Member Info for jointhedots

IMO uncertainty is likely the only thing holding this back, all geopolitical factors are exceptionally positive, company operational performance positive and prospects exceptional.

But we are awaiting an update on multiple fronts - and unfortunately the market hates uncertainty (stick to beat any company with), it is really frustrating with the oil price surpassing $100/barrel and the SP basically stagnant!

That is unsustainable, even if an update was downbeat, they lose the bid for CUDA, raise more money or whatever - I really thing the SP will progress - they are in a strange position treading water when the profits should be rising sharply and shareholders excited.

Incidentally, don't anyone remind me they have hedges in place - even if some production is locked, they are supposedly expanding beyond expectations (so no hedged) and lowering operational costs .

The update on the CUDA sale is due soon , really I'm really not fussed if they win it or not just get it out of the way, especially as the transfer will only take a few weeks as I recall.

Late RNS - just a correction to the last one thgough - looks like they where so excited with their windfall they couldn't think straight.

With all the good news (on basically all fronts) the SP should be flying, not least because the production assets are safe from being impacted by unrest caused by Russian aggression which could include areas of tension not yet considered. Putin is using energy as a weapon and will continue to do so.

All countries will want to back indigenous energy supplies going forward if possible - the US will be no different

I suspect a big part of the perceived problem here is the uncertainty over CUDA, personally I just don't get the problem though, whomever wins the bid for company makes little difference, COPL will be a winner - a strong partner to push forward on plans to develop may not be quite as good as owning the assets but it will mark a great step forward.

Can't agree but we best leave it there.

Just one point, your comment ""Personally I applaud anyone that is doing well for themselves"

Wow - I bloody well don't when it's been at my expencse and threatens my future prosperity.

Chatbox - not convinced on your second point - you only pay CGT on profits. The fact they are likely to make a lot more profit than if the SP had been say £4/shares , is something I find hard to see.

A point I've made many times to people when I hear people cry about tax is that I would love to have the problem of a super high tax liability - the only way that would occur is if I had super high earing - either super rich or anyone on a good number grumbling about is absolute bullsh*t.

I bet they are really upset at getting cheap shares, the fact they have elected (they chose to) sell at a low price is entirely their own fault.

Don't feel too sorry for them mate, they had the option to pay more for shares like the rest of us did..

Pokerchips - I agree entirely.

I noticed Victor wasn't rewarded after he and the other shareholders in Mashme where basically robbed, like the rest of us, even agreed to not sell their shares and invest all the cash they received at 25p, then the existing directors do sell, it looks like another betrayal to me.

How come? Mr Hughes sold 346,920 out of 853,451 - into a distressed market and effectively helped screw the SP, where's the loyalty in that - are they really saying they can't afford to pay tax out of huge pay packets - IMO the guy should be sacked and save any more wages or ridiculously high employment costs . Victor Sanchez has only just arrives and I know more about him than is available about Mr Hughes in his duties wrt Loopup over many years.

Selling half your shares when they are awarded is hardly a supportive action. IMO this is looking more and more like a lifestyle business for a certain 2 directors.

The cheap shares are the ones under the schemes they have duped shareholders into approving - they sit on them waiting for the as stream of bad news for a moment to apply when they can elect to allot at a DISCOUNT to even the ridiculously low SP.

Follow the logic through - had the SP been higher the benefit to them would be much lower so why should they care to mange the expectations of other stakeholders (IR) when doing the opposite is massively beneficial. It is supposed to align stakeholders - it needs restructuring to not disadvantage existing shareholders - nothing is aligned.

Until they are out of the way, it's equivalent to an axe hanging over you, so though I was unhappy with the approval initially, it needed to be out of the way, however they've decided they want another 5million to be allotted at some future date.

IMO there is a case for many of the staff, but the CEO's are disgrace having delivered the disastrous performance yet are be far the biggest beneficiaries - why the hell should they profit? The truth is they have benefitted from crushing the SP and delivering bad news at inappropriate times.

As I suspected - Directors - benefitting from the crashed SP and selling shares into the depressed SP to drive it down - explains a lot and particularly about the disrespect with which they regard shareholders.

As many know , a poor SP is often no problem or welcomed by directors

That said, more importantly, I wanted the cheap shares out of the way (and have wanted it since the vote at the last AGM.

My big concern, as I mentioned last week, was that they would have the cheek to ask for more this year.

What happened to the growing number of potential partners, some of whom were supposedly very close to signing an agreement.

Are new potential partners still negotiating?? Has it stalled?? If so why?? Is is one partnership agreement signed panning out?? Is rollout still scheduled for H1??

Some think there is nothing to report, but there is a mountain of news that the company could deliver if they where more open. the above is just my thoughts in a minute or two on one aspect of the business, but there are loads of other areas where we also know next to nothing.

Because they are so secretive in everything, I believe they could surprise to the upside in some areas in the coming months.

You're right there, the poor PR shrieks missed opportunities on so many fronts - but as I've said before, putting their advisors between us and them is a mistake, means they don't get a true feel for the real disappointment felt and miss the opportunity demonstrate more competence (didn't someone say they sold up the other day because the didn't respond to communications).

