Member Info for Silversprings

People should just wait for the revenue report. It’s clear the market isn’t valuing potential earnings at the moment (across almost any share). The revenue statement will be undeniable though, either people have been buying NFTs if they haven’t.

A lot of what some people are positing is just extremely negative unsubstantiated subjective opinion.

The simple answer to all of this is just to wait until the revenue statement (probably early January?). That would cover the three months including the NFT drops so far and any upcoming drops as the revenue from them is immediate.

Then it will be clear to see whether the strategic direction the board has taken the company in is worthwhile or not. Just going around posting day after day that NFTs are confetti, that you don’t like them, that they’re worthless etc. is not really anything other than opinion.

ME and Nigel must have looked at the projections for pivoting away from prioritising expanding some of the existing revenue streams and moving instead to taking advantage of sports NFTs. That strategy will either be a sensible one or not, but hysterically claiming it’s a busted flush before we’ve even seen a single revenue figure is just ridiculous.

The year on year revenue increase percentage is huge, and as the figures are up to the end of September it doesn’t even include either of the Pumas or Mexico NT drop.

Where does that line of thinking logically lead though Steve? Are you really saying that ME Nigel Tom et al are all in on an elaborate plan to live an exec life for a few years whilst winding down the company to zero value? What would be the purpose? Why would they bother working for all these deals and developing the SaaS platform and market place? They could have just kept a few tele contracts and done placing after placing on the never never if that was the goal. Far less work, far less expense.

Following your train of thought you’re suggesting that the revenues are either not going to materialise or that they will, and we’ll rake in millions of pounds, but the BOD will still dilute for a few 100k in May so they can live a nice lifestyle? It just doesn’t make sense. Then you say that they could have raised but done it at a later time when the price was higher. ME even contradicted this one on the call today, what would be the point at that time, we’d have revenues from the existing deals but crucially would have lost out on major deals.

Ultimately we can debate this all day long and Guzzler is right that results will be needed but it’s not as though we’re going to have to wait long for answers is it. There’ll be a revenue reports over the coming quarters. The money will either be there or it won’t.

After watching the investor presentation, ME said what I hoped he would. The placing was to take advantage of deals that are in the pipeline that will create more value than the dilution. He even put a timeframe on them, they’ll be concluded by the World Cup. The revenue is transparent on the block chain, we can literally see the solana going into MOS wallet.

It’s unfortunate timing yes, but it’s not as though ME and Nigel were singing from the rooftops how wonderful this placing was. They even spoke about how they could have just not done it, missed out on the deals for a short term increase in share price. They’re clearly confident that they’ll create more value than the dilution.

Imagine the scope of what some of these deals could be. They mentioned them in the presentation. More teams in Mexico, la Liga teams, they’ve turned down an NBA deal, boxing, individual athletes.

It basically all boils down to whether or not you believe in the NFT model or not. If you don’t then the company has made their strategy abundantly clear ‘to be the number 1 sports NFT market place’. If you think this is just selling confetti then you may as well sell up. If you believe in the revenue opportunity of NFTs though, then why would you sell just at the point when MOS is starting to monetise multiple deals?

The placing is extremely annoying in its timing and it’s discount but it doesn’t change the bigger picture at all. If MOS build a market place housing exclusive multi year deals with major sports brands, cross selling multiple products, profiting from resales, bringing in instant NFT revenue in the millions of pounds then the value created will be huge.

Pivotal few months ahead now. This is AIM investing though, you’re either confident in the risk you’ve taken or you’re not, there’s no risk free stocks in this market though. Don’t like ME or NFTs? MOS probably isn’t the best investment for you and you might want to sell up (although I’d wait a while until the revenue from multiple NFT drops has hit the accounts)

Jemgee - this is my opinion also. It wouldn’t surprise me if a few national FAs are wanting to try and cash in on the World Cup and have seen how MOS have mobilised the Mexican NT NFT drop. Imagine if one approached MOS and wanted something for the World Cup, MOS could do it but don’t have immediate funds without risking the business, perhaps the opportunity is too great to turn down. Equally club sides have messed up NFTs in the past, perhaps they’ve seen numbers from the Pumas drop and have engaged. The pipeline of start ups might be enormous before revenue catches up. Maybe MOS have taken the decision to raise to ensure more of these contracts can be mobilised so that the revenue stream is fortified moving forward.

That’s what I hope ME comes out with if he does a round of interviews but it’s just a hope, not a ramp, anything else from ME though and the raise is extremely disappointing.

