Member Info for Safi123

No obvious signs of things going off track. Cash flow seems to be particularly good, which is most important. Buybacks are likely to be symbolic but nevertheless a sign of strength and should help lift or at least stabilise the share price. Not convinced by the accounting...I have a slight concern these exceptional and acquisition related costs are not one off as they seem, as they seem to recur every year. Are they using acquisitions to obscure costs in order to fiddle the EDITBA? I'm still very concerned about the projections and whether they can really make them. It appears all the individual businesses are loss making, and if we get a trading statement similar to last year in June, they will not give us much information. I would like them to give specific financial figures for the first quarter, it's only reasonable if they indeed want us to believe what they say. I'm disappointed no one asked about it in the webcast (unless I missed it) I believe they will likely discontinue less productive parts of the business in efforts to increase profitability, leaving us with another boatload of 'one off' costs next year but improving cash position. Takeover is still the best chance for shareholder value IMO.

I wouldn't invest based on their outlook statements, especially with the constant 'management expectations' which means nothing. There is always a sense of obfuscation and R1 do have a history of lack of professionalism with their communications. The pushing back of the trading report is a prime example of this. Nevertheless I am personally invested in this company because I do believe it is really undervalued. I'm glad that Tosca/Singer and co are taking charge as they seem to be focussed on shareholder value and are heavily invested in the share price. I think the company will start to post real profit for FY2019 but honestly hope they get taken over before that as that would come at a decent premium for myself anyway. My only fear is they are currently could be planning another acquisition

Normally you would expect a change like this, if amicable, to be announced at the results, not a few days before. Irreconcilable differences, probably with regards to preparing the full year statement. The question is what about? Figures seemed to be quite good only a few weeks back. Possibly it has to do with writing off assets? Or maybe projections? One way or the other, it sends a poor message

I sold my stake when it appeared the spike upwards fizzled out. I'm very surprised though it looks to be falling south of 200 again. There was intense trading activity the past few days and today totally flat. Looks very underpriced but this company is famous for smokes and mirrors it seems, so the market must be quite skeptical still. I intend to go back in but it's possible the final year results will show higher bottom line losses than expected (I predict it will be 10 million or so for the year) so will wait for now. However in a 6 months timeframe I think it will be a good investment

Can't really make my mind up about this stock. I have to admit I bought in quite heavily recently as I don't see too much of a downside from this price point in the case of missing expectations (unless they are truly dreadful) but loads of upside if they meet expectations. The share price movement is hard to make sense of though. I notice two trades of 15,000 shares each were made at about 170 in the morning, but were only reported after close of trading. And then there are these odd trades of only a handful of shares at a time. Does someone know what's going on?? Can anyone offer their predictions for results? Judging by previous financial statements, it seems they are on course for 15million editba year this year, positive overall free cash flow and perhaps 10million in overall losses. If they demonstrate they had bottom line profitability in H2 then IMO that would be a gamechanger for the share price.

I think this is excellent news for holders. My expectation was that shareholders would be completely wiped out. I think the company is now secure and should eventually recover, but the value to shareholders will be constrained due to the dilution and lingering debt. It's unlikely we will see dividends for several years at least. I assume there was a leak because the shares help up very well between this and the last announcement. For now there is no rush to buy in again, but I will watch and see what happens. The next set of results will likely be poor anyway.

Very cheeky of the board to release the statement so late on an early finish before bank holiday! However it likely won't prevent a precipitous fall next week. The mention of risk that they may not be able to restructure the debt is surely a warning to investors that administration is inevitable without a white knight. The results don't really tell us much we couldn't have figured from the previous statement. The board has shown a little more transparency this time round, although I still feel they are being somewhat evasive with regards to what the options are. IMO the only option remaining is begging the institutional investors for the 5 million, but for 5 million they could probably take the company private or sponsor a leveraged buy out. If this company somehow manages to restructure the debt and remain independent, I might buy back in.

