The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
I don't understand your position here, you're making valid points so you're obviously cued up to a certain degree regarding AIM investing, so unless its a strategic way to attempt to deploy a little doubt amongst the board and perhaps achieve a sub nominal buy in . . . are you really on these boards in search of a random tinker like DHC to hold your hand for you and assure you PF is ready to crack open the champers in his oxfordshire new build, while you select the buy option for however many shares you fancy?
As jimzi said, the day you can get purchase cover on an AIM stock please let me know, because it'd save a huge amount of stress and worry underneath my roof each night :)
Oh and before I sign out . .having spent countless summers in the ex in laws holiday home in Nerja, I can assure you Puerto Banus is about as classy blackpool pier;
(Just IMO)
It really is a very encouraging video for the market to take on board, it’s clear from his body language he knows he’s finally got something good here, and he’s bursting to brag about it a bit more but the poor guys restrained by the market rules just now.. I imagine it was of a similar nature at the AGM for those who attended,
DHC’s back in, good to see you sparking a little more positivity old boy . . What entry did you finally settle for? 5,5, 6, 6,5?? Anyway go easy with the PF stalking this time will you, unless you see him down the Marina at Puerto Banus with a case full of cash and a shiny new yacht nearby, then we’l Know Ghana’s been sealed ????
and the port in question is currently under development to fulfil up to 3.5m containers p/a?
Just to clarify; PF alluded yesterday that the pricing on this Ghana contract is to be similar to a port that charges a scanning fee of £65 per container?!
Sounds brilliant Mike, thanks for the swift reply.
So 70% of a bottom line figure of $10 container at 1m containers p/a, we’r looking at a $7m recurring revenue contract for a predicted 15 years, with clients intentions in tripling the capacity?
Silver fox you have hit the nail on the head IMO .. it’s a common initiative used by Govs to keep wealth within the country, despite the lack of resources to carry out the tasks in question.
The UAE is an example, if you’re an international business wanting trade or work in their regions, you need an Emiratey buddy’s signature on your books.
With this trail of thought, and the apparent lack of experience/relevance that Scanport have, leads me to why I’d be tempted to predict the margins to be weighted in WSG’s favour, be interesting to hear others thoughts?
Thanks to both Mike and HnN for the detailed notes, much appreciated I'm sure by all that weren't able to attend!
The Ghana deal really is a sweet surprise, huge potential not just at this port over the next coming years, but if WSG are able to make a name for them selves in the shipping industry, then that will be a very prosperous avenue to go down!
Despite the chaos between the western world and Iran, I'm stupidly a little optimistic that we may still have a play with this one, despite any bad blood between the UK/US and Iran, it can only bode well for the Iranians to have a UK security outfit operating their airport security; to terminate the contract out of spite on the basis of WSG British origins strikes me as being a bit like cutting your nose to . . you know the rest. Im encouraged by the statement anyway from PF that technically we are already to go, at the least its good to see we are still pursuing this with intent on our behalf.
African contract - again I understand the company's comms RE the struggles of working with these types of countries/clients/environments . . it really is the wild west, therefore I wouldn't be surprised if we get an RNS confirming commencement of this project tomorrow, equally never.
The bad debt airport prospect - interesting, and could be a sweet extra bonus of an additional MSC , however I fear the gentle reminder to the client of the unpaid debt situation may be enough to send them tendering elsewhere - BUT the bad debt may also suggest this slippery client to potentially have/and or be prone to capital issues, therefore what better business model to start running than a PAX fee customer paying one?
Very interesting day, and although the market seems cautiously resistant, still stuck on the fact that we have been here countless of times before with PF and his charming ability to have us on our knees and all doey eyed, I think if we get confirmation of Ghana within this next 30 day period, we will start to see more trust that he's going to stop sleeping with Julie next door, and come home to us each night, in time to read the kids a bedtime story :)
Evening all
I'm not one to engage in an argument on an online board, but when something I very much stand by in what I have said, is addressed as 'absolute bullshit' I feel obliged to return back and challenge that if you were to ask the majority of investors who bought in on the MSC MOU, what difference would it have made if the company had prior disclosed the location . . I strongly suspect the general feedback would be that those said investments would have been smaller, and in some cases if at all.
