Member Info for Sangijuelas1

There's a vote on the 14 December

What is said in Investor Meets is not binding

Yes we are being diluted because they are raising £50m at 2.70, which is approximately 18m new shares

Really don't know why Forward is being involved. Seems to be to the benefit of Forward, BlackRock and Molten management.

One of the key risks is the impact of the low share price on the likelihood of an activist investor getting involved or even a bid for Molten. Events that could be seen as positives for some shareholders but which management see as potential negatives - mainly because of the impact on their LTPs

It seems to me to offer Molten shareholders nothing. Just a load of e-commerce firms, marketplaces and pre Chat GPT "applied AI".

If MV had raised cash to invest by itself I would be happier. Now introducing a potential bias toward investing in the Forward portfolio and away from the likes of Earlybird and other European opportunities.

With the addition of approximately 18m new shares NAV would see a reduction from 730 down to 660 plus whatever Forward contributes to NAV

The NAV of 730 should underpin the SP.

It's a bailout of a failed fund that has close links to MV.

And it enables management to pick up shares cheap as compensation for the underwater options that are due to vest next year at 940p.

And has also killed off the chance for any further rise for the run up to Xmas

So a Molten partner leaves in 2021, joins a fund that IPOs and burns through £35m raised investing in overvalued start ups. The £2m MV invested at IPO dropped to £500k.

And now we're bailing them out with them trading their worthless shares for 10% of MV.

This of course gives the MV directors a chance to also gain from the dilution to make up for the massively underwater options in the LTP, which are due to vest next year.

If BlackRock believed in the prospects of Forward they could have funded them directly.

It also stinks that one of the Forward portfolio companies is Koru Kids, an app for childcare, which has attracted controversy due to the involvement of Sunak's wife.

The current SP here is completely arbitrary. It was hit hard by the SVB collapse, which had nothing to do with inflated valuations or losses from investee companies.

Now it just bobs about on the moribund UK market subject to the vagaries of rises and falls on the main market.

Hopefully should get some added traction as the move by pension funds to invest more in start ups gathers pace.

We are also seeing massive deflation in terms of the valuations. So there are portfolio companies like Iceye, which despite having revenue over 100m Euros is not yet a unicorn and neither is Isar Aerospace, which is looking to compete with SpaceX (137 bn dollars valuation) for European business. Isar is basically the main hope for the EU space programme given the Ariadne problems.

Iceye seems to be going from strength to strength and next year would not be a surprise if they have 200m.

So we are getting companies not recognised as unicorns that could be worth a lot more in a couple of years.

Google would not be the company it is today if it hadn't been for investors pulling the plug in the early noughties. They said you need revenue so they turned to the digital waste from searches and saw that could be monetised.

Some of the portfolio companies are having to bootstrap a bit, which could be good for them.

But not taking on what I am saying. The NAV would have to be about 520 to trigger a breach of the debt covenants.

The lenders are happy that it's nowhere near as low as that.

Also interesting is the drawdown of £38m. Presumably they need it to participate in 1 or more fundraises for larger holding(s).

Increased valuation on the interim and they have just announced Klarna as a new logo.

https://www.altfi.com/article/klarna-partners-with-form3-to-boost-european-payments

If we were actually only worth the current SP the lenders would have stepped in a while back due to a massive breach of the debt covenants.

In one of the notes it says in stress tests a 31% drop in the gross portfolio value at end September would trigger the debt covenants, although they also say they would be able to avoid breach in other ways.

I think the lenders would be very happy to take on the assets here. HSBC would see them as a great addition to their current interests in the SVB book that they took over.

That was one of my concerns somewhat alleviated.

Expect to see late prints of more dumping. Ocado is up 13% from the US inflation figures and we are treading water.

Paradoxically the higher the SP here, the lower the risk going forward.

Strange that there was so much talk on here about how positive the trading update was.

Since then selling has been relentless probably because the portfolio had a £70m write down from just 3 companies (hopefully Graphcore cos if not that's to come).

If you have got good news you don't release on a Friday. That's when you hope it will get buried.

It's publicly available info. I will wait for someone else to bring it up.

No sorry don't do unpaid research

I can't take what anyone says on here seriously as the biggest concrete risk is never discussed so I can assume no one is aware of it