We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
And in your reply, please don't use 'INDORE'. I think you have marketed it more than official marketing team of CyanConnode and it is evident that INDORE or some other reference doesn't really matter. There should be other criteria which is unknown to you for the rest 80% opportunities which is dropped out of calculation of business prospects.
I hope you understand.
Thanks,
-MNM
tonyj,
I am not sure what exactly do you like to project on behalf of CyanConnode or as a representative of investors. Cyan for more than a decade into these projects never really delivered. Yes, there were orders, MoUs etc etc. No profit though. Failed deliverables always (if the reasons for failures were external, failure to assess such a possibility is also a failure of management according to me and the management needs to consider all the risks before providing the positive projections repeatedly to the shareholders every time, over all these years). And a surge of MoUs and prospects and projections has been going on always, just before further fund raising and dilution of shares. For unknown reason, it is always the institutional investors (we always come to know after it is being subscribed fully, at the price and time decided by the board) and never offered in market. The same is always projected as a positive sign as well and it is really beyond my comprehension. For talking on behalf of the management, I hope you have really understood and digested all these very very well. And I hope YOU REALLY believe everything told there without ANY DOUBT. If not,
While you have been providing opinion of 'strong buy' for years, your view if it was right, should have been beneficial for investors years ago. You need to really review your own opinion, just for your own reputation if not for anything else.
Any business in this world would have SWOT analysis in place for the benefit of stakeholders. Have your ever seen it in the presentation of CyanConnode ever, officially? According to their own reports they are targeting only 20% of market in Indian marker? (other regions are unknown yet). Considering only India, is there any officially statement from the management about where or to whom the rest 80% is expected to goto? And why the share is not 80% or 50% or 100% instead of 20%? Why and what is being hidden? I am still in perplexed state as I was when TNEB first phase was being discussed here in 2013/14/15.. forgot the real timeframe as well.
The joke continues.
Thanks for reading,
-MNM
Hey Ruprecht,
Happened to see another visitor like me in you. Thanks.
Yeah, I was trying to recollect the IDs, 'numpty and 911'.
You would know the debate back then. Proprietary Vs Standards.
Result is still the same even if Cyan acquired Connode for Standards or adopted cellular solution etc.
Never going to see dividends.
-MNM
Not sure if you ever understood this game, tonyj.
I stopped looking here years ago on regular basis. I miss Sage and others who were so active during TNEB days. Good to see ltt, lti and jake still being around.
From your posts I get a feeling that you still think that you can motivate everyone to be invested or invest more etc and that your posts matter deciding the SP. You have not yet understood. It is not decided by the bloggers and the positive posts. It is decided by the MMs and the management. They decide when the Price should be up and when it should be in other direction.
To understand the same, all one has to do is go through the RNSs of last decade. You will understand what to expect next when series of MoMs show up or whenever the director buys and what's the value of an MoM or Agreement or PO etc etc. It never changes. Individual investors have no value.
DYOR/NLN etc etc..
-MNM
Ok I missed out the other one.
LC is not the advance payment. It is only a guarantee on payment from a bank of the issuer to the bank of the one who delivers the goods. So, the supplier should still ensure the delivery takes place first by their own finances and then the money will be released (or discounted) based on other terms and conditions like the usance period. If the LC is with 180 days usance period, it involves the interest accrued on the amount to be paid (and Rate of Interest in India is about 10-12% depending on the bank) if it is discounted before the period mentioned in it (and you don't know those terms, as CC won't talk about it).
Considering your inability to carry out the research on your own, here is my help to you.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/letterofcredit.asp
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_of_credit
https://cleartax.in/s/letters-of-credit
And BTW, what others say also doesn't matter. The issue is not about trying to help CC in improving SP, it is about being realistic.
Good luck tonyj. See you again whenever time permits (irrespective of the state of affairs).
tonyj,
It proves you're off the track again. I think I should start another LoL.
You're still talking about 1p and I'm talking about survival and being alive. Re-read my post.
BTW, I first came in years ago when things were too optimistic and not when it was tough.
I guess you didn't really get going onto real research after my recent posts. Do you think the 3 main manufacturers are dependent on CC RF for their business? You should compare their numbers vs CC's contribution in their business. And it is foolish to think they won't survive without CC. They have too many options.
Again DYOR and Good Luck.
I pity you tonyj, wrt the effort you really put in on the bb thinking it would help the sp to go up and you can lure the newbies to invest here. The fact is, only the RNS will change the SP, and not the messages (especially based on assumptions). I wish you could provide some inputs to JC about how to attract PEs or public funds in current situation with your great insights instead of trying to attract tiny individual investors here.
What matter now are,
- What is the cash position and how long can CC continue without dilution (I expect no loans are possible in the current situation).
- Will CC be able to convince the investors (specifically based on their track record, previous projections and failures).
- If they fail to deliver the orders in hand will they be able to continue the business without getting blacklisted?
- Will they be able to reduce the costs (can they afford to reduce the manpower? If so, whom can they sack?)
