Member Info for phil01

There is an advantage to being an independent in this field. At the moment I would rather they do not sell the company.
Someone or some people are throwing serious money at this and I do not think they are doing it blindly, unless of course they have a few millions spare change at the back of the sofa.

I am hoping to be here when this gets to £10, the only question is will they have sold out by then. Results of the next two quarters will provide a clearer idea of the direction of travel.

Need to get to a touch over £4 before I break even.

Applegarth,

Your post unfortunately betrays your level of intelligence, so don't really feel like getting into a banter with except to say that in this case I take great pleasure that you appears to have lost your shirt.. lipsticks and all.

Destabilise share price!! Really!! ... to what 0p? SO I can buy in at 0p or someone offer me them for free?

Placing at 0.01p, shares trading at 0.011p and you think whatever anyone says will destabilise share price?
Minus the DESTABLISATION, where really do you envisage this to go .. I suppose it will jump to 1p, (market cap of £38M), once we all agree for this to become a cash shell.

I GIVE UP. Please load up, at this low price as you are bound to make your fortune once we all come to our senses and the price shoots up!

Really never amazes how some people will contrive a reason to lose money.

Bottom for entry into a cash shell??!!*** What makes this cash shell worth any more than others? Further is does not have any cash .. so a cash shell in name only. Only benefit anyone that wants to reverse into this is shell will be the savings on AIM listing cost. A cash shell with no money and an outstanding shares in issue of over 3billion? Without any new shares, (even though we all know that the first thing an company reversing into a cash shell does is to raise money),if this share ever hits 0.5p it will have a market cap of over £18M.

The £175K raised will be lucky to get them through a few months so I expect this meeting to wind down to happen quite quickly. NOMAD has to be paid, getting a prospectus out about the change of direction as well as the EGM will all cost money and the rest of the staff left will have to be paid their wages or redundancy.

Not nice to see people lose money but the red flag on this share has been there for well over 1 year..but those that were hell bent on losing money or fail to do their research find a reason to throw money at it. Every setback and run-to-the-hills red flag was seen as an opportunity in some convoluted way.

Anyone with a half decent research and who was not emotionally tied to the share, (thus finding straws to clutch at in the face of contrary evidence), would have worked out that today's announcement is possibly the best that could happen with this share.
They do not have the balance sheet strength to we awarded a contract by any reputable company...irrespective of how good the technology is or not. [As for contracts, they have been waiting on a contract first from RBS since 2008. RBS was supposed to have trialled it and will roll out to all their branches. I make that over 10 years since we have been waiting for contract from one company or another.]

If the tech is that good they may have an opportunity to sell the IP as part of the wind down....may provide some money into the kitty. With the state of their finances however they do not have a lot of time to haggle on the price.

Good Luck nonetheless. Not nice losing hard earned cash even if people willingly throw it into the Thames in the belief that they have a chance of stunning a trout if they through it with sufficient force.

Did not want to follow Destitute in telling people how not to lose money, it was their prerogative, but now that everything is laid bare, it does not matter.

Slowlyslowly,

I am not saying this is bad news but just answering your question on face value without implying anything. The director may genuinely have other business priorities .. each must make up his/her own mind.

If you are a director when a company went belly up, then you need to declare that on future directorship appointments.

[This answer may sound as if bad new … but none is implied. You asked a straight question based on the assumption that it is bad news and I provided a straight answer in that assumed scenario.]

I like reading this BB , brings a smile to my face reading the exchange between those that believe this is going down the pan and those that believe this is a sure multi-banger.
As people just see what they want to see to support their views regardless of evidence to the contrary.

If this company delists tomorrow there will be plenty saying, " I told you this is the end".. on the other side there will be plenty saying that it is a smart move by the company as they are saving money by taking out the cost of LSE AIM listing.

Will be interesting as this plays out to see which side is actually playing with the full deck.

I suppose people just want to see what they want.
Admirable that they took shares for unpaid salaries ... but I am not sure those trumpeting that as being significant in any analysis. ....they need to get a calculator first.

They each took 60,000,000 shares at 0.02p that equates to £12,000 each. Not earth shattering.

To their credit the director's are not the most handsomely paid within AIM companies so that is probably a month's wages that they have taken in shares.

There is no doubt that the directors are trying and want this to be a success ..but sometimes wanting it is not enough. You need to have the skillset to make it happen, and going by over 10 years experience this team have not showed that they have what it takes. Company have been in existence for well over 10 years and has not made a cent in any of those years.
Tomorrow is always another day.......by this time next year Rodney we will be millionaires.

The did promise full scale deployment by year end, so I suppose they are just putting the last light bulbs on the deployments today.

