Member Info for IntrepidInvestor

We are all arguing over the precise meanings of the recent RNSs. That is a terrible signal. It proves the RNSs have been written by highly paid legal-types to be deliberately vague & confusing rather than to be clear and exacting. That is the sort of approach we’ve come to expect from slippery politician-types, not trusted partners in a valuable commercial venture.

I have read them several times and can see the RNSs are clocked in double-meaning; allowing them reader to ‘see’ the messages in a light framed by the reader’s own internal cognitive bent - in other words, you read into them what you want to.
That is NOT what is needed now and any BOD knows that. This choice of half-speak PR message is another red flag.

My view is the BOD don’t think the company will raise further money at attractive terms if they tell it as it actually is. And they are now gambling that the newly signed ‘zero-hours’ contract proves fruitful. If it does, they will be safe for the find-raising. If it does not, be prepared for ‘significant’ (theres that word of the moment) dilution.

Hi chances.
The MMs don’t care what the price is. Volume and volatility are their best friend. They are making money regardless, currently.
The stock has bounced because shorter (or those who sold higher) now see the price as an attractive punt.

I agree with your sentiment but ask one question: how will the SP go much higher right now if everyone (except count-bloke) realise a placing or rights issue is coming. JD will get more money but I would be surprised if it’s at 12.5p. Happy to be wrong.
Also, re revenues; bids declared £26,692 “sales” with £20,286 “cost of sales”.

In other words they paid out to the owners of the games, 75% of their revenue.

When BIDS talks about £10m revenue, I believe they are deliberately masking the fact that those revs come with 75% “cost of sales” so their actual gross operating revenues will be £2.5m. And don’t forget that is from a contract that is effectively the B2B equivalent of a zero-hours contract. There may be business to be done but nothing is guaranteed.

To answer Count’s points earlier: I sold enough at c 22p to now be in it for free (not quite). I really want this to fly but I’m not risking any more cash. And I give my honest opinions because I care about other investors. I want us all to do well. Or at least not end up with suicidal thoughts. Whatever we all spout here will not change the fortunes of the company. It will succeed or fail regardless of what we write. For example: if BIDS had delivered some revenues then all that JW wrote would not have mattered. The future is in BIDS own hands and they are #inthegame but they are currently dropping the ball.

As for whether my earlier post contained facts or my opinion; people speed daily on UK roads. Just because they don’t get caught or I didnt see them, does not remove the fact.
My facts were just that. Believe them or don’t. And if you don’t, explain where the revenue is, or who is paying for all the staff or the lawyers? Give me counter-arguments to the facts I have listed.
I’m just the messenger. I tried to warn you all when JD sold shares but was shot down and it appears those same people want to double-down on their positions with my views. I want to be wrong, I really do, but currently, the facts I listed are exactly that. Obviously I don’t have insider knowledge but I’m experienced enough in this type of thing to know those facts are correct.

The only way through this for BIDS is to raise some cash and/or hit a home run with “significant” actual (not contrived) revenues of c £24m pa (to cover current est costs).
That revenue hike is a massive ask right now so it’s inevitable they will ask for cash.

Well, here goes! Against my better judgement I’m going to offer my tuppence. FACT 1.
It is now clear that no-one is yet buying any ‘in-game advertising’. I say “yet” as that fact could clearly change.

FACT 2.
Bidstack will soon run out of cash. I estimate that their current burn-through rate has to be a min £500,000 per month, based on c. 50 employees. They will cost min ave £7,000 each per month to the co (inc company NIC contributions and being London-based and HR costs per person) and then there is all the other costs (offices/marketing/PR/travel et al). In any ‘service’ co, wages are the biggest cost. But usually around 40-60% of totals. However BIDS other massive cost will be Legal fees. All those negotiations over new contracts will rack up large fees. I can’t see that figure being less than £100k per month - very likely much more. I’ve been there. It’s scary.
So BIDS could be burning through at much higher than my suggested min £500k pcm. My guess is £750k, allowing The £6m they held on 30JUN10 will now be only £1.5m. That’s at best 8 weeks money.
So ‘FACT 2’ is that BIDS will require more cash. I suspect they will raise it, but the terms won’t be as good as last round.

