Member Info for bluerill

(Bloomberg) -- Investec reinstated coverage of Invinity Energy Systems Plc with a recommendation of buy.
PT set to 125 pence, implies a 26% increase from last price. Invinity Energy Systems average PT is 125 pence.
Targets range from 125 pence to 1,000 pence
Invinity Energy Systems had 1 buy, 0 holds, 0 sells previously: Bloomberg data

I know I'm sounding a hypocrite, but my advice to you Alfa is, Don't take the bait. Of course you will want to treat this as a legitimate query from a genuine interlocutor. You will then be tempted to explain, 'Actually Yellow, the question itself is misguided, even misleading, a red herring. Right now, the potential opportunity here is so substantial that there is plenty of room for multiple competitors. Rather, the most important thing right now, by far, is 'proof of concept', ie., getting flow established as a legitimate alternative to Li-Ion - getting the technology to critical mass in the market, if you will - so having a mega-cap player like Sumitomo committing time and capital to it is massively beneficial to that end, and therefore will necessarily benefit EVERYONE, particularly the early-market leaders like IES, who will in fact, likely benefit disproportionately. And furthermore, even after accruing those early-mover rents, IES is very unlikely to have to compete directly with a Sumitomo as the latter must necessarily focus on mega-projects in order to move the profitability needle while IES can (and already is) focus on smaller, more bespoke projects while nicking the occasional role in a large-scale project as well.....' You'll explain all that in good faith, Alfa, but all you are likely to get in return is some version of, 'oh yeah, well, how can you be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN of all that? And if you can't be ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN, then you must be wrong....' Or maybe crickets. But won't you won't get, guaranteed, is any useful return on your contribution.

The endless question of whether this is a genuine stakeholder who is simply drowning in a pool of his own bile, or a tiny creature who lives under a bridge and gets off winding people up (and is maybe even paid for the effort) is moot, honestly. Engaging with 'someone' like this, as I admittedly have, is always ever going to be, at best, a circular effort with no desirable outcomes. He/it makes some snarky, ignorant comment about how the market doesn't seem to be 'buying the story' bc the share price isn't moving higher at some moment in time, I respond that, well, actually it has moved quite a bit from the lows and since the update, etc, he then counter-responds that I'm some sort of egomaniac, implying that I'm taking credit for the move and, oh by the way, that gain may not be sustainable, so who cares about the share price right now anyway, thereby completely contradicting his original premise, leaving you wanting to strangle something. Whether 'real' or not, posters like this Yellow character are mobius strips of empty rhetoric, unable or unwilling to concede a point or recognise an error. Avoid

you're an empty barrel. End of

Share trades through a quid. Price is now up the better part of 20% - a bit fitfully I admit - since the update, doubled+ since I first started posting altogether. I'd say that's a pretty reasonable endorsement of my measured, careful view expressed here. Meantime, yellow, you and your bitter, shameless dissembling can well and truly kiss my shiny white bum. Bluerill out.

It's not my intention to keep referencing my own posts, but this is getting a little weird. I highlighted this podcast extensively Monday, (which is easier to get this way: https://soundcloud.com/user-596578261/vsa-capital-podcast-episode-37-larry-zulch-matt-harper-invinity-energy-systems) : '....Listen to the podcast closely. Outside the obvious good news on orders, lower-than-feared C19 impact and a very persuasive (and familiar-sounding!) narrative on the future of flow within the sector, I think Larry and Matt (and the moderator) are trying to not-so-subtly guide the market on sexier, shorter-term items like new business wins and especially, co-operation (or something more intimate) with industrial giants. Even if retail investors remain stubbornly rooted in an 'I'll believe it when I see it' mentality - which is entirely understandable - I do think today's update will resonate with institutions which, as I've mentioned a number of times, have been pouring money into this space, often using a shotgun rather than a rifle, since many concede they can not yet separate completely the winners from the losers so a portfolio approach is often essential.

Alfa, ha! Obviously, it's nearly impossible to ever say what might act as THE spark that finally ignites the dry tinder that is a deep-value share such as this one. One thing I would say however, is that the type of institutional investor that is typically attracted to a name like this at this moment in its trading history tends to be a smart generalist, very much like Andy Brough at Schroeders, our leading institutional shareholder at the moment. A go-live announcement on a development project like in Dalian is exactly the sort of 'inflection' point that can trigger them to act.