A very basic macro analysis during the Trump campaign, would have picked out the party's dialogue towards the JCPOA . . and even back then, before he was anywhere near the whitehouse gates, would have been enough to throw off any small-medium risk adverse investor.
There is no denying the financials are outstanding, and if/when the contract does kick in, it truly will be company transformational - I admire your passion for the company, but please at least set aside your emotions before commenting back to what is a fair and honest post from a genuine investor.
Agreed.
And its a convenient blanket for PF & co. to lie under and hide, because regardless of how we all know there are valid arguments to point fingers at the BOD and accuse them of this shareholder abuse . . IT IS the responsible, and industry expected approach for a security company to adopt.
If the location was previously disclosed, irrelevant of the transformational financial gain, the political uncertainty would have no doubt deterred maybe not so much investors, but perhaps rather sizes of investments, and quite rightly so, given the chaos of current world affairs, and yep we could have all guessed it . . of course the nation of our much awaited MSC would be taking centre stage. If you don't laugh, you'l cry.
There is also an argument to suggest that at the same time, blind eyed shareholders were naive to think such a contract would be located in a pretty solid, more westernised region such as Oman for instance (admittedly the timing of their new terminal was unfortunately very suggestive), and that the sheer practicality of the business we/they were invested in, and of course the business model, doesn't equate to such ventures . . just yet!
We live in hope hey?
There is no MSC factored into current share price, whether that be Iran, the alleged Africa prospect, or any of the other previous MOU's that have been hinted at by the board in the past.
IMO the current SP is a result of battered sentiment, after years of speculation and hype, which has continually never lead to anything major (in terms of MSC); and also the current economic state and perceptions of stock market investments.
Its a shame, and also quite ironic, because aside from there being a few more shares in allocation, the co. is in the best position its ever been in,
Where has the info re. 'required ASAP' came from? I couldn't see it on the site, or was it a misleading post by OP?
Interesting. Can only relate to Iran, unless they have some other secret project in Afghanistan we're unaware of. Also mentions the ability to speak German.
Do you know when these jobs were posted? I hadn't checked the site for a while until just now,
Best
If you follow DT's track record the story is playing out how it was always scripted. His ego's only concern is to have the DT stamp of approval on policies, trade deals, and other global negotiations the US are apart of - its for both his legacy, and will of course help strengthen his campaign for a second term amongst the blindly led army of supporters he has.
Take North Korea for example, he kicked up a huge fuss whilst the rest of the world were minding their own business, and then all of a sudden he's the first world leader to have came to some sort of 'peace deal' with KJY and he's perceived as a global hero by an unprecedented number, in line for a noble peace award.
Other than the potential Iranian retaliations to the US provocations and sanctions; Think about it - realistically what grounds is there to go to war on Iran? They were complying with a negotiated JCPOA nuclear arrangement with all the Worlds powers, then all of a sudden one of the powers pulls out, not because they were failing to comply, but simply because he wasn't at the original table to agree to it . . so now they go to war, it would be ludicrous?!
As much as Iran is a minefield for investment right now, you can't blame PF or the company for this one, it is a macro-eco issue of the greatest kind, and when the dust settles, it will be worth the patience for everyone involved - if it gets to that point.
Like what was stated in the last RNS, contracts in these types of locations are where WSG have their advantages, because as of now, I don't believe the company to be in a position, experience or the credentials to be targeting the more developed, western airports.
This isn't a ramp or a tongue up PF's backside by any means, just a shed of realistic perspective on the situation.
You could argue they were devious by withholding the location being Iran, which would have undoubtedly dampened a bit of the excitement and buzz around it all back in 2016 . . however due to the nature of the industry, I guess you could also argue they were merely being a responsible security outfit, withholding sensitive information to the general public.
DS
Regardless of twitter being a somewhat questionable channel of communication between a board member of a security company and a diplomat, I think the fact that all three of 'Mr Sutcliffes' followers are known WSG shareholders, may cast a shadow of doubt in the authenticity of that tweet, amongst even the bulliest of bulls.
DS
It's really quite deflating to watch to be honest, no different to seeing a scared playground of kids fall in line once the school bully enters the yard.
