Member Info for Prospector99

I was not expecting much from today's presentation.

And that's what I got. Not much.

That's why what I say here is so important - but not very.

I didn't expect a huge fanfare of flaring trumpets, the descent of the heavenly host and the Second Coming of a new Messiah. No, not at all. Because - and this is important. Really important. Because I emphasise this was NOT my expectation.

Instead what emerged was a ghost that had been put to bed. A ghost neatly tucked up, subsumed by taut, pristine sheets replete with uncompromising hospital corners. A carapace of constriction, worthy of a master chambermaid. Yet being insubstantial how can such an indignity be imposed upon a ghost? Nobody knows. I leave it to father to provide an answer in due course. No doubt the Old Duffer will enlighten us at some point.

Of greater importance is the matter of time. There is plenty of this commodity - perhaps 3-5 years. Yet equally, there is also very little - as perhaps, like sands in an hour glass, it has all evaporated. Something that we all know sand has the insufferable habit of doing.

But one thing is certain to even the mockers, whose noses father and I invariably tweak with our amusing little teases. It is this: although the timelines may be bleak, they will not lack inflection points. And you can rest assured I will be here to enlighten you as to their existence.

After all, it's important.

Rodent Writes Global, Pere et Fils.

If I recall correctly, Iky has been wrong about every single one of his predictions to date.

So I hope he sticks around and continues to delight us with his inside knowledge. He's best vieweed as an infallible contra-indicator - see what he says, then expect the opposite.

Poor Elric & Son. Wonder how they'll spin this one ...

Kitchentowel, your full stop key still appears to be malfunctioning.

I suggest you have it rectified as it makes your posts (which otherwise appear relatively coherent by the standards of this board) look like the work of a chronic St Vitus's Dance sufferer.

Any sympathy Ashman may have gathered from his recent softball Elrico interview has now dissipated. His actions seem most like those of a petulant baby.

In the next decade he'll be in his nineties. But I still wouldn't put it past him.

Having been the subject of much vituperation since June, Ashman may well have decided to take his bat home regarding informal updates.

He'll do the barest minimum mandated by AIM regulations, which in practice means providing year-end figures to deadline and an AGM. Work to rule, in effect.

It's a bit babyish, but I'm not unsympathetic.

Pathological empathy for the psychologically damaged?

Glad to see the issues of Zenakine unit costs and volumes being raised. It's troubled me from the start and I wonder if it may be a case of "the mountains laboured and brought forth a mouse". I'd like to assume that the fanfare and constant emphasis on the word 'blockbuster' means that Ashman and perhaps Elrico know something the rest of us don't. But with this endless radio silence from Ashman I fear that no news may well be bad news.

Ashman's refusal to buy a substantial shareholding while taking a vast non-profit related salary may mean something sinister.

Incidentally, how can Elrico possibly know that Ashman having 'overstepped with public comments' was unintentional?

Uncertainty is killing this share.

Is Ashman going to ever deliver his promised 'early' August Trading Update?

Or is he too occupied with finding a wheelbarrow to carry his salary home?

JL, I refer you to MM's post of 13:33.

Who does he think he's fooling? Same M.O., endlessly posting links to macro market information that are irrelevant unless the company actually monetises the opportunity. (Which of course it shows no signs of doing. )

Lamest of all were the daily charts on copper. He doesn't seem to understand that a single point is not a trend.

Still waiting for JL to answer Moneyman64's question. Perhaps his AI machine has blown up under the strain of it all.

The new red herrings - getting better PR and having emails actually answered - are a hiding to nothing if there is actually f-all to report.

My own experience (and years of it with this rubbish share) indicates that with Bird, no news is bad news.

However, to be positive. The "potential solution" I can "bring to the table" is this:

1. Propose a vote of no-confidence in the supine Bird.

2. Pack him off to a Dubai retirement home

3. Get someone with vigour and grip to monetise what are supposedly some valuable assets.

Positive enough?

Toyin, point taken about 'fast uptake', though I suppose one could quibble about meaning of 'fast'. (Especially coming from a man who said Axisbiotix sales were growing 'alarmingly'. )

Nonetheless, would you agree that Ashman is in direct breach of Article 10?

He may well be stuck between the rock of the NDA and the hard place of financial disclosure requirements of AIM Rule 10:

"... companies must ensure that information which might reasonably be expected to have a significant effect on the price of the company’s securities is disclosed without delay." This obviously includes financial performance.

He may already be in breach of the requirements having failed to disclose any substantive financial details of the Croda deal in his last half-year RNS.

The even bleaker alternative is that the Croda deal is so insignificant to the company's fortunes that it it isn't worth mentioning ...

My conclusion to all this is that either ...

1. previously supposed revenues from Croda were insignificant or non-existent,

or

2. our understanding of accounting dates are somehow faulty

or

3. Ashman and co are in breach of AIM rules

Whichever, I would certainly expect to see some indication of Croda revenues next week.

I wondered if such disclosure was mandatory in the kind of trading update we're expecting next week ...

