Member Info for BlahBlahDoh

No doubt that yours is an honest opinion Ryan, but aren't you assuming that all that unaccounted-for-revenue will be recognised? It may be that the unaccounted-for part grows rather than disappears. And revenue is only half the story, of course, the real issue is whether CF has got the ballooning costs under control yet or not, imo.

"BARCLAYS RAISES M&G PRICE TARGET TO 219 (194) PENCE - 'UNDERWEIGHT'"

It is difficult to fathom what metrics the analysts are using to arrive at such low valuations for M&G, seemingly different ones than they use on all other companies?

Skelm? Why on earth are you calling me a scoundrel Jock, can't you take a joke? Gratuitous insults aren't allowed on this board, it's against the rules old chap, and awfully rude. Yes, it is blatantly obvious what the literal definition of a penny share is, but, equally obviously, that's not the point I was making. As your friends knowledge seems a little outdated, here's a more clued up definition for you, in case you are interested in contrasting AAF with a typical "penny share": https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/pennystock.asp#:~:text=A%20penny%20stock%20refers%20to,OTC%20Bulletin%20Board%20(OTCBB). Hope you find it useful.

"Perhaps "punt" could be a spelling mistake?"
No idea what on earth you can be suggesting Mafuta. "hunt" for value, maybe?

Agreed Nanonano, the seeding process did not exist before Nanoco invented it, and Samsung don't appear to dispute using it. Their attempt to deny the patent's validity thus far seems incredibly feeble, imo. Although it is difficult to be confident about comprehending the technology, documents emerging from court suggest they are relying on contrived technical interpretations which differ from accepted norms. Hopefully the patent board will see it that way!

It's interesting to read Strode's take on M&G. Despite his years of experience he seems to be rather out of touch with the changes which have occurred. His reasons for seeing "trouble ahead" seem to be linked to the idea that M&G's only business is retail investors. Even before they were part of the Pru that was not entirely true, and with independence they also acquired parts of the old PRU along with their original businesses. The retail business itself has been underperforming and overcharging for ages, the company has publicly owned that, but both those issues are being actively addressed, so it seems odd timing to cite that as a reason for exit. Arguably the prospects for the retail business are in better shape than they have been for a decade, albeit the future is unpredictable. It also seems odd to state that the company is "vulnerable" - this suggests either a takeover (bad reason for exiting) or complete collapse (virtually impossible due to the capital structure). Presumably the supposed vulnerability is merely the chance of a fall in the SP, but there are surely many more convincing reasons to anticipate exactly the opposite and to see the sustainable dividend as an increasingly visible safety net?

Moany man on Friday: "This won’t be going anywhere until big contracts are signed and money in the bank... Doubtful it will rise above the IPO price of 10p until later in 2022"

When Moany moans, the SP goes up: scientifically proven

Actually, Gareth Walsh only worked for the company Mar 2019 - Aug 2020 so is long gone. Seems like a very strange reason for reaching your grim conclusion anyway - surely more instructive to look at the company's products and early revenue trajectory?

The word "shopping" surely completely explained what Poundland is Jockrock - too complicated? ( :

I could have included a reference to shops in every other country, to avoid your accusation of "jumping to conclusions", but the joke only works with pounds, you see, because I'm referencing your persistent comments about an 80p barrier and contrasting them with the current price which is approaching a pound, hence "poundland". Your suggestion of Randland just wouldn't work, do you see, unless you had previously made comments about an 80 cent barrier?

It's good to know that your investment here has made about £23.5K, that should go a long way at Randland (is that really a shop?). Your assumption that this is a "penny share" seems misguided though?: it has serious long term backing from an enormous and successful parent firm and unlike the typical penny share "jam tomorrow" formula, it is growing fast and making money. Your friend can probably set you straight about the difference, and it's probably why they recommended this. Good luck, and enjoy your summer too.

I'm upset Ryan, that you have sought to bolster your argument with a personal attack, and even accuse me of "spreading misinformation". That's an unpleasant attitude. I'm entitled to my opinion, and it is based on reason and published figures, not deceit. I genuinely think that we have been misguided about costs and need to be wary of them. Maybe I'm wrong, but there is no need to insult me for expressing that opinion. A discussion board is for kicking around ideas, not just ones you agree with, and it is courteous to stick to discussing the company, rather than fellow posters.

You said "Going from the results presentation where you can see the revenue per quarter and Orphs loss/Profit you can see that the spread of losses was between Q1-Q3 about £2.6m each month before it was turned around in Q4 with a massive increase"

A loss of about £2.6m a month would have resulted in a total loss of £15.6m for H1. However, the official H1 results show the loss was only £5.6m. How do you reconcile those numbers?