JM is just saving it as a an Xmas present for the believing shareholders and will announce by close today that they have finished deployment in ASDA , Sainsburys and a couple of high street chains.

On the other hand maybe we should ignore the fact that they have said full scale deployment by year end and believe the subsequent statement about contracts by year end.

I wonder what will be the next guidance …... ..Contract by Easter anyone !!

Personally where PSL is now financially, no sane company will give them a contract of any significant value.
This is nothing whatsever to do with how good their product is or is not.

If the margin is 20% for their business, it means that for a £1M contract PSL needs to show that they have at least £800k. That is just for that contrct and does not include operating expenses such as office space and salaries which will still need to be paid even if thre is no contract.

If I am to believe JM on the fact that they were close to signing contracts a few months ago, then this may well be the reason why we have not heard anything. The fact that they were only able to raise about £100K minus expenses is also worrying for me? This money will hardly be enough for 1month.

Administrative expense for H1 (up to June 2018) was £1.29M, which equates to £215K per months. As such I am not sure what raising less than £100K is supposed to achieve, unless the well is dry and that was all they could raise.

Directors re still getting paid, because if they have opted to be payed in shares to conserve money then that would have been announced via RNS.

That is just my reading of the situation which I am sure is different from a lot of people on this board.

DISCLAIMER:

I no longer hold shares in the company for more than 2 years now. Made money when I exited, but still pissed off as I really has high hopes for the company and thought I would have made enough to retire. I thought the idea was good...but had advised getting rid of Camtronics and LED part of the business about 4-5 years ago as they were just money sink and draining the finances. Unfortunately management did not have a clear strategy. In those years they have sunk over £10M into these without a penny of profit.

Just for balance, in case anyone took my havering as investment advice... I am as clueless as the next person.

I put some of my gains from this PSL into another company that has great story and potential...but like PSL the management talks a good game but short on delivery...AudioBoom (BOOM).

I am pretty sure that one is also going to go under in the new year and I will suffer a loss of about £43K.
like most people here , the time for me to cut my loss and move on has passed so I am still there hoping for the best but fully expecting it to be a miracle if it survives. [There may be a slim opportunity for a take over at low value for BOOM,( grasping at straws), which unfortunately I do not see in PSL]

For those that think this will come good and are encouraging others...news next hour.

This must be a great opportunity for you to load up.

Have sold many moons ago before most here even came on board. I once had great hope for this share as I thought they had a unique offering so I held over 3% of the shares. Execution however was a problem for me so I sold out. I was fortunate that I made good money out o this.

I will be surprised if this does not go under, sometime next year. Even if they get a contract they will not have the wherewithal to execute, where is the working capital to execute the contract? With them putting the manufacturing arm into administration I am not sure they can access any loans from a regular bank unless all outstanding loans /debts were settled. The loans that they had got previously were secured against the assets of the factory which is now in administration...so they do not have any other assets to secure any loan/debt. With company existence's in the balance, I am not sure if any bank will just advance them a loan if there is nothing to secure the debt and secondly if they were not able to pay off all the debts that they secured against the factory. [Bad credit rating applies to companies just as to individuals].

Anyway.. this is not an advice just a view. People will normally believe what they want to believe irrespective of any evidence before their eyes, so ignore my post if you are invested and are still optimistic on the company's future.

Hoping against all hope that things will work out is different from being optimistic about the company's future. In the previous scenario you have just accepted your fate but hoping for a good outcome.

Optimistic however, is where you fully believe this is agreat opportunity, so you are pilling in money because you see a great chance.

I think that most that are still here are just being hopeful rather than optimistic that this company has a great future. If they were optimistic on the company's future then the buying will far outweigh the SELL.

I am still hopeful that it works out for you, but as a new investment this is not something I will even give a second glance.

At what price the funding that is needed in the short term to keep this going? How many shares will need to be issued even to get enough money to tide them over for the next 4 months?

Just as the sale of LED arm is a distressed sell, this funding is a distressed funding which if not achieved will threaten the very existence of the company, so expect a deep discount to the share price for this funding. .....assuming of course that there are takers out there who has money to gamble on this.

For me, not an investment and definitely not a worthwhile gamble. For those that are already in, hope it pans out for you. The current state of affairs however was predictable for those that wanted to see the writing on the wall well before today. Then again we see what we want and tell ourselves that all other evidence staring us in the face is immaterial.

Sorry, phone just sent before I finished my last thought:

The association is looking to implement Smart Estates vision. are they looking for a full package of offering hence will they walk away if they did not get a solution that satisfies their aim. Halcyon works but the other technologies fail...will they walk away or just implement Halcyon?