Whether revenue from an NDA-covered contract must be disclosed in an annual trading update depends on materiality and the context of the update, but here's the clear breakdown:

🔍 Annual Trading Updates – Purpose and Requirements

Under AIM Rule 10 (Principles of Disclosure) and AIM Rule 11 (Disclosure of Price Sensitive Information), trading updates (especially annual or year-end) are used to:

Provide guidance or confirm expectations,

Highlight significant changes in trading or outlook,

Summarize financial performance vs market expectations.

These updates must not be misleading or omit material facts that a reasonable investor would consider important.

✅ If the NDA-Covered Revenue is Material

If the revenue is:

Material to the group’s total revenues or profit, or

Explains a significant change in performance, or

Is otherwise price-sensitive (e.g. changes guidance, impacts outlook),

…then yes, it must be reflected in the trading update, even if not named.

⚙️ How It’s Usually Handled

Even under an NDA, the revenue will be referenced generically, like so:

"The Group expects full-year revenues to be approximately £12.5 million, an increase of 30% year-on-year, driven primarily by the ramp-up of a significant customer contract in the financial services sector."

"Performance for the year was ahead of market expectations, supported by a strong contribution from a new enterprise license agreement signed earlier in the year with a confidential global customer."

❌ If the Revenue is Not Material

If the NDA-covered revenue is not significant to overall group performance and wouldn't alter a reasonable investor’s expectations, then:

It does not need to be highlighted in a trading update,

But will still appear (anonymised if necessary) in the full statutory accounts.

🔒 Reminder: NDA Does Not Override Disclosure Duty

Even in a trading update, confidentiality must not mislead the market. If you’ve had a revenue-driving event but try to hide it entirely under NDA, that could be a regulatory issue — especially if market expectations would otherwise be wrong.

Here’s how AIM-listed companies typically disclose revenue or contracts under NDAs, while still remaining compliant with UK financial reporting and AIM rules:

✅ Common Disclosure Techniques (While Maintaining Confidentiality)

1. Generic Descriptions of the Customer

If naming the customer would breach the NDA, companies often use neutral descriptors:

"During the year, the Group entered into a significant supply agreement with a major global technology company."

"Revenue for the year includes £4.2 million from a leading European telecommunications provider."

This satisfies transparency obligations without breaching confidentiality.

2. Segment or Geographical Reporting

Under IFRS 8 (Operating Segments), companies often disclose major customers or sources of revenue by segment:

"One customer within the EMEA region accounted for approximately 24% of the Group's consolidated revenue."

3. Footnotes or Notes to the Accounts

In the notes to the financial statements (usually in the revenue note), a company might say:

"The Group had one major customer contributing more than 10% of revenue during the year. Due to confidentiality restrictions, further detail is not disclosed."

This approach is often accepted if it’s clear the company is complying with reporting standards.

4. Use of RNS (Regulatory News Service) Disclosures

If the revenue contract is price-sensitive or material, AIM Rule 11 may require a public announcement. Here's how it might be phrased:

"The Company is pleased to announce it has secured a multi-year agreement with a leading US-based software firm. While specific financial details and the counterparty name remain confidential, the contract is expected to generate revenue in excess of £2 million per annum."

📌 Important Caveats

Companies should consult their NOMAD (Nominated Adviser) to ensure that the level of disclosure meets AIM Rules.

In cases of very large contracts or where the revenue is transformative, the NDA may need to be amended or waived for regulatory disclosures.

NOTE last sentence!

Just to make the NDA issue absolutely clear ...

A Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) cannot override the legal requirement to disclose revenue in an AIM company's accounts under UK law.

Here's why:

1. Legal Financial Reporting Obligations

AIM-listed companies in the UK must comply with:

International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), or

UK GAAP (if applicable),

As well as AIM Rules for Companies (set by the London Stock Exchange).

Under these standards and rules, companies are legally required to present a true and fair view of their financial position, including:

Revenue recognition,

Material contracts or transactions,

Segment reporting (where relevant).

Even if the source of the revenue is subject to an NDA, the revenue itself must still be reported if it's material.

2. NDAs Cannot Contravene Law

An NDA is a contractual agreement between parties, but:

It cannot override statutory or regulatory obligations.

If disclosure is required by law, regulation, or by a regulatory authority (e.g., FCA or London Stock Exchange), the NDA must allow for that.

Most well-drafted NDAs include a “required by law” or “regulatory disclosure” exception clause.

3. Materiality and Market Disclosure

If a revenue-generating contract is material to the company:

It may also require disclosure under AIM Rule 11 (Disclosure of Price Sensitive Information).

Even if specific counterparty names are not disclosed, the financial impact (revenue) must be.

What can be done under an NDA?

While a company must disclose the revenue, it may:

Avoid naming the counterparty directly (if not necessary),

Use aggregated or anonymized disclosures, as long as the accounts remain compliant,

Include wording such as "a significant customer in the [industry] sector."

Conclusion:

No, an NDA cannot prevent the disclosure of revenue in statutory accounts for an AIM-listed company. Companies must comply with financial reporting and market disclosure obligations, and these take legal precedence over any private contractual agreements.