Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
It's DOT, ATOM, ICP & Lido which will re-rate this towards £5. Alts will rally in the next few months, the only questions appears to be how high they go...
Sounds like you need to look on NASDAQ, anything with those characteristics wouldn't have been on AIM since 2006...
WTF is going on here? Tipped in the Sunday Times, results on Monday which said they had to rely on customer payments to continue operating, placing on Tuesday, $20m contract win Wednesday. 46p > 72p ?
An utter farce IMO. Shares shouldn't have been trading for any of this period, and there is no way they should be placing for £1m 2 trading hours before a material contract win is announced. The FCA need to sort out AIM immediately, these companies clearly think they can do what they want.
Note the RNS released on 19/06/23 regarding placing speculation at that time, quashing any rumours and emphasising the newsflow to come. I'm very surprised that a similar RNS wasn't issue this morning if nothing was going on. Looking at the order book into close yesterday I was sure a placing was pending but nothing yet... If you want an AIM share price to fall further then create a news vacuum, people will usually quite rightly assume the worst.
The one other thought I had was maybe II's are playing hard ball due to the £38m convertible? It's a large amount of money to clear, yet I suspect it was the only way to access such a sum in October 22.
Interesting day to come that's for sure...
It's a good deal for those 'lucky' individuals that bought in yesterday, triggering a 16% rise. Blocks of 10k shares being bought all day - thought of buying in but didn't pull the trigger.
I think the market reaction can be explained by looking at the last segmental breakdown in the half year results;
TIC contributed £13.5m of the £33m adjusted operating profit for H124 and had £5.8m in dep'n and amort. So just £7.7m of operating profit. GRC was £22.9m adjusted operating profit, £19m operating profit after dep'n & amort.
So GRC has been sold for just 11x operating profit and 9x adjusted operating profit.
They've chucked in what appears to be a customised metric "16.2x proforma adjusted cash EBITDA" to make it look good value, I've never heard of anyone using adjusted cash EBITDA...
So if GRC has gone for 11x operating profit and TIC had £7.8m operating profit in H1, I think the max anyone could value TIC at is £170m. If we value it at 9x H1 adjusted operating profit of £13.5m then we get £243m. However, both valuations ignore £6.8m of head office costs...
Bottom line, post the £150m shareholder return I don't see how a business with ~£9m of operating profit can be valued at much more than £200m?
It looks looks like a strong buy until you read note 13 re. legal proceedings. It'll never trade at a decent multiple given the seemingly endless stream of litigation... Nevertheless, a nice trade this morning and good luck to those who hold for the US listing...
@Servalan, which numbers are moving in the right direction?!
Prescriptions of 77k vs a 28th September forecast of 100-130k ?
Cash was $13.5m at 30/06/23, they then added $20m secured debt + $6.1m equity placing in September, at at 31/12/23 cash was back at $13.9m... so cash burn was $26m for H223?
Based on that their current cash balance won't get them past the end of Q2, if they are lucky.
Q4 revenue was still pathetic - 2024 forecasts were for $62m, they aren't anywhere near this run rate (which was still projected to result in a ~$10m loss)
So which numbers are you referring to?
I was amazed this opened at 5p, in reality it should have been 2.5p at max. Viatris will end up with the drug IMO. Administration beckons as nobody will believe what they forecast now, which equals the end of the road for a loss making AIM company with $20m secured debt.
@reduk, yep it's outrageous. I've never seen a projection methodology blamed for the near 20% overstatement of ACTUAL numbers.
Note that it's not just prescriptions, but revenue;
Prior H1 accrufer revenue = $3.7m
Q3 reported = $4.1m
Q4 today = $4.3m
Total = $12.1m
This is $500k higher than the annual figure of $11.6m they've reported today...
So the prior revenue figures were based on estimates? What?!
"Onshore salt cavern opportunities
Key opportunities for investors include gas trading arbitrage, long-duration storage and interseasonal hydrogen storage.
Gas trading arbitrage
The primary role of gas storage sites is to store gas for periods of high prices (that is, trading gas by buying at low prices and exporting at high prices). This was why EDF'S Cheshire sites were developed in the first place, and the gas markets are now much spikier than they were.
Long-duration storage
EDF looked at the potential for compressed air storage at both Hole House and Hill Top Farm some years ago, and long-duration energy storage (LDES) is now very much on the net zero-inspired agenda.
It is regarded as one of the key mitigants between high output/low demand and low output/high demand periods, brought about by an increasingly intermittent renewable-backed energy system.
The economics for EDF's gas storage sites did not stack up a few years ago, but last year they received funding from the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DEZNZ) and the government is very motivated to explore LDES as a proof-of-concept.
Interseasonal hydrogen storage
Interseasonal hydrogen storage is the real sweet spot for a future decarbonised energy system, which needs hydrogen to play a role in storing energy (hydrogen is an energy vector) between seasons: capturing hydrogen produced during high-wind peaks for use in low renewable/high demand periods. This is where hydrogen is intended to displace the role currently played by gas peaking plants, and open and closed-cycle gas turbines."