Example: I am looking for something that can add and subtract.If I get something can can add but not subtract do I but on the grounds that I have part of my requirements or do I walk away and continue looking for something that meets my requirements?

DISCLOSURE:
I no longer hold PSL but as a former holder retain a passing interest. This is just an objective analysis from my reading of the RNS. It is not meant as an investment advice. You work hard for your money so make up your own mind how and where you want to invest it. :

Dave,

Not really sure how you worked out that this is an extremely good news. I suppose that is just bias confirmation.. we make up our minds and we see what we want to see in an RNS.
Firstly I am not invested, but keep an eye on this as I once held over 3% of the shares and want the company to do well.

Reading the RNS without trying to infer anything else into it;
Call this a Partnership or what you want but this is just another trail:-

"....As part of the Partnership, the Association will deploy a trial to assess the scalability of a number of the solutions within PhotonStar's V2 halcyon cloudBMSTM ...."
Note the term trail to assess scalability in the part of the RNS quoted above. If thi fails what do you think will happen? The association walks away and looks elsewhere.
People that want to see just what they hope are already assuming that this trial will be a success and have already started counting the revenue from 80,000 odd houses. the company has been trailing this technology for the last 5 years and we still have not seen a contract .. which in the face of it means there has not been a successful trial yet. This may well change with the next RNS of a contract.

".....These Halcyon V2 products are more mature than the other products the Association has tested previously and several other promising technologies will also form part of the trials...."

Your reading of this is that this means that we have a contract ready for signing. My reading is of two fold:
1. This association has already trailed other products and walked away and this time they want to trial PhotoStar's offering. The statement that Halcyon being more mature that the one they have already tested is just an opinion from our CEO.
2. The trail involves other promising technologies, which means that Halcyon will need to work with these other technologies.
Which brings in a second area of risk:
(a) will Halcyon work with these other technologies ..if not maybe a possible development to make in compatible with these technolies.
(b) what happens if Halcyon works and these other technologies do not?

Been large buys over the last week or so and yet the share price is not shifting. Tells me that there must be a hefty sell order in the background which the mm are working.

Without a hefty sell order, where are the mm getting the shares to satisfy the huge Buy demands that have been reported.

My guess , (only a guess), is that it may be the shares given to Triton as part of the break clause on the take over deal. Only £90K of the £700K break clause was paid in cash the rest is in shares.

Needs a cracking result to start this moving again in the right direction.

Phiggy87

Maybe it is me, but I am not really sure how you worked this out. He is joining as a non-exec, which will amount to about several days a year on the affairs on this company.

Non execs only need to attend some exec meetings, ( not all exec meeting). You will find that this is reflected in their salary. The outgoing Non- exec Chairman also doubled as the chairman of the audit committee and his salary was £30,000 per year. [Normal non exec salary can range from £5000 - £40,000 per year because they are only expected to spend a few hours here and there on the company]

As for Mr Tobin, if you add all his current directorships you will find that BOOM will make it 21 active directorships that he has to juggle at the moment. He can combine all these roles because the demand is usually only a few hours here and there for each, and provide advise and guidance if needed.

In order words, there is no basis to know what he will bring to the party. Looking at the companies that he is currently a director does not give any clue either as some of them are not exactly firing on all cylinders. We just have to hope we are lucky and he brings something different to the table.

Personally Malcolm Wall has the stronger CV within the Podcasting and media business: He has been CEO, Content at Virgin Media, CEO of Abu Dhabi Media, COO of UBM plc and held a number of senior roles within ITV companies.

But you never know Tobin might bring a fresh eye.

The market has also reacted as expected to the news, neutral. Only time will tell if our new Non-exec Chairman will bring something new to the table either by way of clients or idea.

Phiggy87,

Can you enlighten me, what make this significant?

petwilkinson,

I believe your analysis nailed it. The first balanced view I had seen inhere. most investors tend to see a share with rose tinted glasses once they are invested. Obvious flaws, we attempt to explain away or make excuses out of fear that we may actually be wrong and lose our money. I have seen shares going to the drain and yet investors convince themselves that google or apple will make a bid for the company. A podcast company is going to make a killing in the future, but whether that will be us, Acast or a mirad of other companies in the space will depend on quality of management and execution. the in-escapable fact is that if any company do not make money they son run out of funds and people willing to fund the management's pet project.

I have a lot ridding on this company so I can't afford to be emotionally tied to it. I have to be objective. I can see the potential but that does not mean that the current potential can be harnessed by this management.

I worry about the endless times we go to the market asking for more funding, especially in view of the fact that several times the management has told us that they will become profitable in the next half of the year. If management has consistently been wrong on their prediction of profitability then any thinking man will have to question the basis on which to believe that they will be profitable this time.

