Member Info for Hexam

“no one else is really disproving the tech.. on the LSE forum”

Well, actually I think they have including me. Of course I am no expert either but it is all just opinion on what we understand (how much or how little that may be).

But whatever is the case I wouldn’t hold up Gardin as some kind of guru as he has come up with some stunningly daft things in the past like when suggesting that if you mine a bitcoin in say three minutes you can then save energy by switching off for seven minutes until the next one can be mined!

Plenty of other examples are available.

The point is that none of us are truly experts and the only way we will know for certain who is right when QBT provide the tangible evidence (or not) of what they say i.e. independent verification that their product/prototype works with the description of how.

Until then it’s all just opinion and hot air.

We should find out soon though one way or the other as surely the waiting can’t be strung out too much longer?

I am often accused of being very negative on this board and that is fair comment but it is simply because in the past three years or so I have seen very little actual good news come out of the company and instead just a lot of hype and awful performance leading to a dramatic fall in sp from the 114p when I first invested (and although averaging down has meant my breakeven is now 30p it has also meant I’m more exposed than I would like to be).

It is also why I get so frustrated at people on here who in my view continually try to dress up bad news as good, often with very dodgy understanding and use of financials to do so which is particularly offensive to me given my own working background, experience and knowledge in that area.

And the cynic in me, given their past announcements and performance, still believes this latest update is just an excuse to announce the end of the sale of PLT that never was or, even worse, the typical, cheap AIM tactic of pumping a share price before a raise.

HOWEVER, despite all appearances I don’t like being negative so I have tried to think of a positive reason as to why they might have released an update so glowing of their performance but without giving any revenue figures at all (something I’ve never seen before on any stock ever) and have come up with one!

It could simply be that revenue IS ahead of expectations but they have not given us any numbers as the revenue ‘growth’ is still negative and would detract from the positive message even though a fall in revenue is obviously no surprise.

They could still have framed the numbers positively though if they had given any forecast of revenue in their outlook but as they didn’t they have no expected numbers to reference against and simply thought it better to keep quiet.

So I’ll put away my cynic’s hat for now and believe that they really are performing ahead of expectations and wait for the update in March to see what is really the case.

In the meantime I’ll try to take out my frustrations with the company much less on this board and on the people who post. Can’t promise but I’ll try and then let the numbers do the talking when they do give them to us.

“You’re presenting inference as established fact once again, then objecting when that distinction is pointed out.”

The irony.

Thanks for your sympathy Bigdaddy but I think you’d be better off spending your energy on trying to understand basic financials a bit better.

Or you could just carry on believing all the nonsense you post.

“The company and brands are loss making.”

To be fair all the brands can be trading profitability (and according to them they are) and the company can still be loss making overall. That’s true even if Nasty Gal is ‘making a loss’ as that’s no longer reported separately as a ‘brand’.

This is because a lot of fixed costs are carried centrally outside of any brands (and their reporting) so the question becomes do the brands make enough money to cover those central costs. If they do then the company makes an overall profit, if not then it doesn’t. At the moment they clearly aren’t enough.

“Yes hexam we understand p/e ratios.. that's howstock exchange valuations have been measured since inception.”

Then why are you simply applying a (supposed) industry average without making any allowance for whether it is at all appropriate?

If you know so much about the ratios then you know they will vary enormously due to all kind of things (not just industry) and you just can’t slap on an average and say there you go.

If you know as much about them as you claim you’d think twice before simply applying 25x to BOO’s earnings.

“Llewelyn

Care to critique my post instead of posting your childish insults.”

That’s why I filtered the muppet ages ago. There was no sense or substance in any of his posts - just abuse not even worthy of a playground. Seems like he still hasn’t grown up yet.

Adds zero value. Best ignored.

It’s clear that few on here seem to understand much about P/E ratios else they wouldn’t be throwing around such silly numbers.

If Debenhams do manage to get to a net profit of £50m (and that’s real profit after tax NOT EBITDA) then the mcap will certainly be much higher than it is today - but not 25x earnings!

Academic anyway though as they aren’t making any profit yet, let alone £50m which seems a world away at the moment.

“Not many people are able to out manoeuvre Ashley and you certainly wouldn't be able to”

Wouldn’t have to as (so far) he’s outmanoeuvred himself. He hasn’t achieved any of his goals (apart from stopping a ridiculous bonus scheme a year or so ago before they decided sidestep shareholder approval) and his investment has gone down in value. Hardly success?

No it is not amazing, it is simply that the write-offs (and other negative one-offs) have largely stopped plus, in the last report, there was a big positive one-off.

