Member Info for bluerill

Jesus. Isn't there some kind of 'You Must Be This Sane to Post Here' minimum? This muppet is so consumed by anger and jealousy that I think he even puts paragraph breaks where they aren't needed just so he can pretend like his gobbledygook ramblings can look like real posts. Spoiler alert: they aren't

I absolutely agree. Unfortunately, I left the word 'before' from my post as in I have never threatened anyone 'before'. I am most definitely threatening someone this time. Bad moment for you finally to get something right

Like being attacked by a horny squirrel. One thing out of your latest upchuck Scout though: not only have I not threatened anyone here (you must have been thinking of yourself again), I don't think I have ever come close to it in any platform. What your yellow friend did is potentially very serious and if he bothers to try and learn something for a change, he'll see I'm right.

And furthermore, yellow, you're not just a bitter egoist, but an ignorant one. Your post is largely all stuff and nonsense, but your ignorance is now starting to border on libellous. I don't even know what a paid ramper is, but it doesn't apply to anyone I know, least of all me, and I'm pretty sure that if I were secretly a company executive posting anonymously on a poxy message board, I would be breaking any number of of corporate regulations, if not criminal ones. So, since I know you don't want me to successfully have you removed from this board for intentional mendacity - what else would you do with your miserable life after all? - I would respectfully suggest you read a book on the stock market and watch your 'tongue'. Because I may not be paid promoter or company insider, I am a significant shareholder and I'm allergic to your particular kind of malignant hypocrisy.

vraiment.....

FB, you are more right than you realise. Larry is the most promising small company CEO I've ever met at this stage of its development. The merged company is brimming with relevant technology expertise, starting of course with Matt Harper himself, whose experience in the industry is unimpeachable, and is basically Larry's COO and partner. For a small company, R&D is well staffed and funded. What the company needs most now - what shareholders are begging for - is an experienced businessman in the top seat who can really organise a multi-market sales effort and CLOSE BUSINESS. IES has enviable geographic reach and the best product offering in a nascent industry. It needs execution execution execution, not necessarily more product innovation, and Larry Zulch is the ideal profile to lead the merged company. Getting the equity placement away into the teeth of the C19 market meltdown, closing it literally on the worst day for world stock markets, was nothing short of a miracle, and it was almost entirely down to the strength of Larry's and Matt's presentation and vision for the company. This is such a needless, ridiculous debate started by someone who just cannot look beyond his investment failure to date and instead insists on continuing to casually toss out silly claims just because he thinks he's earned the right somehow. I had absolutely no interest in writing this type of post, but this guy's sense of entitlement to toss out nonsense is a bit triggering I admit. If Yellow's simplistic idea (as ever, I don't know wtf Scout's on about) of what constitute's the 'right' background for someone to run a tech company were remotely accurate, somebody should run and tell Mark Zuckerberg in a hurry because I don't see M.I.T. or coding anywhere in Sheryl Sandberg's CV.

Q.E.D. Let's try and move on everyone
Just one more little item though: 'long-term holder' is not a thing. The simple act of having owned a losing share over a longer period (which includes me, but never mind that right now), doesn't magically bestow upon the sufferer some kind of elevated status worthy of a capitalised abbreviation that then inoculates him from criticism or even, yes, mockery. Sadly, there is also no greater likelihood of wisdom or insight deriving from that extended misery either. I think I'm like most everyone else, thank-you very much: I'll have a go at whomever I reckon deserves it, and I tend to lean towards the irrationally angry, puffed-up bullies and the downright nasty for starters, whether or not they are 'LTHs'.

Um.....ok.... Listen, when the grown-up work of trying to make money is done and there's more time for trivia, could someone who's been around here a bit longer run some this raving lunatic's posts through a crap weasel-to-english translator and give me some idea what he's trying to say please?

thankyou Squadron for playing interference. Scout, I admit I don't like you. I'm repelled by your proud ignorance, your irrational, misguided and misplaced anger, your insane and completely inappropriate accusations, but for all that I was trying to help to get your thinking straightened out and of course in the process, make this board just a little bit more productive. I can see now that I can only focus on the latter; the former is geometrically impossible.