FACT 3.
That means dilution for all current shareholders. Or the company goes bust.
You all need to decide how much dilution you are prepared to take. My way of doing this is to ask myself if I’d put in more money right now, and how much as a percentage. Those figures are IMHO inversely proportional to what will actually happen; eg. if you would put in 5 times your current investment at these levels - you are looking at 20% dilution. If you can only face putting in 20% of current £ then dilution could be as high as 500% (ie you will lose 4/5 of your % shareholding).

FACT 4.
I have reduced my holdings down to 25% of previous and I still don’t fancy buying back in at these levels. In fact I sold some to further reduce risk: because of Fact 5.

FACT 5.
JD and BOD have lied. They told us at the last AGM that the £300k revenue from 2018 were from “only 6 weeks worth of the system being live”. If that were true, how come they have not repeated that over the last 6 months? My assumption is that the £300k in 2018 figures was contrived and not real demand. They asked someone for a favour and have or will repay them that money thru the back door. Happens all the time but is illegal, particularly if one is about to raise cash.
CONCLUSION.
I will hold what I still have and expect to be diluted. But I won’t put in any more cash whilst JD is CEO. He is no longer investable IMVHO.
GLA

....... will be sub 6p.

The red flag of both founders selling share has been finally vindicated (not in a good way).
They knew in October that no-one is taking up their advertising.
Expect a cash call in the new year at sub 10p.
You were all warned.

It's most likely they sold the same amount of shares because they were trying to sell the maximum possible each, which would have been a larger amount. Their broker would have advised to sell together and they probably struggled to sell, say 3m shares each and had to settle for 2m apiece. the order would have been in the market for at least a couple of days, probably more. Their broker would most likely have attempted to place the orders first but then it looks like they had to go to the MMs to get the orders done. As far as I can see, only 2m went through, which suggests the rest went through as smaller orders, to complete the 3m. Or, there is another 1m trade at 20p that we missed?

Hi calamari, if you are correct, then it can only be the FD exercising their options and selling shares. One more director who is in the 'know' and wants some cash out. I can't see how it can be the CTO - I think it would have to say he exercised options in the RNS about him selling shares; and as he already had shares, why would he exercise options and sell those as it would create a full tax liability, whereas selling founder-held shares will not create as big a tax liability - I think but am not sure - if anyone else knows, feel free to chip in.

I really want this to come good, but I think we are in for a tough few months until revenues are revealed - then even tougher, if my instincts are correct.

I am reducing my holding down. Hence the 'weak seller'. I still want to believe in BIDS but both directors selling, without a revenue update does not make sense.

Jeez, you rampers are 100% sure of what you know, aren't you? This is a major danger sign and you are all discussing it as though we are about to get a massive uplift in share price any minute, and all is well in the BIDS kitchen.
George Bernard Shaw once said "It's not what we don't know that gets us into trouble, it's what we know for sure, that just ain't so".
Look at things and ask yourselves; why the sell off in August (prior to expected results announcement)? and then why the delay in leaving the H1 results announcement to the last day? Why the sell off a couple of weeks ago. Someone knows something, and it ain't you/us.

Hi all,
I appreciate you are all emotionally invested in this stock, but hear me out. This announcement is a bit of a disaster for BIDS and, if I am right in my assumptions, could proof terminal.

The two major shareholders selling a significant proportion of their 'sellable' stock is always a bad sign. One director with an acceptable and broadcast reason (such as divorce/tax bill/illness) is ok, but the only 2 directors with shares selling with 'unbroadcast' personal reasons is a big red flag.
However, that is still not the worst bit. The fact that they have not taken the opportunity to update on the H2/Q4 revenues at the same time is the biggest red flag.
Ok, so selling their shares now is bad enough, but why do that if the revenues are flowing as you (the directors) said they would. If revenues now are flowing as predicted, then the obvious thing to do would be to issue a trading update confirming the same, and then sell at the higher price.
The fact that no trading update was issued either before or at the same time is the most significant danger sign. My natural conclusion is that revenues are not materialising, and that these two directors, knowing the the revenues are not coming through, (even from GRID), have chosen to sell as big a stake as they can 'get away with', so as to at least get something out before BIDS demise. The board will have an almost instant knowledge of revenues (because of the unique 'instant' market style of this sector) so have no excuse not to update investors at the same time as they are selling.

