 per month, especially when it likely means an increasing AOV too.

Huddled managed to almost hit operational breakeven in March with DD just above the 30% mark, but more importantly, Nutricircle running at 58% and Boop at 63.7%.

With Nutricircle trending below 50% in May and Boop below 60% in April, the marketing cost, whilst still rising as a total, will be reducing per order.

At the same time, the AOV should also be tracking higher because existing customers spend more than new ones.

What all of this means is that order growth can be slower whilst the new/existing mix is worked on, and still the business can enter cash flow positive territory. Better still, it can achieve it against lower overall revenues because each order will be more profitable.

Martin is still playing things close to his chest a little, and sensibly is being cautious. That will mean that interest will likely only be sparked when the figures start to come through. But I don't see it being a long wait, and such caution and honesty around the business's development should stand us all in good stead as this AIM story develops. This stock doesn't need spikes that leave investors disappointed. Slower and steadier is what I want to see.

I still think July feels right for them to hit cash flow positive, but I can also see a scenario where Q3 is a period of consolidation at a cash flow positive level to boost existing customer number contribution (plus it is the holiday season) ahead of a big Q4. That should then allow a big drive on both existing customer sales (boosted Christmas AOV) and new customers alike.

My current thinking is that Q4 can deliver +£9m in revenues. Combine that with a more elevated and deliberate new customer mix, and the profitability should be very solid. By Q4, Huddled should have a significant customer database and purchase history to be able to encourage return visits to buy the sorts of things Huddled knows they like to buy. This is exactly what is being done at DD already to great success.

Huddled is a great puzzle that I am enjoying solving.

Ask and thou shalt receive.

Here's my view on the latest update.

What he has told us today is that solid growth is there to be had alongside a rising AOV, which means a falling marketing bill. That is good news and should be recognised as such.

https://x.com/BigBiteNow/status/1923037426253013101

I am happy to discuss everything I have researched, and I am always open to negative angles that I perhaps haven't thought about.

This is not about being an eternal optimist, this is about establishing whether the progress to date is better than the valuation, which should be at least 12 months forward-looking. Plus, the likelihood of that progress continuing further.

The first goal is ensuring that the group has enough cash to reach positive cash flow. My analysis, which is also controlled in its nature, says they achieve that by July. It requires AOV to remain at c. £33 during what is a sharp increase in new customer acquisitions. It also requires refunds to return to normal levels, which appears to be happening. If so, then HY cash burn, even when allowing for the warehouse changes and lift costs, should come in under £1m.

After that, it is about what FY25 can achieve vs. what the broker is forecasting. We do need to see that the new warehouse is performing, and some feedback from management on this would be most welcome. But it isn't a significant risk at this time.

I would also like to see further evidence that customers are returning.

Hit my July forecast and then add even limited further growth for the remainder of the year with a reasonable uplift in Q4, and I believe we will see FY revenues go beyond £27m.

When I look at the current MC, I see decent value against those two outcomes.

I don't see Huddled as a stock where a quick buck is to be made. I don't know when the market will switch on to it. But I feel very good about where they will be by early January 2026. I also think this is a management team worth backing, and life teaches us that in this game, management is most important.

It will be interesting to watch this story develop over the next 18 months and discuss it here with open-minded contributors. If they get it right, then I see high returns ahead.

Yes, I have seen the Northern Ireland issue, but it was two negative reviews, and the issue has already been resolved. Such one-offs will come along, but they are being resolved at pace, and that is what matters most.

I think the bigger risk is the new customer to existing balance, which affects the group AOV and places more emphasis on marketing costs.

But my £33 figure is already historically low, and I believe that the controlled growth policy also plays into that thinking, with a balance being sought. A c. 12% growth figure helps with that.

Huddled could quite easily drive much higher growth, but quality would suffer and the AOV would be pulled down with it.

Important to remember that even at this controlled basis and a minimum £33 AOV, Huddled welcomed c. 100,000 new customers in Q4 2024/Q1 2025. The conversion of those customers is still working its way through. Not all will return, but even if half become regular customers throughout Q2 and they visit just twice in the period, then half of Q2 sales (c. 195k) would be covered by returning customers, even before we consider the existing regular customer base. This is why customer service is so important.

If I then consider that DD is driving new advertising from May, as the new warehouse space comes online, it is difficult to conclude that sales there would then drop. My understanding is that the honing of the offering at Discount Dragons is helping drive stronger return visits, as more of the things that they buy are restocked. I am sure the same is being applied at the other two brands also.

Those two posts aren't designed to tie down exact figures, they are more about demonstrating that even further controlled growth places Huddled very close to being cash flow positive. It may come a month later, but it won't be any more than that.

March has already achieved c. 52,500 orders. Why? Because we were told in an April CEO update that March orders were 10% higher than Feb and revenues were 17% higher.

The February trading update stated "just under 48,000 orders."

So March demonstrated that on a like-for-like basis to Q1 (137,000 orders) that it was running at c. 152,400 Q1 orders. That is c. 11.25% growth in just 1 month.

April is demonstrating at least c. 11.9% again.

