Member Info for ITKnowledge

Looks you are right as you didn't specify which way it will move. First 2 proper days of trading in 2015 and 10% down.

Any negative news will cause it to fall like a stone. Two sides to every story. What this really needs is to show consistent progress. That is the only way we will see a consistent share price. Until then it will be traded up and down on every piece of news either way.

Tick Down - This afternoon

Hi Ka, Wasn't my intention to make numbers up but a genuine error. Lets just address the first 6 months of this FY being growth on the same period last year. Technically that is correct but it doesn't include the Rise base that has never been mentioned that moved over to OUT. This accounts for nearly all of that growth. The reality is the first 6 months of this year the company has gone backwards compared to the last 6 months of the previous FY. Like for like (H1 2013 to H1 2014) there are huge gains. Current HY period (H1 2014) against previous HY period (H2 FY13) they are going backwards. So lets work it with those numbers. £600k exit MRR give a turnover of £7.2m. They previously had non recurring (services of £1m) however without lots of new customers coming on that wont be the same. so if they have lost some customers and added some in they will have some services and also some services to existing customers. Lets assume that figure is £600k. that means on an £8.5M turnover we may see MRR go to about £660k average for the year. The exit rate will be interesting if they publish it. There are only 3 public deals that we know of: Current LSE deal will be worth £30k per month and I doubt they will see any of that in the current year. The release says over time they will add voice services but not clear if that is or isn't in the projected figures or will be additional. July win - They expect it to generate £10k MRR by end of this year Full roll out during Q1 2015 which should see £70k MRR. June Win - Doesn't have a number associated it but knowing the pricing model I reckon that is worth about £10k MRR. So yes when all up and running we will see £100k MRR but in this FY we will see additions of about £20k. Even at £100k this isn't a huge amount and they need to be adding at a much faster rate to stop cash burn. On those predictions it is very cheap but they are wildly unrealistic. There is a long way to get to the £15m in 2015 from these rates.

I thought this comment was interesting at the bottom of a channel register news article on OUT: Broker Investec estimates Outsourcery will hit revenues of £8.5m for 2014 and report an operating loss of £5.2m. It predicts the business will turn over £22.6m by 2016, and make an operating profit of £4.4m. ® If they are correct it means the business exited 2013 with MRR of £700k (£8.5m TO) and they will end this year with £8.5m TO. Based on the fact that some of that £8.5m will be services we can only deduce that MRR for the year has gone backwards.

lol, credit where credit is due £20k a month of MRR is a great win. That adds nearly 50% to their MRR. if they can get it rolled out and billing through Q1 then that will make the rest of the years growth on its own. Still think they will need more cash though.

Yes they will have a BCP in place but more like to cover outage and disaster but wouldn't surprise me if company failure was left out as normally this isn't a major issue as business can continue in the short term but with cloud it s massively different. Novating a contract is very easy and no doubt they would have that in the terms. Migrating 10s of thousands of users from one Lync Enterprise Deployment platform to another if it was switched off one day inst 5 mins work....

Do you actually understand what OUT do and what role partners play? A channel partner sold the solution to the customer but the solution is on the OUT platform. The partner will front the deal and invoice the customer and then pay OUT every month. But the if OUT were to go bust the service would go down and the end user would be stuck.....

Or are they people taking the opportunity to get out now at a smaller loss. There are a lot of people that bought in at £1.30 ad all the way down in the last 12 months.

That is a real decent win and will help boost MRR which is all important here. What still surprises me is that the CIO of a FTSE 100 company would be prepared to put all of their telephony though a company that is so small and burns so much cash, I am surprised their risk assessment didnt flag this as too high risk. They do say in the RNS that the company chose them as they are the only accredited Lync platform offering enterprise voice. Therefore must be an organisation that has to be on a government approved platform so that should narrow down who it is.

Damn hadn't finished. That means from Dec 12 to June 14 they have had practically 0 organic growth but have lost out on at least £500k of non recurring rev in the first half of this year compared to last.

Dec 12 MRR 300k June 13 MRR 300k Dec 13 MRR 600k (That is the not to be mentioned Rise migration) June 14 MRR 600k Dec 14 MRR ????

