Member Info for BlahBlahDoh

If these two have influence over SP then they are responsible for the complete collapse during their stewardship. Even if they got it back to 24p it would still be 20,000 leagues under the seas. Logically they should only be rewarded for improving the SP from the start of their term, doing it from low points they have caused makes no sense and means heads you win, tails you don't lose, i.e. not an incentive, just a freebie with no relationship to performance.

Not sure where you get that 75% figure from. Is profit even broken down by individual author? That seems extremely granular and would involve calculating individual marketing campaigns. In the actual results, it is reported that 40% of revenue came from the non-consumer division, so that alone seems to invalidate your claim. Even within the consumer side "success was broadly based across our portfolio". What is your source?

Blackrock significantly reduced their exposure on Tuesday. Not sure why the market has turned sour on BMY, presumably they see headwinds ahead based on latest results, but there's nothing obvious justifying the sentiment beyond US trade dementia

Great that they are casting Brits, and filming here too. Looking forward to Nick Frost as Hagrid.

Yeah, underpinning retail sales is exactly right, a whole new generation of potential readers.

I recently read the first Sarah J Maas title, and can see why she is compared to Rowling, but it's quite different in character and sentiment.

Very cinematic though.

I think what you all may have overlooked is that group finance director Penny Scott-Bayfield is stepping down. She has been a major player in the company's success and it's a big loss. Nevertheless, she leaves the business in superb shape, and I trust them to find a worthy successor.

"Calling me names only goes to show how clueless you are"

But errorTwit, you started the name-calling with "Armchair warriors", remember?

You've labelled yourself as clueless, while also being hypocritical and slow witted. Hat trick.

There is no real moral to this story. The technology has substance, it wasn't a bad investment idea. It just didn't work out. Yet.

Those are possible Shark, but all I've seen reported are comments like "Proceeds from the IPO are expected to support product development, technological upgrades, and regulatory expansion into new markets." (from Business Tech Africa). Nothing about shareholders, all about business growth. When Airtel Africa itself was IPOd, the owners of parent company Airtel (India) retained the majority of the shares, and still do, so we won't have any say in it and are probably not a major concern.

I hope small shareholders are treated fairly, but it's possible that they get fobbed off with an offer of slightly discounted shares, or something similar, i.e. invest more or effectively get diluted. AA's balance sheet and prospects will be different when the Money division leaves, there will be some market adjustment.

The IPO has been shunted to July 2026 but could easily get delayed again in the current turbulent environment. It feels like a bold move into a separate market sector with different challenges. Management are probably right to be cautious.

Ah, I see, you found the quotation of total assets, as well as the current assets, to be nonsensical. If you'd said that specifically, it would have avoided confusion. I was merely quoting published figures to compare against your assessment because it isn't clear where you got your numbers from. So you are, in fact, making a comparison between the value of assets and the SP? It would be clearer, again, if you simply confirmed that that is what you were doing, because it isn't obvious from the way you've framed your calculation. The reason your "49% " phrase seems opaque is because it doesn't seem to be applied logically. It's surely easier to answer the question, asked in good faith, than to attack the enquirer.

"Comparing market value to total assets is nonsensical. "

I assumed your post was a reponse to Countach's (the SP is a fraction of assets). If you thought that was nonsensical, why did you respond with an assessment of assets? Genuinely puzzled by your calculation, and you don't seem willing, or perhaps, able, to explain it. The phrase "The value of the 49% still held" is particularly opaque. The fact that the SP is lower than the sum of assets seems at least some indication that it is undervalued, rather than nonsense, since assets obviously have a value?

Don't understand your calc. Assets were listed at £76.6m in December. Current assets were £37.9m. Mcap indicates the market expects very slow growth here, probably based on sales persistently lagging expectations .

Retiring non-exec with a very interesting CV. His wisdom will be hard to replace

They are planning this spinoff company in 2026 via IPO. What are the benefits to shareholders of this restructuring?

"The company said the advisory vote on the directors' remuneration report was not passed at the annual general meeting on Thursday. 52% of votes were cast against the adoption of the report.

The re-appointment of Chair Jamie Pike was passed with 22% votes cast against, while the authority for directors to allot shares up to two-thirds of issued share capital was passed with 25% votes cast against."

They clearly are not aligned with shareholders. Their shocking self remuneration is astonishing in light of performance. Anything short of going out of business altogether seems to result in extraordinarily generous bonuses and rewards for one particular group.

As I understand it, corporate brokers have a variety of services, but the main one seems to be the provision of positively slanted research, aimed at raising the companies profile. The new Berenberg team presumably adds something which the existing Investec brokers couldn't provide. Not sure what the cost/benefit is of having two teams. Management apparently see no need to justify it in any way

Everyone's costs will increase, so again, what's the relevance? I've tried to highlight some factors you appear to be missing. The main one is that high growth shares are valued differently

What do you mean by "NLW & NI " and what is the relevance to the value of the share price?

The flatness of YOY is due to an exceptional previous year caused by sensational success of one author, it was recognized at the time as exceptional and not expected to be repeated. Before that there were many years of continuous growth. Ambitious expansion into the American market suggests that growth is set to continue.

"the romers that DT is going to create an app"

In all the years of LSE, it's hard to think of a less intelligent comment. The man is a convicted fraudster who has a terrible business record. He doesn't do apps, and nothing he says can be relied upon, let alone "romers". Witness recent remarks about the cause of death outside one of his hotels - made up lies based on nothing, which were instantly shown to be false. In fact, one of his own supporters was the perpetrator - that's the sort of person spreading these "romers".

Stick to facts, please, this isn't a fiction workshop

Can't decide whether the deal over the Spanish subsidiary was a good move or not. The market seems to be expressing doubts. On the one hand, it potentially gives access to absolutely huge markets and hands over non-core issues to someone else. Also, the money spent on acquiring Albyn has been more or less recouped, while retaining 49% - that acquisition looks fantastic with hindsight, it generated much needed cash, from the start, and now provides another essential boost of liquidity. That encourages faith in the management of CREO. On the other hand, we've lost control of a lot of distribution and marketing decisions - not necessarily bad, but worth considering. Also, China is notorious for stealing technology and for a lack of transparency. Most Chinese companies are ultimately owned or controlled by the communist party, which has no functioning system of justice or morality. In Chinese courts, foreign companies are routinely shafted. So, maybe the decision will result in a smaller slice of a bigger cake? And perhaps we should just be grateful that the company is taking aggressive action to chase down markets for what look like world-leading products.

The Canadian invesment bank has trimmed from just under 11% (based on voting rights) to just under 10% - see rns for more details.

Beware of automated sites which have disastrous coding errors, and consequently spread highly misleading information: https://www.tipranks.com/news/company-announcements/canaccord-genuity-ups-stake-in-creo-medical

Appears to be research funded by Bloomsbury, therefore likely to take a favourable slant?

Nevertheless, the high quality basic factual information is greatly illuminating. What stands out for me is the observation of considerable potential for expanding margins in the academic sector - this is a clear pathway to long term growth in revenue. The recent acquisition even offers short term potential in this area. This underpins their remarkably upbeat comment "The current valuation remains relatively undemanding for such a quality track record"