Member Info for news

Go to Twitter and in the window, type "#imtk". There one can see openly that 2 - 3 "Tipsters" called for the price down.
without actually checking what is the total price package. Well, NO ONE knows until the co gives the details and the co results are due. When one gets to the page #imtk, look at the icon "Top".

The IMTK RNS came out on 17 Aug 2018 at 15:40pm and there was no reaction of significance as the share price was still 8.55p to buy [I checked live dummy price] and one buy of 10,000 was the last deal.

Over the weekend, these "Tipsters" with no licence to give price targets etc started twits. People may have panicked without asking them how they got their figures. So, basically, without even checking with the Nomad as to what the final price is worked out to be given there is a loan by V.M of £500,000, folks just gave out "fag" packet price targets.

However, on 26 July 2018, the RNS was known from DAY 1 that the price would be 2.5p - 5p. But WITHOUT TIPSTERS, the price DID NOT FALL [answer to question].

So, all those who sold, they could contact the proper people at FCA. Others have done so. For this reason, even on forum, laymen should NOT be giving out target prices which could constitute investment advice etc? For this reason, the FCA wants analysts [trained & qualified by City firms] to provide broker reports/notes. That way, people are protected as these firms have to be registered with the FCA and presumably have professional indemnity insurance.

In the USA, they start class action.

I am mentioning this because one poster is unhappy with his loss. Other people have complained to the FCA and they have contacted the sol-called self appointed unlicensed tipsters with no insurance.

Hope that is helpful. It is fact and one can check Twitter to see for oneself.

She started Advanced Computer on AIM in 2008 with a mkt cap IPO of £32m.
In 2014, Advanced Computer received a TAKEOVER OFFER OF £724 million from VISTA, a US private equity group.

Comment:
So, she turned early investors money from £32m into £724m = 20 times or every £1,000 into £20,000.
This is all on public record and fact. Please check.

Under the "Whitewashing Waiver Rule 9 Takeover Code" there are RULES so I am sure that the price paid is "Fair Value" in light of the awaited accounts etc. That is the job of the Takeover Panel, Nomad etc. That is also fact.

We await the "Whitewashing Waiver Rule 9 Takeover Code."
We are also awaiting the IMTK results.
The calculations will have to take in the LOAN of £500,000 vs the "Controlling Investment Equity".
So, that means the £500,000 will have to be ADDED into the "Controlling Investment Equity" + Interest DIVIDED by the shares = THE REAL PRICE PER SHARE.

Unless the FIGURES ARE KNOWN , its all a stab in the dark.

Observation
Over the weekend [after the Fri, 17 Aug 2018 RNS re:Controlling Equity Investment] Twit was very busy with Tippers calling for a price. However, none could get 1 price as they were not in agreement and no technical calculations given etc. Today, is Day 2 [Tues, 21 Aug 2018] after the said weekend.

Often, from observation, the price Tippers mention is "low". I give an example - IMTK is currently, say 6.375p [London South East free price above this page which is a delayed price & NOT Live] with a MKT CAP OF £2.1MILLION with a comparitively low share count of 33 million shares in issues.

So, take the 4p that one tipper wants means that the MKT CAP goes to £1.3million appox. From the update, one recall that the Revenue is around the £3.7million mark [not adjusted for new clients etc]. Cost savings were said to be £800k from recall.

<><>PRICE TO SALES RATIO: IMTK
[Total mkt cap divide by total sales over 12 mth period]

That means, in theory IMTK with REVENUES/Sales of £3.7m with a MKT Cap of £1.3million!
So, in theory that = £1.3m divide by £3.7m = 0.3 [Revenue/Sales more than price = Getting Sales 3 times MORE than price or £1 equivalent to £3 Sales appox]

Link : Price to Sales Ratio https://ycharts.com/glossary/terms/ps-ratio
Quote: In 2010 Starbucks had a price to sales ratio[PS] of 1.12 while Yahoo had a PS ratio of 2.56. In other words, Yahoo shareholders were paying $2.56 for $1 sales whilst Starbucks shareholders would only pay $1.12 for $1 of sales."

In these examples, the sales were LESS than the SHARE PRICE in the Yahoo case.

Comment:
Hence, investors need to know why anyone would call X share price or Y. One needs to know HOW the figure/s are calculated using ANALYSTS NORM TOOLS like Price to Sales Ratio [PS RATIO].

Otherwise, its appears to be calling share price like "bingo" numbers ie any number is as one would like to pay. I remember 1 Tipper said G.. an oil stock in Kurdistan is going to 0. One can check the current price currently and it is not 0.

So, it would be nice if some WORKINGS can be given to justify any share price call that the investment community uses as NORM.

Sorry, not editing as in between lunch. Please check as there can be errors. DYOR.IMO.