I took advantage (if you could call it that) of the partial share recovery and sold out my remaining holdings at a significant loss, but not as bad as it could have been. I still hope for another entry once things become more clear. I figure if theres positive news i can always buy back in. The debt repayments were already placed on an extended moratorium, and were due to recommence this month at 1 million a quarter. On top of that the board have stated that they will require further liquidity between now and the end of the overdraft facility, meaning they still expect to be cash negative or at the least in need of investment funds. So basically they need rescue funding. The bank are unlikely to provide a further debt facility considering they just ate a 10 million write off on the administration of investments The only saviours could be the asset funds holding 40% of this company. However a new placing is probably out of the question due to the low share price The company HAS to deliver evidence of a turnaround on the next update, and judging by their recent statements this has not happened. But I wouldn't put it past the board to surprise us, they seem to be very conservative with their updates and up to a couple of months ago seemed very positive

It appears this director resigned on 18th October (noticed filed on companies house 27th October) He was formerly the director of British Philately, and was senior part of the company for at least a decade. Was he involved in the investments division? I suspect the decision to cut the division loose was in the works for some time as it became clear nobody would make an offer for the company on account of the contingent liabilities

Bobx i also wonder what changed so suddenly within those 6 weeks between the updates. Judging by the schollium statement, it seems likely that SGI did close at least one deal. Did the other proposals just turn sour? Is it possible that they decided to cut off the division before obtaining more funding in order to avoid potential liabilities for allowing it to fail? The latest statement mentions "an offer for the Company as a whole is unlikely to be favourable to shareholders whilst the legacy contingent liabilities remained." That implies the decision to cut out investments was due, at least in part, to make the company more attractive to potential suitors/proposers.

SG guernsey owed 11million mostly it seems to the company's Bank. Did this debt make up a portion of the 17 million facility which is known about, or was it another hidden liabilty the board kept quite about?

Investments made up the lions share of this company's operations and profits (although was cash negative). Up to march 31 the revenue from the now remaining divisions accounted for only 13 million (albeit overall profitable and cash positive). Will that be enough to handle 17 million in bank debt though? Things werent clear before, but this has really muddied the waters. Anyone have any ideas what the net assets will be now? Will it be higher or lower? It looks like about 12 million of philatelic stock is gone, but so are a large amount of liabilites it seems

As far as the share price is concerned, the only thing that matters currently is the outcome of the FSP. The final sentence in the report states that the conclusion of this (nearing completion) process will allow the company to draw a line under all this mess. Based on the report of multiple proposals and more importantly the bank being satisfied with progress, that would imply that the debt will be paid off or reduced significantly, and the company will be able to continue operations either as part of another company or even independently. Pearl, are you sure they want to get rid of the bank loan first? The report states the �10m revolving credit/overdraft is available until 31 May 2018 and currently has 0.6 million headroom. The bank loan is repayable in december at 0.5 million a quarter or earlier in the case of a major asset disposal If my (limited) understanding is correct, a strategic investment could only result in a maximum of 30% ownership of the company. At the current marketcap of approx 15 million, if we were to want to sustain the current share price of approx 8p after dilution you would only need to generate 3.9 million in funding at 8p. That seems hardly adequate even with non core asset disposal, especially if we assume ongoing trading losses. As such a strategic investment must value the company at significantly more than the current share price, or a major asset disposal is in the pipeline, or both. I know that disruptive have deep pockets, and apparently have been chasing this acquisition for at least 6 months, so remain optimistic a deal will be struck at the conclusion of the FSP. But perhaps my maths is way off.

And where is 8 million going to come from? Perhaps a strategic investment along with further sales of non core loss making assets as well as breaking even might just about manage it, but not before doing major damage to shareholder value. And the company would still be in significant debt. It currently has more debt than market cap. My personal view is that the board actually do want to sell the company. The whole process was started after the disruption approach, which was likely arranged to get a higher offer. It is in everyones interests that the company is not left to continue on life support like this. I am grateful for the board not taking the easy way out. It seems that disruption need to stop lowballing and put in a decent premium.

I really wonder how Tim Cook is viewing all this. Is this the outcome he anticipated? The concern is not whether the GPU IP at IMG fits in with Apples technological roadmap (which is the reason they gave for dropping IMG) but the value it will have to Apples competitors who may use it to make products that eat at Apples market share. It really is a no brainer for Apple to have hoovered this company up, at least to deprive their competition of it if not to use it themselves. A settlement does not solve this issue. IMG going to the Chinese is a strategic disaster for Apple...surely they cant be this short sighted?

