Member Info for iWantThatOne

It’s worth pointing out that the 200p share price was reached at a time when EPS expectations were for approx 27c this year. After the Shinez debacle, and the issues the company is seeing in the Google search market, the EPS were dropped to approx 23c. So the 200p is a mirage - its current equivalent is more like 170p.

Having said that, I remain convinced the company is worth at least as much as that if broken up. I think there’s a distinct possibility the Board rejects the offer and says that is what it will now pursue.

Kestrel and other IIs were buying at well over 125p not too long ago, so that is a factor to consider. Also by now the company will have done some analysis on reporting OM and OP separately which will, I think, open up options - eg separate bidders for the two parts of the business. Arguably, all 125p does is move some way to removing some of the conglomerate discount. So I’d be very surprised if this is the highest bid we’ll see. The company has ammunition now to say “well OP on its own should be worth $x”.

“And that is 2024 just about done ! A busy and transformative year which we hope will be recognised externally.” In other words, what is going on with this silly performance / share price disconnect! Paul Larbey’s reflections on 2024 are also bullish - “2025 promises to be even bigger”. And their marketing manager comments “Excellent year for Bango”.

Stas, the fiduciary duties that Boards have to shareholders do not include them providing support to the share price. Yes I’m sure. Ofc share price is the fundamental measure of shareholder return, but other companies in this situation just tend to say that they can’t control what the market thinks of the stock. They can only control what they control. The buyback mandate is in place, it’s being administered in accordance with instructions. The company will be focused on improving operational performance. FWIW I’m not expecting any outperformance at year-end given the issues they had Q3. This will be a long haul back to growth. Simply hitting $97m EBITDA, as guided, and seeing some stability will be a good result (and might in itself see some improvement in the SP).

Good, positive interview with Anil. The first retail DVM deal, proving the concept is relevant outside of just the telco channel. This after the first bank deal earlier in the year, and there are now two of those. And if Continente (“the Tesco of Portugal”) see the Bango platform as enabling bundling and super-bundling, why not one of the largest UK supermarkets? Or Walmart? When asked what 2025 holds, Anil says “more of the same but on a greater scale”.

H2 is always better than H1. So double H1 EBITDA and they’re on $8m. Add the expected additional transactional payments (usually a 45/55% split) - that’s an additional $1.5m. The DVM ARR at end-H1 will by itself exceed H1 (take the 12.9m, x 55% seasonal split, x 1.3 say to reflect growth seen in the NRR - that’s an additional $1.5m). Add new DVM business (3 in Q3, these are typically $1m each, plus Q4 unknown). And we’ve been promised admin cost savings, which may affect both gross margin and opex. I just don’t see how the results won’t be very close to what’s expected.

It’s not management’s job to “support the share price”. Their job is to get on with running the business, focusing on what they can control. The idea that the Board is focused on day-to-day movements in the share price is for the birds.

HUM’s peers are typically valued at 3xEBITDA. If the debt to equity goes ahead at 2.667p then there’ll be roughly 1.7bn shares in issue worth about $57m. Add debt of $135m, say, and the EV is close to $200m. Deduct $35m for Dugbe, add creditors of >>$100m and you’re somewhere around $300m. That feel about right for Kor’s EBITDA (100k ozs pa x $1000, taking a margin on the current gold spot price). And that assumes Yan is worthless, which is overstated but it’s not worth that much. So I think the offer is a little light but not too far off and I’ll be voting to accept. With great regret after the amount I’ve lost here but it is what it is. Dan Betts was a disaster.

I think you guys are way off. “Keeping the price down”. “Getting ready to take the company private”. I’ll bet anything that Directors are not intervening in any day to day decisions about buybacks - the buyback mandate is settled, Zeus is executing it and the Directors are hardly calling every day to say “buy more. Buy less”.

