Member Info for skid35

Five thumbs up as a great incisive post.

1. Companies below c £250m on AIM have no analyst coverage. So God knows where two plus analysts come from for ENET.

2. Without looking I expect this leads to the quite simply brilliant simplywallst site. Anyone thinking this counts as research needs a lobotomy.

Unfortunately there is no coverage from tech analysts from Forrester / Gartner, although these are hardly independent.

PK.

Anyone can check facts here. 4 posts yesterday, none friday, 4 Thursday - not quite 33 a day. Mainly in response to quite ridiculous posts, given the knowledge of posters and their volume here they really have to be at the very extreme end of ridiculous for a response so quite light from me.

Many thanks for backing my analysis showing the importance of the Chinese customer,and that as we haven't had an RNS this remains unpaid.

The statement "continues to support" means ENET haven't taken their teams off the contract and downed tools - a one sided arrangement rather than movement from the customer.

Leg in / PATT.

Thanks for the calcs, but extrapolating one quarter is problematic.

1. The two q4 deals with not form the basis of on going quarterly cash generation, certainly not at that value.

2. Time to close and generate cash from New opportunities is uncertain, with prepaid licence deals enet is not in a great negotiating position.

3. Neutral cash over a year still give a rise to pinch points especially with lumpy revenue streams. Tech notoriously back ended with the hockey stick on revenue, working capital / cash conversion a 3 month lag.

4. Need to see how the revenue mix plays out from a margin perspective.

Key still is clarity on the Chinese deals, stock conversion to understand how much $$$ and then cash out from this.

Yes - topped up (the 44k at about 10 at 5p).

Hopefully a nice rise from here with 5p as the base. Hopefully a re rate of AIM/ micro cap overal, a bit of a Santa rally as well as company specific news.

Anyone on here tozzer jt or they knowitall from X ?

How many times - anyone using the LSE market capitalisation hasnt got a brain cell

QS. Best go back to the play dough.

How many times. THESE.ARE.NOT.FREE.

The real lack of understanding of tech pipeline, pipeline conversion and time taken from discussion to contract to meaningful contribution is telling on this board. DL has also repeatedly been far, far, far too optimistic on this and doesn't understand the approval process and sales stages within customers - clearly little risk appraisal from a useless CFO and chairman understanding actions / mitigations etc.

The contracts DL spoke about were the chinese ones, where clearly there has been no breakthrough in the customers abiding by the contract terms, or ENET perfroming to the contract terms.

The three real contracts they have have been very long term relationships and only now are they really starting firing.

Rns not end. Predictive text!

F1, the end literally states the number of shares in issue.

Did listen to the charles archer pod, thanks for posting.

Although directionally he is correct I dont think he understood the economics of a SaaS business, particularly the ramping of ARR and cost ratios.

As is usual with tech a large proportion of orders in Q4 / Dec dont add much to revenue but increase ARR.

Key will be go to market model and use of sales channels (and their margin). Sales channels execution, especially for geographic expansion, key to success.

I have been impressed with any interview / communication from the CEO - really seems clued up, focused both strategically and operationally.

Have some spare cash so hoped todays rise wouldnt have happened.

Quant - I'm really not sure if you can actually read.

1. If you don't understand how royalty / prepayment contracts work in tech, probably best not comment and carry on reading the beano.

2. Cutting edge tech ? Clearly does the job in this product, if it were cutting edge tech sales would be in the 10s of $m a year.

Quant - the shares in issue / market cap on LSE are wrong

A total lack of understanding of both this and the tier 1 aerospace.

These are not new contracts, they are changes to the payment and contract terms from quarterly retrospective royalty reporting to a prepayment for a defined quantity of licences.

Key here is what is the quid pro quo with the customer in doing this - a quite large discount for early payment.

Good news on both is that ENET tech / IP is embedded in end user applications / products. Just hope the poor financial position hasn’t forced selling the family silver at pewter prices.

Surprised everyone is surprised Bergen is bailing out above their buy price, they just want out as they just dont trust DL as an individual or businessman.

We no longer have the tictoc investor brigade here so not many buyers to soak up Bergens millions. No news on chinese deals means no resolution or cash as these are RNS events.

Malpenn,

Agree they want to deal with a financially stable company with access to working capital to support their contract.

BUT they will have access to escrow should the worst happen, DL will buy the IP at a knock down value and have this as his retirement fund.

As I have said previously it would be great to have a Tarana IPO as the listing document would provide i) product sales with a direct extrapolation to ENET ii) they would have to provide a list of key supplier and risks.

A post really lacking in any understanding of the company or the market for renewable infrastructure funds, especially on the massive discounts they are already on.

What does "results" mean - the NAV, the operational performance of the underlying assets, or I think you are talking share price performance which is not "results".

On NAV with a stabilisation of discount and exchange rates expect minimal movement.

Operational performance, all seemed good with further movement from assets performing rather than under construction.

Buybacks at the current discount to NAV very accretive.

Dividends secure.

Does look like an AI play from GROW.

Hopefully a slimmed down cost base between the two.

Looks like they had this "underwritten" at virtually the current price so no need for retail funds.

Additional shares are always dilutive, but it the % you own of a larger market cap that counts.

Sadifanalytics.

It will be like the buffoonish simplywallst stuff, a stupid extrapolation using the most juvenile of maths and stats.

The how much the directors are invested in ENETs case isn't a reliable check as a private investor as it usually is.

DL has always maasivelyq misjudged the pace of how quickly he can build a pipeline, the pipeline conversion rate, the time taken to convert to a deal, the time taken from deal to cash, the cash to keep running in the meantime. It didn't help with a cfo from the jewellery business with no understanding of tech businesses unable to challenge and a buffoon of a chairman.

He is quite naive with customers and blinkered around the competitive threats.

With broadlight the dominant customer was the supporting shareholder, but a a massive cost of dilution.