Everyone knows,
- it's hard to get the funding now
- the situation worldwide (including India and Thailand) is not good for execution of any project, forget about new orders (for the time being at least)
Please don't tell me we have LC from Genus and others (I have seen you repeating it a lot earlier). It indicates you don't know the meaning of LC. LC is not advance, it comes into picture only after the delivery and that too based on the condition of usance period.
Be safe (both health and finance) with or without research. Good luck.
I'm sure whenever I get back here I have to do this again and again;. Ie., 'I told you so'. It happened years ago with TNEB too when I was repeatedly telling India is moving towards standardisation and not going to be with proprietary technology and acquisition of Connode had to take place (just to get hold of 6LoWPAN which was open source protocol or the software which could've been developed easily? I doubt it, there must be another stronger reason and it is not that Cyan could leverage on existing orders of Connode definitely in which case they wouldn't be ready for acquisition). How did it really help towards standardisation is yet to reflect in India. To my knowledge, even with current 6LoWPAN based solution CC, it is viewed as proprietary (wherever CC got the orders, only CC is the supplier of the solution unlike open technologies or protocols. BTW, apparently there are lot of stories back there about how CC managed to get hold of those orders. You really need to get in touch with the guys who can get you the ground level info). Too difficult to explain it to the ones like tonyj and can't afford it due to time constraints.
"To my knowledge EESL is still with GSM not any RF solution. I don't know how could you associate Indore, TNEB or any other orders with EESL. They are independent orders." I posted it earlier. And from the EESL interview 'researched' by you, it is evident.
None of those points mentioned by me earlier is without 'proper/real research'.
Btw tonyj, whether I post, should I post or not is to be decided by me and not by you. You have your choice and I have mine. If you provoke me, I may ensure to spend more time here and every nonsense of yours will be countered.
Good luck.
Dear Mr/Ms tonyj,
1. Unlike you, I don't throw my opinions about anything and everything which I'm not sure about. I have seen you mentioning 'Indore' in every post of yours, perhaps to get attention of everyone about it. But I don't have anything to say about it. I'm neither privy to CC's business plan nor their competitors'. It could be a successful project. But no one can guarantee whether Indian utilities choose CC or not, just because Indore did (there could be other solutions which you are not aware of).
2. You have been talking about EESL and CC too. Other than a mention about a meeting, I don't see any conclusive reference about EESL accepting any RF solution which is part of their specifications (leave alone CC's offering). To my knowledge EESL is still with GSM not any RF solution. I don't know how could you associate Indore, TNEB or any other orders with EESL. They are independent orders. So, if the same utilities continue with CC's solution in future, it's good for you. If other utilities among the hundreds of Indian Discoms choose CC, it's very good too. But who knows, when other options exist!
3. My previous post was only to tell you that there have been other procurements (couple of 100K of CC vs. Millions with non-CC solution) in India, which means you should not link anything and everything happening in the world on RF/6LoWPAN to CC.
4. After my previous post, LTI (and is it you or someone else?) mentioning that it is accepted that there would be other alternate solutions. But have you seen/heard in any of the CC's presentation who their competitors are? Whether in Smart Metering or in AMI/AMR? Definitely a 'No'. They don't talk about it publicly. Otherwise, people would start thinking more about it negatively?
5. Why did the accounting period change? If you don't have a clue, here is my view. CC didn't have confidence of fund raising by December with nothing significant in hand. Stretching it by three months (with the hope of more orders) would provide extra time to come up with more MoU's, LoI's etc (if guaranteed orders are not in place). Not my assumption, go back and read the RNSs of previous years just before the placements.
6. I'm neutral here. If CC survives with more orders and if they find and convince the investors with further dilution, it's good for you. Another year of your investment is safeguarded (whatever it is worth of).
7. Lastly, I don't consider you worth of replying with your half baked or near to nothing info/knowledge. So, your future queries are not worth replying. But I hope you would stop your mudslinging acts in someone's absence. If not, you have to come up with more facts/proofs before you get any authority to question my posts.
Good luck (I won't say DYOR as you don't know the meaning of 'Research').
tonyj,
If this is how you bet, people should be very careful in listening to you or taking your advice. No one becomes a fool by stating the facts. I'm sure you have not understood my post. Not even sure if you're capable of comprehending it. I have not mentioned MSEDCL purchased smart meters; they may or may not in future. I said 'they have been procuring 6LoWPAN (non-CC) meters for years'.
Are you aware, whether Smart Meter or RF Meter, the communication technology is independent? CC don't manufacture Smart Meters or RF Meters, but provide the communication solutions/networks. Similar to GSM or WiFI, which is independent of the end use.
If you don't know how to filter out the irrelevant links, search for 'MSEDCL 6LoWPAN' or 'MSEDCL 6LoWPAN -smart' or 'MSEDCL 6LoWPAN -4g', etc etc..
If you thought you can say something in a person's absence and escape, you're wrong again. I may be checking the posts whenever time permits, though not posting anything regularly.
Goodluck.
Oh ho,
The messages just crossed I guess. If I had seen such assumptions of BST or tonyj, I wouldn't have posted the previous one. I would rather be happy that you thought it came out from someone like the one mentioned by BST.