And let’s face it - the company is not in a fit state to be sold or taken over. The SEO decline needs to be addressed; a solution needs to be found to the TikTok audiences; Shinez needs to be refocused. I’m pretty sure the major shareholders will be focused on this rather than agitating to sell the business to new private equity owners.

Thanks Masterfly. We know PE isn’t totally compelling right now for all sorts of reasons, including the weight of the non-cash items as the company scales up. On an EV/EBITDA basis, though, hitting the $16.8m EBITDA target would see a ratio of 6.1x at year end (at 100p) and 3-4x on a forward basis. Hopefully investors will view that as very attractive post-update.

Another day, another couple of chunky sales as the drip drip goes on. The odd decent buy here and there but we need a lot more to counter these offloads. The year-end trading update can’t come soon enough to give some positive momentum. Where has everyone gone on this board?! There used to be a steady supply of posts but it feels like the Marie Celeste.

Thanks for that info Dartron. Kestrel having taken one company private, I can see the possibility certainly exists here. However I don’t agree that having a significant shareholding here means only one thing - that they will be looking to take control. The whole point of their opportunities fund is to take meaningful stakes in under appreciated companies and challenge / support management to grow the business. So a big stake doesn’t necessarily mean anything.

I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding on this Board about Kestrel. Kestrel buys shares on behalf of its discretionary clients - who are group of unrelated HNW investors unlikely to band together to make a bid for the company. Mr Royde himself only has about 18m shares - less than 8% of the share capital of TIG. Any purchases by Kestrel or by Mr Royde himself need to be disclosed because as a partner of Kestrel, and as a director of TIG, he is considered a related party. But I think it's wide of the mark to suggest that when Kestrel reaches 30% it has to make a bid. If it were Royde himself, then yes. But as I say, these are mostly discretionary holdings only. As a result I'd imagine a Rule 9 waiver would be requested and granted if Kestrel went over 30% and nothing would change. None of this means a bid couldn't come from a different third party, of course, and if it did you'd expect it to be well north of the current share price.

Basically the company needs to double sales on that margin to get to zero EBITDA. I’m sure I wrote that several years ago too. I *think* there’s been a bit of progress but there still a loooong way to go.

I see the rampers are out in force today, all recommending each others posts. So depressing.

The more I ponder this the more I think we need to categorise Online Marketing as a recovery play. Declining top-line income (if only marginally); systemic changes to the landscape; fierce pricing pressures; execution risk. And I wonder if that’s what’s driving some investors away. I still don’t believe the conspiracy theories, I think the current decline is just people realising that the way ahead is hard.

And I know I bang on about this but OP’s value is being harmed by being hitched to OM. By contrast to OM, OP is in a strong competitive position and growing steadily. If hived off into a separate listed entity I think it could be worth $200m (almost as much as TIG today!), whether as a continuing part of the Group or after a sale. And that would leave TIG as a pure-play, focused OM company - cash rich, debt free, with a value much higher than today.

Sure, Henry, and I am completely confident in the progress Bango is making and I honestly think this stock - if they execute well and don’t get bought out - could make me and others a lot of money over the next few years. West Elk investing £4m after (no doubt) a thorough piece of due diligence also gives me confidence. I’d just rather the market recognised the opportunity here sooner rather than later!

What do you mean “not helped by Zeus”? What are you expecting them to do? They have a buy back mandate to work to.

I’m absolutely sick of this selling. Elk buy 3.9m shares and the SP doesn’t move. Maybe Liontrust’s sells were equal and opposite but no TR-1 yet to indicate they’re out. At least Elk seem to be in for the long run and will be under no pressure to sell.

As IIs go I like the look of Elk Capital. From their blurb:

“We look for businesses that we believe have large addressable markets, recurring or repeating revenue models with a stable customer base, differentiation that can provide a long-term sustainable competitive advantage, and an excellent return on capital at scale.”

“We focus on smaller companies because the very best of them have the potential to become much larger over time, and yet today they may be overlooked, misunderstood, and mispriced by the market.”