Member Info for LGO-fan

I think that is wise. I have made the same mistakes like you on AIM/small caps. it's a learning isn't?

I am waiting here to see a trading update that convinces me of enough proof of concept from a marketing and financial POV. Secondly, I need to understand- via RNS - what the cash position is and how long they can last before some form of funding is required. Been here too many times. Including - very misleading situations - where a company gives a positive trading update, everyone starts buying and ...guess what, a nice little equity raise to "reward the LTH's!". AIM/smallcaps....it is a cesspit :)

Like I said, not sure what is positive about the SP at IPO to where it is today. It feels very disrespectful to the suffering LTHs to say there are "nothing but positives" as you do.

To people who say, "yeah but I am in it for the long run"...fair enough, but note that there is no tomorrow without today. And today doesn't look too rosy

never catch a falling knife

It has definitely blinded a lot of people. That's a fact. And I feel sorry for those who lost out. I really do. I have been there - done that and bought the T-shirt. It is painful but you can learn from it.

One the key eye openers to me was how fanatic PI's react and how personal they take each negative comment of a BB. This has always surprised because I have mostly invested in big FTSE companies. Let me tell you, these guys get grilled by investors at investor meetings like you wouldn't believe it. The institutional investors are very shrewd and don't take prisoners. Even the most successful CEO's, who have driven the SP up north many times above expectations, still get the same treatment. Why? Because everything can always be done better, faster, more effective. So challenging, whilst on a human level seems unfair and harsh, is actually designed to have an even better financial performance of the business in question.

If you know this, you can only appreciate challenging questions as a good thing.

So to those who get so quickly agitated at negative/challenging posts....think about this and maybe fuel your energy at challenging your BOD.

yes, but there is "down". and then there is "crashed". Look at the SP since IPO of this company. An utter disaster.

Punters who bought in today maybe feeling happy, but the rest...I really feel for those who bought simply because DB bought some shares.

If you have a balanced portfolio and you want to have a high risk share in it like CBX, ok - why not. If the portfolio of shares is balanced it should recoup any losses incurred here. But, I am afraid most here will just have put all or most of there eggs here....and are now attacking, shouting, and calling names...towards anyone who questions the performance of this business.

Don't be fooled into thinking that because DB invested here, you are onto a winner. Do your research into what drives the SP of a company. Hint: it's not derampers or rampers....don't be distracted....it's all about company performance, numbers, profit and loss etc..:all the noise and tantrums form Little Ad & Co, are a mere distraction.
Challenge your BOD to deliver !!

AM, unlike you - who seems to think name calling is the proper way to behave - I am here to debate the merit of this company as an investment. And I raise my questions and concerns.

I have made the mistake to jump into a share way to quickly and figure afterwards what a mistake that was. So, now when I see something interesting, I study it first in detail. Given this is a BB to debate, and not your local CBX-
country club, I am pretty sure that is okay. You seem to think that this board is designed to sheer on this company, regardless of past performance. If the performance was outstanding, the commentary would be according. Not sure what your issue is. Focus perhaps on the BOD and their performance, challenge them perhaps. Might be more beneficial to your investment then calling critical voices names.

this is typical of the level of research from certain posters ...,they don't even check the date of the article

Not investing until I see results of their current marketing campaign and have clarity of the cash position. I assume we will hear early july, as a sort of H1 trading update? Hopefully earlier. Maybe they will give us an RNS with a trading update of the first 3 months since the start of the marketing campaign

I think these are very reasonable questions for any one looking to invest here.

what is the cash burn per month?
how much did they invest in marketing ?
what loss or gains did they make?
and by how much has SG&A gone up?

These are the real questions to ask.

it seems very plausible that they need some form of cash injection. Raising equity is one of them. What is the problem with stating that.

If you look at the 2 last cash positions the company communicated, it's all in RNS s, you can calculate the cash burn per month between I believe Aug and Dec.

