Member Info for TheTrotsky

Scie, It indicates whether the sp has risen or fallen since you added the share to your watch list. It only shows for those shares that have been added to your watch list since the feature was introduced (because prior to that date the website didn't record the sp when you added the share). If you try creating a whole new watch list you will see that they all have a red/grey/blue symbol next to them. Not sure whether it's of any value.

AI is clearly the future - I'll be damned if it isn't already editing human beings out of existence ;-)

gavster, you are rignt about nesf going ex-div (have to admit i'd overlooked that myself until you pointed it out) but bsif is probably benefiting from today's article in questor which was written before reform's announcement.

questor basically says that investors have been irrational (in part due to fca cost disclosure requirements) and that the whole infrastructure trust sector, of which bsif is fairly typical, is long overdue an uplift.

tice, trump et al are muppets. the basic premise of the kyoto protocol was that the planet was at risk of global warming and that action needed to be taken immediately to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and reduce planetary overheating. nobody ever said that the alternatives would be cheaper in the short/medium-term.

the pity of it all is that they decided to label it "climate change". the muppets have been downplaying the potential impact on the planet ever since. what they fail to appreciate is that, although the planet has survived many climate change events over the last c4.5billion years, all major climate change events have been accompanied by mass extinctions.

now that the pips are being squeezed they'd rather revert to good old, reliable fossil fuels and damn the consequences! pathetic really; they're willing to put lucre before all, even (human) life itself! i don't personally subscribe to the antics of extinction rebellion; i instead often think the planet and its fauna would be far better off without **** sapiens.

I think that people currently underestimate the value of quality, proprietary data to a good AI system; people assume that data available for free on the internet will suffice (and that RWS's technology will simply be priced out of the market).

Have a look for articles about Google AI's Gouda add for the Super Bowl being re-filmed; that should convince anybody that AI systems relying on data freely available on the internet cannot be relied upon for business critical systems. The system is only as good as the data.

No fireworks but no damp squibs either.

MMs still playing games though. Still think the sp is being "manipulated". I wouldn't be surprised to see this morning's early gains being whittled away later. Hope I'm wrong.

Sheltie, It's my understanding that it is a work in progress so hopefully it will happen; I'd just like it to happen sooner rather than later ;-)

The reg capital is not sorted and, based on previous posts I've read, they need to find c£40m. That's not chump change.

It should happen but don't count your chickens before they hatch.

Still think a fundraising would help but, at the current market valuation, it's unlikely it could raise c£40m.

My only bugbear at the moment is that FTC don't appear to be securing any major contracts with any other customers in the space sector at present. I think for the next step change in share price to happen that's the next hurdle; not grumbling about the SpaceX contracts but we must diversify our customer sales. Hopefully FTC can start securing some major contracts with other customers in the next 3-6 months, if not before.

And some ;-)

Last time I checked the CT rate wasn't c60% ;-)

Tich, If the sale isn't wrapped up before October, I don't see any reason for BBGI not to pay a dividend and I'm not entirely certain that the purchaser would reduce the purchase price further (as I said, I think a lot will depend on NAV performance between now and then). If there was absolutely no possibility I don't think the purchaser would "reserve the right"; they'd rule it out completely from the outset. That's my take.

Might they have bought some, off market, from other large, institutional investors? If so, doesn't necessarily help reduce the free float, unless those institutional investors already had plans to reduce their holdings anyway.

That should have read "next SIX months"

Hi Doncaster, Based on my interpretation of the future dividend situation, I sold some of the shares that my wife and I held when the sp was briefly above 145p after the announcement; on the basis that I thought I could reinvest for a higher return elsewhere. Unfortunately couldn't sell all before the sp started to fall back. At 143p and a potential c3% return over the next months (plus maybe an additional dividend in October), I'm ambivalent.

Trendz, FTC's gross margin at the last interims was c61%. Assuming gross margins remain constant and operating costs are not materially affected by additional contracts, you could see additional profit of c5m in FY25 (based on an addtional, say, £8.5m of revenue) and a corresponding amount in 2026, over and above current forecasts. That's the drop through affect of additional contracts.

Hi Doncaster, My read was that the agreed offer price was based on the next dividend, due in April, being deducted from the final price paid (read the notes towards the bottom of the RNS; it seems implied to me); which in part explains the premium to NAV being offered.

It says in the RNS that the deal is due to be concluded in Q3 2025 and it's less clear whether the dividend normally paid in October would be deducted, if the conclusion of the deal extends beyond that date. I think it will depend on whether the NAV excluding dividend at that date exceeds the offer price less the April dividend. If it does, I'm inclined to think that they'll pay the October dividend without any further reduction in the offer price.

Terry, You are only looking at a return of c3% on BBGI. They said in the RNS that they are looking to finalise deal in Q3 2025; so that would make an annualised return of c6%. Should also bear in mind that the next dividend due in April will definitely be deducted from the agreed price (look at the notes towards the end of the RNS). Any dividends later in the year are less certain.

Pokerchips, In principle I agree with your thoughts about buying the shares out of Treasury but if one assumes that LGEN would simply recycle the money into more buy backs then the same result ought to be acheived. The rationale for why you might choose to do this, instead of Meiji Yasuda simply buying on market, are (perhaps) cost and preventing wide gyrations in the share price whilst Meiji Yasuda tries to buy on market and preventing LGEN paying over the odds to buy back shares at the same time (Meiji Yasuda might want to buy up 5% over a short timescale whilst LGEN can spread the equivalent buy back over a longer period of time and thus avoid short term sp spikes). Just my thoughts.

Swingman, Not sure you've read the RNS right. They are selling their US Protection outright and (effectively) selling a 20% interest in their ongoing US PRT business. They don't want out of the US PRT business; they are selling an interest to help accelerate future growth (by leveraging the partnership with Meiji Yasuda). In addition, Meiji Yasuda are intending to acquire a c5% shareholding in LGEN; LGEN are not selling 5% of the core. On would assume that Meiji Yasuda will either purchase the shares on market or out of Treasury and this, together with LGEN's share buy backs, should will help to reduce the free float and ultimately boost the sp.

I think all the infrastructure funds are up today because of the BBGI offer

Might be peanuts to SpaceX et al in the US but they're slow payers. Average debtor days at the end of H1 2005 was c108 days up from c70 days at the end of H2 2024! Also worrying declines in European and Asian sales; hopefully just cyclical. Need to broaden customer base and increase sales beyond US.