Member Info for Clenchedcheeks

All LUCY do is raise.

Sooner or later they're going to have to generate some income from sales if they wish to grow

How much money have they gone through!

This is where the TEK model fails. Instead of releasing a substantial sum at float when the share price was almost 5 dollars, we're now left with a gnats at 24 cents. The exact same has happened with BELL.

What is the point of funding companies through the pre and post float stages if you're not making a profit.

Your mention of faulty products would explain a lot Concept. Is it fact or based on rumour?

No more than a vanity project which has consumed thousands of pounds pre-float and a few million post float. They've never even got close to making a profit.

You need an experienced CEO or someone with a huge cash stake of their own running the company, not someone with little to show on their CV being handed it as a learning experience at the expense of others.

LUCY is a fine example of great ideas not making great businesses. I still see people walking around talking to their phones because they're not even aware that smart glasses exist. They need massive promotional spends, not brand ambassadors that few people have heard of. If it were Beckham (not that I'm a fan), it would be a different story.

I agree entirely re accountability.

I'm a long term TEK shareholder (but that's another story) and I felt that BELL was one of two companies that had global potential. Perhaps there were early warning signs with the prolonged delays when they were seeking FDA approval for X-PLOR but once secured with some money in the bank from their float, I thought it would be a simple matter of selling their product and being paid within a certain period of invoicing, or even using invoice discounting if cash flow was tight. After all, COVID had increased their potential market massively.

They seemed to have the orders, so why couldn't they convert them into cash? What has gone wrong?

I personally think those at the top should step aside, be content with the money that they've earned to date and let others who are better qualified for the task in hand, take the company forward.

I agree with Lord. LUCY has swallowed cash, BELL have a great product but haven't been able to make it work financially thus far and as a result TEK are sitting on little shareholder value. To think that BELL was worth £1.36 at one point and we're now left with a fraction. It's shocking.

Many will fear the same with SALT which is probably our best hope in the near term. If TEK don't extract shareholder value from that product then we shareholders will have well and truly had our leg lifted.

Our shareholdings in both LUCY and BELL will currently be worth less than our marketing and development spend to bring them to market. What sticks in my throat is that Belluscura seemed to have a great product offering. Do the individuals running the company have the skill set to do so. The same applies to LUCY.

How much has been spent on that Guident RMCC? I'm sure they've raised a substantial sum for it previously.

Seriously two steps forward and three back with TEK. I struggle to comprehend why two of the major holders continue to add, which they have done at much higher prices than these. They must be sitting on significant paper losses.

Here we are after possibly our best hope has floated and doubled it's price, at almost the same price for TEK as we were before their float.

Https://ukinvestormagazine.co.uk/tekcapital-shares-jump-after-sp-angel-analysts-issue-buy-rating-and-revised-price-target/

So refreshing to see an uplift in the share price.

I thought I'd take a look at the TEK accounts for the year ended 30th November 2021 to see what values they'd placed on TEK's share of the two companies (BELL and LUCY) that have now floated

BELL 22.695m USD & LUCY 17.345m USD

What are the true values of our shares in both now?

From a shareholder value perspective both holdings were either wildly optimistic, badly managed, or most probably both.

Another sale of BELL at rock bottom prices. I'm confident that more money has been raised via TEK to fund BELL to the point of IPO than we've had in terms of value out. It has great products for which there's huge proven demand. What are we doing selling at a low point!

No mention of repaying the loan to LUCY then. My initial thought was that the Microsalt IPO was being delayed get again and they were going to have to repay the LUCY loan. That doesn't appear to be the case. In addition to our now minimal holding in BELL we owe LUCY £500k plus interest from whatever proceeds we get from the Microsalt IPO. We've gone from four companies with great prospects pre IPO to two plus the shocks product (which we already had) post IPO. I've disregarded LUCY because that's not making a profit and the BELL holding is modest now.

Improving people's lives (Except long term shareholders)!

TC

You make a good point:

All those continual posts encouraging everyone to sell their BELL shares and buy TMT shares have also contributed. Wouldn't be surprised if they're connected too. One was incessant, daily almost, at outset.

Other than very little, does anyone know what our retained value is in BELL based on the current share price?

BELL was one of the golden nuggets but we may see very little return from those years of investment. I expect BELL will have had more £ support from TEK in the early years, than TEK will receive in total return. They have great products, so why not grow organically and borrow from a bank to do so? Where has the money raised to date been spent? Surely sales convert to receipts after 28 days or whatever terms they grant. I just don't get it.

Theboyg

My sentiments entirely. Surely their bank would fund. If not, invoice discounting?

Desperate is an appropriate word. This has come after the 'desperate' sale of around 1% of our Belluscura shares for £215k in mid November.

Remember the quote last month of achieving a US$100m + valuation for its portfolio companies!

I assume the courier partner in the UK is Regional Express not Reliable Express as per the RNS.

The RNS does mention a 30 ton purchase order with one of the worlds largest beverage / snack food companies. That's a greater quantity than you would expect to see on a trial run.

He does need to go. It's always next year with Cliff but it comes and goes with no change. He has a very nice salary package but he hasn't delivered value for shareholders since outset and our large holdings in two of the four companies have now shrunk. Talk of building a £100m company are conjecture.

Should something positive occur, he'll come rattling the tin and the cycle will begin once again.

I'd dearly love to know what the larger TEK shareholders are thinking.