City - I’ve read the RNS a few times but can’t discern if the 50k sales revenue is all for MOS or if that’s the total figure then subject to revenue sharing between Pumas and MOS (just for exact clarity to any new investors who may be reading)

Either way the numbers are hugely significant as it’s showing that: all NFTs are selling for a minimum price of $5, lots of the NFTs have clearly sold for more than that in order to generate the 50k figure, the demand is there for NFTs that may not be the biggest draws (e.g Alves).

To get all of this on top of confirmation of the market place working and that it was done without significant marketing expense is fantastic news.

Exactly City - Then some may wish to do the maths on potential prices for each NFT and the numbers that might be sold within days/weeks to that market with revenues flowing immediately to MOS. Then factor in multiple NFT drops per client. Then factor in the percentage MOS keep on the resale when these are traded.

Then multiply that by upto any number of clients MOS can onboard (via a process that is now well honed)

Is that he sound of a penny dropping for some?

I find it almost inconceivable that organisations like Pumas and the Mexican national team would have signed the scale of contracts they have, with the timeframes linked to the World Cup, if they’ve not seen a market ready version of the MOS metaverse. A complete non starter of an issue in my view. I’ll wager it’s ready but there’s little point in formally launching until you’ve got products to sell, hence the deals being struck.

Such a shame the BOD put all that effort into acquiring IP and building out a joined up cohesive proposition with fertile markets to sell it into and ownership of the delivery method.

If only we were reaping the regards of that work now…..

Growth companies this size always reach a tipping point where initial investment costs are eventually balanced out by revenue. MOS is extremely close to this and the revenues are only going upwards as more deals are signed and current deals are extended and improved. Quibbling about the month in which revenue figures are accounted from will pale into insignificance in the big picture of where this could go over the next year or two.

Some undeniable positives:

MOS can close deals with major players: Vodafone, JIO, Battleriff, IGS, Pumas = we have services they need, and the organisational capability to win work and partner with them, this becomes a virtuous circle the more deals are struck

One of those partners has extended the deal already = mutually beneficial for both partners and clearly delivering on revenue targets (otherwise why extend?)

MOS has exposure to multiple markets through different propositions: NFTs, gaming, content provision.

I’m not sure what the rationale would be for selling at this level unless an individual had to. If the company continues to perform in its recent manner then revenue is only going to increase, market share is going to get bigger, the gap between MOS and new entrants in this field continues to grow.

City - the reaction to MOS partnerships and acquisitions is baffling from some. They are increasing MOS IP/propositions, delivery capability, and market penetration/network all the time. I’m not sure how some genuinely expect a growth company with few employees to achieve this, there’s only so many ways to skin that cat whilst keeping built in costs low and business agility high.

I’d be more worried if we weren’t making these partnerships. We’d be carrying a single proposition (and therefore point of failure) in a rapidly evolving market and potentially losing revenue opportunities whilst we sunk permanent costs into in house development and marketing/sales. That seems folly to me.

This is a revenue game. The likes of Pumas and other potential clients are not going to wait for MOS to be ready, they’ll go elsewhere. If MOS wants that revenue it has to take opportunities as they arise and take calculated risks. Does that mean that occasionally they may have to row back on previous comments put out to the market? Possibly, but at the time ME made that fully funded comment MOS was funded for what it wanted to do in the Telco contract space it was in at the time. Perhaps the opportunity to move into NFTs came around quicker than anticipated but does that mean the BOD shouldn’t have taken it?

The revenues in the months and years ahead will validate the strategy one way or the other. You can either trust the BOD have done the right thing in grasping these opportunities or you can question that they should have passed up on them in order to avoid dilution and keep their cash.

From ME’s last interview it’s clear that first mover advantage is key. There’s a lot of other players in this field. MOS has the advantage on some of them at the moment but it might not stay that way for ever. So surely it’s right to be pursuing revenue generating contracts (exclusive ones at that) and further building a chasm between MOS and any new entrant to the market. That way when it comes to bid winning MOS is going in with multiple examples of proven track record of delivery. The only ways to do this quickly are through spending cash on acquisitions, share placements to raise, or giving away some equity in the business. For a growth company option one is just not feasible and would incur huge risk. I can see why MOS have done what they have. Once more contracts are won and revenue is multiplying then we won’t be in this situation but in that scenario the investment opportunity would not be as good as it is now because the market would already see an established profitable growing business.