My May figure calls for that to increase by 16.6% based on it being a 31-day month, an expanded warehouse and increased advertising. Then in June, I call for just 5.8% (30 day month). These are not crazy goals when compared to March and April.

The wonderful thing about Huddled is the amount of data made available through the various update channels, which I really hope continues. It gives data junkis like me an excellent edge against a market that either won't look or cannot be bothered until it smacks them officially in the face.

2/2

As an example.

At 2,200 per day, Huddled would be processing c. 202,000 orders in Q3 (without further growth). Having reached the stage where their operating costs are all covered and they are eating into a c. £95,000 per month PLC overhead, every £1 they add to the AOV at a c. 50% margin would be extremely meaningful to their profitability.

Now apply that to Q4, where the AOV would be expected to rise as customers increase their purchases for Christmas, and orders would be at their peak.

But before we even get there, we still need to see the full effect of the increased warehouse space. 2,200 per day is not the end station.

I expect that we will see close to the 2,400 orders per day figure in June. This gives the team sufficient time to test the warehouse and monitor quality, etc. Perhaps the new product quality control manager will be in place if not already.

At 2,400 orders per day and an AOV of £33, we are talking monthly revenues (30-day month) of c. £2.38m.

These are not racey growth sums compared to previous months. Boop, for instance, achieved more revenues in March than it did in Jan/Feb combined. Nutriciricle is tracking to £1.6m in Q2, having had its best month to date in March, which led to £1.2m in Q1 revenues. That represents 33% growth in just 3 months. The trend has already been set with the only outlier being Discount Dragons, which, to be fair, was sacrificed during Q1 because of limited warehouse space. It now has a dedicated floor and team, so it is logical to expect growth there in Q2 because, as I said right at the start, the Huddled team has consistently shown that it has the drive and ideas to make this happen.

Hold orders at 2,400 per day for the rest of the year whilst maintaining the £33 group AOV, and suddenly, FY25 revenues rise to c.£ 25.5m without the need for further growth or a Q4 boost. But they are both clearly coming.

Now, the exact timing of 2,400 orders per day may adjust slightly. Perhaps it comes in July. The point is, it isn't very far away. April already tested such a number, and the monthly growth seen even when the warehouse was strained points towards this happening very soon.

If operational profitability can near as damn it be achieved at c. £1.75m per month then it is well in at £2.38m. The business should also be very close to cash flow positive at that stage.

But that is not the end. It is just the next few months.

What this says is that at c. £95,000 per month in PLC costs left to cover the current cash on hand is already sufficient to move the business into cash flow positivity because that £95,000 is already being eaten well into at the figures I have demonstrated above.

The business needs to minimise refunds and maintain gross margins, but at the same time, it clearly has much more growth to come this year because the trend and the efforts since February are already demonstrating that.

1/2

Since February, monthly revenues have only risen.

Until May, the Huddled team has had to find clever solutions to maximise order volume. They reported in January that 110,000 orders in Q4 were near maximum capacity. Since then, they have managed to squeeze this up to 60,000 per month (c. 180,000 per quarter) before the second warehouse floor becomes available. That is a positive, hard-working, effective trend that is likely going to continue.

April revenues were already tracking at +£1.9m over a 30-day month. That is a minimum 8.3% MoM gain during a 30-day month vs. 31 days in March. Adjust it to 31 days and the gain is c. 11.9%. This occurred during an adjustment phase where Discount Dragon picks were reduced, driven by a maxed-out warehouse capacity. Yet they still achieved a minimum 11.9% increase in revenues.

What we also know from the FY results presentation (6th May, which reflects April's progress only) is that Nutricircle is already tracking towards £1.6m in Q2 revenues (£1.2m achieved in Q1). That, along with the push on Boop, says April came in above £1.9m, meaning 11.9% is the minimum. My figures say it is closer to 13.5%.

Even when allowing some slack, this points towards May beginning at close to £2m before the business begins to enjoy the initial growth drive from the second floor + the effects of the first advertising campaign that pushes all 3 brands. In addition, Boop has raised its advertising to the next level by making a significant influencer the face of its TV campaign. In parallel, Huddled has tested the warehouse at +2,400 orders per day with no problems, and that growth comes with no additional warehouse fixed costs.

I wouldn't expect May to deliver all of that growth in one hit. There is a desire to protect the business from elevated refunds (note the reviews on both Boop and DD of late are much improved). But something in the middle would be fair. Achieve c. 2,200 per day at a group AOV of £33 (which is conservative) and monthly revenues increase to c. £2.25m.

To place that in context, such a figure would already have Huddled running at a FY25 revenue outcome that is higher than the broker set (£24.1m vs £24.3m) without the need to add any more growth through the rest of the year. Bear in mind that Q4 is likely going to add a significant boost in FY25.

Remember, this business is not about sufficient demand, but warehouse capacity and controlled growth that doesn't negatively impact customer service, driving greater refunds and reducing return visits. By focusing on customer service, Huddled aims to attract new customers back, which increases their spend and pushes the AOV higher. Presently, a c. £33 AOV is driven by the high percentage of new customers. As long as customer service remains good, Huddled will continue to convert more of these to repeat visits, which in turn will drive the AOV higher.