Just looking at the HY results again trying to work out what full FY may bring. They finished up 2013 with an exit rate monthly MRR of £600k They finished the first half of 2014 with MRR of £600k and turnover of £3.4M. That means they must have lost a chunk of customers and then gained some back as 6 months of £600k is £3.6m. If they started with £600k and ended with £600k there must have been a dip in the middle to only do £3.4m turnover in 6 months. What doesn't add up though is in 2013 they also posted £1.1m of non recurring revenue. This would have been for services to deliver the solutions. Yet in the first half of 2014 they don't mention a non recurring revenue figure but going on simple maths there cant be any, or very little. No new customers means no direct service revenue to add in. How have they lost customers and added new ones and not generated any services (non recurring revenue). Am i missing something here Ka?

I guess you are right on the market. Strictly it will be a turnover gain of 60% but with an annualised MRR of £7m it is less than 15%. If they don't get a big rise in sales volume in first half next year this will be the last big % comparison on prior year or prior year period they will be able to do.

need to be a bit careful of your growth in % terms although they will use this. If they do £8m yes it will be a near 60% growth on the prior FY turnover but lets not forget they exited the year with £7m of annualised MRR so the real growth figure will be less than 15%. Also if they only do that amount it will be really bad as they previously did £1m of services and they wont do that on the same MRR unless they have had massive churn. MRR growth is the only figure that really counts here.

Looks like that roller coaster ride from the MS announcement is over now. Fun while it lasted and some people would have made some quick cash and some more would have been sucked in by the hype. Shall we have a sweep on when the announcement comes that the full FY doesn't meet expectations due to on boarding partners taking longer than expected and the pipeline that was growing nicely is taking longer to mature. Lets also run a second sweep on when the next cash call comes. I will start. announcement one buried during Xmas and NY. Announcement 2 will be within a month before the final FY results are released

"It's a long-term game," he said. "But it is really starting to gain traction out there. Tony Singleton [G-Cloud director] and the Crown Commercial Service are actively out in the market - they are talking to buyers and suppliers, they are organising events and webinars. There is an enormous amout of work going on. They are doing their best to get out there." The Cabinet Office says: "We have been working with regional communities to help connect suppliers to share their experiences. We are looking at more case studies to be able to help suppliers understand about buyers' needs. Now that the Digital Marketplace is in public beta we are also looking to provide suppliers with more detailed metrics such as how many times their service offerings have been viewed. "The number of customers [on G-Cloud] continues to grow strongly - up 46 in October (bringing the total to 643). The number of suppliers is also growing - up 18 in October (bringing the total to 428). Our regional events have also helped to bring more buyers together and we are working on developing more online resources to help buyers build on their knowledge of technology and procurement."

Managed services and consultancy outfit Fordway is among the top 50 G-Cloud suppliers and to date has racked up sales of more than £2m. Its managing director Richard Blandford said persevering with the paperwork and training is worth it in the end. "It's a common misunderstanding that by getting onto the framework, business will come to you," he said. "It doesn't. Getting on it is the first part of a lot of additional work you've got to do to be credible and able to transact and be useful to the government. Because it is comparatively easy to get on the framework, people don't understand it is just the first step." He said that the government's stringent security measures meant his company coughed up a six-figure sum to train staff, gain various badges and have its facilities tested and accredited. But he added that the result was all worth it. "It was a major undertaking and we were surprised by the additional work we needed to do, but we had good customer engagement and thought it was worthwhile to do it," he said. Stick to what you know Last year, research from Six Degrees Group found that three quarters of local councils had no idea what G-Cloud could be used for, leading the firm to slam the framework for "not doing its job" of marketing it correctly to the public sector. Really Simple Systems' Paterson agreed that end-user reluctance was a problem his firm faced when it was on G-Cloud. "In talking to people running G-Cloud - and I don't want to knock those people, I think they are doing a sterling job despite the environment they are working in - one of the problems was they had difficulty getting government people to use G-Cloud," he said. "So the customers were not comfortable and didn't know how to use it. They are more comfortable dealing with their traditional suppliers." Top G-Cloud suppliers BJSS and Methods Consulting clocked up respective G-Cloud sales of £17m and £13.6m over 562 and 993 individual transactions each between April 2012 and October 2014. TechMarketView's research director Georgina O'Toole said getting your feet under the table with the government can be lucrative. "The nature of government means that organisations love reference sites. Once a supplier wins one bit of business, they are much more likely to win the next similar piece of work," she said. "A framework is a framework - it doesn't guarantee business. All suppliers know that. It doesn't eliminate the need for the usual business development activities such as networking, understanding your client, forming relationships, developing a strong offering and so on." Advice Cloud - a firm which helps companies, particularly SMBs, win government business - defended the framework and said it is still very early days for the project.

