Member Info for technoInvest

Amtech. I had a question for you if that's okay. Clearly you are unhappy with the company but at some point you must have felt like I do currently, i.e. there is an opportunity to get a return on your investment. Would you be able to share what / when made you get interested in the company in the first instance? Not a problem if you don't want to share and will respect that but it would certainly interest me and I have been transparent with what I like about them.

Amtech. I did not know that but if the NFT venture had taken off then it perhaps would have been a positive as you say he said.

Perhaps people need to separate (1) the company not delivering and (2) the company not having the right strategy or financial resources to pull something off. I think the second bit there is where MOS went wrong (i.e. needs a large amount to pay rights owners for their NFT rights and large amounts to spend on various different marketing) with NFTs but in my view NFTs are only good if they are very sought after and I like what MOS have been doing with the integrated benefits but I think its such a new idea it will take time. As a newer investor than most here I am not so interested in the NFT business.

As they did deliver the NFT platform I believe they will deliver the gambling platform (in part as I would imagine its already done its just a case of reskinning it and deciding on marketing etc with partners).

On updates all I can say is I would not be happy without regular updates as the project progresses (away from the results that they put out twice a year). I don't expect any financials in the updates and I don't think that they should be reported outside from the results but things like they put out last week so for example website / app ready to launch, start of marketing, etc. If there is anything more exciting than those sort of things you would think they would be wanting to shout about it too.

"Source oil and gas locally, urges Equinor energy boss".

Lead story on BBC Business website is along the lines of what UJO have been saying. Mainstream news putting out the same message can't be a bad thing. Usual eco messages within the article too.

That's my opinion. It is based on the fact that he said that it was his idea at the investor presentation you have right pointed out is not on their website!

Also in my experience of business relationships make a big difference and I think that ME is the sort of charismatic person that is very good at developing relationships with others.

So my opinion is based on it being his idea and having a good relationship with the others involved and they decided that MOS could be a part of it rather than just taking the idea and excluding them.

Secondary to that I believe the stuff he was saying about how having a listed company involved increases the compliance angles and if they believe that medium / longer term they could have something that could be attractive to a large company having all the compliance / regulatory / etc aspects really nailed down would make that attractive. First they need to launch and then grow something though.

I think I owe all the holders an apology! I may have jinnxed the share price a little by deciding to buy a small amount!

Jackal5. Thanks. My comments are not meant to be annoying to those that have been invested for longer as appreciate that it is quite painful where you have shares in a company that has not done what you expected. I simply see it as a good opportunity for me.

Amtech. Funnily enough that is exactly one of the things I have on my list to ask the company next time they do an investor event. In a way that is all part of the opportunity as looking at their website (the PLC one which has the Investor Relations info) I think that it is pretty poor when compared to other companies I have decided to invest in and if they can address that then I don't expect it to be the single biggest factor that changes the sentiment but it all helps and you would think that is easy to do. In that regard if they have not done anything with that in the next few months I will factor that into my decisions in terms of holding.

For transparency. I added 1.2m shares to my small but growing holding this morning as I may well have called this wrong but my gut feeling is that if or when the share price gets a fair bit higher everyone will see the potential and I would prefer to have a bit more of a holding prior to that understanding that as with all shares there is risk involved. Classic herd thinking!

Thanks bluepun.

Weedavemac. According to the MOS website HL nominee accounts hold about 25% of all stock. So I would suggest that would make a big difference.

Small companies are damned with whatever they do! Existing investors dont want a big discount and they also want to participate in raises. MOS tried to do both in terms of what investors want but it backfired a bit and having the largest nominee holder who is also the UKs biggest retail broker not allow investors to participate certainly would have impacted the figures.

I suspect that is why most companies go down the route of using bucket shops with flippers taking the stock when they raise but at least MOS tried to do what in my view is the right thing.

23 August 2021 to 27 September 2021 looked like a pretty good opportunity for anyone that timed that right!

I invest longer term as a general rule but if I got a 3* return in 1 to 3 months I would be taking my small investment and wishing the company and everyone else good luck.

On a serious note though you can say that about many or maybe even most AIM companies and it all comes down to when you invest and when you decide to walk away.

Most are not long term investments but once in a while you stumble across one that offers a reasonable chance at the price it is trading at. I have no idea if this will be a good long term investment or just a shorter term investment (3 months?) but I am happy with how it looks.

It's as simple as that for MOS as far as I am concerned.

That's your opinion which is fair enough. My opinion and figures mentioned earlier are based on looking at the total raise (since they were announced at the same time). I felt your comment about the 35% was a little misleading but again that's just my opinion.

The comments about the £200K to a linked company from another poster are certainly valid.

Moving forward at this price I don't really see a lot going wrong with MOS (assuming that the company delivers on their stated plans). This comment will be controversial but previously they have delivered a NFT system, although not with the volume of sales that many expected. I only mention this as lots of AIM companies never deliver what they say and that's why I believe they will deliver the gambling venture and with the elements that they appear to have in place I have invested as I think that they have a good chance of getting it working.

