Member Info for phil01

A-E_Marsh, I desperately hope you are right. Unfortunately getting this right depends on how good you are at forecasting. You pay x upfront for a podcast and agree to yy% revenue share based on the fact you believe that you will sell z millions of the podcast and that your production cost will be £xx per podcast. Unfortunately if I have to go by the history of forecasts provided by RP in all his interviews , it appears that audioboom is not too great at forecasting. They managed to get wrong even the basics of forecasting or assessing the demand before going public on a defining reverse takeover which requires you to raise many times multiple of your market cap. I would actually have been happier if the podcast agreements is based on profit share rather than revenue share. With profit share agreements if we don't make a dime the other party does not make anything either except for the upfront fee we payed them. With revenue share the other party is quids in whether we make profit or not. Anyway here is hoping as I went in big purely based on my expectation that the sector will be the next growth area. However wether that will be Audioboom or Acast will be the key beneficiary remains to be seen..I know a few podcasters that have defected to Acast.. not sure if it was related to the issue with podcasters not being paid by Audioboom recently. I know they still have not caught up with paying lapsed overdue payments. I am still hopeful, but then those not invested will say that I have to be since I have a lot ridding on this.

The question is how much are they paying for all these deals and how much will go through to the bottom line? Announcing deals is one thing , anyone can do that, what is still to be demonstrated is if these are good deals or are they similar to the half baked idea to buy Triton. For example the deal with F1 means that audio boom pays a fixed sum for each upload then revenue share. No one know what the revenue share percentage is. Even if it is 50/50,then Audioboom's revenue share has to be greater than their production cost plus whatever they paid upfront for each upload before they can make a dime from the deal. In other words no one can say if this is a good deal or not until the numbers are in. Currently the only person making money from the deal is F1 who will have to be paid a guaranteed fee upfront before each upload while audio boom assumes the production cost. That same logic applies to other deals since Audio boom are now paying to buy in contents before revenue sharing at unspecified percentage. This may in part be one of the reasons why the KPI seem to be increasing at tremendous rate, but with increasing cost of sales and the gap to profits seem to be getting wider. For each of these deals audio boom picks up the production cost meaning any money from revenue sharing needs to cover al these cost of production and fees before anything gets to the bottom line. The PR from the company is about growing KPI, growth in KPI does not mean much unless it translates to increase profits. Without KPI translating to money getting into the bottom line, it becomes meaningless as anyone can buy in increase KPI by paying over the odds to podcast owners and distribution mediums. DISCLAIMER: I am invested, but not adding nor reducing till I see if all these deals makes a contribution to the bottom line or if it is just a panicked deal made from a position of weakness. (Grabbing at every flotsam and hopping that is keeps us afloat?) Next set of results will provide a clear indication.. if TO is going up but it is not making any dent on the cost of operation then we are paying out more on these deals that is coming in. Above are purely my views and are not intended as an investment advice. DYOR.

Lost any kind of interest in Malcy's views when he thought that the shocking deal to buy out High Power interest for a significant uplift to what they are worth was a good deal. people that purport to provide unbiased commentary on companies should not be living in a parallel universe if they expect to be taken seriously. Previous to that deal H2P had 25% of Canadian assets and have an option to make this 50% of Canadian assets by paying $4Mill to exercise an option. Without H2P having paid the required $4Mill to exercise their option, the management at CAB decided it is a great idea to acquire this 25% of Canadian assets from H2P by paying $8.71M , ( $1.75M in cash and the rest by issue of 103,796,08 in shares). Malcy also thinks this was a terrific piece of business. I am sure that would have been the first warning sign to H2P that the management are not up to mustard. from having a 25% interest in Canadian asset and 29% interest in CAP, H2P now owns an effective 56.53% of CAB. In short CAN now because effectively owned by H2P...which in the end turns out to be a blessing in disguise as they haver tuffed out this clueless management before the squander the money raise in the last placing on useless venture...changing the company name did not change the management's practice of frittering away share holder's money. when you consider that previous to this apparently fantastic deal, H2P only have 10% of the Italian assets and will need to pay something like $10M for additional 10%, and in one fell swop they are given 50% ownership. Until Malcy actually puts his money in, I am not sure any thinking investor cares what he thinks.. those that have money riding on this including the key share holders, supportive share holders as Keith called them, have voted with their feet before they lose their investment. I am sorry if that denies Malcy access to a crony who he can have purported interviews that only acts as a PR exercise for management without asking the tough questions that investors want to ask. With thie management tuffed out , CAB may actuaally become a buy. Prior to this the direction was only one way. Already the money raised has been ****ed against the wall, having an increase in production where cost of operation still dwarfs To is not a investment but a money sink, this is inspite of several interviews where Keith has stated that the break even volume is about 400bpd.

