Member Info for lymie

Ok that�s better. In the fullness of time we will find out: 1. The fate of the FD and 2. What claim will be made against the auditors, who will presumably be replaced. I am surprised that the review costs will be expensed in the current financial year. I would have thought that his charge should be provided for in f/y 31.1.18

Interesting that Briffa sold some �238,000 of shares only six months ago.

Given that the stuffing has been knocked out of confidence, I calculate that this share is now worth about 50p. That would 2xNAV and a p/e of 8. That is of course if there are no other nasties in there.

In my past life as an auditor you always started with an analysis of all the balance sheet items and demonstrated how you had verified each item. In this way the debit balances would have shown up no matter where they were hidden. If you verify the balance sheet at beginning and end then the P&L looks after itself.

It is no good blaming an ex minion. Any FD worth his salt should know what is in the balance sheet and regularly review the debtor balances. The auditors should have recognised the same large debtor balances appearing in deferred income and have circularised them at year end. After all �3.3mm is a large amount. It is ironic that the Annual Report has pages of verbage (garbage?) on what checks the audit and risk committee carry out and what work the auditors have done to satisfy themselves and the shareholders that the accounts are true and fair. I have a feeling that these statements are reeled out parrot fashion in most annual reports. Accountants please defend!

Whilst it is not clear what the accounting was, the RNS says that "Certain uncollected receivables were inappropriately offset against deferred income rather than being expensed to the income statement in the appropriate financial year." This suggests to me that these were effectively bad debts. I hope I am wrong!

Sure a bad debt does not affect the cash balance but it does affect the cash you were anticipating and the net worth of the company. Ultimately it appears that the results have been overstated and no doubt the figures to be released shortly will include a charge of �3.3mn to cover this.

It is inconceivable that the Board did not know there was an unprovided bad debt(s) of this magnitude. Surely this cannot be a trading debt. More detail required urgently.

I guess the CFO will be on his way and we shareholders should claim against the auditors. How could they have missed this over a five year period. If we could get back their fees over that period it would probably cover the bad debts.

In October sophisticated? investors paid 40p for these shares. How come they are now 30p. Are they being shorted?.

Let's look at the positive, there was more demand for the share than originally envisaged. The present p/e of 11 ish does not reflect the prospects for the company and the institutions that have bought in recognise that.

Big price increases announced by Sky. Could this herald an easing in pricing competition and help VOD?

The problem with the interim figures is that whilst turnover has risen by 52%, EPS has only risen by 5.8%. The question is why have there not been any economies of scale?. I hope it is not because the directors are the ones reaping the rewards.

I guess that Deutsche were speculating.

You would think this was a third world exchange, when a top 100 company (non-mining) can go up and down by 5% a day. Not a fund managers dream. Is this our cousins influence?

Is this because of Utd Rentals numbers or because Harris has taken 5% holding?

3 purchases of 240,000 shares reported this am. Directors?

As I have questioned before, what does the CEO want out of this business?. He is drawing a comfortable income but at the same time is destroying his capital value. He needs to reappraise his objectives.

Obviously the market doesn't think this is a good deal for the outside shareholders

Very muted response to excellent figures. Probably because 11 million shares on the market and sold this am.