this is getting a bit silly

Ok, so the shares have now bounced the better part of 100% in less than a week. Anything can happen from here of course - most likely a significant market correction - but I would also like to take this opportunity to highlight to certain people in particular, that this massive move was more than a fluke and more importantly, not necessarily (as I said yesterday) the result of leaked news (though I do expect the company to provide at the very least a general operational update sooner rather than later, and I admit, that if that update doesn't include some sexy talk re closing on real business that we will no doubt fall back some), but in part because the shares simply fell far too much RELATIVE TO REAL MARKET FACTORS THAT GENUINELY MATTER BUT ARE SO OFTEN UNDER-RECOGNISED OFTEN BY SMALL SHAREHOLDERS WHEN SHARES ARE IN FREE-FALL. Of these factors, I have focused until now primarily on the simplicity of IES's enterprise value relative to the market leaders, which was (and is still) patently ludicrous based on one of the most basic principles in markets: risk/reward. I'm sorry, but in no known universe, at its most basic, was the risk inherent in IES 50-75x greater than the diverse collection of Li ion names with which we are all familiar (now its more like 35-50x, but its still ludicrous). Some can hold their breath and stamp their feet, shout 'show me the money', and most of all, bang on endlessly about corporate history and the sins of 'Scotty', but this bounce demonstrates the dangers of that kind of narrow thinking. The message here: IES may not have a future, but it definitely has a present and that present, IN THIS MARKET (e.g., some very smart people backed a fundraise just weeks ago at a still higher price. Some on this board may have forgotten that, but I assure you, whoever's behind this move in the share price has not), that present was worth a lot more than £20m, now £35m. Let's see what the company has to say, hopefully soon. It may just be the proof of life everyone desires.

Nice sized raise from Ceres Power, around £50m for the £800m company, at roughly a 10% discount to last night's close. Apparently there was significant demand so the deal was upsized. For me a small positive here as it demonstrates continued strong interest in the general sector at a time where it is not easy to raise money in other industries.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/20/google-ai-greenpeace-oil-gas.html

but I told you so......

I'm sorry, gkb, I really don't want to fight with someone else, but this is just not true. There is no such thing as the 'City' 'looking after' some arbitrary investor and 'manufacturing' a rise in the share price of a company like Invinity to help him out of a loss-making position from a placing. That is a type of fever dream that persists, unfortunately, with a lot of small shareholders even today. There may well be an announcement tomorrow, and it may have leaked, and someone may well have bought some shares into that leak - that does still happen I guess - but again it is rare enough to dismiss out of hand. World equity markets were up 4/5% today and thus many, many, many, many names like IES - ones that have suffered massive falls from a combination of poor fundamentals, investor indifference in light of active selling especially after the C19 crisis, and small cap illiquidity in a post-Woodford world (there's that word again), but nevertheless do not have immediate cash needs and have a potentially viable business model - had 10/20/30% rallies today all over the place. There is nothing unusual here, except that in among that type of buying there MAY (there's THAT word again) well be a few punters who are seeing it my way and rather than KNOWING there is some kind of contract signing TOMORROW, are instead taking the view that at 40p the shares already reflect a hell of lot of execution risk and so buying them down here is a fabulously valued call option on the POSSIBILITY of some those contracts being signed in the near FUTURE. If so, I reckon that type of buyer could well back tomorrow. We'll see.....

