Member Info for OPENSPACES

People as a expert can you please comment.
It would seem to me that most patent cases involve highly technical interpretations argued by engineers. Furthermore, the preamble to the trial seems to have stages designed to cut through the technical fog and simplify the arguments. At that stage I would assume that the judge has a fair idea of the rights and wrongs of the case and would be the best person to adjudicate especially if they have presided over similar previous cases. Why would it therefore be advantageous to put the arguments all over again to a presumably a non-technical jury? Also, at the trial what would the role of the judge be, can she give technical direction or does she simply award costs/fines. It does seem to be a very long-winded process to eventually put in front of jury. Would appreciate your comments on the merits of the process and how it works in most cases

Well Claret I absolutely agree with you there (but please rampers)

To escape with a profit . Simples

OS has been sat here quietly taking in all the expert opinion and noting the new appointments. I did some time ago ask about the additional costs of the new manufacturing regime and I guess this is the first big salary acquisition. Don’t get me wrong I see all the possibilities but the ultimate question is, will CPX deliver? Still a reasonable tick up of late
I also note the comments about the aging BOD and wonder what their various exit strategies are?

In order to put CPXs finances into simple terms FY 19 total revenue from customers was $3.429m which included royalties of just over $1m. The cost of providing these services including staff and supply costs was $7.603m i.e. a loss of $4.174m (so every dollar of income incurs costs of $2.21dollars). This operational loss was reduced by the Australian government’s R and D rebate of $1.596m. PS I am no accountant, but this gives me an indication of the task ahead. Meanwhile an encouraging creep up today

As People would say get your facts rights . I am in fact 75 in July so I can proudly say and in my early 70s and PS I don't betray confidences! Still for me this is the end of arguing this particular outburst from the rampers determined to see off any dissenters. Happy New year everybody

There is no dispute that CPX generates more revenue from other sales than royalties and that is why I chose to quantify that in terms of percentages v total revenue . In the case of the Murata production facility they have bought equipment (by getting shareholders to pay for it) in what IMHO is a huge gamble given their previous track record is producing and selling . I cannot therefore sit by and say nothing when people describe it as a win win situation. They have diluted our holdings with no guarantee of success. Time will tell. As for the I need an audience well what a load of tosh from someone who posts mainly cut and paste jobs three or four tines a day. Any how all this spat started because I said royalties are just about a fifth of total income and that's what they are whether you like it or not. End of

So says the master squabbler !!

Semantics. Revenue is revenue. Whilst accepting your research powers are much more extensive than mine are you able to comment re the new production line ?
What are the additional premises costs if any?
What are the additional staffing costs if any ?
Have additional supply contracts been agreed (I remember a supply problem a couple years ago ) which drastically reduced income.
Are there any forecasts as to when this project will come into profit.?
You clearly see this acquisition as a win win whereas I see it as we are only being given half the story. Mind you I have always said other income revenue has to improve if CPX is ever to go into profit.
Having said that at the heart of our conversations is that you genuinely believe people only want to hear positive things about a share whereas I believe its easy to say things but harder to do them . We agree to differ. And by the way I agree I am a gambler (we all are) but that doesn't mean I shouldn't have an opinion

I know that People so what do you say royalties represent as a proportion of total revenue ? Not that the percentage is that important it is the total revenue generated that counts . I remember back in FY17 proving that Murata and AVX (as it was then) contributing equally a revenue of $350k pa each . Since then the core recurring revenue has not increased significantly i.e. to just over a $1m in FY 19. My point is that so far recurring royalties have not risen sharply and form only a small part of total revenue.

I wonder what Murata would have done with their production equipment if CPX didn't buy it. Bin it I suppose. The point I am trying to make is that any equipment is only worth what somebody is prepared to pay for it . So we have spent a few million quid all we need now are the customers. All I suggest is that historically CPX have never been that good at marketing . Time will tell

JH But unfortunately for you there are others who a similarly minded but you of course shout "duplicate accounts". I would of course remind you that this is a public bulletin board and no matter how much you might wish it to be the case, you are not a moderator. So sadly I decline your offer. If you had any sort of brain you would notice that most of my posts challenge the assumptions of rampers rather than following any negative dogma I am perceived to have . In my day we used to call it "testing understanding". On here it called trolling

People . Your credibility with me has now gone . I have researched royalties in this share over the years and have clearly established that when compared with total revenue they nearly always equate to about 18-20% and have not risen significantly over the years. You challenge this stament and ask that figures be provided. I do this but still you wont accept it and then when I ask for your version you decline. It seems therefore you are just trying to pick a fight for the sake of it, hoping to establish the "I am the only one who can be right" moral high ground. Sorry old chum it does not work with me. You are obviously a highly intelligent man but when push comes to shove you are just another super ramper. I dot decry your right to hold that opinion so please allow me to hold mine. End of