On the London South East, Tues, 21 Aug 2018, the top riser rose +36.36% [open & free data at 10.25am]. Their 2 RNS was :"Funding Update" on 14 & 20 Aug 2018. Earlier RNS was: "Senior Debt Referral & Additional Funding" of 30 July 2018. This co*s mkt cap is £32m and Senior Debt per the RNS is: £63m. The top posting at 10:15am on the said forum: "The FUNDING Green Flag has secured the co going forward."

Comment:
In the case of IMTK, the 2 RNS of 26.7.18 & 17.8.18 refer to: "Controlling Investment Equity". Weekend twit tippers comments on IMTK and today*s top riser illustrates INCORRECT reading of funding in general and in particular, the latter being "the Investment Equity". Thought that this is interesting and educational.

So, the $36,000 question is: Does it mean that funding, INVESTMENT equity must mean the share price must fall as expounded by Twit Stock Tippers?

One poster remembers an oil stock that did a funding at 0.06p for shareholders registered on x date and yet the share price of the stock was 0.39 - 0.43p.

One latest example is that of a large estate agency who placed at 10p which was not an open offer to all. Credit Suisse gave a target price of 17p and the share is at 14p+

REM [no longer exists under this name so can mention] went from 0.04p to 2.25p [£1m to £95m mkt cap] when David Lenigas took over the shell Zest Music. Hence, why investors are interested in big names entering shell like co*s. I remember then, day after day, it was the same comment about funding.

One for discussion. In the case of IMTK, it is 1 person taking a "Controlling Investment Equity" in the co. Investment Equity is not the usual placing at a lending institution.

Alaistair Clayton, CEO of PRIM on the sale of Horse Hill stake to UKOG plc today [Mon, 20 Aug 2018]: " Furthermore, we gain exposure to UKOG*s other projectS including the ADVANCED Broadford Bridge also in the Weald. We are expecting Excellent Results from the EWT...continue to perform as expected."

On topic: PRIM CEO talking about UKOG plc. By the way, UKOG plc became the operator on 1 Aug 2018 and NO longer an Investment co. Someone posted that UKOG plc is an investment co. Please check.

As a shareholder of IMTK, I will watch with interest as to what happens next. So dont think that by not posting, I have flown the coop. Nothing more to add.

News. Mon 20 Aug 2018.

P.S.

If a placing had been done on 1 May 2018 as implied in the IMTK RNS, it may be 1/2 p or less say given the share price was 1.13p region.

Simple maths. The investor*s £1.5m goes into the bank. Add the money into the calculations, does it not mean that it has translated in the mkt cap as cash?

What is the issue about the investment? Is it not good that it may be in the range of 2.5-5p given it has to be grossed up for the loan, interest etc. How can that not be positive to the potential placing perhaps at a discount.

An oil co did an opening placement for shareholders registered on a certain day. The shares were trading at 0.43p to 0.39p and the share price NEVER FELL to the placing price of 0.06p. I know because I got the placing shares.

emil11

I am having my dinner so bear with me. Could you kindly READ the 1 May 2018 RNS which I quoted?
I dont have the RNS with me as this post is not on my Hypothesis/Theory Cals.
Basically, isnt the co saying that they needed to do a PLACING [Ordinary meaning] in order that they may continue to speak to parties? Why is that? If one looks at any co negotiating, they need to have CASH in the bank.
I have just checked the London South East free share chart on IMTK. On 30 Apr 2018, IMTK share price was 1.15p and on 7 May 2018, it was 1.13p. I cant get the 1 May 2018 as the chart is not fune tuned enough.

If IMTK had to do a PLACING via the usual, how much would they do the placing at. We all are cognisant that given the needing cash situation as implied [?], it appears that the norm is at a DISCOUNT. How big a discount? I know of a co who wanted 2p but the financiers doing the placing offered 1.5p period. In this case, the co was going to drill a big project.

So, isnt it correct what I said that thankfully, investors did NOT need to do a discounted placing? Instead, IMTK issued another RNS of 26 July 2018 to say that V.M is giving the co a LOAN OF £500,000.

I did simple maths just to illustrate that the share price had to be grossed up for this loan? Again norm as it cannot be given for free as norm. Also, interest needs to be charged even at normal rates. If one owes a broker money, does it not say that for every day the payment is outstanding, they will charge x %? This is norm in business. So that has to be grossed up as well?

Why does the Investor want a "Controlling" shareholding? It is norm so that the investor*s money is not spent for anything other than value creation ? Without voting control in majority, there is no management control as such. This is norm in business?

This investment is subject to "Whitewashing Waiver Rule 9 Takeover Code" and as the co RNS said, it has to go to the Takeover Panel for approval.

