Member Info for ERV1

you're

good job your not stood in a witness box

BD6Vant, yes time - a very precious commodity when you choose to operate in a saturated marketplace, without adequate capital for the level of expansion required to be successful. Of course your interest lays with what happens tomorrow, however, that may never arrive with this enterprise, based purely on simple math, logic and fact.

There also needs to be greater clarity in the use of the vocabulary that this CEO is using in his reporting. Operating in this sector ARPU or ARPA are widely accepted as norms, so why doesn't he use them? I refer to his application of "typical" to a customer LTV, then he subsequently changed his use of terminology in a RNS. Is he going to continue with this blurry stuff into the tomorrows ... Cost to acquire per user, per account, per customer, per revenue generating unit etc etc. If you are upfront with nothing to hide then reporting with clarity is fundamental to attracting investment/investors.

Perhaps your view differs enormously in your wishful thinking for tomorrow.

Evidently your goading isn't bringing you the outcome that you clearly seek.

As for the overzealous and wrongful use of the past tense of that verb Bradleybear, what brought that on? Reads like you are trying to vent your anger on somebody/anybody. Maybe you glanced the most recent trustpilot reviews ... Given that the CEO has given such emphasis to using trustpilot as some sort of kpi metric, will those reviewers receive a well-reasoned response?

To whom do you refer in the "twisted the truth"? The bear view is derived from the lessons of yesterday - the facts and logic. The bull view is based on the hopes and wishes for tomorrow.

All will be revealed in the figures and you haven't got long to wait so perhaps stop trying to be a flamer or even making a fool of yourself with what equates to childish outbursts.

Don't forget that to give it you need to be able to take it. Your wrongful use of a verb implies you can't - take it.

No puedo imaginar por qué todo ha ido tan tranquilo, ¿están todos de fiesta?

and there's the thing, whilst agreeing with Taffs post, the other side of the coin is - if you are of a different generation and english is not your first language then perhaps lack of understanding on the part of another ...

11-11-11 wasn't D14's posting was it?

Neo,

We already know how much revenue is required to break even based on current overhead/admin spend. Note: current.

Massive downfall and loss of respectability is that you actually believe that you can teach a.n.o. how to suck eggs.

Moreso, when you twist what another states purely to try and save your own face.

You've got some things right and some things wrong. I too get some things right and some things wrong. It's called being human.

Calling others idiots - when they are clearly are not - mistaking RGU's for customers, having a go at sarcasm ...

Really.

Not so different to the posters on here who resort to "flaming". Generally employed because they are losing the argument.

I'll add to that, on the basis that "flaming" appears to be considered acceptable by some on this forum based on opposing views.

A young female with limited knowledge/experience would not be a James Bond in the making.

Neo, having retired almost 8 years ago why on earth would i need to be linkedin? In one of my previous posts I mentioned that the new CFO might make a difference (or something similar). If a bearish view based on the facts as stated by the CEO in RNS or verbal format equates to an agenda then so be it. Having observed this one from IPO and not joining the forum until September 17th, then my agenda is quite simply "just how many times do these people believe that they can continue to extract the michael?" So there you go. They continue with their nonsense then on an open forum I am entitled to post my bear view based on all that they state.

Ah so you are admitting that there are not 3,500 customers. Well, at 31st September 2018 my opinion is between 2,200 - 2,400 customers and maybe just over 3,000 RGU's.

£37,500 GP pa is applicable solely to the 420 RGU's acquired in the month of October x 12. Out of which there are marketing costs and sales staff to be deducted. Circa £3k pm GP wouldn't cover the salaries of 3 sales staff for the month, would it?

D14 far from being an idiot, is very knowledgeable. He and I use different methodology to arrive at a conclusion based on observations, yet, the outcome remains the same. Therefore, I will take it that you must think that I too am an idiot.

Maybe from an unbiased perspective you need to question yourself.

How many RGU's do they need to sell, based on the October ARPU of £24.80 at 30% GP to pay the founder "loan"?

And of course, in doing your homework you will know how the total figure for the "loan" was arrived at?

Further, how many RGU's do they need to sell with an ARPU of £24.80 should the CFO be required to work more days - in a week/month/year given that upscaling is key, in order to survive?

Oh I certainly understand compounding which is why my sheets are set up to take account of ALL statements being made historically and current, whether in written format or verbal. I also understand the difference between what was quoted as "typical" and RGU's/orders and services and so on and so forth. Further, I understand the application of TRUE or FALSE when statements are made together with the application of IF based on assumption.

Inside out and upside down stuff or working forwards or backwards - the latter being applicable if you are working to a pre-determined target or make pie in the sky statements.