Couple of comments here, Rich: Firstly, there is a tendency for some to treat message boards as a kind of free group therapy, where screaming into the void is prioritised by some, very much akin to other social media like Twitter. This is particularly common with smaller companies that have fallen materially like this one. With that backdrop then, time served/money lost over a longer time period becomes a kind of permission slip for credibility. Posters like scooter start to believe that if you haven't suffered and are then obsessed with only with past mistakes, you are somehow suspect. But that's a bit fluffy and maybe a bit mean (true, but mean). Here's the meat: what posters like scooter and yellow end up with is an immunity to logical contradiction which results in an inability to reason with them. Look at this little section that ended Scooter's latest rant: '....MIGHT, IF, COULD, MAY... all the words of a chancer wanting a spike and a get out....' Now, I'm guessing he felt pretty strongly about this point on account of the all-caps, but I hope others can see how spectacularly illogical his thinking and therefore his conclusion is: One, if 'might, if, could, may' didn't exist, the stock market would die. Period. Share prices have ALWAYS been part 'what have you done for me yesterday' AND part what 'might/if/could/may you do in the future', and more important, I spent the better part of the rest of my post explaining that might/if/could/may is a very big part of the $1B++ valuations of the other names I mentioned. Sure redt/ies 'deserves' to be down a lot, but the massive valuations in so many other names in a related space, that are more 'successful' but nevertheless are still unprofitable, perhaps argues that redt/IES's deserved fall shouldn't be 97% over that period, but something a bit less severe. After all, it could triple from here and still be down over 90%! Which brings me to Yellow's typically dismissive response, which likewise contradicts itself. Simply put, if there isn't a 'reason' for today's move (and I don't think there is; the market was so strong today, the buying even reached names like IES, but I do think the quantum of the move contained some of my thinking. All you need is one decent insto to follow Andy Brough in at these distressed levels to get a 2/3 bagger after all), Yellow again dismisses it out of hand as down to illiquidity, the fact that just a few thousand shares are needed to create a big move. Well, ok, but it seems that logic only applies for him on the downside. In fact, today's volume of near-100k was a decent multiple of the regular, TINY daily volume over the past few weeks that has seen the share price collapse further. Where was Yellow's defence of the shares based on how little volume it took to cause that move? If I had been here then, I certainly would have made that point and urged patience. Would he have supported my view? Somehow I doubt it.

couple of missed words: 'I don't think it was MY buying....' '.....including several who invested with ME in the placing....'

god scooter, you're in worse shape than I thought. What you don't understand about markets is a lot. As for you yellow, i don't think it was buying, but I am making the case to a lot of different sized investors, including several who invested with in the placing. It's primarily the crazy rally in all world markets today, but maybe I have indeed played a small role. Again, listen and learn and in the process you might have a chance to disengage from your bitter obsession with past mistakes, disappointments and losses. This is what i meant about trying to help guide you. You (and scooter obviously, but he/she is waaay too far gone. there's still hope for you) are stuck on the wrong track, facing in the wrong direction. You can try and pretend otherwise, but I'm right. Simple as

holy crap. i'm a genius

Very much in that spirit, let me try and double back to what I wrote last week and something back in March. I know I'm gonna put the cat among the pigeons, but I've bought a few today and friday, and it's apparent that there is not much stock around down here. No shock there. However, the other reason we're bouncing is a point I made in March when I posted a few times on the Redt board (guess my paid posting didn't just start last week); namely that Ceres and ITM are once again on fire and while I'm quite aware of the relative progress of hydrogen v vanadium flow, neither of those UK standard bearers is anywhere near profitable, yet they boast £1b+ market caps, making a risk-reward mockery of our £8m! That is why what I wrote in my penultimate post below is so important: Whether some like it or not, this company is priced at such distressed levels - PARTICULARLY against even quasi-peers - it simply doesn't matter where the Oxford hub may be located or whether Redt or Avalon kit will be used there, or any other issue one might debate for a larger, established firm. Frankly, as I hinted previously, ranting about the 'importance' of such things amounts to little more than intellectual w*nking right now. What matters right now and for the foreseeable future are events like the California Energy Commission tenders and whether IES might win $5/6m piece of that business. If it does, along with some articulation from the company about current efforts to close on other order business, etc, and this share price will surge and could easily end up a multiple of the current price. The punters buying ITM or Ceres - or Ballard Power or Plug in the US for that matter - don't have the first clue about the immediate financial or order book prospects of those companies - for heaven's sake Ballard has been around for 30-odd years and has never made a bean, yet it still sports a $2b market cap - what they're buying into mainly is the macro story and the conviction that at least SOME of these companies will be the winners. And its latter part of that sentence that is the key here: the market has decided that battery storage is here to stay, but while the winners are being decided, enough investors are prepared to bet on ALL of those companies, sufficient to take them to massive valuations; ie., all IES need do (and I realise its still a big ask) is get to the point where the market believes it MAY, not WILL, have a place in the sector's future and the shares will literally fly, because well, they would have to close part of that yawning valuation gap very quickly. After a period focused on that and some price consolidation, THEN certain people can come back and battle about hub locations and logistical concerns. Right now however, and for the next several months, the focus must necessarily be on moving from walking on our knuckles to getting upright and not with running marathons.