Member Info for lemonade311

Just have to be patient, once interest rate cuts happen (any they will happen soon) instutional investors will find btr and pbs more attractive again as the risk free rate falls.

Don't mean to be confrontational but if you average is 30p and they are trading at 0.5p then your shares are essentially worthless.

Just sell them... this company is trying to sell a dead product

This is publishing rights, frontier foundry was a failing publishing business anyway.

So it's the correct move and to focus on planet zoo IP

> Where did they dig you up from..you have no idea what you are talking about

No counterpoints I see, just a general statement.

This company is what Nokia was in 2005, this will be a short term pop compared to it's death in a couple of years once AI companies take ZOO's customers.

It also has a dead business model where dubbing and subtitles will be AI generated and ZOO won't have any part of that pie.

they state that they want to go private to raise £9m, the first thing vc's will look at is their history as a public company lol.

they will see this rns and understand the dog **** that this company is.

directors are delusional if they think they can raise any money. they should have fired themselves years ago.

I like that they promoted Pippa Clarke but why have they not got an immediate CEO replacement?

Okay, phew, seems like it will not.

Corporations will still use this clause to pay 5% SDLT and class it as non-residential:

> 6 or more residential properties bought in a single transaction

Will this affect watkin jones as there's less demand for BTR? seems like it.

True, it's a risk of course. However the risk was when this company was trading at 5x the price, not now.

I see they just announced a forward sale as well

Does anyone have the link to their investors presentation call?

I can't find it.

Thanks

Mergers usually destroy shareholder value, it's well documented. Easy sell.

I think where I am going wrong is that this isn't a direct investment such as an acquisition, it's just buying ELFBar stock which will be sold down to generate that gross profit.

So yeah, I think I'm definitely wrong with the below calculation.

Thanks!

Joker - Thanks for clarifying the gross profit thing, let me go through where I got all this from:

The £16m is from this timestamp, 23:40: https://youtu.be/c2Kq5hBN64Q?t=1420

It says £16.4m for ELFBar only for H1 24, it seems it's not just stock that the investment was for.

Judging from what the CFO said, it seems like this is one time thing, ELFBar is projected to produce £6m in Adjusted EBITDA1 for the next FY.

It seems like supreme has net profits around 61% of the Adjusted EBITDA1 metric

Converting this bs ebitda metric to net profit = £3.6m of net profit in the next FY from ELFBar.

The ban on disposables comes in on 2025.

So let's say they have 2 years of profit before they get banned and a surge in profit just before the ban.

Current: £3m~ profit (what they have already received from ELFbar)

Year 1: £3.6m profit (as stated above)

Year 2: £5m profit

Terminal: £0 due to it being banned

So that's a Net Present Value of £7.46m with a 10% discount rate.

£16m investment for a return of £7.46m is obviously value destruction. The above seem to be optimistic projections too for ELFBar.

What am I missing here? Any possible way I look at it means that a £16m investment for this little cash flow over a small amount of years is terrible for Supreme. Obviously it's great for ELFBar as they need to pump out as much $$ as possible before getting banned.

oh, and of course equity development and progressive research dare not talk ill of the ceo because he pays them to push this dog**** to retail investors.

- They bought another company for £40m when inflation/rates were rocketing which means the CEO is an absolute moron and knows nothing about basic macroeconomics. Now they have to reduce debt even though they just took debt on last year. Acquisition was way too big as well. CEO was saying 'It gives us easy access to more land bank', now they are selling it off lol.

- WAY too much cash tied up in a huge land bank and now they are forced to offload it at discounted prices.

Tell me when the entire C-Level team has been removed, until then I'm not touching this with these fools running it.

And that's £2.8m of gross profit, not net, so much worse in reality.

Especially when it will generate only 2 years of cash flow before being banned

A £16m investment to get a return of £2.8m isn't a good return.

> After disposables are banned their revenue will be: £5.8m

* Presuming the majority of users switch over to the significantly less profitable re-usable. Which might not even be the case if a large % of sales come from underage teens which I have no idea if they do or not.