Even further, I know how to set up a successful subsidiary from scratch - in various industry/sectors - without the use of a begging bowl or extracting the michael out of the private investor/shareholders. I have no prior personal experience of scaling up in the telecoms sector, however as I was fortunate enough to acquire many transferable skills, that would include for forensic accounting and all that it entails, along the way and so the math related to scaling based on subscription services, is very simple.

I note that there is no admittance on your part, of confusing customer numbers (which is how typical was sold) with orders placed which are RGU's. How did you arrive at 3,500 customers?

Oh and if you're doing your homework don't forget to include for churn as you'll need it to arrive at the net MRR, month on month.

Incidentally the inclusions on my sheets - taking all variables into account, together with TRUE, FALSE and IF based on the facts as made known - could not be posted on here, otherwise I may as well do their job for them.

Good morning,

Glad I'm not holding my breath in waiting for another to admit they have confused orders placed with new customers, hence why they would believe there are 3,500 customers - and they had the audacity to call you a liar too.

Anyway, that apart, clearly we're now working on RGU's and not "typical" customers - apples and pears stuff - for the purpose of correct interpretation of the "blurry" statements. So as you rightly stated previously:

Average Sale/closed order/RGU was £595
ARPU £24.80
GP @ 30% over 2 years £178.50
GP pm £3,125
GP pa £37,500

How many sales staff in the dedicated sales office?
Average salary of a telecoms salesperson?
True cost being more than just the salary.

Marketing and sales staff costs to be deducted for a true cost of acquiring.

420 RGU's/closed orders was 57% of the enquiries/leads so 737 of those.
23 working days in the month, open 8 hours a day (-staff breaks).

If we say 3 staff as a minimum - 21 worked hours per day.

Averaging 18 sales per day or 6 sales p.p.p.d.

Sales per hour, sales per person per hour, GP per hour, GP per person per hour all simple calcs for KPI/monitoring purposes.

With regard to up-selling or cross-selling, I'm wondering why the number of RGU's per SME is so low - as in, not even 2 services/units per customer on average. Clearly all math applicable is based on average RGU. As a domestic customer using 3 different providers in each of 2 properties, I am subscribing for 2 RGU's from each provider - 12 RGU's in total. Perhaps the SME target market strategy isn't the best then? One of the most difficult telecoms markets to penetrate was how EY told the story in 2015.

Got the clan arriving from MissG's land today, so got my homework out of the way ... sun, sea and buckets full of that stuff that goes with FEVR ...

Have a good one.

Correct Todster. I guess at the end of a day we just don't want Bradleybear or indeed any other to lose/learn the hard lesson.

Bradley bear good luck with your own beliefs and please don't take the bearish views personally.

you're not aiming for the sky then, like the CEO who mentioned 5% of the 5.4m SME as being some sort of goal over 5 years. Only needs to acquire circa 268,000 more customers over 60 months = ???? pm (let you work it out cos it's an easy sum) and way in excess of your own assumption.

420 was order intake ... so RGU's not customers. 420 small businesses placed orders, is what he said and that is a different proposition to 420 NEW businesses/customers. Given that 20% of existing customers are placing the orders then it isn't so difficult to work out how many fall into the new category.

You're not wrong. Others interpretation of a story may very well be. So we're currently working on the just over 300 new customers pm.

we could even ask "what percentage of customers are subscribing for more than one service?" Given that precise figures are no longer mentioned ...

extracted from previous:

600 SME's 1000 RGU's stated in March 17
800 SME's 1300 RGU's stated as approaching 800 at end of April 17
1000 SME's August 17 milestone
1300 SME's 1700 RGU's stated in November 17

So if the story is now being "sold" based on percentages and RGU's are being used as a KPI metric then surely a simple sum?

small businesses concluding contracts ... no mention of new customers

20% of orders came from existing

prior months ... no mention of previous 2 months ...

420 for October ... RGU's/orders or new customers?

embellishment perhaps ...

make some noise based on this:

"The cost of acquisition per revenue generating unit, a key metric for Toople, has also reduced materially in October 2018, confirming that Toople's digital marketing continues to become more cost effective as the business scales."

Cost per action as opposed to the actual cost of acquiring a customer.

We could also question why up until 12 months ago (November 17 update) the number of customers and the number of RGU's were both being stated in the updates, 1300 and 1700 respectively back then ... after which percentages became the norm in updating. Why?

We could also compare the total marketing spend to date with the total number of either customers acquired or RGU's acquired to date to establish the extent of the smoke and mirrors.

I think there are probably just over 2k customers at present. I see another mentioned in excess of 3k and D14 thinks much less. The "approaching 800"mentioned in the latest prospectus had to be a copying error as it was identical to the 2017 IPO.

Yep, we could make lots of noise ...

Good to hear from you, hope life is treating you well.