Member Info for OPENSPACES

I never ramp as I know a fool and his money are soon parted and I am no exception to that rule. With this share many investors believe or in my case believed the patter we are told. I now tend to look at the share performance and outturn of previous forecasts/utterings to make a judgement as to the likelihood of future success. Not a precise science but as I see things. Facts are the market shares my view ( I think). Hey ho its only money.

A take over is I suggest unlikely. AIM is unregulated and the take over rules not clear but it seems the min required is 30%. I wouldn't take less than 20p (ish)

JT If you can find any posting from me referring to an RNS tomorrow you're a better man than me. In the meantime could some one put the court case into perspective. If you say AVX and Murata sales were a factor of 10 a year ago where are they now and in comparison how big or small are LOXUS?. If it there are indeed small it begs the question why no "other" licences announced ? Surely if LOXUS are relatively unimportant others would have signed up by now ?

Man 2061. I think you will find that many of the IIs are companies who hold nominee accounts which are really public investors
Iwgrod can I be clearer in my explanation. The noun Insiders by definition includes directors and employees
OK I cocked up about ADL and admitted it.
I have no agenda . I am just less confient than many in AKs ability to deliver the promised land. It seems everybody except me is allowed to say so. Hey ho who cares

Iwgrod. I have been careful to categorise insiders as directors/employees have I not ? Also it is information in the public domain that a recently retired employee has sold their considerable holding is it not? And just in case you want to latch on to me referring to insiders this is a term often used when assessing prospects viz https://simplywall.st/stocks/gb/tech/aim-cpx/cap-xx-shares/news/who-owns-cap-xx-limited-loncpx/ PS I don’t have access to your PM

Share ownership in CPX is as circa follows a) insiders etc…..7%, b) institutional….19%, c) public..74%. This indicates that AK and his directors/employees have a significant vested interest in the well being of the company. The key questions are a) is no new good news and b) was recent insider sale down to personal needs?

Red I note you do not comment on the plethora of people who plaster ramping posts all over this BB on a daily (no hourly) basis. Surely there must be a place for counter opinions. It just seems with this share that every time the promised land is in sight then some new obstacle comes up. CPX is in such a privileged position in that it gets half of its costs paid for by the Aussie government . I wonder how much influence they will have on CPXs future. In this regard I often wonder what the recent "desk top review" was all about.

Trading . Quite simply I would decide what the strength of the patent was. Then decide risk v reward. In this case I guess we don't know whether the transgression was deliberate or accidental. But we are where we are and clearly many other potential customers are sitting on the fence which is worrying. The absence of any new contracts etc means that they are undecided which to me means things are not as clear cut as some would suggest . All IMHO

Trading/RC. I asked the same question a few days ago. The problem is none of us knows the real strength of the arguments. All we want is a realistic appraisal. My argument is that AK has consistently failed to deliver over the years in turning potential world beating products into sales and having been here before I worry that it could yet go TU. I naturally hope it does not but you can understand people who don't want to take the chance.

This case could be AKs finest hour or alternatively his Watreloo. Meanwhile the SP continues to suffer because of the uncertainty. Lets hope that it is sorted out quickly. The continuing silence from CPX does nobody any favours. I guess the stakes are that high. I guess an Oct statement is now the most likely.

In the case of the current litigation, is the defendant in the meantime allowed to continue producing and selling the disputed items i.e. innocent until proved guilty? Also, would any settlement have included royalties on previously sold items i.e. the longer the case takes the bigger the settlement?
As regards other companies surely, they have a choice i.e. take out licences or transgress as well and risk action. My point is that any delay for the other companies surely costs them time and money and market opportunity so why would they delay. What would be their strategy?

In its Press Release of the 29 November 2004 the World Economic Forum in Geneva selected CAP-XX as one of the 29 companies it assigned the status of 2005 Technology Pioneers. Hmmm 14 years later

Like this Onaplate guy . He classifies my posting as gripes . That's precisely what they are . I am the eternal pessimist but life is about opinions.

Iwgrod. Please read Welsh's comment 0827. I simply mentioned (in response to his posting on the subject) that no matter how big an increase AVX's royalty payments amounted to they were unlikely to surpass in total AVX's licence fee income for several years. However in retrospect he was probably commenting about the legislation. Nevertheless the situation remains that these previously large amounts will now drop out of the balance sheet. If Tech Tom cannot see this or understand it then that disappoints. Still some people simply exist to throw insults. Business is simply you aspire to generate more revenue than you spend. It worries me that this business is perhaps controlled by engineers driven by achieving technical excellence not by marketing/salesmen.

can you enlighten me? That is not true.

Welsh . Obviously the strong growth in AVX sales is to be welcomed but it also has to seen within the context that the initial 3 year licence fee "bonanza" has now ceased . The point I am making is that the bottom line will probably be worse off for some years to come in terms of AVX revenue. Our salvation will lie within the outcome of the patent case. Still not long to go now

http://www.ioxus.com/english/products/technology/.

They seems to be firmly in our market space

Thank You Parkez. It is often said that I am being paid to reduce the SP. I know that is not the case. However I do often wonder if there are others who deliberately encourage the opposite course irrespective of the facts.. Personally I don't think they have any real knowledge of what will sell but are merely trying to justify their investment. As for me well I know from long experience that Directors only tell you what you want to hear. The question is, is AK over egging our prospects?

OK chaps Volvo chose Maxwell, Samsung chose Seiko. Why? Are these decisions down to cost or are there technical equals on the market ? Also I don't know about you but if someone called me an illiterate engineer I would not be inclined to do business with them?

Sorry Claret but your summary is pure guesswork. Nobody expect AK and his cronies know. It must surely be make or break for him personally ?