There is no reason the rest of the worlds powers should feel threatened or obliged to give in to America and Trump's wreckless behaviour, and quite frankly it undermines every single one of them.
Aiming you and Ned are right, regardless of anyones opinion on Iran, they have complied with an international agreement, to be been unfairly victimised, and fall at the hands of an idiotic psychopath, who's narcissism and arrogance insists on changing anything his predecessor had accomplished, just in vain of gaining recognition once a new deal or policy has been implemented under his own establishment, with zero consideration whatsoever to the potential catastrophic implications that may incur outside of his deluded little America first bubble...
...and the fact that the other JCPOA parties know full well this is the case, however are still failing/seemingly hesitant to help uphold the deal, is an insult to Iran.
wpa 'Here's hoping they see (UK's) WSG contract as a 'quick win' that comes from one of the Big 3 Instex promoters; ticks all the boxes to promote trade with Iran; has universal international benefit; in an area (aviation security) that no-one can disagree with (not even DT) and, given that the Iranian's probably want their new terminal security up and running asap, then we may just be the one to kick this thing off .... maybe ?'
It is for these very reasons you have highlighted, why myself and probably a few others here are quietly confident there still is light at the end of this murkey contract tunnel.
If ever there was a trade deal to be made this year that would benefit each party on numerous political levels (jpoa, iran-european relations, brexit, terrorism prevention, aviation, tourism, int security, compliance, etc) . . it wouldn't be a bad shout to suggest this one.
Come on guys, bring it home for us :)
Gibbo, Foxy ... frustratingly I agree with you both. Despite Mike, in my mind without a doubt, most certainly having PI’s best intentions at heart with his proposed movement, the reality is, realistically it’s pretty ludicrous to even contemplate a vote of no confidence with no alternative strategy in place (As far as I’m aware, other than foxys daily sarcasm-filled post, there hasn’t been one mentioned publicly on these boards?). Now, unlike how the whole brexit fiasco ended up, I believe the chances of actually achieving a vote of no confidence to be very, very slim .. something I’m sure that Mike himself perfectly well knows, and his sole intention of pursuing such a movement, would be to merely give the boards boat a bit of a rock, and project shareholder discontent in a more alarming fashion... You know ... let’s actually show them we have a voice here. Perhaps the WSG shareholders march around Westminster, let’s say. But thinking rationally, as Gibbo, IMO, has very correctly pointed out .. we should perhaps take a bit more responsibility here, and use the devestating state of affairs we find our country in just now, as an example, of what can go wrong chasing a poorly thought out, unplanned, wreckless, utopian idea. Subliminal brexit rant over ... of course, I wish to reiterate that these thoughts and opinions of mine are all based upon the assumption, that currently, there is no shareholder plan . . and I forward apologise to anyone if I have missed something over the last week or so. I for one haven’t a clue what would happen if the board were given the boot, from both legal and operational standpoints, however I’m sure there are others out there, a lot more well informed than myself, and if there is actually a serious motion brewing amongst a few of us, I will be glad to listen and learn. With that being said, however, I really do believe that if we reach this years AGM, as we are today, and still with no mention of anything ... there really needs to be a huge amount of pressure put on the BOD, more so than ever, and answers need to be given. Foxy I’m genuinely finding you more amusing these days. I don’t know if it’s because you’ve upped your wit levels, or that perhaps it’s a warning sign that my patience and faith in this Co. is indeed coming to its tether. Either way, I don’t know how that makes me feel. Enjoy the Easter weekend everyone, make the most of this gifted weather outside. DS
I do believe this meeting to be of significance for us. \
Maybe this will reduce the anxieties of the British banks, which according to the statement from Lord Lamont, explains that their is still uncertainty on how british companies will receive the payments from INSTEX due to the reluctance from the British banks, however there is no mention of this from the AHK (the german equivalent/iranian chamber of commerce), therefore one would hopefully assume the strategic implementation of our German subsidiary should actually negate this issue, and we can get started ahead of the rest.
On a side note, came across this whilst doing a bit of delving, the original page is inaccesible, however you are still able to translate it from google, and read the original contents - a list of suppliers an iranian outfit is set to use;
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fa&u=http://paaeez.ir/&prev=search
DS
Can you elaborate on why gibbo?