Member Info for Ocelot77

Scott has the majority of holding. It puts him in control to lead a buyout. I have commented here for a long time that LoopUp could return to being private, planning a later sale, what else would be the continued motivation of the high stake investors. Ordinary shareholders will lose out, as a reasonable offer will be less than they bought. On a brighter note, despite the pound falling, LoopUp collects revenue globally. So the new PGi revenues will have a gain over the forecasts relative to the US$ rise against the £. Given the price drop today, the opportunity to invest at this price is stinkingly good.

JTD - I agree. SO no big bang roll-out, rather it will be phased. How they categorise customers and manage each phase (grouping) with their limited resources comes down to management skills.

Remember PGi kept acquiring for a growth of revenue, despite the decline of revenue per customer. You can't "right size" for now and shrink easily later, taking on staff and infrastructure comes with commitments. Loop can not afford that burden, nor will they make the same mistakes.

"it is unimaginable that they were simply transferred" Quite, and despite your past tense, they haven't been transferred, according to the last RNS the first batch have only just been notified.

PGi are not simply turning off customers on a given day, reading into PGi they have made this agreement as a best endeavour to shed costs and reduce debt. So PGi will be continuing service until collectively with Loop they agree on batches to transition, those that don't transition I expect will be able to continue with PGi until a given date.

I'll hazard a guess "the first and largest batch" per the RNS will be the smaller enterprise customers, where the transition can be largely automated for quick wins. After the first, I would anticipate batches to be categorised with more attention. Attention that focuses the transitioning customers spend from a propriety conferencing service to Teams driven.

Loop has agreed on a revenue share deal, for customers that transition, and no more. If I am wrong, the burden of costs set against declining revenue will drag Loop down.

"It must also mean Loop are getting some of PGI's infrastructure, facilities and maybe staff or they simple could not manage the transition of so many customer".

JTD - I hope not!

You have probably just blundered in part why the revenue number seems conservative... Loop have an infrastructure, they also have an equivalent conferencing product so I can't imagine any appetite to take on PGi costs. I make the assumption until each transition, each customer will remain managed by PGi not Loop Up. As you touch on moving an enterprise service will bring friction, and to move each customer will end up being a mutual decision by the customer and Loop Up...

What you're most certainly recognising, the success of this new revenue is down to how Loop manage with limited resources, especially considering they must be ultra focused on the new portfolio, not to mention LinkedIn indicates they are operating on less employees since a couple of years back.

The last thing Loop need is greater cost, even with the new revenue, given it's declining. What we really want to see is Loop convert the best customers to their new portfolio and see economies of scale come from the PGi capacity on Loop Ups existing infrastructure.

You are absolutely correct todays RNS is setting plausible expectations, let's hope this starts a new era of investor engagement and communication from Loop Up.

WhiteKnight - cynical, and almost on point. Except it's not a case of PGi not being bothered about their own customers, it's a fact dial-up audio whilst still reasonable revenue is in decline. A quick Google shows PGi's holding company had debts and defaults a consequence of naturing a declining revenue stream with poor attempts to hide through various acquisitions.

Why are Loop different, well they weren't until they made the portfolio pivot. Now they are poised to succeed. The PGi revenue spares Loop the need to find alternative cash . Even better the deal only carries the cost of *resource and the right strategy* which can be covered by the new cash.

From the SP right now it's all upside. However, I understand the lack of market speculation, awaiting a few more proof points that this team has the right attributes to pull it off. I hope they can. Oh and +1p's gonna buy me a few thousand mars bars!

bunsenburner123 - LoopUp have traditionally served PSTN audio conferencing, with sustained growth by winning churn from the bigger known audio conferencing providers who progressively killed off audio conferencing services for the past decade.

Understanding the growth was unsustainable, pre Covid Loop started building a new proposition around Teams, with aim to serve all existing customers the new proposition.

Covid came and brought an initial increase in the use of Loop traditional services, but then the whiplash, as the end users either chose or were told to use alternative services like Team or Zoom. Despite the short-lived Covid spike, this brought a cliff edge drop to the already declining use of Loops audio conf product.

