Member Info for skid35

The director buys on LSE (like market cap) are not accurate.

There have been other buys at lower levels than this, but are not listed on LSE.

Due this week. As usual cns very tightrope until it's released, the difference between good and bad can be a single order moving from Dec to Jan or vice versa.

Complete rubbish, might as well use simplywallst.

You cannot use ridiculous algorithms from the market to assess a company like ENET.

There are no analysts covering ENET.

Five recommendations ?

You really do need to do the very, very basics here - market cap is not correct on LSE.

Weird with his background to invest in DIS.

Possibly made his money and this is just a half hobby / half investment ?

Must say interesting agreement.

No haircuts just payment profiles. Must be solvent or the Israeli equivalent of fraudulent / wrongful trading going forward.

Interesting to see up buying juniper.

A quick Google and I can't see HP having a ddos supplier agreement so hopefully positive, but mergers are always disruptive especially if their a few key relationships in juniper.

RTW on winterfloods IT recommendations for 24.

The baby level of responses from some here on a simple question / clarification is just hilarious.

Backlog at the end of 2023.

Tarana - Zero.

Chinese OEM contracts - Zero

OEMs - Zero from tier 1 oem (RNS 2nd Nov), $300k from RNS 29th Nov.

Little elsewhere.

So not a "full order book"

No I dont work for a MM or in the City. 35 years in senior financial / commercial / business operations / contracts in EMEA entities of leading US tech / software companies with EMEA revenues c 1/4 $bn pa. Slight change pre retirement now but deeply involved in early stage commercialisation / spin outs etc.

Probably have more skin in the game than most here playing with their paper round money, so more to gain than most on a price rise - I just don't like seeing so much rubbish spouted as gospel truth in so few words which is so easily disproved

Giovs,

Very happy for you to answer the question then.

What is ENETs backlog at the end of 2023 ?

Mickey,

Not sure how many basic facts to correct in this one, I think everything you have said is incorrect.

But lets focus on a brilliantly phrased "full order book". Could you please tell me what the backlog is at the end of 2023 - I make it a couple of hundred $k.

Simple, come on now, you know this is all about "gut feel" and facts / knowledge / research dont count.

Sgd, you're well ahead of them.

Interesting seeing a few "experts" have RTW as their investment trust pick for 2024.

As usual this morning no facts.

As I've said in the past this could be 5p or 0p, even if this is based on fundamentals rather than the crowds of 18 year old Tiktokers in their bedrooms we have here buying and selling.

Yet no one is prepared to state what these catalysts are and the potential impact.

Let's take two which have most short term potential.

1. ENET comes out of the TSP and we understand the cash position after creditors have been settled of say £500k - £1m.

2. ENET receives an order for tarana $2m for 6 months supply.

As expected no facts.

One of the most respected operators in the sector? with $ bns in thousands of specialist funds, private equity, Tech companies and their venture funds etc it's amazing none will put even £10k into ENET when they have run the sliderule over them.

Rob,

Please tell me which fact is incorrect ?

He is not one of the most respected operators in the sector hence the position ENET find themselves in - what a pile of rubbish.

I await with baited breath for those deals.

These might be the ones he told the group of shareholders about with Cisco and Juniper, but told us "in confidence that this doesn't go outside the room" (an interesting conversation could be had with the FCA) with the CFO nodding in the background. Zero integrity.

The group of PIs that met with DL/MR both in person in London and over zoom held over 10% when the market cap was x times where it is today.

None are now holders, all realising DL simply in a bit of a deluded bubble about his baby and without a network around him of people with commercial acumen to align to tech knowledge.

How many times.

There are no brokers, not even a house broker, covering ENET.

Why would they cover this micro cap when they don’t cover any micros and small caps.

Fred.

I'm afraid facts or posters knowledge / qualifications / real world knowledge (or risk weighted forecasts based on market / tech / company both and and down) really don't count on this board dominated by a few still wet (or drowning) behind the ears commercially / business wise.

Unless you are an ENET employee (or at a potential customer about to contract) this remains a speculative punt, could go to nothing / could go to 5p.

Over riding issue is DL is a decent techie but not a great business man, unfortunately he hasnt received good counsel in the past (from the CFO/Chair) and I havent seen this being resolved.

Volmer / Brondby.

A really interesting one. Clearly would have been good to have more clarity legally to close the risk down but I can see the counterparties not wanting to spend hard cash on expensive IP lawyers as they dont need to engage unless Acuity provide some consideration.

Firstly Acuity did not give the right to IP, it was retained. Reading between the lines the software seems to have originally been developed in an era when there was a lot on "in house" developments using some third party support - hence the two counterparties and a lack of clarity of background / foreground IP.

There is really no fault from corporate legal / existing acuity management here, just some slightly messy history. The key element is no royalties seem to be passing between Acuity and the counterparties for ongoing contracts, and Acuity has full use to develop the IP further.

The risks are either

i) end users can obtain the open source software full of bugs and not pay Acuity. I can say this is not a risk, any company buying risk management software wants supported software and doesnt download free, potentially corrupted and cyber insecure, software into their network. Open source software tends to be in the academic world and is not used in large enterprises / government bodies, what is used tends not to be "enterprise" application specific software and is very simplistic.

ii) competitors somehow utilise this software. Again I really cant see this happening, compiling / decompiling / reverse engineering is a pain in the **** - more costly and time consuming than starting from a blank sheet of paper

Software is also pretty useless on its own, you need the consultants, pre sales engineers, sales to really understand the customer requirement and make it work - the overall service wrap is the key selling point.

One final point is that most software contracts usually has a clause which idemnifies the customer from third party claims, so a customer is secure that the supplier is on the line should a third party dispute the IP in use.

In summary I cant see either counterparty doing anything as its simply not in their financial interest to do so.