Will the Takeover Panel NOT want to see the figures and that the rule of the highest sp preceeding the 12 months be complied with if I read the rule correctly?
L
What is the difference between 26 July 2018 RNS and the share price going up to nearly 10p+ and the RNS of 17 Aug 2018? What happens if the a/c*s shows a SMALL LOSS say since the co needed cash on 1 May 2018 - Trading Update.

Was it not good that the Investor gave a loan in the meantime? Or would investors want the co not to get an investor in and a placing to be done? I am discussing the aspects of the whole picture.

I have to stop for dinner.

At the end of the day, I am sure the Takeover Panel will see that the rules are complied. How can anyone without ANY FIGURES or the awaited a/c just jump to the conclusion of the figures?

Speak later. DYOR.IMHO.

Conclusion:

Ref: IMTK RNS, 1 May 2018: "Trading Statement"
Quote: "The directors continue to carefully MONITOR the co*s CASH POSITION & it may be N e c e s s a r y to seek additional FUNDS in order to successfully progress the ongoing Formal Sales Process."

Comment:
Thankfully, IMTK did not have to SEEK FUNDING perhaps by the normal type ie PLACING.
Hence, why the next RNS of 26 July 2018 stated: "New Finance Agreement" re: Vin Murria giving a £500k loan.
It appears to show goodwill and saved both the co to seek funding and for shareholders too.

Isnt that positive?

Oh, by the way, for completeness, one has to mention that in an article, our investor is said to have not been born with a silver spoon.

I am sure everyone that the £1.5million [£1million investment equity, say + £500k] will be going STRAIGHT INTO THE COFFERS OF IMTK and if you re-calculate this sum back into the share price and mkt value, it hasnt been watered down?

The money invested via logical deduction has to be for use to enhance value?

Otherwise, why did IMTK decide to put the co out for sale or investment ?

In fact, if one were the Investor, they are cognisant that their money is on the line as it leaves her bank a/c for good and gets nothing except PAPER SHARES. Unless one can enhance the stock, what can one do with PAPER SHARES on its own since IMTK *s account needs a loan?

Hence, why co*s seek BIG NAMES to invite to invest as they may have contacts etc.

Just a discussion of looking at the broader picture and why the IMTK board have done well to get the investor?

Let us say, for example, "The" Investment Equity Investor puts £1 million into IMTK @2.5p [RNS 17 Aug 2018 stated as likely]. That appears to be 40 million shares with simple maths although NO amount has been mentioned.

From the Financing RNS of 26 July 2018, one understands that this said investor is LOANING the co £500k.

So, simple maths says £1million + £500k [50% of £1m] divide by 40 million shares = 4p roughly and NOT 2.5p.

So, one can see that by Twitter folk jumping to their own calculations without knowing details is stabbing in the dark.
Just as an example.

Also, the "Whitewashing Waiver Rule 9 Takeover Code" has more details and why dont Twitter people ask the broker/nomad before saying its x or y and therefore the price should be Z?

Any reasonable person knows that NO bank or financial institutions will loan money for 0 return hence why when placings are done it is at a discount?

So, this said Investor is bringing maybe £1.5 million to this co and with what SP says is a "Scintillating " record. This investor is listed in the Tech 100 Rich so does it not mean that IMTK is very fortunate to get such a high calibre candidate with her investment?

The co accounts are awaited and it may be there have been FURTHER calculations done as I am sure our investor will have to do due diligence.

Just a discussion to SHOW all calculations COULD PROVE TO BE WRONG as NO ONE has:
1) The details of the sum invested.
2)The rules
3)The total sum as the loan has to be taken into a/c as no one lends for free anywhere except perhaps Bank of Mum and Dad etc. Certainly, no financial institution is a charity?
4) One may be assured that the Takeover Panel will look at all the various aspects in the Report so why not let the proper authorities look at it and proper financial experts to look at fair value.
5) On Twitter, none of the folks doing their own broker notes [no one can agree on 1 share price] put out a disclaimer that they are not licenced by the FCA to do share valuations. If they do, investors will know that these are fag pack calculations one can ask at the Pub?

DYOR.IMHO. Just a discussion. Sorry not editing as eye strain.

Having taken on board what has been said here and on Twitter, may I suggest that we take this matter to the London Stock Exchange Regulations so that it can be sorted out namely:

1) Some think the share price should be x, y or z and NOT what the market says per Efficient Mkt Theory?
2) The RNS and Twitter re-wording ie the latter is correct and not the RNS terminology: "Controlling Investment Equity [the Investment Equity]?
3) The co is due to release results and that the Takeover Panel, Broker & Nomad with their licences dont know as much of the rules as Twitter folks who are doing calculation without ACTUAL FIGURES etc.

That would SOLVE EVERYTHING. Anyone interested in approaching the London Stock Exchange Regulations Dept?
A suggestion that would solve everything and everyone*s comments put to them. That would cut to the chase ?