The underlying profit is pretty much trading water still.

As Mikey himself has said it is what is in the RNS that counts. They have not said they have a working prototype (and the demos don’t prove that either) or that testing programmes are in place (the NDAs were just the first step on the way to that).

By all means though, extrapolate away.

“He is now trying to work out why the MMs have knocked the price down after so many net buys this morning.”

Actually it’s the other way round now - there are net sales (reportedly) but the sp is still up.

And Uncle Doug, I’ll have egg on my face when they report actual numbers that back up the hyperbole of their words (something they’ve pointedly failed to do over the last few years).

And, as a holder, the egg will be very welcome 👍

“It's a brief trading update signalling an upgrade” - I can’t recall many (or any) updates before from companies that mention profit numbers but not any sales figures. Very fishy to me.

I’m pleased with the sp increase though despite the underwhelming EBITDA number and my own misgivings. Not exactly a rocket (yet) but a decent start.

Mikey - so you can’t provide any evidence that they have disclosed that testing programmes are in place or that working prototypes exist both of which are your speculation that you are claiming as facts. Thanks for confirming.

And no I’m not saying ‘deliverables’ equates to ‘commercial delivered / revenue’ - just yet another of your truth bending interpretations. In my mind all they would need to be classed as a ‘deliverable’ is a working prototype - precisely one of the things you claim but cannot prove.

Sorry my posts seem too infrequent to you - sounds like you think I should be posting more???

I thought it was a brilliant update too…

…until I noticed what wasn’t there, saw the kicker and read the small print.

What wasn’t there was any detail at all on quantifying the ‘trading above expectations’, ‘discernible improvement in the performance of our Youth Brands’, ‘the continued momentum in our Debenhams brand’ and ‘the pace and scale of PLT's turnaround’.

All really great words but what is missing is absolutely any detail quantifying any of this - surely if the numbers matched the words they would be shouting them from the rooftops?

And then the small print. All this fantastic news but somehow only a £5m increase in expected adjusted EBITDA and less than £10m above what it was last year? Still treading water virtually.

Once again things just don’t add up - unless the update is simply a cover for the real news, the kicker, that PLT is no longer up for sale and perhaps never truly was, instead maybe it was just an excuse to blur the numbers (which they can now do again by adding PLT back).

Despite all this, hopefully the sp does react more positively than I think it should as this may finally be the exit opportunity I’ve been looking for and I can leave with a profit 🙂

You’ve totally missed my point. I’m not questioning the RNS, I am questioning your truth stretching interpretation of them - and your continued mangling of the English language.

In my mind they haven’t delivered anything and what you describe as ‘deliverables’ are just steps or milestones on the way to delivering something - but that is just disagreement over words.

More seriously you keep twisting what is in the RNS into things you claim as facts but which are only your speculation. So the onus is on you to provide evidence to back up your claims - such as where has it been confirmed for example that testing programmes are in place or that working prototypes exist?

“So the record is clear: delivery has occurred, commercialisation is pending.”

No, it is absolutely not clear.

They may have achieved steps on the way to delivering something (revenue generating or not) but they haven’t actually delivered anything yet (as far as we know). And commercialisation is not ‘pending’ - you need a product that works first.

Even the steps you have listed as being ‘delivered’ are questionable in terms of achievement.

‘patent filings’ - yes, they have filed patents but have any been successful yet?

‘working prototypes’ - really, where are these mentioned and evidenced?

‘lab validation’ - we’ll take their word for it but any validation yet in the real world?

‘third-party testing programmes under NDA’ - that was certainly the intention but is there any evidence that any such programmes are now in place (let alone begun)

As always you complain about others not sticking to facts whilst you trample all over them yourself in order to make out things are progressing far more than any statements show - just to serve your agenda.

Please just stick to the facts and when you do speculate (as with the above things) make it clear that you are speculating rather than implying that your speculation is fact.

And Mikey I put it to you that you have a financial interest in inflating the share price.

You just cannot see that it is simply two sides of the same coin.

‘Once a poster admits to holding a short position, their posts are no longer neutral commentary; they are interested speech.’

True - but then exactly the same applies to longs.

So what? Opposing views are healthy however ‘interested they are’.

Face it, you just don’t like anybody not having the same opinion as you.

“...and thats exactly why the majority of retail investors like you lose”

How do you know I lose? Like I imagine nearly all investors I have winners and losers (Debs at the moment is in the latter group). Overall across all stocks I’m up (at the moment) but I know that could easily change.

I think you must have misread or misinterpreted my post as I wasn’t suggesting at all that I bought shares when prices are high - quite the opposite in fact.