Thanks for that, Alfa. Of course I was joking about the footnote credit; I only responded that way out of excitement. I believe sincerely that RELATIVE (under)valuation versus the broader sector is the most crucial factor that will drive this share price for the near-term at least, and likely longer. The thesis is that, even after this bounce, the Company's enterprise value remains so materially distressed relative to still consistently unprofitable comps (even vs AFC since IES is much further in delivering product) that institutional investors will - especially after yesterday's 'proof of life' update - find the severe undervaluation too compelling to ignore and just one or 2 reasonable, longer-term investors are likely to set off a significant repricing of the shares. I addressed the pointy end of this argument yesterday in a 2nd post imploring serious shareholders to again listen carefully to the VSA podcast: '...I do think today's update will resonate with institutions which, as I've mentioned a number of times, have been pouring money into this space, often using a shotgun rather than a rifle, since many concede they can not yet separate completely the winners from the losers so a portfolio approach is often essential....' Meantime, here is my most complete post on the subject from late May:

Meantime26 May 2020 13:15
The general sector, writ large, is kind of on fire - again - led by ITM, which has regained all its C19-related correction and is taking out at least 10 year highs, up 17%. Ceres up 6% as well. This sort of thing matters and I'm pretty sure that's what's getting our share price moving at the moment. As I've said previously, we don't really need news just yet to get this share price back towards the placement price of 80p equivalent (or higher) - which was already a severely distressed price - if the already massively valued market leaders by size, like ITM and Ceres, are seeing this type of ambitious buying. IES is then likely to benefit as its enterprise value relative to those sort of names is ridiculously diminished, which I believe is what's happening. The capital raise, the very complementary merger, the improved quality of the management team, the focus on a full-court press sales effort, and the Bushveld investment/supply deal, constituted more than enough good news to get us moving from the suspension price in the first place. This is just a delayed reaction in many ways. Maybe we do get an RNS or 2 soon, but I never thought we needed it to see a material bounce, and this is now playing out.

omg, seriously? I have written a series of posts on this subject from the May lows in the share price onwards, which included an unfortunate one where I got the market cap of AFC all wrong.

Wait a second, alfa, I thought you were an academic. How about, you know, at least a footnote credit for referencing my original work?

don't be short....

....but the market continues to reflect its huge disappointment in yesterday's actually-terrible-update-deceitfully-presented-as-early-contract-success-and-post-merger-synergies-despite-tough-market-conditions by taking the share price higher (the ultimate rejection by the market in the upside-down) on light volume. What an utter disgrace!

Bidding maybe not, but the Group will be all over it for sure

Listen to the podcast closely. Outside the obvious good news on orders, lower-than-feared C19 impact and a very persuasive (and familiar-sounding!) narrative on the future of flow within the sector, I think Larry and Matt (and the moderator) are trying to not-so-subtly guide the market on sexier, shorter-term items like new business wins and especially, co-operation (or something more intimate) with industrial giants. Even if retail investors remain stubbornly rooted in an 'I'll believe it when I see it' mentality - which is entirely understandable - I do think today's update will resonate with institutions which, as I've mentioned a number of times, have been pouring money into this space, often using a shotgun rather than a rifle, since many concede they can not yet separate completely the winners from the losers so a portfolio approach is often essential.

useful follow-up on the update:
https://soundcloud.com/user-596578261/vsa-capital-podcast-episode-37-larry-zulch-matt-harper-invinity-energy-systems

Expect some aggressive marketing of the story on the back of this update

You do realise you're making common cause with a troll with an agenda, right?

Um, in a word: no. I made a silly error which confused exactly no one while providing shareholders useful information on their dividend worries. You on the other hand, thought it necessary to bring into the world a post with no evident purpose other than pointing out that silly mistake in such a way as to try and embarrass me and I guess, pump up your damaged ego in the process. Classy.

Ok. I'm going to try this one more. San Leon have paid the full amount of the dividend proceeds a month ago. Those proceeds were disbursed to an INTERMEDIARY like Compuserve. This is how dividend disbursement is often done, particularly for small companies, particularly ones that are not yet paying regular dividends. The very idea that a small company like San Leon would go through the administrative nightmare of trying to confirm exactly how many shares are held in custody at which financial institution and then manage a cash disbursement to scores of them, is patently ridiculous. That's why there are firms like Compuserve that specialise in this activity, and ALWAYS HAVE. As I have explained several times now: if you have not yet received your dividend payment, it is either down to teething problems between your broker and the intermediary or just a general lack of prioritisation for small shareholders at now chronically understaffed brokerage firms in the UK; i.e., NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH SAN LEON. ZERO. NADA. p.s.: the email posted below is therefore either: 1. bogus; or 2. more likely written by a moron at HL who doesn't understand the first thing about back office activities and since learning about such things does not pay his bills, he makes no effort to do so. Instead he does some perfunctory telephone calls so he can write an email back to his pain-in-butt client who won't stop pestering him about some stupid dividend (this is what your broker is thinking ALWAYS when he has to check on something like this. Don't blame the messenger), that blames the Company in the hopes that his client is too uniformed to realise its a nonsense.

'...How is it some have received the dividend?.... I'm sorry, but is that a serious question?