Member Info for Pip56

The dealing you describe was made on 8 September and took Bayford to a 29.10% shareholding.
Turner/Bayford is constrained by a legal agreement limiting his shareholding to under 30%. The counterparty is Harwood who are similarly constrained. The legal agreement to limit their holdings was signed after they both attempted and then failed to take over the company and was announced in an RNS.

Perhaps you might explain how Bayford will break the legal constraint and go beyond the 30% holding. At the same time give a little insight into why Harwood, the counterbalance shareholder, will give up their almost 30% to allow Bayford/Turner a free run? Whilst your 'Honest Opinion' might hold credibility in polite society I think a few facts will facilitate greater illumination over the opaqueness of this company?

PUSU has been extended until the 30th Aug. The results are in the public domain but HMRC still hold the Sword of Damocles over the company regarding alleged landfill tax discrepancies. I assumed ECP were waiting for the annual results to be published but now it looks as though the real issue is HMRCs decision and whether a fine is likely to be imposed - £20m has been set aside but a fine could be double that or half as much.

It would be nice to have all this cleared up by the end of the August. 2 months seems a reasonable time to make a decision.

Lukeytukki. Can you explain how "households may start looking at companies like GSF as an alternative to current gas and energy suppliers". I'm intrigued to understand how you perceive GSFs core function/market and why GSF might somehow think this applies into a domestic setting. Personally I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of GSF.... but I keep an open mind and look forward to reading your reply.
Pip

First production of copper from Quellevco, Peru. More importantly this project has been expertly led and delivered by Tom McCulley. Hopefully he can now hand over, move to Yorkshire and take up the reins on the Woodsmith project as per the RNS of 10 Dec 21. His arrival should bring in a substantial uplift in activity and raise the profile of the project in the AAL Reports.

NEXUS (NEXS) represents a good like for like comparison because it has a similar profile to FCRM. NEXS also design and deliver multi-utilities (subdivision - tri-connex), EV charging networks (E-Smart) and civil engineering (Tamdown). All divisions are in profit and the company has a net cash balance and returns a dividend. The SP has fallen back but that's hardly a surprise in the current climate. E-Smart is so successful they are talking of spinning it off as a separate entity - which is what you might expect given the supposed demand for EV charging.

Compare with FCRM and it is like chalk and cheese. Same fundamental business activity but the outcomes and results are completely different. Difficult not to conclude that something is fundamentally broken in FCRM.

Absolutely it is. Primarily because it has all the licenses and acumen to design, build and deliver complex power utility systems. If they can be focussed on being the best and most competitive in that domain then they are well worth a look. However anyone giving it the eye will have to spend considerable energy stripping out the waste and dismissing the BoD.

At the current price its there for the taking but oh what a lot of baggage it brings with it! It might be better to see it go under and then buy up the scraps in a fire sale.

The real question isn't "how did this happen?" because that is history and there is sufficient evidence to pick through in the RNS's to find the answer.
The real question is "how much further will FCRM fall and is it investable?" A much more difficult proposition. The income from asset sales and fund raise has been burned through... we think (results will confirm), the venture into domestic meters turned toxic. The balance of power in the BoD sits with two distinct parties at loggerheads.

The EOY results will be interesting. Not for what's happened in the past but for how they see the future and the path back to profitability. Any inclusion of a verbose statement about government plans for 'net zero' setting conditions for FCRM (as in past years) will be a smoke screen with the distinct odour of BS.

Is that a rhetorical question or are you genuinely asking a question. If it is the latter I suggest you spend 20 minutes looking back at the last 18 months of chatter on this thread. If its the former then it should come with a mighty exclamation mark and a look of disbelief and frustration.

Under Offer!! A bid made for the whole company at 445/share. Board minded to accept after due diligence so they are opening the books.

It's a shock and very sad to see.

Nomiungo - I Disagree. The last fund raise at 12p was not well received by the city and for good reasons. The company has lost its way and, as a consequence, it is not profitable.

FCRM was spun out of National Grid with the precise function of designing, planning, building and delivering complex power infrastructures. Initially electricity and later gas. The company has all the credentials needed for supporting the governments 'Net Zero' vision. Extending into EV infrastructure made sense but pottering about replacing domestic meters did not. Installing digital meters into homes is a sideshow that has consumed too much of the companies resources/energy and, as the recent RNS has shown, returned nothing - Let's not forget that 1 member of the BoD owns the energy supplier that contracted FCRM to install the domestic meters at a knock down rate! Prior to his arrival FCRM had no engagement in that activity.

In the same vein the company is totally opaque. Late reporting (last year), a fund raise to facilitate acquisitions that have not materialised, BoD musical chairs, threats to delist and the more recent RNS describing events tantamount to strategic failure. Arguably these events should have been declared much earlier.... were the failed contracts described in todays RNS in jeopardy when the company was fundraising. If they were then those buying in at 12p might not have forked out their cash and have a right to ask some serious questions.

Until FCRM gets back to it's core function in a meaningful way, demonstrated that the BoD game of musical chairs has stopped for good and taken steps to ensure greater transparency toward the share holders then there is no chance of further fundraising being successful.

Clearly just my own views. But there is enough history in the RNSs and the SP to back it up.

