Member Info for MattTheBrave

there we go - super!

What an odd post - perhaps you might elaborate. I was certainly amused by your confusion - that makes me unpleasant, does it? Get over yourself.

Tyche - your post at 11.48 is your best yet!! You have clearly confused MENSA with MENCAP! Mensa don't deal with mental health you daft boy.

Still can't stop laughing - it's a wonder I can type...:-))

Sorry Buko, not my intention to upset you, but you stated than Vodafone had a 'Going Concern' statement, and I simply pointed out that this was not factually correct.

Secondly, this was not an RNS, but regardless, my point is that without some form of revenue guidance or estimate, this news provides nothing of significance.

Not sure what you mean by 'biased'. If you don't have a bias one way or another how on earth can you be a successful investor? My bias on this stock is neagtive, but simply for financial reasons which I have outlined many times below. I am at a loss to know when I've actually been rude to you?

Here's a thought - could old Tychey be DW - still on here desperate to try and get his worthless options back 'in the money'. No more ridiculous than suggesting that me, SS and HITs are all the same person - LOL.

(I have mused previously that GCC could be DW, but surely even a company as desperate as Avanti would steer clear of employing people living in a mental health instituion........wouldn't they? ;-))

I don't see a revenue number tychey? What's the significance of this news? What's your analytical take on this? Come on, we're all desperate to know....? ;-))

https://www.frc.org.uk/getattachment/62ae3969-fe26-4def-8d25-e2acd821e7b1/Guidance-on-the-Going-Concern-REVISED-WEB-READY-2016.pdf

Buko - table on page 10 makes this clear. Going Concern disclosure only required where material uncertainty exists.

* no 'Going Concern' statement included.

Tyche, you do make me chuckle - like you had any intention to have a proper debate - good one..:-) . Feel free to prove me wrong though. Not sure why people are upset about me simply copying a part of the official results statement? Everyone seeemed to love it whne Dan did the same thing - odd, eh?

Buko - no they don't. Indeed I have just looked at Vodafone's 31 March 2019 results statement, and I can confirm that there is 'Going Concern' statement included that I can see. Perhasp you could reproduce it here for us..?

Oh, I love this Board, keeps me smiling all day!!

Good spot SS. Here's the full text here so that none of us are in any doubt:

"The Directors have accordingly formed the judgement that it is appropriate to prepare the financial statements on a going concern basis. However, this judgement is formed on the basis of: achieving significant growth in bandwidth revenue through the remainder of 2019 and through 2020; delivery of the forecast annualised cost savings; successfully negotiating the deferral of an embarkation fee due ahead of the launch of HYLAS 3; the drawdown of a further $20 million of 1.5 lien debt; and the refinancing of the Super Senior Facility ahead of its maturity at the end of December 2020.
Accordingly, these matters represent a material uncertainty that may cast significant doubt on the group and the parent company's ability to continue as a going concern. The group and the parent company may, therefore, be unable to continue realising their assets and discharging their liabilities in the normal course of business, but the financial statements do not include any adjustments that would result if the going concern basis of preparation is inappropriate."

Couldn't be any clearer, could it?

...still drifting up, even on down days. Clearly not out of the woods, but the fundamntals still look attractive to me.

Tyche - could you please point out the positives and expalin how they counteract the key negative factor being the debt. When do you expect the Company to go EBITDA positive, and then when do you expect them to go cash flow positive (excleding exceptionals). Then we can have a proper, serious debate.

You will have noted that I have not responded to your posts for many months on the basis of not adding to what has clearly been a very difficult period in your life, and I will continue to adopt thisd approcah regardless of your actions. Perhaps in return, you could afford me some respect and desist from your own rather unwarranted personal attacks.

I have a view on AVN, which is built on experience both of the Company itself, and others I have invested in. Posting one's view on AVN is what this Board is for, regardless of whether one is a holder, or not and I will continue to do so. The fact that it happens to be different to yours, or other holders should not necessitate such a response as has been given by you and others. The fact that it has been borne out, even more so.

...bacK through £4. Dar, you're going to miss oput if you're not careful......;-))

Good analysis HITs - thanks.

Au contrair Bradders - MENSA corrroborates my claim...:-)).

Dan - how about we skip the part where you biazarrely accuse me of being a paid deramper (you seriously believe this would happen on a poxy Board like this?), and hence clearly iognore the posts I make on about 20 other stocks, and instead focus on my rationale below for being negative, and explain eactly where you disagree and why. That is, after all, what these Boards are for, no? Otherwise, who's going to take you seriously?

You seem to be saying it's not possible to be clever and nice at the same time? What sort of a wierd polarised world do you inhabit...?

I have a lovely life Dan - seriously, I genuinely have a great life, helped in part by judicious investing over the past 30 years - but thanks for your concern. I see that you haven't actually argued with any of my points, which is sensible, so happy to have helped enlighten you. Take care. :-)

Dan, as ever, you're missing the big picture. The issue is not whether the assets will continue to be operated and provide a service for clients. We are shareholders, and hence it is the value of the equity which is key. Even if these assets are brilliantly managed, the crushing debt burden is still likely to kill the equity value (lenders take contyrol and sell off the assets for the best price they can get), or lead to further huge D4E swaps diluting the legacy equity holders worth in the company down close to a value of zero. IIn the former, the loss is 100%, and in the latter case, for long term holders, it's going to be close to 100% depending on when they bought it. Arguing about whther it his technicaly bust is largely irrelevant as the econiomic effecyt for long term holders is broadly the same as if the Company were liquidated.

Yes, let's argue about whether people have lost 95% or 100%. Good one. Honestly, you are daft.