Good luck to anyone who also sees what I see and to those that don't you are welcome to your outlook as the difference in what we all think is what makes a market.

Hi Lothbury / lost money. "It’s called “a can of worms”…"

I have tried to get my head around this approx £200K :

- it would be simpler for people (me) to understand if there was no payment to a company where there is an overlap in management; that said it is not uncommon for things like consultancy, rent, directors fees, etc.. (note it would be better if it was not like it is for us simple minds to understand)

- I don't actually know what the payment was for but I plan to ask them if they can share any more detail next time they do an investor presentation

- I can speculate around what it could be in a "glass half full" or even "glass has been drunken by someone else" fashion but I think I will ask the company next time they do an investor presentation

Is that not just accounting though?

They agree to pay X for NFT rights. They agree to pay that in stock rather than cash.

Then they do the accounts and the accountants / auditor says that they need to book that cost against revenue so they book X against the revenue but it was not paid out of cash it was paid out in stock (which apparently they have not got so also not sold - according to most recent company presentation).

That leaves them having already booked the cost and with X years left to run in the contract which is why they said the profit margin now on those NFTs was almost 100%.

Thank you. Appreciated.

I will try! If I can work it out I will write up my research here.

For me the opportunity with HE1 is done unless it drops well below the placing price. Then it will be a case of what news caused that drop. I certainly wont be sending a cheque to those that took the placing which any market purchase would equate to!

I very much doubt that this would ever get actioned but after some comments here I checked the company info for directors pay. On one hand its not that high but its also not low for the lower end of the market. Perhaps they could commit to investing some of that back in the shares. If the company ever read these boards then perhaps they will consider that?

Last post had link removed. I am ew to LSE bulletin board but I went to the UK Gov Companies House website, typed in "Mobile Streams PLC" to look up info on a company. Then looked at directors for the company and then that shows you other companies they are linked to. Found that other company and went into the info for that company. Then looked at info they have declared. Seems a bit odd a bulletin board removing a factual link but there you go. Anyone can recreate my steps but would have been easier if LSE just displayed the link.

Can you help me with this bit please: "consider this fact a CEO charging Mos the company he is CEO for rent and services via another company while raising money from PI to fund it".

How do I find out how much MOS is paying to "another company"?

I am not great with accounts but I have been through them so have looked at the various different costs (which I find hard to do) but I must have missed the amount in there.

I have also done a check on companies house as best I can and the only company that Mr Epstein is also a director of is "IGNITEAMT SERVICES LTD". This is a pretty new company so no real filings and could be anything or nothing! Link: [LINK REMOVED]

If you can help me fill in the gaps as you clearly understand this pretty well it would be helpful. Thanks.

I have tried to work out the maths!

12th Dec 2023

Raised £675,000 at 0.07 pence (with warrants)

9 Jan 2024

Wanted to raise up to £300,000 at 0.06 pence (no warrants)

12 Jan 2024

Announced raised £114,756 of the up to £300,000

Therefore:

- Total wanted was £975,000

- They raised £790,000

- So raised roughly 80% of the maximum amount they they wanted / were actually allowed to raise

Notes

- They do have some cash although we only have figure of £900,000 at 30 June 2023

- The second raise would have had commission and I believe that's normally 5% or 6% whereas the larger raise most likely had no commission

- Any business has to adapt and so if they are c. £150K to £200K short of what they need then they will need to adapt their plans; does not seem like much of a shortfall to me

- I was pleased to see that the discounts were not big (the second was actually a small premium) when they raised. Any company can raise a portion of their market cap if they give away a big enough discount

Hi Systemicbods.

"the raise didn't get 35% of the required amount."

Would you be able to let us know how you came up with this number as it looks like you are just looking at the second raise and ignoring the first, larger, raise that they did in December?

Be good to understand your maths if you can share the workings.

I will work it out later also but my guess is the 35% should have been closer to 15% of the "maximum they were allowed to raise / wanted to raise" rather than "required amount"?

Agree with betting being the best opportunity. Perhaps the Talk venture will be good too but they say that is after the betting launch so one step at a time. Also agree on the NFT side of things but IMO that is as much about the promotion rather than the product. I look at the NFT business as:

1) They wrote off all the costs incurred in the recent results

2) If they work well with the partners for betting they have said that the NFTs can be promoted at no cost (through the partners)

3) They have developed (incurred all costs) their platform for NFTs

4) Also I hope they will have their Bitso integration at some point soon

5) I remain interested to see if they get a third party valuation on the NFT business as everyone else in that space seems to attract a higher valuation despite many being no further on

I have put a value on the NFT business as 0 in my head as I see the current market cap, with cash, being worth the betting venture alone so as a new investor its quite exciting but I do believe that there should be some value on their NFT business.

Until the points above become clearer the NFT angle is worth what anyone wants to say as its just individual opinions!

Thanks for all the info and comments people. I bought a starter amount and will add the rest over the next month or two. Appreciated.