Member Info for TheTrotsky

Turkeys and Xmas come to mind.

You should be careful what you wish for. You've clearly not been reading what Boaz Weinstein/SABA have been up to at other ITs.

At EWI, for instance, SABA has refused to talk to the existing board and, despite having rebuffed twice already, is continuing to press shareholders to vote in favour of its motion to replace the entire board with its own designated appointees at the next AGM. SABA has been highly critical of the existing board but refuses to divulge its own plans for EWI should it win control, despite having been asked on several occasions.

Now, if you are in the habit of blindly handing over your door keys to anybody who asks, feel free to support SABA but be under no allusions, SABA intends to strip GSF for its own benefit. Hedge funds are not in the habit of being charitable to other investors. SABA may look after its own investors perfectly well but it doesn't have a good track record of looking after the interests of other investors. That's not their remit.

"... perceived concern that lenders expect to see additional security. It's a remarkable, and somewhat bizarre, leap to say the Special Dividend has been hijacked because of Mr D Trump's administration ..."

Firstly, we know that the funds were received in December (I suggest that you read the RNS issued on 15 December again if your doubt me), if not before, and were being held in a lender-controlled account until "certain project financing conditions" were met. It's my recollection that in the subsequent investor Q&A the CEO suggested that he didn't foresee any issues in resolving these outstanding matters (just a matter of signing the appropriate paperwork) and that he expected the funds to be released from the lender-controlled account in early January. It's now late February and we still haven't received any confirmation.

Secondly, if you kept abreast of the news emanating from the US you would have appreciated that the Trump admisinistration has become openly hostile to renewable energy production. As a consequence, it's not unreasonable to assume that the valuation of US renewable energy assets is now in turmoil (facing free-market competition with no government price support and a country awash with an oversupply of cheap gas, valuations are bound to be affected) and that the funding of such ventures may have been turned on its head. When valuations become highly volatile, banks become extremely cautious and start to tighten up their lending criteria e.g. LTV, interest cover. Indeed, a tightening of LTV requirements can be a double whammy; banks start deanding higher LTV security just when valuations are going through the floor.

Thirdly, we shouldn't lose sight of timescale. GSF was in the process of selling its tax credits just when Trump entered the White House. Lest we forget, his new administration initially threw the whole tax credit regime into turmoil. For 6-8 weeks it was unclear whether their proposals would have a retrospective impact on the likes of GSF and stalled the whole sale process until it was resolved. Since then, Trump has just turned up the screws on the whole renewable energy sector.

So, no, it's not at all bizarre to suggest that the second special dividend might have been hijacked by the Trump administration. They've completely moved the goalposts since the sale of the tax credits started and it's quite feasible that the lender may now have raised the crossbar (considerably) from where it was before this process all began.

Even I am beginning to get a bit narked with this executive team. It's mid-February and they still haven't announced the second special dividend.

If I recollect correctly, they previously indicated that satisfying the financing conditions was expected to be a formality and that they expected the funds to be released from the lender-controlled account in early January, if not before.

There may be justifiable reasons for the further delay but they ought to be updating the market.

The only potential fly in the ointment that I can foresee is that Trump's actions over the last 12+ months have totally de-stabilised the US renewable energy market and made the valuation of battery storage facilities and/or estimates of their interest cover, a lot more difficult to assess. I'd normally have expected GSF's US lender to be happy to release the funds provided any remaining loans on the assets in question didn't exceed (say) 50% of their estimated NAV but lenders may now have become a lot more reticent about their loans (like they did after the 2008 banking crisis) and wont to shift the goalposts in their favour and want additional security which GSF may, or may not, be willing to provide e.g. additional security on assets that might currently be debt free or based in different overseas locales. Unfortunately, in those circumstances, until GSF can get the lender to play ball, the funds will remain in escrow beyond our reach but, if that is the case, delaying the announcement isn't going to make the pill any easier to swallow.

Before anyone apportions any blame for letting the lender getting their mitts on the tax credits in the first place, short of committing fraud, there was nothing GSF could have done differently to avoid this situation and the lender is fully within their rights to withhold payment where a debt remains outstanding and they have concerns about its potential recoverability (the tax credits were never sufficient to fully repay the loans and pay the special dividends too). If this is the cause of the further delay then the blame lies squarely at the feet of this Trump administration.

The unaudited NAV has increased by 14.2p (c6%) since 02 February. All things considered, that's an unusually large increase in c15 days.

"This new contract, in support of one of the largest streaming services companies globally ..."

Certainly sounds more likely to be Amazon/Netflix than Paramount.

Chelsea, you have no need to drag other people into your nasty machinations.

Ironknut can say what he likes and doesn't need to justify his comments, least of all to you or Coeurdelion and especially when you are being so discourteous to him when you say " ... a structured and coherent response to that question ... but, not expecting one ...".