Also in March 2012 there was 9m shares placing “to acquire new production plant” p5 2012 annual report. Then we sold some production equipment to Nationgate in 2014. The point is that the information available re CPXs “production facilities” (Lane Cove / Malaysia) has always been a bit vague over the years with lots of changes of emphasis . All of this has left me with an impression that we have never had a real manufacturing strategy which works ... so we now have the latest attempt. I remain to be convinced this will be a win win .
Incidentally what percentage do you say royalties make up of total revenue People . You rubbished my assertion but not pout forward your contrary opinion

Clarejay. Does it matter where it was actually spent the facts are that £2.43m was raised in 2017 to accelerate certain projects but there has been no tangible effect on the bottom line. So what benefit do you say there has been for our £2.43m ?
People Historic total royalty income has not been comparing like with like for years because of AVX one off (well three actually) but recurring revenue you will find is about 20%
As regards Forecasts surely Allenby are provided with some direction from CPX
Still no matter what time will tell who is right .
One question where is previous People Power (Tech Tom) . Guess he saw the light as did Graham Wales or whatever his name was

The effect was said to have been felt in FY18 on wards. In FY18 the forecast total revenue was £5.3m with an outturn of $4.9m. In FY 19 forecast was £7.8 m (outturn $3.2m). So, no acceleration. You will note I never ask for proof of projections. That’s because no matter how much research you do they are only guess work. The past can be backed up with facts whereas the future cannot

Royalties have always been about $1m but have on occasions been masked by one off licence fees. In FY 19 the forecast total revenue was $5.162m although after a disastrous performance the out turn was $3.882 million. So royalties of $1076625 in FY19 was 20.8% against forecast and 27.6% against actual. If you go back for previous years it will be between 18% and 20%. I also proved that AVX and Murata contributed equally in royalties until the recent change. So please dont tell me I am a numpty when a lot of this have been proven before you arrived

As regards previous placing see RNS dated 24 Jan 2017 Subscription to raise £2.43 million CAP-XX, a world leader in supercapacitors, is pleased to announce that the Company has raised gross proceeds of £2.43 million, by way of a subscription (the "Subscription") of a total of 27,000,000 new ordinary shares (the "Subscription Shares") at a price of 9 pence per share (the "Subscription Price"). The Subscription Shares are to be issued within the Company's existing share allotment authorities, in line with CAP-XX's dilution policy which was approved by shareholders on 29 November 2016.
The proceeds of the Subscription will be used to accelerate a number of projects. As I recall a lot of this went to the Malyaisa operation but there was no acceleration.
So please People hold your opinion but don't treat ne as some sort of numpty who mouths spurious nonsense . I have been in this share a lot longer than you and have proven many of my statements before. Be lucky

People
Ultimately and I guess its only human nature, posters on this board only want hear good things about a share so as to justify their investment. It makes them feel good. Having said that I have been investing a lot longer than most and know that every business portrays itself in a positive way and almost always overstates their prospects. Some say that CPX has rock solid IP yet it only generates less than one fifth of its revenue. Several years ago as I recall there was a placing to increase production in Malaysia but that never took off. Now we have the latest win win placing. All I say is don’t believe everything you are told and that research is no guarantee to becoming a successful company. There is only one thing which we help CPX and that is sales and nobody can guarantee them. The world is a changing place, and nothing is forever. I remembering listening to a presentation years ago from Rank Xerox who thought they had a licence to print money, then along came Canon. I appreciate all your comments, but I have one thing and that’s experience and my experience of CPX is that “ I heard it all before”. I hope you prove me wrong but let’s wait and see. And by the way my mental and physical health is perfectly fine. The only issue I have is that I don’t share your total confidence that CPX will deliver.

Sorry Kencarv but to date CPX as a business has been built on quicksand. It has never ever come near breaking even in 15 odd years. Ok its time may be coming but all this talk of win win rosy future etc we have heard it all before. Now I don't mind anyone having a contrary point of view but your personal insults coupled with the request to report me for simply stating my point of does nothing but make me the more determined

Can nobody understand that 100% of all patents case starters are confident of winning but 50% are subsequently proved wrong , thereby indicating their confidence was misplaced . Doesn't seem rocket science to me. All I am asking is that with an "average 1 in 2 chance of winning " what could be the consequences if we lose. If you continue to rubbish the question it merely demonstrates to me that maybe you have your heads in the sand.