Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
The lunatics have taken over the asylum – comes to mind. What an extraordinary disappointment. They are back to where they were in 2015, focusing on the space the company was founded on. Yet there are 3 times more shares, less cash and is losing more money. How this Board of Directors can survive beggars belief.
I find the continued delay of the results worrying. It is not how a board should behave and the advisors need to get a grip. I checked the AIM rules and they clearly state that results are to be posted within 6 months of the end of the year. They have an April year-end and it's Friday 28th October. So they are leaving it to the last day - Monday 31st Oct. I shall reframe from writing more as I am beginning to fume....
Last year they issued their final results at the end of September. With the stock trading so low, surely it is in their interest to get as much good news out as possible?
Langdon sale - I have tried to find out who bought this. I have personally never heard of a sale being announced without the buyer being disclosed.
Opacity creates uncertainty which dilutes trust.
Completely agree with you. You are more forgiving - I appreciate the CEO may not have his prints on the murder weapon but the Chairman and Non Execs do. I believe in a tiny little company like this the board are accountable and in my humble opinion has let us all down and should probably go.
You are right we paid less than £50,000. BUT "For the year ended 30 April 2022, the Langdon business made a loss before tax of £129,979." - two or three-year holding period - combined losses of +£200,00. That came out of shareholders fund + £50,000 cost = + £250k loss. They sold for £100,000. Unless I am stupid which may well be the case and for that please forgive me.
This disposal is very disappointing. I had to read this twice thinking there must have been a typo about the £100k. I think shines an even brighter light on just how weak this management team has been and is. This has cost us much more than we paid for it given its losses etc and is now providing valuable working capital – about a month? The impact this board have had on shareholder value is incredibly disappointing.
Most unusual move - in my experience this has happened because a hidden hand has wielded the axe. The chances that Ian woke up one morning and thought this up is remote - it is a small company and the last thing they need is a bureaucratic board room. I am not saying it will not work - I wish them all masses of luck - but I think we should keep a careful eye on matters.
I have been a holder for some time and have the scars to show for it. Increasingly, I believe the board is at fault. Making a series of wrong decisions which have cost shareholders dearly. I look back at the beginning and the company was growing at +25%. Missing targets but growing driven by the founders. It would seem that those that were at the helm then were punished by being removed and replaced by so-called industry Pros - twice! The latest lot seems to have removed all that DNA and not surprisingly are now struggling to make headway. Certain board members have been in place for all this journey whilst others for a lot of it and need to accept responsibility for this. The market is white hot for procurement technology and we are not benefitting.
I agree - Great names and reassuring - I just hope it is not false comfort. The lack of any news during a period where supply chains are being transformed and there are large amounts of VC and PE money flowing into this space I believe is of note for a public company in this growth sector.
I watch the constant trickle of sales and deafening silence with concern. I am surprised the new management aren’t trying to firmly establish themselves and win the support of us shareholders. I hope this board hasn’t broken why this firm listed all those years ago. Let’s hope.
Brewman777 - I think we all "hope". As I am sure you know by now as an investor when we revert to hope - it's not a good place. I think the board has a lot to answer for. The Half Year statement was an example of the CEO trying to say the right things BUT for me, they were the wrong things - who is advising him. For me the worst heroic claim was that he enjoyed 80% employee turnover! It takes years and years to build teams and an equal time for those teams to have a meaningful impact. You cannot paint or buy a company's culture - you have to live it and it takes shape over time. With this in mind - if you look at the CEO's Linkedin profile he has rarely spent more than two years in roles - not a man with a track record of building cultures and teams from the ground up. I wish them well and I remain hopeful.
Some of my concerns have sadly been proved right. The board is admitting that the last CEO made two now redundant acquisitions which required diluting the shareholders by 240m shares of the 340m now in issue. However, what saddens me is the CEO spouting off about covid delaying matters – this is nonsense – RDT’s sector has strong demand. Look at the huge increase in private and public money pouring into this space and the corresponding increase in revenue of those companies – Coupa, Simfoni, Sievo & Suplari was recently bought by Microsoft and Proactis which is quoted on AIM has been bought by Pollen Street etc etc The company has gone back to where it was 4 to 5 years ago. The board have failed us. There is something that is wrong at this company's core - it is not connecting to the momentum. The problem is NOT all product related - that is nonsense again - you can have the best product in the world and not sell one license - this company boasts massive logos they signed up years ago - it must be the new culture and leadership. If you look at the numbers and ARR – they are losing clients! I would go so far and say the CEO is coming across as a product manager NOT a growth leader.
When the company was listed it was growing quite well. This stock is dead in the water unless there is a fantastic spark that re-lights the fire - it will need more than an up graded product and a polite comment from an existing client or two.
My main concern is they may be missing the boat - with strong demand in the market where new customers will adopt these smart new technologies for 5 years before changing again - the window of opportunity in key accounts is closing. You need to be ahead of the buying cycle to get a chance to win the account. Having invested so much in a new product - Speed is critical.
So although I admit that my comment about the management positioning RDT to take it private was completely wrong (PrivatePunter was right) – I do think RDT is FAR more valuable being private. If ARR is £5m – then in the private market that equates to £25m to £50m in equity value – I will take that any day of the week than watch this languish for the next 4 or 5 years.
Looks like Meridian has been around for +15 yrs - with revenue of £1.4m and £366k PTP. I would say it has probably been a tough ride. They seem to be an audit firm where there is a lot of manual work - limiting the scale for Glantus but I am sure they have existing clients they can sell these audits to. Bobbyaxelrod mentioned the competition I thought was quite interesting. All the companies mentioned are part of the new wave of digital transformation which make old manual processes in the AP function far more efficient and less prone to error. It seems Meridian's business model is based on finding these errors for their clients. I expect the market is getting tougher as businesses digitalize their operations. But it looks a nice little niche add on.
I have just signed up for this free account - my Horizon account https://www.darkbeam.com/ - my goodness that is interesting - not just cyber but investors should probably keep an eye on the cyber risk of their investments. Highly recommend it.
By the looks of things Darkbeam is materially different than Darktrace and is focused on monitoring external vulnerabilities of companies and not internal risks as Darktrace does. This is interesting for Crossword as supply chains have thousands of suppliers and if you can in real-time monitor all their external vulnerabilities you are addressing an ever-present important risk that all supply chain functions will be looking to address. If you can see what the hacker sees you can take action. Interesting!
You can play it back here https://info.rosslyndatatech.com/agm-meeting-2021_download-recording
I honestly thought it to be mixed at best. The board looked somewhat uncomfortable, uninterested and unprepared. Although you cannot see the investors on the recording, come across as being engaged and energized. I am not sure about the answers given - posture and manner in which they were delivered appeared defensive and uncertain. It lacked energy and excitement. Referred to how big companies do things and best practices - I completely agree but small AIM companies are not big FTSE companies - they need to be nimble and slightly unconventional at times.
Then the Chairman fact checked the CEO to say he was wrong about not having a partner manager, they did have one - yet earlier the CEO said partners were strategic - he has been chief revenue officer for just under a year and ceo for half a year - and forgot he didnt have a partner manager? Weird.
I thought the three were struggling to believe in their story and as a result were and looked uncomfortable.
BUT underneath this, there seem to be one or two good businesses in good markets that are growing rapidly !!! We just need to hook into those tailwinds.