Member Info for Stuartrm

It says

“Australia, UAE

Dubai authorities launch money laundering probe against litigation funder LCM

The Dubai Public Prosecutor's office commenced a court-assisted investigation into LCM and its chief executive Patrick Moloney in March, Intelligence Online has learned. The DPP is examining details from a complaint made in late 2022. The company says it has not been contacted about the inquiry. [...]”

Just so that readers can see both sides and make up their own minds, I append below what appears to be a link to the report. In the interests of transparency, I am an investor but I know no more than what appears here and in the press.

https://www.intelligenceonline.com/corporate-intelligence/2025/05/13/dubai-authorities-launch-money-laundering-probe-against-litigation-funder-lcm,110448292-art

I am not sure where they get their figures from but the 2-8 May 2025 of the IC has the following earnings per share estimates:

3 months ago 3.4p

1 month ago 3.6p

Next 12 months 2.2p

This seems odd, given the recent increase in the share price. The share price at the time of publication was 81p.

I think you are right. They have (just) achieved the target, otherwise they would have said “exceeded” or something similar. Anyway, “achieved” is better than “missed”.

The price is up 6.98% today, at the time of looking, without a single transaction having taken place. Pretty extreme, eh?

Tradingstar. The answer to your question “ How many people have actually answered my question listed on the title ?” is the same number who actually know. Unfortunately, I am one of them as I have no clue.

Thacker Pass Nevada has significant quantities of lithium.

I suspect that the answer to your question in these uncertain times, Oogleflugal, is "no". Although the figures are encouraging and hopefully they indicate that a corner has been turned, the impressive growth rate is from a low base. For the time being I would be relatively satisfied if the share price stopped falling and I would consider any rise to be a useful bonus. If the projected sales increases continue through the next few quarters, and even better if they accelerate as confidence grows, then we will hopefully start to see a meaningful improvement in the share price.

You may be right about the next piece of good news causing the share price to rise - how much will naturally depend on how good that news is. The trouble, historically, is that the share will drift back down almost as quickly as it rose and perpetuate that all too familiar saw tooth pattern. I, for one, would be delighted if the troughs started to show a rising trend, but I still suspect that we will need at least a couple of years of solid and improving results to demonstrate that past problems are behind us.

In my view the results vs last year are pretty much flat, and as such they do not match the positive words that accompany them. It is therefore unsurprising that, given the recent significant rise in the share price, there has been a substantial correction today. Hopefully the projected progress this year will be visible in the next set of figures.

Shaml89

I suspect the answer to your question is distrust of the NAV and/or fear that it will fall (possibly much) further. Steph is working hard to rationalise things in her posts but at the moment fear and mistrust, compounded by unpredictability across the pond, seem to be in the driving seat of very many share prices.

The RNS has some information on the skilled person review, DaveT1. Namely:

"Further to the announcement of 27 June 2024, the Company confirms that at this stage its subsidiary, Jarvis Investment Management Limited, continues to progress the additional remediation work recommended by the Skilled Person following their recent review. It is anticipated that the majority of this additional remediation work will now be completed by the end of the third quarter 2025. The Skilled Person will then review this additional remediation work. Further updates will be provided as appropriate."

I read that as Jarvis will complete their "corrections" over the next 6 months or so, after which "Sir" will check the homework. It is unclear how long the check will take and whether further "corrections" will be required. There is also no clue what the "corrections" comprise. In short, I would not be surprised if this sorry saga has another year to run.

This development is undoubtedly interesting but there is no hint that I can see of how well sales of the tiles are going. Looking on the Companies House website I see that Alusid filed accounts on 27 March 2024 for the year ending 30 June 2023. On the assumption that accounts for y/e 30 June 2024 will include some trading figures, we might get an early indication of sales up to last summer in about a month's time. There is nothing that I can see on the Alusid website to quantify their progress, albeit there are articles singing the praises of their products.

To save everyone hunting, here is ironknut's post with the question to which he refers:

"All these exciting postings. Talk of buyout and the wonderful news re Siemens All very positive. Meanwhile the sp is 20 % less than one year ago.. As an innocent not to bright investor. Please tell me, are those so positive about Kromek being over optimistic or has the market got it very wrong. Clearly one side of this situation is hopelessly WRONG."

There is an argument that the market is never wrong: the value of a share is only what people are prepared to pay for it. Will that view increase with time? I certainly hope so as the average purchase price of my Kromek shares is just under 16p. I bought in based on Simon Thompson (IC) recommendations. All I can say is that the performance of this share has been better than that of some of his other recommendations! In my view sentiment has turned strongly against tech stocks, and that explains part of the performance. Other aspects are the poor state of the UK economy and world events. These, however, do not explain all the under performance. Over optimistic forecasts, lack of cost control and poor management of the companies, however, are the main factors. A genuinely good company will, after all, outperform in pretty much any situation over a reasonable time period. Has Kromek turned a corner? Maybe. Things look brighter now than they have for a long time. Time will tell.

I think you have pretty much answered your own question about why the Kromek share price is still languishing, skid35, ie "The "operational" business results are just terrible". We are all accustomed to false dawns and over-inflated promises from Kromek but this time the Siemens deal has given us something more concrete to support the share price. Concrete, however, needs firm foundations for it to set properly to enable it to stand the test of time. The operational results are just not providing those foundations. If the results had been significantly better than the market expected, we would probably have had a larger and more sustained market reaction to the Siemens deal. Unless and until Kromek can provide a credible trend of steadily improving results, however, with each result preferably being better than the market expects, I fear this roller coaster share price will continue. As the saying goes, it would be best not to hold one's breath when it comes to waiting for a sustained and appreciable rise in the price of Kromek shares.

Gallmat

Thank you for the clarification.

The RNS states that Litigation Capital Management Limited achieved four case wins and incurred three case losses, resulting in an aggregate multiple of invested capital (MOIC) of 3.7x on realisations.

It goes on to state that realisations (A$m) were 52 and invested capital (A$m) was 14, giving a MOIC multiple of 3.7x. To make things clear, it adds "Note: Invested Capital includes LCM capital invested into the three case losses in the period."

Taken at face value, it appears as if A$14m were invested in 7 cases. The money invested in 3 of them (in which they backed the losing side) realised nothing whereas the money invested in the other 4 realised A$52m. That, it seems, meant that there was a net profit of A$38m (ie 52-14). Now, unless costs of running the business for that half were A$46m (ie 38 + 8), how can LIT anticipate that it will have an A$8m loss?

Am I missing something or are the costs of running the business really that high?

While projected revenue being over 300% of the previous figure looks very impressive, the problem is that tripling very little still results in not very much. They will need to maintain that sort of growth for quite a while before the company will become a force to be reckoned with.

Without the typos! Sorry about that.

I can see that forecasts being met would be positive, as it might start to build the trust that is so sadly missing, but I fail to see how missed forecasts could put us in a good place. Yes, the market may be expecting the forecasts to be missed so if they are there may not be an extremely adverse reaction. Looking forward, however, there will be even more scepticism about the company so that can only be bad news.

I can see that forecasts being met would be positive, as it might start to build the trust that is so sadly missing, but I fail to see how missed forecasts could out us n a good place. Yes, the market may be expecting the forecasts to me missed so if they are there may not be an extremely adverse reaction. Looking forward, however, there will be even more scepticism about the company so that can only be bad news.