Member Info for DamayHill

Pompal, thanks, I understand the principle and there are hundreds if not thousands of them on here, I'm just not sure I believe that anything other than news or anticipation of news actually shifts the share price. Anybody who believes that what they write on here will materially reflect the share price is deluded IMO. Hence the question - but of course our multiple profile friend is too gutless to answer the question directly.

Just in case it's helpful for posters on here, B_Positive and Tominvesting (and who know which other profiles) are one and the same person, often posting consecutive posts under different identities. Amusing moment on GFIN chat this morning where this became painfully apparent. I have no interest in EUA, just flagging a less than fully transparent person in your midst as both profiles post on this board! You may or may not care. Good luck.

Just in case it's helpful for posters on here, B_Positive and Tominvesting (and who know which other profiles) are one and the same person, often posting consecutive posts under different identities. Amusing moment on GFIN chat this morning where this became painfully apparent. I have no interest in HE1, just flagging a less than fully transparent person in your midst as both profiles post on this board! You may or may not care. Good luck.

Joking aside, B_Positive/Tominvesting, I'd be genuinely interested to understand why you do what you do. There are hundreds like you on these boards posting with multiple or throwaway identities. But why? What's your purpose? What is written on these boards makes barely a shred of difference to the vast majority of share prices, even on AIM. So what is it that you want or expect to happen?

Classic... Rumbled. Dear me.

You might want to check your decimal places there buddy. A £10m MC would equate to c.0.3p.

With respect rookie, the patent application has been filed, the patent has not yet been granted, which I believe is the point Tim Smith was making. Your phrase 'patent is lodged' has no meaning. I'm genuinely not detracting from the massive potential here, just seems a bit unfair to tell another poster they know nothing when your own grasp of the process seems pretty tenuous.

Not sure Sandyman, whose account got deleted?

Demonstrating your masterful grasp of the figures again. I just told you that well over 90% of my holding was bought at below today's closing price and your razor sharp mind has calculated that as an almost total loss. Embarrassment after embarrassment. I've been looking all over for some Surface Transforms brake pads Johnnyy, but I can't seem to find such a product. Over and out.

I'm not sure you're in a position to mock anybody - you are perhaps the most prolific poster on this board yet you believe that SCE manufactures brake pads. As for my own position, I've been quite open that as a long-term holder I have invested at prices way north of where they are now. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but this would suggest that I still have plenty to learn about investing too and there are a few people on these boards who have something to offer by way of insight and education. The fact remains that well over 90% of my considerable holding was purchased at prices south of today's closing price so like most others I desperately want SCE to do well and certainly benefit when it does. But I am also able to maintain a balanced and objective view. Unlike you, I can walk and chew gum at the same time. And unlike you, I actually know what SCE manufactures!

Balanced and knowledgeable post fevertreeman. Absolutely agree with you re Cleminson - he's had the singular focus to achieve surely the only scenario that was non-terminal. I'm slightly more lenient on Johnson but I recognise the shortcomings you mention too - he and Bundred were not a good combination. In terms of OEMs, let's hope that over time their pragmatic, understandable and very welcome self-interest returns to appreciation for the product and all the reasons they originally made the contract awards.

You're correct, you did miss me. If you slow down a bit, you'll see that I shared my positive reflections early this morning on what is a very welcome RNS for all, whether you're a LTS or more recently in. When all around us is in flux, the one constant - the thing we can always rely upon - is that you will embarrass yourself Johnnyy. Whether it's misunderstanding what the company actually manufactures (that was a belter) or getting yourself in a horrible mess trying to interpret figures (most definitely not your strong suit!), you never let us down. Silly, silly boy.

This is certainly the most positive update for two years, arguably longer. They'll certainly need to further improve the yield but getting up towards 80% is very welcome news. Total revenue for the year forecast at c.£17-18m, will be interesting to see in due course what the guidance is for 2026 as the next 18 months is so critical. Obviously this remains in a precarious, distressed position - and disappointing to see another short tenure at senior management level - but this TU marks a decent step away from the edge of the cliff. Intrigued to see what the market response is today - still very hard to know how to value this company right now.

LatentValue, brilliant post and thank you for sharing.

What a thoroughly tedious and blunt instrument you are Johnnyy. No insight, no knowledge, no nuance, no value. Congratulations.

Truthfactory, that sort of valuation is where it could and probably would have been by now without the catalogue of issues over the past three years. Ramping up production was never likely to be entirely straightforward but they've made a right old meal of it and the rate at which they burnt through cash and managed expectation has been, without the intervention of OEMs, terminal. As I've said a number of times on here, one thing in our favour - and why OEMs have agreed a change to payment terms - is that the cost and time associated with the contract awards and the implications of SCE failing are just too disruptive and expensive for OEMs, so their current support is of course entirely self-interested. The four big 'ifs' for me over the next 0-36 months are 1) if they can demonstrate material, sustainable improvement in volumes and scrappage 2) if they can continue to garner support of OEMs in terms of advance payments and prices (I would think this is a given as long as 1 is true) 3) if they can avoid any further major issues with production at volume plus instal all planned/funded capacity and 4) longer-term, if OEMs can see past this sorry chapter and we see follow-on and possibly even new contract awards based on the superior quality of the product.

Johnnyy, I have continued to invest and like everybody else, I have every reason to want this to do very well. That doesn't mean I don't view it objectively and dispassionately. I was here for many years before you arrived and I expect I'll be here for many years after you've disappeared again. This is currently exactly where I and any rational investor would expect it to be. Why must you behave so objectionably towards anybody and everybody who doesn't immediately fall in line with your completely one-sided view of the world? Do you have any idea how poorly you come across?

In what way is nobody getting this? SCE remains a fundamentally binary, existential equation. If they manage a few consecutive quarters of significantly higher output, lower scrappage, and continue to receive cash advances from customers (the only thing enabling ANY working capital) whilst they gradually move to a cash generating position themselves, then clearly this is currently undervalued to a considerable degree. If they fail on pretty much any one of those measures, then SCE almost certainly folds. The current SP reflects that reality and the massive risk/reward equation here. Why do you expect different?

2reincarnted, interested to understand more about what technically has happened today if you'd care to share? Thanks.

Geng, for anybody who has followed this closely, none of this is news at all. Quite the opposite, it's long since established and accepted, relates to 2024 which was an awful year, and is the reason we were at sub 0.5p for so long. If this comes as a surprise to anybody, then they simply haven't done their research.