Member Info for guntoncliff

Interserve are not a specialist engineering contractor in power gen; Doosan Babcock are, and have the project management resource and engineering understanding, to deliver these types of projects. It does beg the question whether tender price, rather than technical capability (and risk assessment), won out in the final decision. What matters is that the error has been recognised.

What you say is perfectly logical, however, the problem with Bus Dev is its commercialisation. You can argue as to the market reasons for this delay, particularly in O&G. I also do not see the acquisitions that were made from Wellman significantly adding to the value of the enlarged Group, beyond the purchase price. Overall, unless there are some contract break throughs, in these bus dev areas,I cannot see this share price going anywhere anytime soon

Just look at the share register to understand whether as a PI you should sell or hold. Alternatively ask yourself why you know better than the sharks

Are these tomorrow or Thursday; I cannot seem to establish from Co web site Thanks

I think it will be interesting to see the reaction when the results are published. It would also appear that the market attaches no value to the Hope acq, in a UK construction market that is raw material constrained , and, most importantly, likely to remain so at least into the medium term. All in all a somewhat strange valuation

I don't think we should be too concerned given volumes traded. Large fluctuations on small volumes are always likely given size of free float. The positive that I take from the announcement re resignation of FD, is that we should hopefully see a business at b/e and cash neutral. Given current trading conditions this would be an acceptable result for me; any less and it is goodbye as I am massively under water on this one

Can you explain where you have obtained the info re Order Book please???

I bought into this 10mths ago, seeking to diversify my holdings in infrastructure-related funds - I have held 3In for some yrs - and thought this was well managed and hence a good addition? Views

This company is an unmitigated disaster. Tang has presided over a systematic destruction of shareholder value since his buy-in. I have lost faith in the management and bailed out - despite the financial pain.

For those of us who bought in at 25p plus, not so stretching in my opinion

I do not understand your logic. The issue is one of lack of supply. if anything Labour are more likely to stimulate building than any other party, based upon both the Budget and respective manifestos. Spending our hard earned cash on the demand side is frankly nuts!! This comapany is in a good position and I see no reason to believe that we will not seea substantial upturn in the sp over the next 9mths simply based upon where they are today

I suspected it was too good to be true; you have a very good business

Whilst SSM is unlikely to be transformative, I believe that they have got a bit of a bargain here. They are not a run of the mill sheet metal shop and appear to have both modern equip and some track record in aerospace. Whether 2015 is, or is not, exciting only time will tell; the comfort I take is that the share price cannot get much lower!!

I share your view, but take comfort from the small av. value of trades; the key shareholders are still there. The issue remains the commercialisation of their prod developments, and "time to". There will be either a huge upside here from a trade sale, or bust.................

We have bought in to a business that is heavily dependent upon technically-based product development. Sales are into markets that are inherently risk averse (to tech change) and heavily regulated. Consequently the directors need to keep whistling to keep spirits up - shareholders included - and emphasise dev progress to commercialisation. The concern is that what is (or may) be technically good will not achieve a sufficient level of sales before the cash runs out! 12 mths will prove this, one way or another. To put Cartmell's total investment in perspective it is worth roughly £120k; not a huge commitment, particularly given the developmental nature of the business

I think that the lack of profitable business growth is the bigger concern; we still seem to be in a product development phase, and an early one at that. Clearly the sudden, and more importantly, unexplained, departure of an FD would add to concerns. When we look at share volumes I hope that the major shareholders are trying to line up a trade sale and soon, since the rate of cash burn v rate of growth of profits does not give me a lot of comfort on where this is going

I agree that orders have been less than exciting, but exactly who the customer is (in terms of building market credibility), at this stage, is probably more important in terms of future take-up

Many thanks. I suspect that the number of applications that the product is presently 100% capable of supporting is more limited than expected, and the research prog to which the article refers, is key to whether we get boom or bust with Corac

Forget about profitability!! In what is acontract-related business, there is no news that they are winning anything...........

Re: the changed gas market. If their technology permits the extension of field life at minimal cost, then it should still be commercially viable. This is a simple test to apply. I think there are three problems: product developers are inherently optimistic about the speed of take-up v the period for which your development is truly "new"; they are selling into an industry that, for many reasons, is highly risk averse in terms of process; and lastly, we seem to have a lack of real commercial capability. My hope for an exit from this debacle, short of a take-over, is that they license the technology, and quickly