Loop then push the Teams product, but not fast enough to catch and migrate existing customers, who likely already have Teams and audio connect services through other providers. In any case and critical, Loops new product while it could serve their past customer base, has new targets - businesses that can't yet drop dial PSTN but want the flexibility of VoIP extensions, and are based across the majority of countries Loop have become a regulated Telco. Better still Loop doesn't;t want these customers direct but via telcos and bigger providers that are not licensed across the same geographies.

Loop have a burden with the new product - it needs a critical mass of usage to drive down operational and transit costs. This is where the PGi business could be a saving grace to buy more time for Loop to grow clients on their new proposition. Plus the opportunity to upsell the PGi base to Loops teams service.

So yes Loop have awesome margins, but they need volume and growth.

JTD - It's all upside, I just wish the communication to investors set a realistic expectation that can be exceeded vs a revenue figure that's bound to decline. Let's hope this will be corrected with more frequent updates. Key being Loops strategy, previously a weakness demonstrated when bringing on the MeetingZone business, so this a great opportunity to flex the MBA's and demonstrate they can turnaround.

I am seriously increasing my holding, but waiting out a communications trajectory that grows my confidence of Loops management and strategy.

Anyone reading who is new to Loop, this stock is undervalued, Loop needed a cash injection which this PGi business brings, providing a longer runway. Now Loop has more time to establish significant partner relationships and cloud wins. At this SP, forget the history and consider Loops direction and pivoted portfolio, built on a proven platform.

Remember 10m revenue to PGi won’t be assured to Loop. That revenue will reflect billed usage to date, but this step change in provision will require every user to be transitioned to the Loop platform, and while I bet Loop try to make it frictionless it will require communication and instruction to every end user… and that likely requires agreement with bigger enterprises… Anticipated friction could cause the majority of existing business to swop out all audio to another service.

If Loop have the charm and resource to romance many customers to stay with them for audio attach to Zoom, Teams, etc. this is an amazing gift.

For me the true measure of success is Loops ability to manage their finite resource and effectively own and grow each relationship, no small task.

JTD, I know we have often sparred on this forum, mostly owing to your optimism and referring to Loop as our company, if it were we'd have steered it quite differently. Today you're closer to my perspective "Bod... insensitive to the disparity between their outcome and ours".

I do not dispute the demand for Teams PSTN termination, but it's clear Loop are failing to show success and have misjudged their value at the party.

My best guess the leadership team are equally disappointed in themselves. The evidently bland BoD, need a shakeup, they are clearly failing to bring ideas, ignite major partnerships, or direction.

WIll the 25% shareholder exercise their majority and shake the BoD? Does anyone have any expectations from the forthcoming AGM?

To make key decisions, ‘special resolutions’, it takes a majority of 75% plus… that’s why holding just over 25% is key. It also gives the 25% plus holder the right to appoint or remove board members, they will be recognised as a PSC.

How can management buy-out happen without the vote to go ahead from shareholders? Funny you should ask... one person, the same who bought the majority at the last placing, holds just over 25% of LOOP.

This suggests LOOP are buying time. Sailing very close to the wind.

My optimistic side, they have a deal not quite over the line that they hope to have signed to share at the same time as a poor year, to show the potential for the approaching year.

My pessimistic side, based on Loop needing funds, and are not positioned for another placing, leaving acquisition or MBO. I don’t see how investors win with either way, and the last thing they want is a suspension.

Now it could be both, in which case I’d consider hoping for good news, a little raise, perhaps to 25p close to the last placing, Armageddon, and then the change of funding.

“ Cost me a lot of money on that rise, buying in at 12p”
That boy Wres should do his research… just an idea perhaps read the history in this forum and listen to the long investors. Just sayin’ :-).

"some good people have returned to loop" That is good to hear, I doubt past employees would return if the culture was toxic with intolerable leadership.

I am ok with Thetruththe, who has been burnt by Loop as an employee. A good employee buys into the mantra, placing trust in the leadership until they don't. As shareholders, we have all shared that pain. One difference, a good employee can walk into a better job with little financial loss. Shareholders can't.

Wressmycash on the other hand is ruining the chat on this board, failing to contribute any meaningful analysis, and calling out those that do. Wressmycash is literally pumping out googled rhetoric.

