Member Info for skid35

Ridiculous.

I think time for a top buy and hold.

Anyone here in RTW, a bit in the same pot?

Admission document page 25.

A little uncertain on the volume of deals and how these are spread by value, they will be picking these up on a monthly basis but not material enough for an rns, more likely an update on a quarterly value of orders and arr impact. As usual in tech back-end year focus.

Good that they have a channel focus with some good partners who do the hard lifting and provide geographic coverage.

Great to see this on the leader board for a few consecutive days, bottom drawer for me for sometime.

….as well as an understanding of cash

A frankly ridiculous and stupid comparison.

Anyone working in this sector, especially where you are 1.dealing with channels and OEMs and you are one or two steps away from end user demand 2. still developing and testing the product 3. in a market where there are still long lead times for components etc knows how external issues can very easily take you off track, especially where income recognition is backdated in the year.

Although "on track" is welcomed I think only new / follow on contracts will steady the nerves and take the share price higher.

Jesus, reminds me of those who think penny shares are some sort of bargain because they don't cost a lot individually.

And zero, absolutely zero, to do with the available VOLUME of shares.

All to do with the VALUE of those shares, the proportion not in tight hands and with that market movement based on buyers / sellers.

Nice listen to twin petes 102. It’s usually hit and miss but a good listed, worry about wheelie as he seems to be watching gbnews a bit too much in recent weeks.

Guy called Alex degroote (cv in aim tech small caps) with a really interesting summary at the start on the overall “state” of the market for aim tech stocks, Institutions simply not interested below £150/200m market cap.

One of the pros then listed calnex and spirent as 2 of his 5 shares to take a look at.

Further discussion on an Israeli share tremor, and the issues of trust faced by Israeli listed companies.

Poor companies can have great governance but it’s rarer for great companies to have poor governance.

Was hoping this was a very, very specific cash squeeze prior to receiving cash from milestones. Unfortunately, apart from existing contracts on track, there is so little to go on which is really solid.

Really do need a very comprehensive trading update covering, well basically, everything. I do feel the China contracts could be massively undervalued if we see follow on orders.

Also where is the tarana follow on order, can’t believe they have ordered on the drip and not declared it ?

As always hoping there is a DL master plan, and in the background it is being executed.

The ENET conversion cycles are too long.

- Pipeline conversion from opportunity initiation to signed contract (as well as poor pipeline focus)

- Conversion of a signed contract into revenue.

- Cash conversion of cash out (either in development or stock) into cash in.

They do need to show higher revenue on a high fixed cost, high gross margin business as this is what leverages profit past a breakeven point.

Otherwise the mix of ebitda negative and long cash cycles means constant cash calls and dilution, in a really poor market for cash calls. When investors have this visibility with a good degree of certainty that this is not required, this will be a massive inflection point for the share price.

Realise an error on Director purchases, but they are still really immaterial.

Wondering whether it is worth attending, just be full of bland "apprentice type" statements with no real substance.

SOH simply cannot say anything at this meeting of any significance if there isnt a release.

He may just blow the cobwebs off an old powerpoint and wang on about the overall market for micro biome prodcuts which is expanding exponentially and is a great opportunity, one which he has failed to execute against.

You're not making any logical or statistical sense. The usual correlation vs causation issue based on a narrow statistical population of 1.

How this goes will be the strength of the news flow however individual holders read this from their individual perspective. Overlaying this is the unique position of ENET with a massive overhang from Bergen.

It's the value of those shares (in total or not in tight hands) that is important, not the number which as I have said is completely irrelevant.

The drag on the share price, no you just get more shares for your £1k, £5k. So if there were 20m in issue at 30p your saying it would rise even quicker, or 2m at £3 ?

By the way 200m is a hell of lot of shares for a £6m company anyway.

The number of shares in issue is completely irrelevant, having a tenth of the shares in issue with a x10 shares price or 10x shares with a tenth of the share doesn't determine where ENET is going.

Yeah, I must have missed that tiktok teenage influencer investment advice which said the number of shares in issue determines investment success.

It's not an opinion it's fact.

The issue is the tightness of the share register and the percentage that is not in tight hands that is the issue.

So if we have £3m not in tight hands it doesn't make a toss of difference if there are 3 million at £1 or 30m at 10p or 300m at 1p - it is still £3m worth.

The only real time it does become important is of the share price becomes too high - see personal assets, Berkshire Hathaway,Japanese stocks in the 80s etc.

The price floor under which they cannot convert doesn't hold water to me. The $2m from Bergen was provided in advance and I can't see that there would be a restriction on conversion, there is a requirement to keep a stable market afterwards so they can't just dump.

Mojolse.

Rude, you're very easily offended by a simple statement ?

All I said was share count is irrelevant which it is - otherwise every company would do a reverse 10 to 1 share split and somehow the share price would be more than 10x.

What was erroneous on my statement on visibility, previously acuity was an investment in the accounts and treated as such - and now it is the accounts. As an investment there was no statutory requirement for rnss from acuity, now there is.

Mike.

With your lack of facts and lack of critical thinking you don't seem like an engineer, more like a Brighton hairdresser whose hit the prosecco after his French bulldog has died and he's crashed his white mx5.

I think you're arguing to yourself on Chinese contracts, yes they are more risky that's why you don't contract multi million deals with companies with no credit where the contract is pay at the end,and then recognise income when you shouldnt. If export guarantee didnt touch it can't be great.

You have said I "made up accounts". This is juvenile stuff, anyone can see easily see in a couple of minutes what I said is correct. As I said an engineer would ask themselves questions on why this is the case.

In most of the recent raises on AIM I have seen directors have put their hands in their pockets, not selling is not a positive signal. The lack of a cfo purchase is telling. The £5k from the ceo is a small proportion of even his c 20% pay increase.

I have seen a lot of investors such as yourself on this board over 4 years who have bought in on promises as the St writeups, only to be down as the share price falls on a lack of execution. You are now down probably 20-30%, as your average is less than mine hopefully you'll be breakeven before me.