I believe the board is hiding behind the much less onerous reporting stats of AIM and are not issuing any revenue updates because they can. The board's next statutory release of figures is on 30th June 2020. My guess is the board are hoping that a) there is some revenue by then to report and b) BIDS has not run out of money by then.

If no significant revenues appears (and remember, they only kept 24% of the 'test' revenues, according to the H1 report), then BIDS will need to raise more money. It will be hard to do that when the two main directors have sold shares already.

I think this share is going sub 12.5p (the last placing price) and will hang around there until either a positive revenue update is released or another company starts to show interest in a take-over move.

My last point is this: I cannot yet understand why there are no revenues (as I have now concluded at least that). I suspect it is to do with the whole 'market awareness'; directors of companies with advertising budgets want to know which parts of their spend has been the most effective. The problem with 'in-game' advertising as opposed to the facebook model, is that there is no way of knowing if the gamers are seeing or absorbing the message. I therefore suspect marketing directors are being hesitant and not putting any budget BIDS way yet. I have no evidence on this point but until we see revenues, I know this much - somethin

Hi.
I watched the whole 20 mins of that Grid promo link on twitter that was posted yesterday.

I concede my eyesight is not what it used to be, but I could not make out a single ‘in game’ advert. Not one. Unless ‘Fatlace’ is a brand I’ve never heard of.

What does that say? Can anyone else point out the adverts I clearly missed.

Intrepid

There is one other reason why the figures were so low yesterday. I won't spell out the reason, as I think it will have negative affect on the SP, if I did. However, it, in itself, is a very positive thing.
Cryptic I know. Just remind me to spell out the issue I am referring to, in 2 yrs time.

Hi all,
It appears I seem to have rattled a couple of cages. I am sorry if that is the case as I had no intention of that. But I know that to much time on these sort of forums can instil a suspicious mind into a person. 1000+ posts would certainly be enough time.
I have only recently discovered this website during my research on BIDS. Previously I've avoided forums because my experience was always a bit too negative and, dare I say it, spivvy.
This forum seems better than previous I've experienced so I have broken a rule and 'engaged'. Indeed, some posts are excellent and offer some really useful information and insight.

For anyone who may wonder, I've no hidden agenda. I am an ex MM (many years back) who is now a private investor with a reasonable level of experience in private equity as a private investor. The views I post have and will be solely my own personal meanderings and conclusions on what the future holds for BIDS.
My repeated reference to future cash calls is based on experience. Companies with 50+ staff (and growing) and little or no declared earnings naturally have a high cash burn through rate (estimated min £3.5m per year, probably nearer £5m). BIDS, as an AIM company does not, I believe, need to declare it's burn through rate (I might be wrong, here). Either way, the market will find out the situation sooner or later.
My guess is that the Board will now have a good handle on predicting the income growth rate vs the outgoings and have raised enough cash in April for at least a year, during which they would have made the assumption that the income will overtake the outgoings then (so, April 2020). That's therefore my 'expected case' scenario.
The worst case scenario is that the income is lower and/or the outgoings are higher than predicted and burn-through rate is significantly higher; ergo, there may be need for fund-raising, on that basis.

That said, this is normal for this type of company in this stage of growth. The key is that things are 'heading in the right direction' at a pace that keeps investors excited. The opportunities to BIDS are massive, and the risks are considerable. But for me, the opportunity far outweighs the risks.

I don't know about everyone else on this forum, but I immediately spotted the potential the moment I heard about BIDS. I've had that feeling multiple times in my career, with some flying and others dying. Until we see real figures, we are, in the words of Mr Buffett, a voting machine. Once the figures appear over time, is when it all become a weighing machine.

