Member Info for Mooney111

Thanks for your thoughts gents much appreciated. I look forward to part two Italian :). Interesting to read some of the more controversial thoughts haha.

So very tricky to come to any real conclusions surrounding clear reasoning for so much of what we know. It does however remain my default that the fundamentals across revenue, debt and company potential via existing partners significantly outweigh the dilution - and that the pain unfortunately just needs to be borne in the meantime.

If nothing else at least these RNS's have given us something more meaty to talk about lol.

GLA

Hi Mel

In the context of where the lines are drawn between companies and when their reporting is liekly to become combined from - i.e. would napster revenue be "frozen" from a reporting prespective for Real networks at the point the RTO was announced and all revenue from that point could be reported by the enlarged group, or would it be from the point of admission of maybe even some milestone in the middle? I literally have no idea but would guess it would be at the point of readmission. I'm wondering because the enlarged group has already reported that the combined 2020 revenue for 2020 was $96m but in reality, if the the revenue can only officially be counted from re-admission then its likely to be more like $8m........a big swing from the perspective of reporting. you guys seem much more knowledgeable with such intricacies.

Also as a complete side-note, following on from what Themis said - If there is no holding RNS then i had thought that technically it must mean they're selling them off. I've just had a quick re-cap on the rules and they're slightly different for non Uk companies for which shares are for AIM listed companies and it appears that there's plenty of loop holes for credit institutions and investment firms where there is a tranfer of securities as collateral. Not sure if this applies or not as im not well read in this area . At best in effect it means that they're only obliged to report at each 5% interval as opposed to 1% intervals over 3%. Their initial conversion @ 63m shares would have only put them at 2.4% by my calcs so they wouldn't have had to have declared.....Now however i'm not sure and work it out to be circa 7.3% & the third biggest shareholder before they convert more. If they converted the remainder now they could be convert and gain an extra 250m shares and easily become the largest shareholder by quite some way. Not sure how this would sit with the board and where their limits are to 'protect' investors.

At these prices thats another 10% dilution.

I'm pleased that they're investing but definitely going to be emailing Equitory for an explanation. keen to hear if anyone has any thoughts on this.

GLA

Will be interesting to see how the shareprice reacts. At present that takes the total converted to £3.57m which still leaves a decent amount of potential dilution and a decent amount converted to shares.

Great news about expanding territories with SONOS.

Italian, Mel - do you guys have any experience with RTOs - specifically when the Napster accounts are likely be included from?

GLA

Was looking back to see what I'd missed and the market maker article is very interesting. Seems to fit with frequent price action on this one for sure

Sorry lord not following

Only Three weeks left I think ??

LSE trade reporting appears to be complete nonsense too because the guys easily outweigh the sells yet we're 10% down. Complete rubbish

Bugger all I suspect other than a combination of low volume (prior to the drop), the absence of any news flow or communications and the fact that due to proximity to the financial information release, there's now unlikely to be any positive news releases between now and when it's released - meaning opportunity for the SP to be susceptible to another push lower.

I agree it's a bloody frustrating share to be involved with

Lol shocking that they think that this is equal to consistent investor communications.

Proper bugger all in terms of trade volume. If they avoid announcing any information until results out until the end of the month it's a fair slap away. That will be practically 3 months by that point since there was any announcements (excluding the RNS for the PI interview). It's where I think it's going, but still remains complete b****cks when they talk about consistent communication. Still.....only 3 weeks until it lands. I'm praying for good things. The only thing that will keep the SP down here as I see it, is if Napster revenues drop further and the trend continues down.

GLA

Themis

I eventually get half baked responses if I persist for a response. Their responses are generally perpetuating the exact same information. Anything that doesn't have an easy answer is ignored.

GLA

This is true Mel. Just a shame that we even have to speculate this far down the line rather than being provided the information along the way

Apparently they've for sufficient cash flow to last until march 2022 according to statements in the interview. The but that's unclear to me is whether this is utilising just the 8m from N&G or includes the Davis loan facility or not. I'm guessing that it would but not sure at what point they'd be looking to require extra funds but I certainly hope that they won't need to raise any more money. Maybe that's me being naive but if they're hitting the marketing hard then I'd hope they manage to keep generating enough to cover costs. This also brings us back to the questions of what 'wignificant capex savings' have been made and whether or not MVR continues as a business in its own right or not as these things both significantly influence what the overheads are.

Right I'm with to now I think. the speculation is around the timeframe in which the CLNs need to be converted as opposed the actual drawdown of the loan. So in principle at present only circa 1.5m has been converted that we know of, but regardless of this at some point in June Napster will have drawn all 8m. So it remains to be seen how much will be converted. I'm in 2 minds with what I would prefer to happen. Although potentially more dilutive, I've pondered whether it would be better if the fill conversion was announced as it would technically bury the CLN issue completely. Or whether it would be best that less was converted and the company chooses to pay back with the 5%? Not sure what anyone else thinks? Personally I think full conversion would probably be best

Morning Lord

I'm not quite following what the question is? Apologies if I'm being dim

GLA

You can guarantee the big boys are all getting proper updates and as long as their all happy to chug along then I think we're looking good. Good news at present (at least IMO) is that there's a significant re-rate to be had purely based on current fundamentals so I think (providing you have a low enough average) that it should be win win as theres a hell of a lot of upside beyond a 2.5 x multiple of the current shareprice. That's a lot of upside. Hasn't stopped me moaning mind you lol. But that's because I've gone pretty heavy into this one and it's causing me some short term pain

GLA

Thanks Croydonboys. Interesting that Asia is perceived to be area for biggest growth. Hopefully we're well placed with Singtel providing we can make that partnership count

GLA

* sorry my post meant to say key information missing from financials....

Hi djp

Optimism has certainly been trumped by reality but let's not make this out to be that this is solely impatience or expecting too much.

The company has released financial info but this has key information about why additional funds are required and why the release is being accelerated. The financials also have thus far still failed to quantify what the 'significant' capex savings are and there's no reason that this cannot be shared with investors.

Additionally, the presentation, operational update and the press releases are mostly speculative statements which do not actually give much information. It was welcomed very much to see some targeted turnover though. A big step in the right direction on this specifically. However, the admission document was explicit about the first milestone of the marketing campaign, and in consideration of the onboarding of equitory and the declaration of forthcoming consistent communication to investors, it is not unreasonable to expect this milestone to be specifically acknowledged - even if only to tell us plans has changed.

Furthermore, the press releases also added new information about continuation of the MVR business as opposed to sunsetting it post app launch - due to fondness for the brand. This is not insignificant information, is again against what has been provided in the AD and perpetuates the inconsistent and unclear communication to investors.

I plan to be in this for the long term but all of my gripes at present all revolve around the poor delivery of information from the company and/or failure to follow through with the information which has been provided. Yes there has been an improvement but do I think it's enough and do I think they're communicating appropriately? No. The absence of true information means they continue to be unaccountable and this is why I have an issue with it. They are accountable for absolutely bugger all at the moment because we have nothing to measure anything against.

As I say, I'm long term but I disagree with what youre saying and certainly do not think that the board should be applauded for their current communication skills.

GLA

If anyone needs to be shot for rampant rubbish it's Napster board and equitory. They're the ones who haven't delivered here. Considering the clear statements within the admission document I know I was certainly still hopeful that they'd drop something today too.