Very interesting read below from a couple of months back;
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=82ecc181-7225-4757-8245-5902a5090682
"The operation of gas storage sites, particularly in salt caverns, is less simple than might first appear. However, the opportunities introduced by a net zero energy system are significant, and gas storage in salt caverns is one of the few credible solutions to both LDES and the interseasonal storage of hydrogen, making it the perfect complement to a renewables-dominated energy system."
Jeez, people are going to get nailed on this.
For a start, each NASDAQ share = 2x each AIM shares.
So $1.25 = $0.62.5c / 49p. NOT 100P.
They have no cash & were on the verge of going bust;
"Net loss was $10.2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2023, compared to a net loss of $12.0 million for the three months ended September 30, 2022.
Cash and cash equivalents totaled $13.9 million as of September 30, 2023."
I suspect they will be selling shares via their NASDAQ ATM facility to pay the bills. The company certainly needs to release an RNS to control this ridiculous price movement though.
Bounced back off 'technical' resistance at £17.80, that's the 5th time since November that shares have failed at that level (not helped by market makers setting their usual false spread of course). Ultimately it just means that Alpha should be able to buy back more shares with their initial £20m allocation, so short term I'm happy for it to remain range bound, although don't expect us to get any more gifts in the £15 range...
I do find the the UK market incredibly depressing though, having spent time looking at Australia, Scandinavia & of course the US, I find it hard to believe that Alpha would be capitalised at
100%, early Feb it was NT at 7p for more than 10k shares, a couple of sells for £5 or so land and it drops back under 6p. The market makers desperately want to keep this under the radar, volume is tiny, when a big volume day arrives we'll be back over 10p in a flash. All of us who have posted here for a while know what the required catalyst is!
Agreed @koolhead, the valuation sub £15 was one of the craziest I've ever seen on a stock market. Pleasingly, the buyback is being conducted in a very aggressive manner - £1.6m stock already bought back in the first 7 days, reducing share capital by ~0.2% already. Given the balance sheet strength, they could very easily keep a buyback in place which utilises say 75% of daily interest income, this would buy around 13k shares a day / 3.3m per annum at £18. That alone would boost basic EPS by nearly 10%... Of course, if average cash balances continue to grow and rates remain in the 3-4% region then their buying power could increase further still. Such a fascinating situation moving forward.
Another 30k shares bought back yesterday - if you scroll to the bottom of the RNS it breaks down that total into the individual trades with time stamps, which is nice info to have. It confirms to me that they are picking up shares when there isn't a buyer for a sell. In pre buyback times the 25k shares they bought at 9.08am would have very likely caused the share price to fall back, particularly if the falling price had generated more selling. Not so now.
Shares have now reached the first resistance point, in line with 5 month highs, can they break through and extend the 7 day rise?
This news certainly adds further momentum to the recovery and great to get confirmation that H2 operating income remains on track for £167-187m. There is no pattern to H1/H2 trading here, however looking at historic splits since IPO it's unusual for strong momentum to only last 6 months. Consequently, I expect their FY25 guidance to come in well above the current market expectations which have a mid point of £295m, and could be anywhere up to the FY22 3 year target level of £360m. Couple that with the efficiency savings and operating income will be back well above £100m and I expect shares will be at least £2.50...
Excellent week here, and I agree with your targets @koolhead, this is still a bargain entry point with the 200 DMA at £19.50. From watching the book I suspect we've had a new II buying in the market which has removed the need for Alpha to take the other side of any forced sells. In the meantime, Alpha should have generated another £1.5m in interest income, meaning they've paid for the shares bought back nearly 5 times over!
Article released 31 mins ago;
https://www.retailgazette.co.uk/blog/2024/02/superdry-stake-shares-fall/
£400-600m value if owned by a brand management company!
"A new investor has begun stakebuilding in Superdry, leading to takeover discussions around the business intensifying.
First Seagull, a Norwegian alternative investment fund, has snapped up a 5.3% stake in the retailer.
It is thought that the investor considers the fashion retailer to be ripe for a bid following various profit warnings over the last year knocking down its share price.
Authentic Brands Group and Sycamore Partners are also thought to have the clothing company on their radars.
The news led to Superdry’s shares immediately jumping by around a fifth.
Superdry’s value owned by a brand management company would be roughly £400m to £600m, from its current value of around £21m, sources have suggested.
The brand is believed to have cancelled a meeting with investors yesterday, further fuelling speculation.
Superdry’s share price has plummeted nearly 90% over the past year, according to The Times.
The business is currently working with PwC advisers and is exploring options such as a company voluntary arrangement or other form of restructuring, under a move that could lead to job cuts and store closures.
In January, Superdry boss Julian Dunkerton admitted the retailer was facing a “difficult period” ahead as it posted widening losses and revealed CFO Shaun Wills had quit the business."
On reasoning, they went into quite a bit of detail on capital allocation in the half year report;
"Alongside allocating capital to grow the business, the Group intends to continue with its progressive dividend policy. When taking all of the above into consideration, we believe the Group's current cash position creates significant return-enhancing opportunities. We will of course review our cash position on a regular basis, and if we feel it becomes excessive, will look to adjust."
Given the Q4 ACB of £2.1b at a blended rate of 3.8% would have generated £20m in it's own right, I suspect it's simply genuinely excess cash + the share price had / has become disconnected from reality. It also doesn't make any sense to let your share price become depressed when you have the means to decisively intervene.