Mon 20 Aug 2018.

I put the question. IMTK wanted to sell the co - the results are awaited so cant comment until we get the results of the actual figures. They stopped the process with parties. Then, came this new financing deal of 26 July 2018. The range was given. As said, the "White Washing Waiver Rule 9 Takeover Code" is detailed.

No one need pay what is the market price - that*s choice. However, in order to calculate share price, one needs to be licenced under the FSA otherwise, its figures without mechanics? It is rather obvious that those who are holding shares believe that the Effiicient Mkt Theory has priced the share correctly based upon the news released by the co.

However, if one were to change the RNS into something that was not said [per Twitter?], then it changes the story to something different?

The exact words of the RNS stated: "likely". How does one work out the whole package? The results [awaited], the £500k loan etc and the rules. I have checked on "White washing Waiver Rule 9 Takeover Rule" and there are procedures to follow. Why NOT let the Takeover Panel, Broker & Nomad oversee this as I am sure like everything else there would be a need for a Report with the normal VALUATION BASIS?

None of us are qualified or licenced by the FSA to make QUANTATIVE calculations WITHOUT knowing the ACTUAL figures or the basis of the said Rules.

By the way, in answer to the comment: there is NO suggestion that anyone taking a "Controlling Investment Equity" is going to take it private? What would be the point? Why spend so much money plus give a loan of £500k? One can buy private co*s outright with that type of money? One wants to buy into a listed co in order to run and have a "measure" of management say? Yes, No? Norm?

Oh, by the way, to complete the whole story, someone tweeted [one can see and check on Twitter #imtk] that the shares should be "Suspended" as it was a "Market Issue" and added "Scene was set from word go." As said, scence was set from word go ie RNS 26 July 2018 already spelt out the terms from Day 1. I took it to mean that this person wanted the London Stock Exchange to be contacted to suspend the shares as the RNS did not say what was said on Twitter?

Usually, one could take it to mean in general academic terms to be suspend in this case to ensure an "Orderly market" and to prevent a "Disorderly market". That way, there would be no room to "mis-read" the said 2 RNS*s as said of 26.7.18 & 17.8.18 with no difference between the two except Twitter comment.

So, that is historically what happened.

DYOR. IMHO.

P.S.

On 26 July 2018, the RNS came out and the share price went up upon the V.M details.
[Please read and check the London South East IMTK Share Chart which is free to see].
So, it was known from 26 July 2018 what the actual terms were from DAY 1.

On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 IMTK issued another further update RNS which is exactly the same detail ie "Controlling Investment Equity." It also mentioned the likely price. The RNS was issued at 15:40pm which meant there was 50 mins to digest the RNS and the last transaction was 8.55p with total 3 deals with Volume totalling 23,000+ shares dealt with. SO NO CHANGE IN THE SHARE PRICE of significance. Same situation and details known from 26.7.18 but NO one said anything on Twitter then.

However, regrettably, there was Twitter comment over the weekend after the Fri, 17 Aug 2018. However due to posting rules of the London South East which is in line with London Stock Market regulations, it was NOT repeated on this IMTK forum. Maybe, they are not aware that even on Twitter there are guidelines in line with the LSE and authorities.

So, that is what historically has happened.

It would be interesting to see what happens next.

Mon 20 Aug 2018

DYOR. IMHO. [This is part 2 of my earlier post under this thread]

Today, there has been a RNS from another co. On Twitter, someone just tweeted without even checking the RNS and did a calculation by extrapolating figures.

Upon reading the RNS, the CEO of the co gave the financial basis. It is now been tweeted.

In the same manner, one should CHECK HOW the FIGURES were derived. Also, the IMTK RNS of 26.7.18 & 17.8.18 stated: "Controlling Investment Equity [the Investment Equity]" conditional upon the Takeover Panel..." Also, in the said 26.7.18 RNS it also stated that VM will loan the co £500k. Without seeing IMTK*s results [awaited] etc and the detailed workings/calculations, how can one throw up figures blind?

It is regrettable that any investor could have rung up the authorities to check if they did not understand rather than listening to Twitter postings who are not licensed by the FSA or a Financial Advisor [Licensed]? It is always wise to check with the authorities which is due diligence?

DYOR. IMHO. Please check.
Mon, 20 Aug 2018

The actual RNS of 26 July 2018 stated: "Controlling Investment Equity [the Investment Equity]" conditional on the Takeover Panel..." The RNS of Fri, 17 Aug 2018 Further Update is still the same. So NO difference.

The above comes under the "Whitewashing Waiver Rule 9 of the Takeover Code."

As such, there are certain guidelines to follow.

For balance, people should enquire HOW the said RNS figure has been worked out.

The said RNS specifically stated: "Controlling Investment Equity" and that is clearly stated.

Any technical or market value basis?