What exactly has Ironknut done to incur such ire? He's clearly unhappy that the share price has fallen by more than the dividend today.

If, as you claim, you were replying to Couerdelion question's, which was directed to Ironknut, then who else can you be disparaging other than Ironknut!

Wriggle out of that one Worm.

Be man, not a mouse, for once and admit you were simply baiting me (as usual) and then tried to duck out of it with some lame excuse.

Oh, sorry, I forgot you've filtered me. Deaf ears ;-)

Liar, liar pants on fire!

The narcissist speaks but does not listen. Strangely enough it's difficult to hear when you're profoundly deaf ;-)

Ironknut, I don't take any pleasure from "calling it right" today but "tomorrow's always another day". All other factors being equal, it was always likely that OMG's share price was going to drop when it went ex-dividend today (even Chelsea admited that) plus it's also been a "red day" in the general market, so it's perhaps not too surprising that OMG's share price has dropped more than 3.25p (I'd estimate an extra c1.75p when measuring from last night's closing mid-price to tonight's closing mid-price).

I think tomorrow/Monday will likely be the real litmus test of whether or not people are starting to get cold feet ahead of the upcoming AGM statement and I also wouldn't be totally surprised if the MMs did a bit of tree-shake at tomorrow's open (not because it's OMG; it's been my general experience over the last 12+ months that the MMs haven't been afraid to push the envelope).

Chelsea and Couerdelion will no doubt point to the current uptrend and be expecting normal service to re-start tomorrow. I'm not going to disagree with them per se; trend or no trend, where OMG's share price goes in the mid-term is, in my view, entirely dependent on the AGM statement and the H1 results (the rest is just interference).

In the shorter term, the direction of movement of the share price from here on in to the first milestone, the AGM statement, is now going to be dependent on what the "day traders" decide to do i.e. those PIs who've invested in OMG in the last 3-4 months in the prospect of a short-term gain and aren't interested in being long-term investors. Results aren't necessarily their friend and I personally think that we might see a lot of day-traders now looking to sell to lock in their profits. That's just my hypothesis; tomorrow and Monday will give us a better insight.

What I do know for certain is nothing is ever guaranteed and that just when you think you've at last sussed how the market generally operates, it will turn around and bite you (and I'm sure that if my hypothesis is wrong both Chelsea and Couerdelion will take much glee in telling me).

... and you're simply a narcissist who can't accept somebody else having a different point of view to your own. I'm only wrong when the Fat Lady sings and my current view is, and always has been, premised on the basis that I don't trust the current executive team to deliver the results we need. They've failed for the last 18-24 months. You only need to look at the share price performance to appreciate that fact. Even an idiot like you should be able to appreciate that!

You can prattle on all you like about smart manufacturing being the future but, as far as the market is concerened, Vicon has been the here and now for the last 18-24 months and the share price decline since Imogen has taken charge has mirrored the decline in Vicon's fortunes.

It's sad but true that most, if not all, of the gains made since October will just evaporate overnight if the AGM statement and/or H1 results don't pass muster and, if I was day-trading OMG, I'm not sure that I would take that risk based on the executive team's past performance.

I genuinely hope that I'm wrong and that the share price does continue to move on up past 70p (it wouldn't be self-serving to suggest otherwise) but the increase since October is purely based on speculation and is not grounded in any hard evidence from OMG or its execitive team that they've actually turned the corner at Vicon.

All we've had since Imogen took charge is hyperbole and a self-serving manipulation of data disclosures in the accounting notes (you're just too blind to see or appreciate that). My view of Imogen is not based on misogny; it's based on calling a spade a spade. She and her team are in the last chance saloon as fa as I am concerened. The fact that OMG's remuneration committee has seen fit to recently lavish the executive team with LTIPs having no performance-related criteria could be seen to speak volumes about their current business expectations (certainly no fireworks here methinks).

Whether the market's view will start to focus more on smart manufacturing rather than Vicon and whether growth in the former, despite the decline in the latter, can start to do the heavy share price lifting remains to be seen.

If I was spiteful person, I'd be secretly hoping that the AGM statement and/or H1 results are a bust just to see you have egg on your face but that woud not be in my portfolio's best interests. However, you're such a prat ... a short-term loss on OMG would almost be worth it ;-)

Chump, the dividend will come off the share price when it goes ex-dividend, all other factors being equal. There's nothing "another" about it; you're simply trading part of your capital for revenue and, if you hold your shares in an ISA, there are no tax conseuences. The dividend was declared back in December and would be payable (or not) regardless of the current share price (not because of it). So, all in all, it's a big fat zero; a totally pointless post simply intended to stir up another one of your juvenile arguments.

We go ex-dividend on Friday so, all other matters being equal, we can expect the share price to drop c3.25p by the end of this week.