I've been buying for 5.8p up until 21p and am happy to sit back and wait now. I suspect 2 years should do it. If I post more than 30 posts in that time, I will be surprised.

Hope this clears up any issues.
all the best

IMHO, the results for 1H probably being held back due to the fact that the broker/company want to give an updated 'guidance' on 2H performance. In essence, they are using the time to see how the recently signed deals will affect earnings. If 1H earnings are 'as expected' or below, they will want forward guidance to be above par, and are expecting the new deals to contribute on the upside. I am expecting another round of fund-raising before YE; and that requires good forward guidance, if they want fund-raising to be successful/cheap.

In my research, I have identified 4 main risks in the short/med term (next 18 months).
firstly, BIDS might very well come back and ask for more cash - 65% chance IMHO.
Secondly, BIDS board might sell out to one of the GOOGLE/FACEBOOK et al - 75% change IMHO.
These are likely to be mutually exclusive. If they need and raise more cash, they won't sell. If they sell, obvs no cash raising.
Third risk is that the BIDS board somehow mess up and burn through their £5m without any further advancement on the supply and demand sides (games and online ad booking platforms) or any real revenue streams (£10m +pa). This will make it much harder to raise any more cash. 33% chance.
fourth risk is that google's new Stadia broadsides the whole market and sucks up the whole gaming community and does not feel the need to buy BIDS in the process. 10% chance.
These are over the next 18 months. beyond that there are more serious risks such as renewing the 3 year contracts already in place. Will be tougher if other entrants then in play.
My money (literally) is on a sale at somewhere in the £500m to £1b valuation, so £2.10 to £4.20. That's within 18 months.

Hi all,
this is my first ever post on this forum. I'll try to keep it short.

I first purchased BIDS at 5.8p in Sept last year and have been buying regularly at ever increasing levels. I also participated in the recent placing. I attended the AGM in April and had a very interesting side conversation with another shareholder in the room. He was representing a USA based institutional investor but he would not say whom. I discussed my fears with him (that BIDS would fail to deliver or require massive more amounts of cash). He said the real danger was that the board of BIDS accepted a takeover at to low a price/to early in the growth cycle. He and I could see a google or similar attempting to acquire the company on the cheap (no figures were mentioned), essentially before the real, non-contestable, valuation can be revealed.

In short, we both thought the upside was immense, so long as BIDS delivers on the 'land grab' they have described.

We all know that share prices never travel in a straight line, so it is very likely that sooner or later, there is a price drop, but timing that is a fool's game. It could be now, it could be at £3 a share. no-one knows. What we do know is that, until some reasonable revenues are generated/proven, the price can only reflect 'hope' and 'potential'.

My best guess is based on the other side conversation I had in the AGM room, where it because clear that the initial £300,000 of revenue posted for the 2018 final accounts was based on one game and for 6 weeks. Assuming that revenues from all games will be similar and constant (not likely, but one has to make assumptions), then each game should provide a min £2.6m of 'revenue' per year. One thing to consider is that BIDS first £300k or revenue was generated before the 'Demand Side' systems were developed/launched. So that revenue was harder to win. My 2nd guess is that, now the Demand Side systems are being integrated/launched, it will be easier for the advertising industry to divert some of their budgets to this new channel.

So, I've made another assumption that the £2.6m of revenues per game will double to £5.6m per game. I then feel this growth will take a further 12 months to come through, as BIDS works with the industry to educate them on the new channel. In the meantime, I've kept the revenue figures at £2.6m per game for H1 2019 and £3.9m per game for H2.

I then think a conservative £5.6m per game for 2020. Given that DIRT2 launches in Sept 2019, and is likely to be the biggest game in the system to date, I think that this is the reason BIDS are saying the revenues will be weighted towards end 2019.

So, given the above, I suspect 2019 revenues to be 2020 revenues to be something along the lines of £29m and 2020 figures £50m revenues. All based on 9 games. Any increase in games will increase these figures.

If anyone else knows how to turn those revenues into a share price/valuation, I'm all ears because, I feel that is what we are cur