Member Info for LedZep

Overall, an encouraging set of Q1 results. However, for me there are a couple of issues that cause me a little concern. First one being that there has only been a 3% rise in UFRs from Q4 2016 to Q1 2017, and this is the key IAB standard indicator that has been adopted. Secondly, it appears that this RNS has been rushed out, to get data into the market, as the description of the revenues for Q1 are in the future tense "will exceed" rather than "have exceeded", which suggests to me the numbers have not been signed off yet - hence the little bit of doublespeak re: better than Q4 £630,000, and with £2m booked for 2017 inclusive of Q1, rather than stating the actual revenue for Q1. The release of the 2016 results will probably clear up the muddiness of Q1 results, but the UFR numbers need a little more clarification IMO.

Increasing your holding, company or individually by more than 20%, just before 2016 results and more importantly 2017 Q1 results, shows a high level of confidence going forward. A couple of more weeks and we should be on the verge of the update.

So is the S. American country Peru or Ecuador ?? From 600,000km2 / 250km = coastline of approx. 2400km.

Gunner: As I remember it, Boom went through the hype-cycle about two years ago when Biggob and his crew were pushing this one, around 13p, I think, but LSE's historic only shows 10p ish.......so I may be wrong. This when the canine one got involved calling it down to the 1. somethings. We are well rid of those times, but are now being measured, IMO, by the fundementals and little of the potential, hence the bad response to the EOY results. The massive potential is there (as we know), but we need to twin it with some excellent real numbers, which I feel will come this year. Only then, will the potential be a significant part of the sp, IMO. Then the sp will have a life of its own.

Leapfrog: I think there may be a little misunderstanding going on. I wasn't suggesting that continuous improvement was driving demand, only that high level benchmarking can be very useful as a industry comparator to drive the internal company improvements. The larger gains come from the base factors of partners, channels, UFRs, audience etc. Not sure where you get the impression of my dislike of Boom, its the actual opposite, as I feel this company has a long way to go, and 2017 will be important for Booms growth. As I stated in my last post, the future IMO is very bright. If a top down approach has been taken to derive forecasted revenue, I would be a little sceptical, as I would have preferred a bottom up approach from known company data. However the guys involved must know their business environment and as long as we meet or exceed the forecast, all well and good, as it is the "actuals" that matter.

Pas: Thanks for that an interesting read. Must admit I'm not a fan of "top down analysis", owing to the high level numbers hiding/including a multitude of assumptions and sins. For me, applying an industry average revenue per UFR/download to a company specific target volume of UFRs/downloads and suggesting that is the revenue potential for the year is a little misleading, owing to the lack of accuracy around both variables, rather than just one. i.e. both factors are aspirational, so the result is aspirational squared. Then to apply existing growth factors to the result to give forecasted revenue for 2020 is multiplying any potential error. Using the $ per download as a benchmark and driving continuous improvement to achieve and excel beyond this, is very worthwhile and that is where IMO the true value of the broad brush benchmarks lie. From past performance of Boom: 2015- £1.10 per 1000 UFR 2016 - £3.02 per 1000 UFR As we continue to target advertising on a more dynamic/focussed basis with the assistance of SONR this indicator can only increase IMO. So with an increasing listening base, more partners, increasing volumes of UFRs, and improved targeting ...................... "The future's so bright I gotta wear shades" (credits to Timbuk3) Thanks again, Pas, for the link.

Pas: could you post the link to that quote from Stuart, as I am keen to see the context, as how he can qualify the accuracy of his figuring to the year 2020. If growth is exponential (which has been mentioned here many times) it is difficult to forecast from a small base - owing to the nature of the beast. Cheers in advance

Just listened to the latest podcast, and must admit RP sounded very relaxed, confident and "buoyant" about all things Boom. Total change from the previous podcast when he was exasperated with AIMs response to the year end figures. Sounds like the proverbial ducks are all in line and standing to attention, except for "Revenue" duck, who has donned his best Nike trainers and is chasing down Usain Bolt. RP very relaxed about the 5.4m revenue forecast being out there - what numbers can we expect for year end?? All looking good in the main, but would be interesting to see the impact of the development costs required to fully integrate the SONR adserver solutions with Booms offering. Looking like we will need additional financing before the targeted break-even date as "we will be considering further financing options" in addition to the £1m CLN being issued. All in all, looking forward to the next year with Boom as IMO this is the year we should start to see some momentum in the sp -------- thinking the portfolio needs a shakedown to release some cash to more advantage of the dips.

I got the impression from his RPs previous podcast, that this market is all about moving fast and staking claim of a sizeable proportion of the market. If SONR allows Boom to expediate the process of the land grab, without waiting for cash build up, then all well and good in my book. The spectre of the placing has now been put to bed for the foreseeable, and we have Q1 revenues and cost reductions to look forward to. Missed the opportunity yesterday to push a few more into the SIPP, but that's now been sorted.

Gige: Don't want to add to your pain.............but I feel I must. AA's calcs are out by a factor of 10, you will need £2.18 to regain your investment. £24 @ 2.625p per share = approx. 914 shares (consolidated - presumably you bought about 228000 pre consolidation) £2000 x 100 / 914 = 218p sorry...............................

The revenue figures are important and I'm sure they will be impressive, however, we have seen the market reaction to a 500+% growth, as there is too much emphasis on profit, and not growth. If the next Quarter also indicates that the cost reductions that were suggested in the last podcast are being achieved, then I expect a change in sentiment regarding the sp. I'm pretty sure Boom will come good to the benefit of shareholders and patience will be rewarded, which is a rare commodity on the AIM today. I am also hopeful that that the costs are being managed diligently enough, to allow the increase in revenue to prevent a possible future placing, which would be a Brucie Bonus. Looking forward to 2017 with Boom - how can it fail with a ticker of "Boom", tempting fate or what !!!

Jeeez DrSpankle - I do hope this is the only share investment you have made. If not, you need to get closer to your portfolio.

As the saying goes "you can't polish a turd !"

Just mentally preparing for parity, when Article 50 kicks in - Ha Ha

Nice increase today to build on our success last week. Costs being managed down, increasing revenue (target $5m 2017), $1m+ already booked in. Looking good for 2017.

Good to see we're holding the rise from last week. Plenty more to come here IMHO.

LL: Either way, a sprinkling of good news moving towards the Q1 results can only move us in one direction.

Good to see some volumes here today, with a nice uplift, after several quiet days. Just wondering what triggered the interest, as the trades kicked off from early doors. Perhaps news will be revealed on commencement of trading post xmas. My money would be towards a dual US listing, as RP was pretty vocal about AIM in the last podcast.

These latest child's piggy banks with the combination locks and purple dye release, are a "swine" (haha), to get into. Anyway, cracked it (or them) this am, and made a future investment for the little ones. The more I think about this share, the more I'm looking forward to 2017.

Peak: I'm pretty sure that if there was a product, process, piece of software etc that could be patented, it would have been applied for. You did ask a relevant question and received pertinent answers, but you've brought the subject back to the starting point.