Copy of my comment in ADVFN: I suspected that it would not be long before High Power found out that the management are clueless. Once they became the majority share holders, in fact they own CAB based on their shareholdings,I am pretty sure that would not have been happy at the performance since the funding at 5p a share. Neither will the other significant holders who put in their money. New CEO; New Technical Officer and New Financial officer says all they need to say about what they thought about the management. Hopefully the new people on board have a better idea what they are doing.

It may seem wise after the fact and using a rear view mirror but this debacle clearly demonstrates how out of touch RP is. he estimated tat book building will take just about 3 weeks??? Based on what exactly by maybe one investor Candy telling him that he is willing to take part in the placement to a tune of �2Mill??? A well organised deal, you will find that places are already lined up and potential price range agreed before even the offer is made or announcement made to the market. I also note that I did enquire why one of our key Execs left suddenly an some people were of the opinion that this happens all the time even though the nature of the parting of ways showed that it was due to disagreement. Earning targets since then we have missed then this botched attempt at a reverse take over. I sincerely hope that the exec that left is not the key driver for the business as I am having serious doubts now with regards to RP's competency. If nothing else I think RP should rethink his position if we survive this...as this is a monumental mistake beside if he can not convince institutional inventors to buy into his dream, maybe he is the problem. A new broom may help to regain investor's confidence after this monumental cock up...but that is assuming we survive this.

I wonder what the spin from the apologists for the company will be. Not nice as I will be stung by well over �35K, but I was never convinced of this reverse take over. Not sure how we could have raised the amount of money being quoted from a share price of 3p. If the placing price was set at 2p... it will take an awful lot of demand to place enough shares to get the quantum that was needed. One of our key problem is that RP always talks a good game but never really delivered. By all accounts we would be in profit by now if he is to be believed. Being a dreamer is okay but it needs to be tempered with reality. Going for this size of a take over I would have expected and RP implied that potential backers have been sounded out prior to going public with this or even making the offer. It now appears that the company started scrambling for places after committing to this offer only to find after months of scrambling about that there is no appetite for this. Now we can either be the geniuses that know this is a great deal while the rest of the investing world including institutional investors are wrong or else we may just be the patsy left holding the baby. Only thing that we can hang our hat on is that we have Nick as an investor... he has the means to advance more money to the company to limp on and hopefully start dealing in reality , like how exactly do they turn a profit as well as cutting the cost base. Had my doubts but decided to hang fire and keep my council to myself till I see how this shakes up. Win some you lose some I suppose.

Not sure anything can be read into no mention on Triton site. They are a private company and hence no need to inform anyone of any offer to buy them. You may also notice that they do not have financials or anything else on their site. As for the delay I assume it is the book building... it is a heck of a lot of money to find, when your market cap is only a small fraction of what you are looking for. Also getting enough inst that are interested is one thing, the price which they are willing to pay is another thing which needs to be trashed out then run by the current significant holders to ensure they are happy with the price. If current major holders are not happy with the price they will just vote the deal down when it comes to the EGM, unless there is a sweetner in it for them, hence all these needs to be aligned before they inform the rest of us. So that in a way answers the question of how important we are. The truth is that if the key share holders vote YES to he deal then it probably will not make any difference how we vote, these share holders needs to be brought alongside either by ensuring the book price is not low enough for them to feel they are being screwed or else give them the chance to participate in the offer so that they can also take advantage of the low price. Above is assuming that the book price is a significant discount to the current share price. If the book price is at a premium to the current price then you have to tell a heck of a story to get Institutional Investors to buy at a premium. That's just my take.....which may well be too left field.

Still processing...but beginning to warm up to the idea of this acquisition and most importantly acquiring a management team that knows what they are doing. 1. 5X TO being paid >>>>BOOM is currently trading near enough at 5X TO. 2. Current Turn Over of target company over $40M, (approx. �30 M): This is more than BOOM have managed and BOOM has been in existence longer than target company...so maybe we would rather have their management as surely they seem to know what they are doing better than ours. BOOM has been in existence before then and yet they have managed to grow their company 5x more than we have. They are EBITDA positive while ours is a money sink.