Maybe they don't realise even complaints very often contain underlying good advice on how to improve and benchmark experiences we get elsewhere, they just need to accept and give their feedback some thought to gain advantage - for them ignorance is bliss it would seem.

Also, I'm sure we have or have had some shareholders with IT/ business / entrepreneurial experience who could make suggestions that would steer them towards additional business or better processes. They are not the font of all knowledge or beyond reproach.

I think they are missing an opportunities because they fear what they might hear (hope it is and not arrogance), it feels like they are hiding away.

stew200 - yes I noticed that - good development, but I think timed to give client something to concentrate on (Boris Johnson tactic - look over here this is for you) when the RNS was released on the same day. Didn't work with shareholders

Good though.

stew200 - I don't want to split hair but I must point out they have not forecast 50 new clients, they have forecast at least 50.

It is important because it suggests it's not an aspiration to hope for but what they expect based on the current pipeline and I would hope they could gather pace through the year and with some decent sales initiatives there is no reason they shouldn't .

The downward pressure from the historic business is factored in but there is no value added for any clients that partners deliver, that is a complete unknown and the RNS would also suggest they have not factored in any growth in Mashme.

I think that was a kitchen sink type update that left themselves some wriggle room to outperform (or make excuses), I doubt they even have confidence in themselves anymore but what they have is a instinct for self preservation.

However they have proved themselves to be incompetent, not seen anyone attempt to defend them for a very long time, it's the one thing there is consensus on, so they may have left themselves wriggle room for more excuses (unless of course they get sacked).

WRT Mashme as I was doing a little research prior to the update, just to round that off, they appear to have won only 3 contracts in Universities in the US prior to the takeover, so my point about to them recruiting 3 support engineer, whatever the reasoning it's not to support 3 historic installations in different states. I read quite a few articles about the historical installations and Victor Sanchez was out in front singing the praises of the product and making the company visible in the press, contrast that with our CEO's who are all but invisible. I would also point out he is very enthusiastic and personable.

If our CEO's are not prepared to fall on their sword they should at least come out of hiding and present a bullish/confident front to potential clients.

What the hell does the US guy do, it even crossed my mind that he may be ill and they are supporting him. If not, it's a serious question, what does he do?? No, interviews, presentations, comments - nothing. Does he even exist??

I'm as annoyed as anyone with this, but after all is said and done WRT the negatives, there is massive upside, I recall they where initially spending £5m/annum on infrastructure and development for the cloud offering - so there are physical assets, intellectual assets and a client base and trained/skilled staff are difficult to even recruit and IMO that makes a nonsense of the current market cap. This must now be an attractive buyout target for competitors who feel they have the competence to turn this around or simple want cheap assets - not that I want a big with the company distressed.

If they do turn this around the SP will soar if not we're stuffed and I don't think they have much more than 6 months to do it - I really can't see any middle ground - obviously the SP could dip lower but not by much not unless a big shareholder throws in the towel - I think they'd go for the jugular of the CEO's first (not literally of course).

Ian - isn't it nearer 200% to B/E for recent buyers, I do agree with you though the CEO's should resign - but they won't though and IMO should made to face shareholders for a ceremonial sacking.

Loop are going to make a loss, of course, but that is par for the course to building a business, more importantly now more than ever they need to demonstrate they have a winning business proposition if the are to raise more cash which they are likely to need even the service successes - they are still adamant they have a winning strategy, clearly the market has had it with their assurances .

They now only have this year, maybe only half the year to prove the concept or they'll start running out of options.

I sure everyone knows, but I would also point out to all that Steve is a disaster in terms of communications with shareholders, on that basis I honestly think he will have screwed up that RNS, obviously timing and also content - the bad news was in full display and should be but I suspect he will have held any good stuff back to use later for the benefit of CEO's. He only now really reports on Cloud Comms performance but the traditional business and new Mashme business are also operational areas - what about them?? What happened to the announced partnership/new partnerships/ Mashme performance, recruitment of a Finance boss etc.

They are so hard faced, I wouldn't be surprised if the asked for more share options to be approved at the next AGM on the basis they have done a great job, they have no shame.

I'm trying to stay factual CRI55 has a history of stretching the facts, the guy knows there is no consensus.

There is no consensus on anything, for the record I believe they may need more cash (and that was always the case) - they never said they were financed long term , just MEDIUM term , which I took to be to end of 2022. That still remains a possibility, as they RNSed that turnover will be at a higher margin this year and they expect to be EBITDA positive.

IF they perform well this year (in line with their target) it will not be a problem as the SP will rise and they'll have multiple options, if not we're screwed as options will be very limited, sell the business, stop expansion or tap shareholders. 2022 was cited as a key year and it will be but there is plenty to play for, the business proposition is still well in tact.

Cash flow will be the issue IMO, not profitability which bound to be impacted by expansion. I can't see why they would raise cash now, there would be no appetite for it and they don't even know how much they might need (if anything).

