Member Info for cielo102

I am suprised this has not been picked up by some of the fans of MONI If they can declare a decent profit in a few weeks I am sure the profile is going to jump with the share price.

Thursday 10 November, 2011 Hirco plc New Valuation and Projects Update RNS Number : 8631R Hirco plc 10 November 2011  News Release 10 November, 2011 Announcement of New Valuation and Projects Update LONDON - Hirco PLC (AIM: HRCO), ("Hirco" or the "Company"), announces that CBRE has valued Hirco's Indian property investments as at 30 September 2011 at £343m. The £343m figure comprises the Panvel development, which CBRE has valued at £217m, and the Chennai development, which CBRE has valued at £126m. As at the last valuation date of 30 September 2010, Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL) had valued Panvel at £404m and Chennai at £420m for a total of £824m at current exchange rates. As previously announced, because JLL had valued Hirco's property assets since Hirco's initial public offering in 2006, the Board has considered it timely to periodically rotate valuers. Accordingly JLL was replaced by CBRE this past summer. The CBRE valuation report is available on the Company's website and can be accessed by contacting the Company Secretary, Mr. Nigel McGowan (details below). Because of the magnitude of the difference between the CBRE and JLL valuation figures, Hirco's board has offered the projects' developer, Hirco Developments Private Ltd. ("HDPL"), the opportunity to provide a comprehensive analysis of the CBRE report. To date, however, this analysis has not been forthcoming. Hirco's Board expects to take the CBRE valuation (and any response from HDPL) into consideration in preparing its Directors' valuation to be included in Hirco's annual report and accounts for the year ended 30 September 2011. This may result in a substantial write down to Hirco's assets. Hirco currently anticipates that its year end accounts will be released no later than 31 December 2011. The principal reasons for the difference between the CBRE and JLL valuation figures are substantial differences in assumptions, in particular: (i) CBRE has used a weighted average cost of capital of 24.4% for Panvel and 29.6% for Chennai while JLL used a cost of capital of 13% for both projects; (ii) CBRE has estimated completion of Panvel in 2024 and Chennai in 2027 while JLL had estimated completion for both projects in 2020; and (iii) CBRE estimated higher build costs and lower sale prices than JLL, especially in connection with the projected sale prices of Chennai residential space and Panvel office space. CBRE has also raised questions about the optimal product mix in connection with the Panvel and Chennai projects and is of the view that changing the product mix would substantially increase their value. As Panvel and Chennai have zoning approval for close to 100 million square feet of development, which may take in excess of twenty-five years to complete, relatively small changes in assumptions can result in large differences in present value. Pr

sorry

Great news this morning. A lot of pluses here. The company said last year that 2011 income is guaranteed, they are speaking to several potential bidders. They have very long term contracts. No customer has made any statement about the service or lack of and ASTO themselves have said that they are trading normally

So could this be the week. I expected first week in June.

I apologise to those who have seen this before. It was posted some time ago on iii. However, for anyone new to the board it will make interesting reading. Our market cap today is just 41m ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Three British offshore project sales in 2008 demonstrate the increase in value as development progresses, says Joel Staadecker, CEO of independent developer SeaEnergy Renewables. He points out that developer Fluor sold its 50% stake in the post-consent 504MW Greater Gabbard project off Suffolk in the east of England to its joint venture partner SSE for £40 million, including development costs, in May 2008 — a value of £157,000/MW to be installed. At financial close in November that year when all the contracting was completed, SSE re-sold the 50% project share to RWE for £143 million, or £567,000/MW. Meantime, Vattenfall had bought the 150MW Ormonde project in the north Irish Sea just prior to financial close for £340,000/MW. Assets: 920MW Beatrice (75% Airtricity SSE, 25% SeaEnergy) = 230 MW 905MW Inch Cape (100% SeaEnergy) = 905 MW 1,500 MW Moray Firth (75% EDPR & 25% SeaEnergy) = 375 MW TOTAL TO SEA = 1,510 MW Benchmark examples: Fluour – Greater Gabbard – POST CONSENT - £157,000/MW VATTENFALL – Ormonde – FINANCIAL CLOSE - £340,000/MW SSE – Greater Gabbard – PRE-CONSTRUCTION - £567,000/MW Potential sale value of SERL (based purely on MW price) POST CONSENT - 1,510 MW x £157,000/MW = £237M FINANCIAL CLOSE – 1,510 MW x £340,000/MW = £513M PRE-CONSTRUCTION – 1,510 MW x £567,000/MW = £856M SERL's UK developments are timetabled to reach the 'post-consent' stage in 2013. It will cost around £50m to take the assets to 'pre-construction' stage. So SERL will be worth around £200m based on assets alone in 2013 and that value will more than quadruple by 2018. That is not including the value of anything that may come to fruition in Taiwan or indeed the industry leading expertise of the Beatrice team. The big question is - what is it worth to the buyer in March 2011? If it will be worth £157,000 per MW in 2013 - here are some possible values per MW now and there effect on the SERL valuation: £10,000 x 1,510MW = £15m £25,000 x 1,510MW = £37m £50,000 x 1,510MW = £75m £75,000 x 1,510MW = £113m These are simply scenarios based on the per MW price.