Not quite sure how to take this news yet. 1. �136M for a company with Turn over of approx. �29.6Mil seems a lot....lets see at what price they are valuing BOOM in this deal. 2. Besides �136Mill payed from share placings seems an awful lot of shares ... and to make it manageable there must be a consolidation afterwards to reduce the number of shares floating about to a reasonable size. 3, Not fully sure the exact business of the target company...but hopefully it dose not put us in direct competition with some of our key route to market ....for example has Apple not recently , late last year introduced audience measurement for their pod cast? ( Will this mean we are now going in competition with Apple...again this is just a first impression as I am not clear as yet what this acquisition means for us). Since we broadscast our podcasts via other channels, apple, Spotify, Deezer etc....what will we do with audience measurement .... are we going to ask these distribution channels to embed it in their system to allow us to meaure listening numbers? Anyway I just had a quick glance at the news prior to work so has not fully analysed its impact or need for such an acquisition. I would have preferred if it was the other way round, Triniton taking over BOOM, that way at least we will get an uplift, they can pay us 5 times sale, which seems to be what we are paying.

Looks like this company hasn't thrown away its previous practice when called Northern Petroleum. the share holders seems to still to be the ones to be stiffed..also the lack of management having put any of their own personal money into the company is now a concern for me. I was previously willing to to give the company the benefit of the doubt but old habits die hard. I have written to the CEO prior to Xmas seeking clarification on the last RNS regarding buying back the Canadian assets form H2P and have not got any response. As the deal stands two things concerns me: 1. It appear that H2P paid US$2.5 mill and US$0.25 well stimulation services ( totalling US$2.75mil), for their 25% share of these assets. Less than a year later we are paying US$8.75mil to buy the 25% back. 2. The valuation used to arrive at this price is given as: "....".. The consideration of US$8.71 million for the Acquisition is based upon 50 per cent. of the net present value, at a 10 per cent. discount rate, of the proven reserves as calculated by McDaniel & Associates Ltd:.." That statement presents another anomaly since currently H2P only has 25% of the Canadian assets , so why is 50% of the Canadian assets used for calculation of the valuation? H2P has an option that would expire at the end of Dec 2017 to acquire additional 25% of Canadian assets for a US$4M payment, that will take them to 50% ownership. That option has not been exercised and is now expired, so why did CAB use 50% of Canadian assets to arrive at a valuation when H2P only has 25% ownership. It will be crass ,mismanagement is the CAB did not know exactly how much of the assets H2P currently have and thus throwing away Share holders assets. For a management that does not have skin in the game apart from drawing their salaries I would imagine that such details are not important to them. Of the entire board only a couple of the non Execs actually put their own money to buy shares. Our Exces tend to depend on getting their shares for free. As such unless I get a viable explanation from the company I will not be participating the Open Offer and will look for opportunity to sell what I have. Clearly changing the name of a company does not mean that we now have a new dawn.

last sentence truncated: Meant to say that I have a lot to lose if this goes wrong. {Consequently I do not care who leads this company as long as they get it moving in the right direction}

Every business has an income potential else it would not be a viable business. Usually companies fail not because the business has income potential but because the management are not capable of realising this potential due to inepptude. Although it I still a bit early to make a definite judgement, I still think that when a business that has been growing at over 20% per quater goes into revers the next quarter after a key board member leaves, demands a further explaination at the root cause. Also when there is such a friction on the board that a key director leaves with immediate effect and the management do not have he grace to even thank him for his services in the accompanying RNS, then the leadership of the team nedds to be called into question. if the company is still on an astronomical growth path, we can all sweep this under the carpet with a "move on ..nothing to see here" kind of attitude. But when the growth comes to as shuddering stop and goes into reverse then relevant questioins need to be asked. is the departed key board member the prime mover in previous growth pattern. Statement like delayed booking is just kicking the issue further down the road, and statement like Q1 is ahead of management expectaions is just creating a rod for their own back when Q1 FY18 comes in. If they have missed they should just take it on the chin, identify the root cause and fix the problem. the problem with the current RNS that they release is that it implicitly reads: A shortfall of £0.6M due to late bookings >>> so I am expecting this in Q1. FY target is £15M so I would at least £3M in Q1 , but management have said ist is running ahead of expectations >>>hence Q1 To of £4M. Hence total expectation of Q1 results = £4.6M { FY18 Q1 TO plus the delayed booking for Q4 FY17}. This is a dangerous expectation to set expecially when we just managed £1. 46M for Q4 FY17. The RNS indirectly implies that Q1 Fy18 is ahead of expectations so when you add the delayed bookings that should have fallen into Q4FY17, we will be releasing a bumper TO figures for Q1 FY18. They should just stop bullshitting and focus on doing their job and the share price will take care of itself it they do their job well. If RP is not capable of leading a united team or if his idea of leadership is, '.. my way or the high way..' maybe the company should try to get someone in that has the ability to lead a performing team. So many new entrants are coming into this space and there is not a huge barrier for entry, these new entrants won't be hanging about waiting for us while we make mis steps after mis steps. They should fix whatever is the issue and get this company moving towards profitability and if the problem is RP then get rid of him. Before you start about only investors having an opinion, I am heaving invested in the company with close to 1% holding so I have a lot t