The cash burn has run at about £0.65m/ month over the last year

IMO that is not unrealistic as the company expanded and invests into the Cloud Comms market and now backs Mashme. They are expanding a service and investment is essential, revenue inevitable lags

Having had time to think about the main points raised in RNS, it's clear to me the cash burn and need to manage cash has been driven be the slower pace of sales conversion and delayed receipt of revenue (what they are saying at least looks true). In effect the cash is being spent well in advance of the associated revenue materialising, they announced an increase in time of delayed revenues.

It's a classic cash flow problem when expanding, that will correct itself with steady growth but if the company has massive success in gaining new business (we can live in hope) the problem could persist and we enter an overtrading situation and need cash or other action to continue a fast pace growth.

But if things do take off, needing cash to service expansion should not be a nice problem to have - banks or equity financing should be easy If the pace is as suggested the cash burn should slow markedly as revenues come on board. Any problem, if it materialises should be well into H2

Everyone should also be aware that about £1.8m of cash every year is used to pay down the Bank loan, its a yearly payment scheme rather than pay at the end of the term. That's a big portion of the cash burn. Would be very helpful if they can sign a new deal with some other bank. Beyond that, it's pathetic that we are still paying the price of the disaster that was the MeetingZone purchase.

I've been taking a look at the numbers and noticed that the SyncRTC shareholders that accepted shares as part of the deal where well and truly shafted with the rest of us. Most of the settlement was at 37.3p (US$2.76 million (£2.00 million) by the issue of 5,374,050 Consideration Shares valued at 37.303 pence per share ) But what I missed was that the cash the SyncRTC shareholders got (US$0.35 million (£0.25 million) in cash) was invested in the capital raise at 25p. I thought they'd got some cash, but Steve must have given them the bullish pep talk to get them to commit their cash. So in truth the whole purchase was settled in shares , the only cost to Loopup was professional fees and the assumed debt of £1m. Looks cheap now

So they effectively paid an average of 31.5p so at 8p they lost 75% of their money in a few months having spent years building a viable business.

Victor Sanchez (now on BoD) must be totally p*ssed off, he's run a more innovative IT business than Loopup for many years so if the big shareholders are looking for a new CEO - so I think we already have a candidate who likely already have the support of 5% of shareholders.

I'd vote for Humpty Dumpty ahead of the current shower, so Victor would get my vote.

Decimated, share price and shareholders. everything at rock bottom and many shareholders thrown in the towel, some panicked.

I wouldn't dream of telling anyone what to do, I've been mistaken to stick with this, but being where we are I think this could be rock bottom and I'm not selling any, was even tempted to buy a few more.

The RNS was designed to lower expectations and I can't believe (woeful though they are) the BoD have done nothing to address issues, the only plan announced is to preserve cash . They literally don't seem to give a damn about the value destruction or small shareholders but I think they will jump if the big shareholders lose it as they can kick them out. Lets not forget one of the IIs is a specialist IT investment company that supports innovative IT companies - if they see value (they have a BoD seat) then I don't doubt there is a possibility of a turnaround.

There was a lot of panic today and IMO the fall is overdone as bad news was expected. The market cap is not ridiculous.

Something has got to change/improve, they've got an AGM to face this year, they can't hide behind Covid. Hopefully a vote to remove one or both of the CEO's will be proposed.

I suspect news will come earlier than most think now Steve has fessed up - partnerships, partners rollout of Cloud (not included in figures), Mashme activity or other initiatives. They couldn't release good news until the trading information was released.

There are things that may be positive, I think Steve has just got all the bad news out, and it wasn't as bad as many suspected. He didn't say an more than the bare minimum on the existing meetings business or Mashme.

I actually suspect we will now most likely be bought out, and at a good premium. Long term shareholders would still end up well underwater, but I suspect the resolve of many is probably now broken.

The added turnover pressure in 2022 is basically due to slower roll out of the cloud services, It's as simple as that.

They actually expect great success in signing up at least 50 new clients in 2022 but they are taking longer to take the plunge and revenues growth offset as a consequence - I commented on this early in 2021, that It takes time to compound the revenues, they knew about it, to me it just sounds like clients are in no rush to change.

They were too slow in changing strategy (buggering about with the botched integration on MeetingZone) beyond that there is no issue - the proposition is being greeted well by clients

My view on how this has developed goes back to the last half of 2021 and Ben Lee's interview with the Microsoft manager and comments on new Teams capabilities, I believe the cause slow take up may actually lie with Microsoft .

Microsoft, have had a few outages with must have made client reluctant to commit without thorough testing but IMO much more damaging in the short term is Microsoft's well publicised plethora of enhancements, new clients options and operator connect. All great in the long run but it creates a moving feast of considerations for potential clients and a sense that the software is not settled.

None of it makes Loopup's offering any less compelling in fact just the opposite, but decision makers will not make change without doing thorough due diligence and being sure things are not about to change and render their decision misjudged.

IMO growth will start to drive the company at some point in 2022.