If you are talking FCRM then the two biggest shareholders combined have sufficient shares to declare they wish to take the company private. The entities wishing to take the company private must be willing to buy out all the other shareholders. They will declare a share price they are willing to pay and then there will be a shareholder vote - Yes/No. The share price is typically a little above the market price at the time of the offer - so today perhaps 9p.

If the motion is accepted then all shareholders will receive the price offered for their shares. Yes voters will get the money for their shares on agreed date. No voters will have their money placed in an escrow account until such time as they accept the vote was lost. Once they sign to accept the vote outcome they will receive the value of their shares.

FCRM was subject to an attempt to take the company private a couple of years back. The protagonists were forced to the table to agree they would not do it again (RNS gives details). since then the individuals concerned have increased their shareholding by proportion and forced boardroom changes. The significance of this has yet to properly play out but the sp dropping from mid 40p to the current 8p via a 12p placing might be an indication of the direction of travel.

If you are a novice, as you say you are, I would tread carefully and spend some time researching the company. Its lack of business transparency should make you cautious.

Just saw on ADVN that this sell off is likely to be a reaction to a poor trading update from Knight Group. Omnicron and the delayed return to work is given as the prime cause for a substantial slowdown in activity. GTLY next update may be an interesting read then...fingers crossed they managed to keep the train on the rails.

Not so steady now. There have been some extraordinary fluctuations in the SP over the last 2 months with no discernible cause. Todays drop of almost 7% (as at 11am) is typical of the volatility. It is uncharacteristic and I simply cannot work out the cause. A comment from the BoD, calming troubled waters or clarifying whatever rumour is out there, would be helpful.

This has the whiff of a contrived smear campaign. 'Sarahsgems' has no history of posting and she/he/it has suddenly arrived to echo the deranged observations of a previous none entity. Proclaiming a 'holier than thou' perspective just doesn't work, particularly if you can't spell 'Holy'.

Boracic: No I don't think so. I think Dugdale is an operator and not a strategist so he has returned to his former role. The new CEO has no baggage in the company so he is free to follow through on the BoDs direction. Conspiracy theorists who see the company being de listed might well see a new CEO, previously in a short term appointment, arriving in the role of a hatchet man.

Yet another change on the Board of Directors. Dugdale steps down as CEO to return to his previous job as COO. All the usual plaudits for "his hard work and contribution towards laying the foundation for future success" from Babbington who increasingly sounds like a hollow vessel.

Yet more redistribution of the Titanic deck chairs or is this a positive change? I suspect it's an interim appointment until someone with authority and industry credibility can be found.

Jl - that is how it is done. If the Board agree to delist there has to be a shareholder vote with the final share value declared. If the majority of shareholders agree then it is a done deal. Anyone who didn't vote or voted against the motion is entitled to receive the share value but if they don't the money is held in an escrow account with a third party agency, such as 'Link'.

In the case of FCRM the two major shareholders have just consolidated their majority positions. I am sure they could now vote through a delisting of the company without any difficulty. Offering current shareholders the opportunity to add more does seem to confuse the matter though and it will be interesting to see how well that is taken up.

I absolutely agree with your statement on the other board - this is one for gamblers and speculators and 'caveat emptor' certainly applies.

Harwood's tender offer was 26.25p just as the sp was bouncing from the pandemic reaction sell off. At that time it was considered a cheeky offer given the pre pandemic strength of the company and the perceived rebound taking place. It's a bit different now. With the SP sub 15p and trending downward they might succeed at 20p. However Cutler (CFO), Lavelle (Indep Dir), Babbington (Chair) and Dugdale (CEO) are all significantly down on their purchases (at current sp):

Cutler: 25,000 for £6,525 currently down by £3,057
Lavelle: 100,000 for £30,705 currently down by £16,835
Dugdale: 25,000 for £9,921 currently down by £6,453
Babbington: 25,000 for £9,984 currently down by £6,522

So they are all losing money and are unlikely to see a return until the sp get back into the high 20's. That said, with the exception of Lavelle, their 'buy ins' are hardly a ringing endorsement of their conviction towards the company. Now is the time for Dugdale & Babbington to double down with a hefty buy. It's called leadership and would do more to steady the sp than the silly note they put out.

I don't agree that the requirement to build in EV chargers to new houses is a multiplier for FCRM. EV chargers will just be built into the domestic circuit so no specialist knowledge is required. Multi occupancy dwellings are however a different kettle of fish. A high rise of 15 floors containing 50+ dwellings is going to require some clever use of real estate to build in the charger units that are secure and accessible for everyone. FCRM could benefit there.
I suspect the real money will come, as always, in delivering the servicing and repair capability 24hrs a day. I predict a future crime will be theft of cables/charging capacity & vandalism of charging units and this will be worse in high rise areas where vehicles are centralised and un monitored.

Hollamatronic.
"It literally says in the update there is a dividend..." Yes it does, 10/10 for reading skills. Now look at the date it was posted! On the 5th October it was an observation of the situation at that time in response to a question. I thought a dividend was unlikely given the supply chain difficulties. Today a dividend was announced and the sp fell 9%. Gain 2.2p and lose 36.5p suggests everyone else thinks the dividend is 6 months too soon?
Pip