Exponential growth? We have actually made less in Q4 than in Q3. Too early to make any connections but has this slide anything to do with the sudden loss of one of our key board member in Q3? loosing a ket board member is bound to have some effect on a company unless that board member did not bring any value to the team... in which case the effect will be positive and the company will proper more without him. On the other hand if this member has a positive impact on the board then there are bound to be some period of slide before readjustment by filling up the role with equally competent person. just speculations as aresult of the margin we missed teh target and the stuttering of the expected growth which seems to be in reverse gear. No wonder we have not heard of Proctor in the last while.. previously he seems to everywhere blowing the trumpet. On a high note the Owned production is starting to make material contributions to the TO.

No idea about relative valuation but their website looks more glossy and professional than Audioboom. First impression based on website layout will say that ACAST is more professional and successful. Maybe time that Audioboom do something about their website and make it more aesthetically pleasing.

http://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/LON:CAB/Cabot-Energy/

If this trade was from Monday then it is a Sell. On Monday the price was about 2.25p Bid and Offer price of 3.5p and this may explain why the price went down. Anyway hopefully that's the Sell order cleared so I would expect the price to recover.

From todays announcement, ..."....approximately 0.13 mmboe of production during the year to 30 September 2017..." This means about 450boe per day production. If they exist the year with about 1000boe per day production, (once you add the results of the Summer work program), then that will do me nicely. With winter work program scheduled to start Feb/March 2018 timeframe, they may yet meet their target of 2000boe by end of 2018. All will obviously depend on how well the drill results are. In the last proactive interview by the CEO he stated that they are already at 800boe , and they still have the last side track to turn on, another side track to drill before end of year and a recompletion well with 50boe also to turn on. That means that unless the last side track is a complete duffer , the target of 1000boe by this year exit will be surpassed.

Red0 I can see where you are coming from and it is all relevant. I have however, over the years, come to the conclusion that managements and directors are not in the business to make PI or anyone else money. They are in business to make a living for themselves and not for charitable designs, so I no longer worry about them. I cases where my interest align with theirs then I invest... knowing that in order for them to make money for themselves they need to make money for me. In this instance due to the decline of the share price in NOP, there is clear lack of interest and pent up anger for CAB and management will find it difficult to raise money via an open offer. PI will not buy in as they feel cheated by NOP. If they raise via institutional placing then the institutional investor will want evidence that their investment will be profitable. Hence based on above CAB management an in a bind, they have to make it a success and self sustaining. Even if the reason for this is to continue being in employment or to entice money into the company. To achieve this the share price have to rise. Previously as NOP, they have producing assets that they can sell to meet short falls and inflated wages. At this juncture they have only one option to make it a success or go find another job because if this is cash flow positive by the time the money in bank is gone , then they will not get either Institutional investor or PI money via Open Offer. Part of their wages are now payed in share options so for this to be of value again the price need to rise. Self preservation is a great motivator and an assets in human endeavour. Management knows which side their bread is buttered and at this junction performance is the only alternative.

Scoopusave, I understand that you probably lost money on this share as did a host of people. Fortunately due to luck more than anything else I did not lose anything so I can view this share objectively with a fresh eye. As you said it might stutter to 1500boe per day. That poses the question : What do you expect the share price to be at that point? If current side track is indicative and if management lives up to their next year forecast then it will be producing between 1500-2000boe by end of next year. Assuming that the price will be 10p for such production then that is more than double the current price. To me that is investment.. or better than sticking the money in the bank for 0.4% interest. This share may never reach its heady days of over �1 unless something happens in Italy, but if it can produce enough to be cash flow positive then the share price will reflect this. Most exploration companies are just running on fumes hoping for that big strike.. the majority don't make it. But as we all know, investing in pure exploration without a producing asset to fund the exploration is just pie in the sky as you said.. but we all live in hope that we have the winning lottery ticket.

Sounds quite positive. I think that an average daily output of about 800boe will be enough to cover operating cost anything more will lead to cash flow positive. If the second sidetrack performs as well as the first one then they will exist this year with +1000boe daily output. Target for next year 1600-2000boe, hopefully that is conservative estimate.