Member Info for MAJOREM

Maplinman I completely agree. The relationship between price and liquidity is very strong. I also agree strongly that the company and its stock need to be doing well BEFORE the re-listing. This does present a little bit of a chicken/egg problem, but it is not insurmountable. The stock probably needs to reach an all time high actually... in the double digits for certain.

To get there, your point on profitability is the key. As it arrives, or as it becomes clear that it is arriving, the shares should find respect and demand and that should/will bring higher prices which increases "average daily dollar volume" which determines eligibility at many funds.

If there is one thing about SEE and its long term shareholders that is undeniable, it is that they both demonstrate incredible patience. I have always thought it to be a virtue. I hope that it is also rewarded.

Trust me, and before anyone replies with the obvious, I realize hope is not a strategy!

My priority/wish list:

While the website and interviews are impressive,

Investor Relations leaves a little/lot to be desired. Communication/details on how contracts' revenues evolve over time; evidence and examples of patented advantages vs. competitors; clear/transparent pathS to profitability (Plan A, Plan B, Recession Plan, etc); high conviction in not needing any more money (dilutive capital) to achieve cash-flow positivity, relist on NASDAQ. After they hopefully do all of the above, I suspect some company in the ecosystem will make an offer SM can't refuse.

Until then, thank you to all for your informative posts over the past many quarters! I promise to stick around a bit after the party because you all seem to be good people ;) maybe we can find the next great investment idea together. Safestocks has mentioned a couple over time but they never got me excited.

There is simply not enough liquidity in the shares while ON THE AIM for many(any?) institutional investors in the US to participate. There might not be enough volume for new large investors anywhere for similar reasons! I would argue that SEE's biggest shareholders have "diamond hands" or are net BUYERS. Therfore, at the margin, until we leave the AIM, we will have very tiny lots moving about...

FYI, current shareholders (per Bloomberg):

Lombard Odier owns ~16%

Federated Hermes owns 9.3%

VSI owns 8.8%

Herald Investment Management owns 4.8%

Richard Griffiths owns 3.77%

Chelverton owns 1.81%

Polar Capital Parters owns 1.34%

Independent Inv Trust Plc UK 40m shares or 0.96%

HANSAINVEST (German?) Owns 0.57%

Crux Asset Management owns 0.55%

Martin Ive's 6.7m shares or 0.16%

Chairwoman Hill owns 4.5m or 0.11%

PMG owns 600k about, but we know potentially millions more if performance hurdles are met!?

Former employees & executives likely still own millions of shares too.

Worth pointing out: I can not find ANY passive shareholders (index funds per se) - whereas in the USA, if traded on NASDAQ, it would certainly become eligible for inclusion in the Russell 2000. This index has approximately $62 BILLION passively linked to the R2K constituents! My rough estimate is that the largest holding in the index represents 0.25% (with a market cap of $5.9B USD). Constituents with a market cap of ~$1B would represent a weighting of about 0.05%. I estimate that SEE could represent about 0.02% initially, that would require $12.4M USD to track/match the index. Undoubtedly its arrival on the NASDAQ would provoke countless others to consider buying shares.

FYI, in terms of current domicile/country of shareholders, Bloomberg shows:

Switzerland holds 31%

Unknown owns 26%

UK owns 20.5%

US owns 20.1%

Luxembourg 1.5%

Germany 1.3%

Anyway, this is why an IPO+relist could be helpful, because I'd argue it is extremely difficult for a NEW institution to begin accumulation. An IPO would likely be materially over-subscribed, could give several IIs a small toe-hold which would prompt them to try to boost stake in secondary market.

Come on, let's get the company to light this fuse!

I marvel at the fact that there are trades on this exchange for less than two pounds. One recently for 46 shares at 5.4 pence. Sorry to be a broken record but it's so painfully obvious that this stock is located on the most incorrect exchange possible.

Hopefully management gets enough practice issuing quarterly "key numbers" that Martin and PMG are ready for a real exchange by the end of CY2024... that plus the fundamentals should have us safely in the double-digits.

My request/ hope: raise a tiny bit of capital on NASDAQ in conjunction with a reverse split and relisting. Get the shares way below 1 billion. Preferably a reverse split of 200- to 500-to-1. The capital raise lets the institutional investors nibble (they always want more) and the reverse split allows per/share analysis to make more sense.

Rough figures: if this happened tomorrow, a 1-for-300 reverse split would reduce shares to just 13.8 million and boost the price to about $23 USD (a relatively normal IPO price lately). Issue another 1 million to 2 million shares to "top off the tanks" and next thing we know we are part owners of a company with about 15 million shares trading at $40+ on its way to $80.

Any thoughts?

All really good points... thanks for everyone's responses. I think PM is a great CEO, and I think the company is doing a really good job at the stuff they can control. Hence why I continue to accumulate.

The point about listing for capital is true but the other reason to list on a non-AIM exchange is for liquidity. It doesn't HAVE to coincide with a capital raise. Companies direct list all the time. Even Google did it.