Next steps:
1. Project that monthly cash burn and deduct from latest communicated cash position
2. Add cash burn for hiring new staff (also announced) since Jan
3. Add cash burn, based on the assumption, that current marketing activities are most likely loss making (logic given status of brand development and launch strategy).

So the above suggests that there is a very good chance that cash burn since Jan has gone up significantly.

If this is true, money will run out at some point. If you assume it takes 3 months to organise an equity raise then there is a good chance this could happen soon.

Nobody knows for sure, but then again investing is all
about navigating ambiguity and eliminating risk.

All IMHO

correct.

BTW, is the CEO saying that CG has 100%??!!! What a joke.

Did the CEO mention anything about cash position and how long they can continue at current cash burn before they need funding?

Let's see when we see the numbers from the company:
- how much was invested in marketing?
- how much net sales generated?
- how much profit was generated?

Talk is cheap, only financial performance will turn this around.

As to your statement, "doing marketing on the cheap"....I believe you are misguided. Cheap is relative to the means they have. A £1mn investment might be nothing for L'Oreal but is a make or break investment for CBX. Not saying they spent that money....
The better questions to ask are:
1)what is the best way of delivering sales through performance marketing. Budget side at this point immaterial, as long as it has a positive financial return

2) The 2nd question then is: it this activity scaleable. They then have proof of concept for their funding round.

An equity raise when you have no proof of concept that your marketing works, will be a lot more challenging and likely to inflict even more pain to the long term suffering holders

and then you need to deduct the marketing campaign. So that 6mn-figure will be significantly lower. After that, the ROI of that campaign is going to be crucial. If the campaign turns out to be loss making, you will need to further deduct that figure with the amount of loss of said campaign.
Nervous times, and enough reason to be cautious when listening to people who are shouting that it is now time to buy. It often happens that a SP drops below the floating price...

check the markets: fear for lockdown in China is having a sell-off effect this am across all markets and shares

posters have impact on the sp, only CG's financial performance does. Its misleading to suggest otherwise imho

Presumably, as you also allude to, the sp is where it is due poor performance. Therefore a turnaround in SP would have to be driven by a turnaround in performance. That remains to be proven and depends on whether their current marketing campaign will have a healthy ROI or not. If CG doesn't achieve a healthy ROI and are therefore incurring losses over and above their pre-marketing campaign cash burn, you can be 100% sure they will have to raise equity. In which case the SP will suffer more. So whilst everyone is entitled to being optimistic, I would caution this just a little bit and at least wait for an RNS which outlines the financial performance of say the first 3 months of advertising.

This line to me shows the CEO is clueless: "we believe our products are safe, of a high quality and appropriate to be on the market.."

You either are in line with regulations or you aren't. It is that simple. "Believing" has nothing to do with it. This isn't a religion. This is cold hard fact: "do you have your ducks in a row or not?" If not, you are out. Simples. It's like
being pregnant: you are or you aren't. But you can't say "the doctor says we are not, but we believe we are". Utter nonsense. I would far prefer the CEO said: "Oops, we misjudged regulations. These are difficult, complex matters and we should have done better. We will fix xyz by such date. We thank the regulators for working with us as we believe that safety or the public is of utmost importance".

But no, instead the company is wrestling like a devil
in holy water for a part of the range that isn't even strategic. Honestly, how many more blunders are investors going to swallow?!

I agree the fall in SP is due to the poor sales performance. In a wat this M&A is a big admission of failure of the company's strategy and so the merger to me seems like a marriage of 2 otherwise doomed companies.

I can understand that their DTC approach failed miserably and hence this merger makes sense from that POV; that's a positive.

Still sitting on the sidelines with BAR: I need to see how they will step change the GM% profile of their brands before I consider buying in. To me this is a company with small brands, margins akin to private label and no room therefore in the P&L to grow. Without a solution here, this will never fly. But, fixed it, and this could be a fantastic opportunity