The next set of numbers is key for me whether to cut losses or stay put. A sustainable business or in fact anything that can be termed a business is one that makes money. If it just about losing money then I can do a better job myself by chucking the money into the river Kelvin.....I may even get luck and stun a trout.

Glad to see that the old management has still got their snouts in the trough.

Great piece if incentive..... options at nominal value. Any wonder the major holders has decided to get rid of the chancers.

Still awaiting the communication of the strategic direction for the company by the current management but one thing is clear; current management can't be worse that the ones that were ejected from this company. At least P2P has skin in the play, they have actually invested money to acquire their position in the company so to some extent their aims aligns with the general PI. The old management did not ever put their hand in their pocket to buy shares... except offering themselves options at 1p, when the share was actually trading at significantly more than that.

Heck I even hold more shares that our erstwhile CEO. During the fund raising the management made a token gesture of taking part. [In placing and Open offer to raise $16.5M our CEO was able to subscribe to a total of £7,000 even though the open offer was less than 60% successful]. Without any personal investment in the company, no wonder they were not that particular about performance of the company as long as they can draw salaries … options at nominal value will always be in the money.

A few people grasping at straws here.

Yes good new may be released on Friday but somehow logic say's it isn't this time.
If I stated that gambling addicts eventually come a croper, I am sure you will find a few gambling addicts who are doing very well thank you. But that does not make the statement false, there is always exceptions to every rule.

My experience is that definitely good new is never released on Friday except for certain circumstances: If a company is in possession of news, (good or bad), and there is a likelyhood that it has leaked, then they must release it immdiately to stop the risk of market abuse. Thus companies releasing good news on Friday is as a result of their fear that the information may get out otherwise hence creating an unfair trading advantage for those in the know.

Normally a company will like to maximize the impact of their good news by releasing it during the week to give the market chance to appreciate the news with the attendant price rise over the next few trading days.

Conversely a good day for bad news is Friday, as the market is closed the next few days so that it limits the attendent damage to teh share price. Over the weekend some people may reconcile themselves with teh new s and would not jump to sell on Monday. [ Provides a few non trading daysfor people to cool off]. If you can release it just before the close on Friday all the better.

Here however we are not even talking about news but results, a guidance has already been given so nothing new there, the results will be bad the only area of uncertainty is the future statement … and this is even subjective judgement by management.
Invariably accounts released on Friday's and at the last permissible date for releasing the account will be bad.

Hopefully, for PI sake, this bucks the trend.. though experience and logic seems to suggest otherwise.

hTTps://audioboom.com/posts/6896692-audioboom-boom-and-chris-bailey-on-rdsb-bt-a-rr-pzc-wine Listened to above CEO interview, there are a lot of positives but also the interview has raised a lot of concerns for me if you look behind the words. 1. The Triton deal was put to over 100 institutions at both sides of the pond and they did not think it was a great idea. >>> Somehow I fail to believe that over 100 institutions were wrong and only Audioboom management knew a good deal when they saw it. 2. the interview did not paint the CEO in a good light. Instead of accepting responsibility as the CEO, ( the buck stops at his desk), it appears as if he tries to make excuses and blame others...it was not my fault honest I did everything correctly but others let me down. Asked why the Triton deal did not go ahead, a two sentence answer I would have thought. He spends time waffling round the issue, proceeding to give an account of how he did everything that could have been expected of him before finally arriving at the core answer which is that out of over 125 institutions the deal was presented to, most did not see it as a good deal. In between these waffling a few of these snippets did not present our CEO as a good leader who can lead a team. [ There seems to be an implied me and them instead of us as a team] '.... I presented to about 7 institutions in UK and they seemed positive and put in numbers against their intent. We brought in Zeus and Allen capital who after reconstructing the presentation, this was taken to the institutions again ...my presence was not needed at that presentation hence this was led by other management. the institutions decided not to invest bar one.' Reading between the lines: what value did the fact that he was not involved in this further presentation serve, apart from ...It was not my fault. If that was not his intent then what value does it serve to inform us that he was not involved in this presentation? If it was material to highlight the fact that he was not involved in the second presentation .. then it implies that the result may have been different if he was at the presentation? Even if this is the case, a good team leader would not be hanging out your team to dry in public as it will lead to friction within the board. My reading of the whole debacle is that at initial presentation which was done by BOOM using their presentation pack, the 7 institutions in UK may have thought that in principle this was a good idea. Once they brought in Zeus as well as their Broker Allen Capital and the numbers were added to the presentation, most of the 7institutions decided that it was too rich for their blood. Hocking this now to another 125+ institutional investors both home and abroad found the same response.. not a good deal. Anyway we are where we are, but I now worry about the leadership capabilities of our CEO.