I really don't understand some of the posts. Do you really think every company is like CC, who are bound to impress upon the investors? There are lot of private companies who don't talk about their capabilities and they don't advertise it. They just carry out the business. You're so ignorant and you think the metering companies are married forever just because they went with CC solution in some project. Just to give an example, Genus went with CC in the new order of TNEB which you've been talking about, but they have been a vendor to MSEDCL with alternate 6LoWPAN solution (and also Zigbee earlier) and they have supplied for EESL tender with 3G as well. Similarly, L&T.
If MSEDCL adopted 6LoWPAN for years (BTW, LTI is wrong again, I never said 5 million is bought in a single order. I didn't also say the procurement stopped after it. I understand the procurement is around 2 million meters per year on average), why EESL should adopt it? Or why should MSEDCL should be interested in ensuring the same is chosen by everyone? Such are the needs of CC and not MSEDCL or EESL or Indian Government or the vendors of MSEDCL. So, stop assuming. Get into real research. Most of the data would be in public domain if you are good in using the search engines.
BTW, all these clarifications are just to ensure that you don't consider my previous post as shoot and scoot. At the same time, I don't have the responsibility to educate every one.
I have conveyed enough. Over and out.
Goodluck.
LTI, CB and all,
I wish to I'll keep myself away. I'm sorry, no clarifications on my previous post. 296 posts in those days were waste of my time. But all of you realised it in a hard way over the years. I don't see those posts of mine here anymore.
LTI,
I'm sure if you sincerely believed in all your posts over the years you would've invested all your savings into CC and you should've been holding significant shares to drive the company by now. I do remember one such investor who used to post here in those days. He used to appear in RNS too due to the volume of his holdings. Has he disappeared after all the dilution which has taken place? I feel sorry for him.
In those days I was looking at investment options in Smart Metering segment which was in early stage and Cyan was attractive due to the potential it had in the market. But when I carried out the 'real' research, I was sure of not investing and I shared my views in detail here just to ensure that people don't fall for all the ramping which was on in a big way. But all of you questioned the motive and didn't even consider the views. So, no point in explaining anything now. The result will be the same. But I have given enough clues for you to carry out your own research instead of assumptions/doubts (you just have to be good in using Google or you can even find someone in Maharashtra and ask if he has a 6LoWPAN meter at home and if his billing is automated or if he receives the consumption details over SMS etc) and connecting everything going on in the world to CC with dotted lines. I didn't even understand how tonyj connected TNEB to EESL and I don't want to know as I already know how CC works in India after little more chit chat with the friends in India today.
As people have already pointed out here no employee or director of CC was affected till today and they are happy as long as they keep finding investors to pump in and the option of diluting remains open always. But tonyj or LTI or Tish, if this works out for you, I will still be happy.
Goodluck.
DNLN? (For old times sake).
I don't know how many of you remember me. Last post must've been 5 years ago.
Cyan (back then it was not CC) was projected as the World Leader with xxxx solution expecting millions of order with TNEB. I had cautioned about the expected outcome with what I had heard within my circle (connected to metering and smart metering in India). I was the target of most of you (who seem to be on the opposite side now!). Where's sage? and there was a lady too. Consistency is observed only with LTI. I don't remember tonyj. Vas, BST, 1967 etc etc were on the same side of LTI?. Received enough booing back then. Was the SP around 40p back then?
The xxxx solution was proprietary and my posts were mostly about the 'standardisation and interoperability' which was the expectation in India. And Cyan bought Connode to get the 6LoWPAN as the technology (which was one of the standards in Sub-GHz mesh protocol). Good.
Now the topics seem to be around yyyy (omnimesh?), whatever it is, which is expected to be high-tech, 'Low cost' solution. And the only such solution in the world without any competition? Hahaha!
Although 'DYOR' is repeated numerous times here, the real 'R' is missing in all the posts. In India, 6LoWPAN solution is being adopted by MSEDCL (Mahavitaran or Maharashtra Electricity Board) for years now. And so far there could be more than 5 million meters with 6LoWPAN RF mesh technology in Sub-Gz frequency consumed by them. They have doing it for years now (you may have missed it as the same is not termed as 'smart meter' by them). Question is why CC is not involved in it? My sources tell me, 'either the technology is incomplete by CC or the solution is expensive (the single phase energy meter with 6LoWPAN bought by them is ~ $11, whereas the RF solution of CC costs more than it without the energy meter'. It leads to another doubt, how many of the utilities remain with CC, if the cost remains so high when other lowest cost equally competent options are available.
These are not connected to EESL. Closed door, round/rectangle table or not, EESL is expected to move on with cellular technology and the hype created here to switch to LPRF seems to be unrealistic.
Anyways, good to be back here after so long. Pity the investors though. See you again in few more years.
Only consistency I see is flurry of RNSs on low volume contracts (no guarantee on cancellation), LoIs, change of board of directors, auditors, etc etc.. just before the placement.
'NLN' (That's how every message used to end in those days). Of course, DYOR (now). Unlike yesteryears, I don't track this segment or CC regularly anymore.
Goodluck.