Tomorrow will signify 3 months of almost dead silence since takeover talks were announced. This will either be due to a lack of interest or due to very stubborn demands from the board. I'm holding on assumption of the latter. I suspect CB were (and probably still are) very close to making an offer, but the increasing scrutiny from UK authorities might have given them pause for thought. The great irony of all this is of course IMG are only needing to sell themselves after hostile maneuvering from another foreign firm, only this one was American and therefore excused for their undermining of British tech firms

When the takeover interest was announced, it appeared that several companies could compete which therefore would provide a significant premium offer. The sentiment on this board appears to ebb and flow with the share price. Here are my (speculative) thoughts: -ves: - Most companies are only interested in IMG due to sniffing a bargain, which would entail a limited bid premium - Very likely there's a lot of Chinese interest, but most such companies are backed by the Chinese government and therefore may be discouraged from bidding against each other. - Outside of China, several companies could benefit from the IP but not without significant risk. Developing a GPU which for years was mostly designed to meet the needs of Apple, to now complement their existing technologies would require significant strategic realignment and investment. Ultimately it might land the company in difficulty if it backfires. For instance I don't believe Mediatek are the kind of company to take this risk, their recent trading update sounded pretty risk averse +ves - Building a new GPU architecture without infringing patents is next to impossible. However Apples approach to in house development is clearly giving them a competitive edge in performance and finances and other companies who want to compete may have to follow a similar route. In particular Google and Samsung who are heavily invested in mobile may find this is a rare, if not one off opportunity to break free of perpetual licensing and optimise their own hardware. Lord knows they need to. - Court cases regarding IP it seems are usually settled with a compromise, and it is likely the dispute with Apple, if it drags on long enough, will eventually end the same with more favourable terms to IMG than is the case now - IMG is in is highly lucrative and growing industry, and with the advent of AR it's likely GPU IP will only increase in value - IMG still has a range of strategic options, all it's divisions are growing and evidently they have made efforts to diversify with MIPS and Ensigma starting to bear fruit. Selling MIPS alone could clear their debt and keep the company safe for years. It is nothing like the case of Sepura which was in a far poorer financial situation, a stagnant market and at risk of imminently breaking debt covenants. Even with no sale the company will be in no such position RE the bid process I feel the due diligence is done and there have been offers suggested to the board already, but they were not entertained. I think the board would rather sell parts of the company rather than all of it for cheap. I don't think anybody should be surprised this is dragging on, and it is by no means a sign of disinterest. Bidders are in no rush and would be very wary of triggering a bidding war, and perhaps first movers, especially ones with deeper pockets, would be put at a relative disadvantage in such a scenario. Of course this is all my subjective judgement, I would welcome your thoughts o

It seems the iPhone 8 will be radically different from previous generations and will have AR as a standout feature, and so it's conceivable that Apple decided on using a newly designed GPU based on IP licensed from one of the other major GPU suppliers. Then again, the new PowerVR architecture can also be used for AR/VR apparently. Apple are no doubt keenly following developments with the sale, but I am no longer so sure they need or even want IMGs technology anymore. It will really boil down to how strong this IP is and how valuable it is to other major tech players.

Does anyone have info regarding Apple's rights to block/facilitate a buyout with their 8% stake? My view is that regardless of whether or not Apple is one of those interested in the group buyout (I personally think they are), they will attempt to leverage their stake to make it as difficult as possible for other parties to carry out a takeover.

Some interesting suggestions. I agree that something is not typical at all here. Whatever it is, the Sepura board must be at least aware. But I don't believe they are deliberately trying to sabotage the deal, they simply cannot beckon such action from the public interest bodies in UK and Germany. It is more the timings of the reviews which is suspect rather than the fact that they are taking place. Either the Brits and Germans are acting antagonistically, or in concert with each other. Considering tensions with Brexit and competing interests, my guess is the former. If there was a genuine public interest basis of concern, they would not be using delaying tactics to try to sink the deal but on the contrary moving ahead sooner rather than later. If the company were so important to national interests, the UK government would not be setting it to sink by their own volition one way or the other. I think they were at first simply cautiously waiting for the outcome from the Germans, who now have been prompted to reciprocate. This is all speculative, next week may hopefully shed some more light