Member Info for Havoc3852

I have to say that table could be made to read a little easier. So I make it we actually have 96 companies remaining in the Italy, 72 in the Pre-analysis NDA and 14 have signed the term sheet. So I would presume that it is only the term sheet we are looking to monetise right now, but this was the end of April so a lot could have changed since then and more clients signed on.

That's the gross origination figure that includes the companies that were lost or failed the DD. You need to read the section below which shows that 108 companies remain and as it stands we know the captive bank is most likely to be the 1st tranche monetised and they are concentrating on the Italian companies only at the stage, of which there are 14 companies.

Sorry that should be £152.3m at 3% = £4.569m revenue (not £6m).

Nobody - the EOY accounts stated that as at the end of April 2021 there are 14 Italian companies, not 194 with a term sheet signed for a total of152.3m of inventory with the remaining either lost or failing the DD. Assuming we monetise the lot through the captive bank at 3% that would would give us £6.092 revenue. But they did expect 20 of those companies lost to regain once the 1st IM has occurred.

Patience

No one has issues with asking difficult questions. The issue is when the same questions are asked over and over again, even when it has become apparent that no one on this BB knows or is willing to divulge the answer. That's when posters become hostile as it makes no sense to keep asking questions on this BB instead of contacting SYME directly as quite often they are the only ones who can even possibly answer them.

Toold we need clients monitised before we will start to see real sustained gains in the SP.

Valuation*

The 5 to 8 billion is the amount of IM that was agreed that the bank would would fund. Not its caluation.

Well last year the 1st tranche was supposed to earn syme £6.5m. if thats the same group of companies that should be 50% higher as its now going through the Captive bank which we get a higher percentage.

Or we could be using the revenue of the italian portfolio to make the purchase as it does on completion of the 1st monitisation and our fee is due upfront.

That is an interesting development as previously we were told that syme would have no ownership of the captive bank and now 10% with the option to buy more.

I am surprised the SP has held up as well as it has. As I said earlier, it was nice to see some more transparency around the gross origination figures: how many companies failed DD, how many are still around (73% by my reckoning?) and how many paid DD fees. That certainly blew the de-rampers "no revenue" narrative out of the water.

My expectation was that we would have been much lower after that RNS. So 3% down is pretty good all things considered

Nice to finally seem some transparancy around the gross origionation figures, how many signed term sheets and how many business have so far been retained.

SAM I wouldn't quite got that far, about the only thing that can be said that he got the name of the company who valuated TF wrong as he assumed it was Parzival partners. I messaged AZ via Linkedin yesterday after he accepted my connection request on this very subject and I got a nice short reply this morning and he confirmed that it was not Parzival partners. I didn't ask for the name of the company who did as I was quite (pleasantly) surprised to get a response at all and I did really appreciate it.

Dont forget, all syme have paid so far for TF is £4m cash and over 800m shares so in effect a total of around £7m. The rest (assuming full £31m being paid) is based upon TF meeting their plans.

Come on, 2 1st time posters in as many minutes both making negative comments? You really couldn't make it up!

Napalm your comment around the CLN being the only way to fund the TF acquisition is wrong based upon the last interview AZ did with proactive. He said there were other parties they could have issued shares to to fund the aquisition, but these parties demanded sizable discounts to the current sp. Hence the CLN route was chosen as it meant no immediate dilution.

Steve, i already pointed out this to napalm earlier as it was an independent company as per the rns so it could not have been parzival. But its a moot point as we don't know who did the valuation.