AIM = Alternative Investment Market. Kind of says it all. An alternative place for misfit stocks. There is simply nobody other than maybe Safestocks ;) caring about these companies. Thank you safestocks, I've been reading your analysis for years! We'd probably be at 3p without you.

For what it's worth, I am a US based investor and have shared my thoughts with the company for years that dual-listing would attract substantial interest over here in the USA. There was a biotech company called GW Pharma that I often sited as an example - they were acquired. Opthea is dual-listed on NASDAQ and ASX, I hope they are acquired too. I have to admit that I worry if SEE don't WANT to be acquired?

With interest comes scrutiny so I could understand why they want to wait until they have a clear path to profits. I believe the finish line is in sight. On the other hand, if the end game is to be acquired, then none of this matters anyway! I just know takeover premiums of 1000% are unheard of. Maybe never. So the best strategy is to get on NASDAQ, they'd qualify for inclusion in the highly liquid Russell 2000, get the much deserved 20p-40p valuation over the next two years and THEN sell for a 50%+ premium from there. The equivalent of 60p is possible in 2026 if the shares are listed in the USA.

This is the way.

Has anyone noticed the performance of this index? No wonder Seeing Machines can't go higher, there's a proverbial anchor around its neck!

Ah, somehow I missed that! Thanks. False alarm :)

Paul said 50,000 Guardian installations on LinkedIn... that's only 1000 or so incremental since end of March!? Seems slow to me!?

FYI, The trade NEVER filled at 5.65p. Yet 10 million or so shares traded since entering it.

Strange to be THE bid price for a few days and not get a fill. Implies pretty much all trades are buys, doesn't it?

Someone please sell some shares to me! I've been the bid all day at 5.65 and NOTHING has filled yet over 800k shares traded! Very interesting. I own plenty already but I'm sick of the malaise so I figured I'd do some shopping therapy. Anyway, good weekend everyone...

Two key points and a question:

Point1: Looks like this Vertical (pun intended) can be served by using SEE technology and Collins R&D budget. This is helpful to keep breakeven possible by end of 2024. Cash payments should also help achieve the goal.

Point2: Exclusivity theoretically does not have too high an opportunity cost. They've been picked by the biggest and best.

Question: how much per plane/sim/unit will SEE earn? Hopefully more than the $10/unit we expect in auto. But how much more? Simulators (the two I'm aware of from past RNSs) I believe had an ASP of $250k!?

Just curious if SM can still work with CAE on the flight stimulators?

These had ASPs around $250k AUD years ago when just one or two installed. Inflation mixed with exclusivity and volume probably results in ~$100k? Or do you think more? The tech isn't any less important. Maybe 200k or more still?

This stock market is currently being driven mostly by liquidity. Longer term, fundamentals always matter. But short term, this stock is a relatively illiquid micro cap that is not currently profitable... those are not the characteristics of a near term outperformer.

I still own a boatload, but realize that this is probably a CY2024-CY2026 story. My price target is 30p or higher by the end of 2025.

One might say, why hold through that period? That will kill your IRR. Good point! I suspect some are exciting now in the hopes of getting back in before the train leaves the station... But SM could also be acquired any day (above 11p, probably needs 20p to get board to agree). They are also likely to win/announce some big contracts (rumors good enough). They could announce intentions to list on NASDAQ (by end of CY2024). Aviation deal could occur any day eliminating all doubt of being fully capitalized to becoming free-cash-flow positive.

I'm a long term investor. This is speculative but it's also almost completely de-risked. Essentially a 20 year old startup finally entering its "hockey stick" inflection point.

Moreover, Bard says that "during 2022, the global automotive industry produced 92.1 million vehicles. Of these, 25.3 million were produced in North America and 19.3 million were produced in Europe."

Let's go recession results in 40 million cars (NorthAm and Europe), assume 40% require/ carry DMS within two years (conservative given Europe is 100% by then) and SEE gets about 40% market share (conservative but "show me"). That's 6.4 million cars. ASPs of $8 result in more than enough revenue for SM to break even. But this high level forecast gives no credit for Fleet or aviation or CAT royalties.

This stock is simply caught up in micro-cap hell.

Only thing I would add... we only need 178k (879k on the road) for the quarter to show at least some acceleration in growth from the prior quarter's 25.3%

That would be my low end bogey. But I think the 200k is a good over/under

Lots of high end trim orders...

I wonder if federated still owns the stock?

It does not take herculean assumptions to get to a revenue run-rate of $200 million (USD) by the end of 2026 (this means $50+ by calendar 4Q'26)... assuming $8/car (conservative), $20/month fleet monitoring, and small contributions from CAT royalties and Fleet hardware. Assumes nothing from Aviation (conservative). Assumes nothing from consumer (conservative). They'll also be cash flow positive before that and net income before too.

YOU pick the multiple. Discount back to today.

One could make the case for a revenue multiple of at least 4x. Mobileye sold to Intel years back for nearly 20x.

I'm pretty sure I remember Paul saying 8 weeks more than once...

25% growth from the prior quarter would get us to 175k. This hopefully proves conservative. Paul talked about doubling annually through 2025... that looks easy in my opinion.