Locked out CRM vendor Really Simple Systems is one of the once-accredited G-Cloud companies which struggled to make any money on the framework. It successfully got on the third iteration of G-Cloud, but after failing to ring up any sales, decided to give future versions a miss. The firm's chief executive John Paterson said the complicated application process was not worth it in the end. "We went through the process and applied and had zero interest, zero enquiries and therefore made zero sales," he said. "It must have taken about a week to actually apply... if you're not used to dealing with government, it is a very confusing process, particularly because you cannot phone anyone up and say ‘is that OK? Have I filled it in correctly?' And the contractual terms of dealing with government are onerous - they want an awful lot of insurance and protecting. They want to pass all the risk to the supplier and not the purchaser. Covering their backsides and making sure they comply with the legal process is higher on the list than having a product that is value for money and actually works." He said that about a decade ago, the systems his company sells would have carried a price of between £50,000 and £100,000 but that now, the offerings go for about £10 per user, per month. He said this, coupled with the high investment in applying for government business, means many smaller firms like his do not even bother to apply. "It is far easier for us to sell to someone in New Zealand than it is to the UK government," he said. "The way all our customers find us is on Google. They sign up, put their credit card details in and off they go - that is zero cost of sale so we can price competitively. But you can't price your products dirt cheap if you have a high cost of sale, which, dealing with government, you generally get. "In a strange convoluted logic, it means it is impossible for the government to buy anything cheap. It is like telling them they can only buy their groceries from Harrods or Fortnum & Mason because they don't have a car and they can't drive to Tesco."

When G-Cloud first burst onto the scene in 2012, it was boldly hailed by ministers as the beginning of a revolution. A wider range of suppliers - including significantly more SMBs - was encouraged to step up and bid for government business in an effort to loosen the iron grip large IT providers had on the public sector. But despite the government's good intentions to spread government IT sales across a vast array of suppliers in its quest for better value and lower costs, analysis of G-Cloud's public sales data carried out by CRN shows that its core team of IT providers is more of a cosy club than a nationwide pool of suppliers. CRN's research found that 50 per cent of G-Cloud's revenue to date went through just 25 suppliers. On top of that, of the near-1,300 IT providers that are or have been accredited on G-Cloud since its inception, two thirds have not earned a penny on the framework so far. In total, 53 per cent of all G-Cloud sales have been awarded to smaller firms, a figure the government is keen to shout about. But while things seem to be improving for SMBs to an extent, it appears that the playing field the government wishes to level is perhaps a lot larger than it first expected. Number crunching A third of accredited suppliers have actually clocked up some cash through G-Cloud, but the vast majority of those sales have been relatively small: 10 per cent of suppliers who have made some sales through G-Cloud have earned less than £10,000 in total to date. Forty per cent of suppliers who have made money on G-Cloud have earned less than £100,000 on G-Cloud to date. The top five G-Cloud suppliers - BJSS, Methods Consulting, IBM, PA Consulting and Equal Experts - collectively account for 18 per cent of the framework's total revenue to date. The amount spent with top supplier BJSS - £17m - is the same as the sum total of what was spent with the 238 firms transacting the least through G-Cloud. Of the top 25 suppliers, which collectively racked up £173.4m of sales on G-Cloud since its launch, 60 per cent were large firms, which the government counts as suppliers with more than 250 staff and annual turnover which exceeds €50m (£39.5m).