Unfortunately perhaps the directors are getting what they deserve by burying their bad news over the weekend. These can now be bought at 7.02p. Oversold?

Can you please explain what you mean regarding gravy train and being suspicious of motives?

I see on their website that they are now offering law degrees from Birmingham University. Looking good.

Nice big buy just gone through

http://cyberpost-seaenergy.angelfire.com/BrokerNotes/Nomura/2010.04.20_NOMURA_CODE_Initiatian_20th_April_2010.pdf

bargain?

I am sure they will both come good in time. However AEC moves on every single trade and it is way undervalued. What I like is the assurance of cash equaling valuation whilst the core market grows at 14% pa. Like NTBR the forthcoming results will not sound fantastic ie £250,000 loss. But if you look a littlle deeper they look really promising. Education in the far east is certainly not a bad place to be: as indicated by their turnover growth

Trading Update RNS Number : 5442E Northern Bear Plc 08 April 2011  8 April 2011 Northern Bear PLC ("Northern Bear" or the "Company") Trading Update As a result of the severe weather conditions in November and December 2010, the Company traded below market expectations. Trading conditions improved in January, and activity has increased further since that time. Whilst March was a very positive month, the markedly improved environment has not been sufficient to enable the Company to trade in line with market expectations. As a result, the Board expects profit for the year ending 31 March 2011 to be below market expectations. **ENDS**

Lemmink I agree with you regarding the undervaluation here. I was tempted to add more a couple of days ago. I am in here at 24p. However, decided on AEC education. £3m market cap, with £3m cash. £8m net assets, turnover £17m and core business growing at 14%. with only 9m shares the price moves on every transaction.

The last trading update was 13th December 2010. Turnover is up to 17m from 14m the year before (was 5m the year before that). They note that their core business is growing at 14% per year. They also have very healthy cash reserves of 3m. They will declare a loss of 250k. This is due the the integration of their new language school. Since the end of the year they have been reorganising this school and increasing its marketing overseas. They have virtually no debt and net assets of 8m Whilst their Language school may have suffered from govt policy on student numbers they do enjoy "highly trusted sponsor" status with the UK government. This, and their large client base in the far east will, I hope, help maintain student numbers at Malvern house. Take a look at their singapore website http://www.aec.edu.sg/index.php to get an idea of how they are growing. They are creating lots of links with UK universities and offering courses ranging from Law, to MBAs to English. Surely this is a bargain at 20p?

What more need I say

I apologise to those who have seen this before. However, for anyone new to the board it will make interesting reading. Our market cap today is just 28m ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Three British offshore project sales in 2008 demonstrate the increase in value as development progresses, says Joel Staadecker, CEO of independent developer SeaEnergy Renewables. He points out that developer Fluor sold its 50% stake in the post-consent 504MW Greater Gabbard project off Suffolk in the east of England to its joint venture partner SSE for £40 million, including development costs, in May 2008 — a value of £157,000/MW to be installed. At financial close in November that year when all the contracting was completed, SSE re-sold the 50% project share to RWE for £143 million, or £567,000/MW. Meantime, Vattenfall had bought the 150MW Ormonde project in the north Irish Sea just prior to financial close for £340,000/MW. Assets: 920MW Beatrice (75% Airtricity SSE, 25% SeaEnergy) = 230 MW 905MW Inch Cape (100% SeaEnergy) = 905 MW 1,500 MW Moray Firth (75% EDPR & 25% SeaEnergy) = 375 MW TOTAL TO SEA = 1,510 MW Benchmark examples: Fluour – Greater Gabbard – POST CONSENT - £157,000/MW VATTENFALL – Ormonde – FINANCIAL CLOSE - £340,000/MW SSE – Greater Gabbard – PRE-CONSTRUCTION - £567,000/MW Potential sale value of SERL (based purely on MW price) POST CONSENT - 1,510 MW x £157,000/MW = £237M FINANCIAL CLOSE – 1,510 MW x £340,000/MW = £513M PRE-CONSTRUCTION – 1,510 MW x £567,000/MW = £856M SERL's UK developments are timetabled to reach the 'post-consent' stage in 2013. It will cost around £50m to take the assets to 'pre-construction' stage. So SERL will be worth around £200m based on assets alone in 2013 and that value will more than quadruple by 2018. That is not including the value of anything that may come to fruition in Taiwan or indeed the industry leading expertise of the Beatrice team. The big question is - what is it worth to the buyer in March 2011? If it will be worth £157,000 per MW in 2013 - here are some possible values per MW now and there effect on the SERL valuation: £10,000 x 1,510MW = £15m £25,000 x 1,510MW = £37m £50,000 x 1,510MW = £75m £75,000 x 1,510MW = £113m These are simply scenarios based on the per MW price.

I agree easy money. 75% of mine is in this. It is not often that I feel there is very little downside. Surely they will get 50m for what they are offering.

Just out of interest. where did you here this romour. An employee? A competitor? Who?