Wressmycash, where do you find the time for the relentless posts? I saw one where you referenced people paid to input to forums, ironic? Your account by volume of posts on LOOP, is drowning out concerned shareholders. It really devalues the value of this forum.

In direct response to your comment, it's "time we all looked at the bigger picture". I really don't think you have, rather just reading PR, which naturally does not cast any lowlight.

Re Mashme, beyond the hype, I previously commented: "The MashMe website leads the proposition with 'room of the future' but honestly look at the assemble of hardware used, it's just an install bundle with off the shelf product, installed by contractors (Emtec). The Emtec relationship is a man in a van install service used by many global video conference suite players, it's not special or exclusive. Sales through the partnership will still need to be LU/MM led." MashMe really isn't going to deliver the golden bullet that will bring the renewable services and high margin we shareholders are looking for.

Efforts need to be placed to bring a winning strategy and solid proposition. Teams and Mash are two distinctly different propositions, barely complementary and non-exclusive. The telco presence we are told is exclusive (but really isn't) shouldn't be limited to Teams, while that might evolve tomorrow it's too late, as PSTN's all but dead...

Telefonica contracting implies trust, and if it works out, they could simply acquire Loop. Delivery and channel sell-through are essential. Let's also be clear the sale on this occasion is for the contracted man in van installation and maintenance of off the shelf hardware, Loops package but not their IP, nor the high margins achievable with cloud telephony subject to achieving a critical mass.

Where today's rise sustains by COP, and together with the trading volume LOOP will be on the radar of many, however, for the institutional investors, it will take more news like Telefonica, evidenced in the next results.

I am holding judgement until mid-next week. My next check the H1 results.

The existence of this announcement, the first LI case study in over a year (dare not scroll back further), suggests there's nothing bigger to report...

According to LinkedIn Delancey has 35 employees. The revenue collected will be a contribution, but LU need deals with clients who have a minimum user base of 3500+ if they are going to shift the needle. Perhaps they have many, just Delancey were the only one that signed off the announcement.

Not excited.

A ~30% rise could draw attention to the stock, as a penny stock many could take a punt... however where they get a 10% gain they might also quickly close. What we need, what we won't get, is Gamestop hype.

I do not think the company will go to the dogs, however, I do speculate the value will be transferred elsewhere as "the company is saved", at a huge cost to long shareholders.

JTD I love your persistent hopium, maybe you could get a role on LU IR team?

The MashMe product leads their website and presumably proposition with "room of the future" but honestly look at the assemble of hardware used, it's just an install of bundled off the shelf product, installed by contractors (Emtec). The Emtec relationship is like all man in a van install services used by every global video conference suite player, it's not special or exclusive. Sales through the partnership will still need to be LU/MM led.

You mention GKE, but that's a container PaaS, that could equally be used from AWS ECS, MSFT Azure AKS, IBM Cloud etc. The MM IP I read about previously is an implementation of WebRTC, it's based on opensource.

The cross-selling, that would be MSFT teams into the mentioned MM customer base? All universities will already have Microsoft education licenses, so then the opportunity is for LU to provide partner dial services vs students using IP audio? Nope.

Ok then sell MashMe into existing LU customer... except it really is a different product and market. The complementary products LU need should maximize it's core infrastructure and expertise, where as MashMe, can really only take advantage of LU's sale's capability.

I invested in CaaS provider, which I expected to grow into a bigger CaaS provider exploiting the telco investment. CaaS is an incredible space, did you see how much Ericcson paid to acquire Vonage?!

Instead of scaling a service based on own IP, LU have become a me two reseller of Teams with MashMe a small-time hardware installer, bolted on.

I still don't fully understand the last aquisition. Ansoff's Matrix is really basics, yet hasn't applied here. MashMe resell product, at best a systems integrator, I fail to see significant IP or how it compliments LU... If it came with an Ivy League or Russel Group customer base I'd get it. Either the acquisition is once again poor judgment, or it's part of a larger plan understood and driven by the larger shareholder, rather than the BOD.

Chuck Rhoades would have a field day, the only issue is he goes after billions.