If Q4 was profitable then to reach the final loss of £11.2m you have to have had a loss of more than £5.6m in Q3 for the numbers to add up. It seems the presentation and the official results tell a wildly different story, so maybe it's a case of which one you choose to believe?

Afternoon Red. Reading back thru RNSs it looks like this is the third? Jul 18 £48.5m @ 125p, Dec 19 £56.6m@ 180p, Aug 21 £35m @ 182.5p (approx, including open offers).

Quite a lot of purposes for the money, including clinical trials in China and Japan, which shows the company's scope of ambition. They did generate some revenue last year - just £9.43m, but it's a start - hopefully this funding round will lean into a period of rapid expansion in revenue as well as product development and deployment.

"the London-based clinical research firm said its pretax loss for 2020 widened to GBP11.2 million from GBP5.8 million the year before, despite revenue from contracts rising to GBP20.6 million from GBP3.4 million.

Profit was hurt by an increase in direct project and administrative costs to GBP32.4 million form GBP8.7 million year-on-year. Looking ahead, the company says it is targeting delivery of full year profit in 2021."

So, in order to believe CFs "profitable in Q4" story, you have to assume that most of that £32.4m in costs was spent only in the first 9 months of the year, then in the last quarter the revenue suddenly outweighed costs. The bulk of the losses for the year would therefore have fallen in Q3 for some unexplained reason - more losses than in H1, more losses than in the whole of last year, all falling in that single quarter. Even if that unlikely scenario were true, it smacks of creative accounting to achieve the required quarterly turnaround. With no quarterly results, it's conveniently impossible to disprove. What is interesting is that the costs were attributed to projects, not restructuring, suggesting they are a result of normal business and can be expected to be ongoing.

The results do not show a profit in Q4, and do not show a "turnaround", those both remain merely stories. The big takeaway from the results was that costs were far greater than revenue, and apparently caused by ongoing "projects" rather than one-off costs. CF and most posters here concentrate only on revenue, which is less than half the story. Actually achieving the claimed turnaround will depend almost entirely on getting those costs down dramatically. It would restore some credibility if CF addressed that elephant, imo.

Great results - no surprises, dividend progression continues, sustainability of the dividend is further improved, the investment case is stronger than ever. Boring and steady: udders may disagree, but isn't that just want you want from a cash cow? Moo! Market negativity is irrational and temporary imo - current SP does not reflect fair value relative to performance, to it's peers, or to the market in general. Hey diddle diddle.

"Interesting that Investec is inceasing its shares"
Think you've misread that RNS, Battersea - it is M&G increasing their holding in Investec, not the other way round?

https://www.sharecast.com/news/broker-recommendations/berenberg-raises-target-price-on-top-pick-xp-power--8056898.html

Fortunately Berenberg were right and Edison were wrong about short term prospects (see first post in this thread) - Edison have now upgraded their estimates for this year and next, happy days:
https://www.edisongroup.com/publication/h121-order-intake-drives-upgrades/29778/
https://www.sharecast.com/news/market-report-close/london-close-stocks-mixed-with-all-eyes-on-battle-for-vectura--8059537.html

State-of-play discussion with CEO Gavin Griggs and CFO Oskar Zahn :https://www.edisongroup.com/edison-tv/xp-power-h121-results-executive-interview/

While mentioning possible risks for H2 (component shortages, increased freight costs) they seem confident they are better placed to deal with these than their competitors and see full year results being slightly ahead of forecasts.

Investors should be grateful to the 700 Vietnamese employees who have been voluntarily living on-site for the last 2 weeks to keep the business running during lockdown in their country, as authorities rush to vaccinate. Hope the company finds an appropriate way to thank them.

Apologies "over £6" isn't much of a target! Both Berenberg and Liberum are now targeting over £60
https://www.sharecast.com/equity/XP_Power_Ltd_DI/broker-views

I think it was just general market sentiment, Skipsharer, coupled with XPPs high p/e ratio - nothing specific to the business, which has little newsflow outside quarterly updates. Now the reassuring update and increased dividend underpin the investment case, there is good reason to expect a positive effect on the SP. One broker now has a target of over £6.

C'mon Jockrock, where were you when AAF broke the 90p barrier, window shopping at poundland?

Market seems to be cottoning on to the reality of AAFs compelling business prospects. Complex organisation but the financials are irresistable.