Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
"Big mistake mate….."
Why? He bought in at 0.9p so he's in profit. Whether or not he makes the big gains he's hoping to make is yet to be proven, likewise it's yet to be proven to be a mistake, big or otherwise . . .
We were trading at about 40p during the dizzy days of the Maersk POC and LONO trials many moons ago. Since then we've suffered approx 100% dilution, so you could argue that a similar situation with MSC could return us to say half of that high. But of course a lot of disappointment has followed since those days, and many potential investors will be waiting for firm contracts before buying back in. However, the potential is still eye watering, so a couple of decent signings will (in my opinion), start an upturn that could still give the patient holders a very profitable return, especially from where we're sitting right now. Oh yes, and if that were to happen, don't expect any of the doom merchants to come back on here to admit they called it wrong, not a single one of them
"They simply must make a move to defer salaries or implement a salary swap system so that the cash runway is extended."
And the key staff leave for safer jobs just when we need them the most
Get a grip, now is not the time to mess the employees about
The accountants listed on the website are Azets (they're the auditors as well), a top 10 accounting firm with over 7,500 employees. Hard to believe that such an experienced outfit would have completely lost all the records, but I suppose in a digital world it is possible. So, are they going to own up to their negligence and do the right thing, or are they going to prevaricate, and hope they can somehow wriggle out of a large compensation payout? You'd think there'd be safeguards in place for this kind of event, some kind of arbitration to determine the compensation owed? But if INFT can show this has prevented them from clinching some kind of deal, then it could develop into a long drawn out legal bunfight
"I have highlighted the average salary is too high in my opinion."
They're not in 'normal' employment though. They're on the same countdown as us. Would you stick around at a place where you might be out of a job in 12 months time if the orders don't come in? How do you keep the right people, to help land those contracts, if you don't incentivise them to stay?
"which would result in a mcap of ~750 Million £, the net income of QED would at least need to be around 200 Million per year "
So you think a PE ratio of 3.5 would be correct?
I like the first 6 words of your post the best 🤣
"Who decides on the 2.5p price."
It's probably a predetermined formula, 2.5 times the weighted average price over x days
Didn't we all get warrants at 7.5p or something like that at the last fund raise? Shame they awarded themselves 'easy target' options yet we didn't get likewise as warrants. This company really does appallingly at creating shareholder value, sincerely hoping I'm proved wrong some day, hopefully it's imminently 🤣
"these dealing sites should at least show details of where the cash is up until the time that the granted amount of stock is paid for and any balance returned."
I did mine on the phone to Barclays, the agent took me through the whole process, explained my options and informed me how the money is now ring-fenced until the shares are allocated. I've had my issues with Smart Investor in the past but they were great yesterday
"Do nothing and you have no chance"
Doubt that's true. Probably the same outcome if a lot of small investors don't take up their allocation. I'm still on the fence myself, but #2k from me won't affect whether or not the company will be a success, just a personal choice whether to throw good money after bad and hope for a better result
i think your sentiment is right colins but i also think your figures are a bit fanciful. i do recall a figure of 1m per ship (when we were still in bed with maersk), which i think was based on a 3-way split of the savings for using msar. so, say 50 ships running on msar would equate to an eps of around 3.6p. if you apply a fairly conservative pe ratio of say 25 that would represent an sp of about 90p. of course that's 'back of a *** packet' and doesn't take into account costs, expenses, tax etc, but it's not a bad gauge to see the staggering prospects we have in front of us if we can grab a decent wedge of just shipping
"I guess the £1.50 a share buy-out by a oil major on a 50/50 shares and cash deal will happen well before then"
Used to be talk of 400p when we had the Maersk LONO in play. We've suffered about 100% dilution since then, so let's say 200p on a like-for-like basis. For me they can have it for 100p, let them think they got a bargain 🤣
From memery I think the MC when we delisted was about #2.5m. If we take the message at face value, that would be a tiddly amount for a large accountancy firm (or indeed their indemnity insurers) to cough up in compensation. Then, if the BoD aren't greedy (ha ha), we might just get our money back
Lots of if's and but's at this stage, however, a gimmer of light at the end of a long dark tunnel
Information for all shareholders
Whilst the board is continuing to pursue a potential transaction, shareholders should be aware of an issue, outside the control of the board, that has arisen and which the board is endeavouring to resolve.
The company has retained a prominent accountancy firm (understood to employ more than 7000 people) for several years to act as its outsourced accounts department, receiving invoices, paying creditors, liaising with the bank, etc. In this capacity, the accountancy firm has retained for safekeeping substantially all of the company's accounting records.
The board has been informed by the company's accountants that those records have been mislaid and are, in all likelihood, irrecoverable. The firm has assured the board that they have made exhaustive efforts, for quite some time, to recover these records, but they have admitted to the board that they have not been able to do so.
This severely hampers the company’s business plans. In particular, the company is effectively prevented from relisting on a Stock Exchange as it would be unable to satisfy financial due diligence without historic information readily available.
There is a procedure for seeking redress in these circumstances, and the board has triggered that procedure. The board has made it clear to the accountancy firm that it expects to be properly compensated, with the level of that compensation to be determined by experts. The board will provide further information to shareholders as that process progresses.
Lots of angst and teeth gnashing this morning because it's the wrong RNS, again
However, whilst it's not the RNS I dream of, I welcome the positivity it brings, and the way it's showing that there's a lot of future left in QED, as we head towards BioMSAR and potentially BioMSAR Zero. In my mind it adds to the value of the company, and makes us more credible to other potential partners. Some interesting tie-in's with BTG's advisory board, former Shell and AkzoNobel employees listed among them. So whilst this new agreement won't pay the bills (for now), I'm glad that the BoD are forging new alliances, as well as trying to get the current projects over the line
It's all grist for the mill