Where the share price goes from there until, at least, the AGM update is anybody's guess; the share price has certainly been on an uptrend over the last 2-3 months but it remains to be seen whether that uptrend will continue once the share goes ex-dividend. In my personal experience, following the initial fall back, some shares power on after going ex-dividend (i.e. revert to trend), some just wallow and some fall back even further. There doesn't seem to be any hard and fast rule.

PS. Somebody else explain to Chelsea the trade off between the share price and going ex-dividend; he seems to be under the delusion that, all other matters being equal, going ex-dividend will have no impact on the share price!

PPS. My alternate investment in FTC is going very nicely, thank for asking Chelsea! As of this morning's mid prices, OMG is currently up c51.4% since its low point on 13 October whilst FTC is up c58.6%. I'm sure there's going to be plenty of nip and tuck from here on in but please do stop with this juvenile boasting about the relative share price performance of OMG and trying to make out that I have somehow missed out. I haven't; I'm actaully ahead of the game at the moment but fully accept that that might change from day to day, week to week etc.

OMG has done very well since mid-October. No dispute. I'm just not confident enought in the current executive team (based on past performance) to believe that the current uptrend will continue beyond the AGM update and/or H1 results. However, as they say, past performance is not a guarantee of future results and the executive team could certainly still surprise me; in which event, the OMG share price will no doubt see another growth spurt. That's share investing; you pays your money and you take your chances. Whether or not I invest any further money in OMG will be based on the executive team actually delivering rather than hopes of them delivering; it's that simple.

There you go, you just had to open your mouth!

Bad Karma dude ;-)

Just chill and go with the flow ;-)

For a-typical, please read typical. Mea culpa.

Also, markets can sometimes surprise. Yesterday somebody posted that FTC's share price was set to nose dive at market open following what appeared to be a slightly lacklustre set of H1 results, despite the fact that this had been known about for the last 6-12 months+ and had already been factored into brokers forecasts (revenues the previous year had been skewed by a large one-off contract from SpaceX to retrofit their existing base stations and the company had been making a significant cash investment in expanding its production capacity and workforce to meet growing, recurring, multi-year orders). Personally, I thought it was a typical PI response (a lot of PIs are simply momentum investors, following the crowd, and don't pay much attention to the fundamentals) and, although I didn't agree with the sentiment, I did suspect that he was right and that most a-typical PIs would be jumping ship.

So, I've been quite surprised by the share price response since. The share price did dip c4p initially (the MMs couldn't resist a bit of fishing) but it rebounded and closed up on the day and, not only that, has rebounded yet further today. So, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe there are less a-typical PIs around than I once thought and maybe there are PIs (and institutional investors) who, now invested, can see the potential value in OXB and will not be completely phased by no offer or a low-ball offer and won't simply run for the hills. On the otherhand, perhaps FTC was just an exception to the normal rule. We'll see.

I'm not sure that the price will drop like a stone if no bid is forthcoming. I think that a few PIs and institutional investors have now cottoned on to the fact that there is a lot of potential value here and I don't think that £12.50 per share is going to cut it. OXB is rapidly gaining order momentum (it's all about production volumes and, once volumes reach a critical mass, profits will start to accumulate very quickly) and it could easily be worth £20 per share in 1-2 years time. I'm thinking that at least £15 per share is going to be needed for management to greenlight any offer.

Bigdaddypump,

Merging apples and pears simply because your losing money on apples and making money on pears defies any commercial logic.

In the absence of any evident cost synergies (using SpaceX rockets to launch xAI satellites isn't going to give rise to any obvious cost synergies, particularly for SpaceX), the only person this deal (or Tesla for that matter) makes any sense to is Elon.

Perhaps SpaceX now owning xAI will enable SpaceX to more easily provide financial backing to xAI's planned satellite investments but that doesn't mean that SpaceX's potential future investors will benefit from such an arrangemnet; SpaceX is already operating at, or close to, its manufacturing capacity, so manufacturing additional satellites will probably entail additional capital investment regardless.

My assessment might be different if SpaceX was, by virtue of this deal, securing additional potential orders that it might not otherwise receive so as to utilise their existing under-utilised manufacturing capacity but, as I see it, it isn't.

Bottom line, Elon can now use SpaceX to cross-subsidise the losses in xAI. In principle, the value of SpaceX has therefore been significantly diminished by this deal and the recently mooted IPO price before this deal was announced ought to reflect this. No doubt Elon will see things differently; his ideas of valauation rarely have any grounding in fact or financials.

In Elon's rather twisted view of reality, if he says something is worth X $billions or X $trillions who are other mere mortals to question his personal valuation! In some ways, his world view is not so different from Robert Maxwell's! Maxwell always thought his businesses were worth a lot more than others gave credit for and thought that banks had a duty to provide him with unlimited financial resources, no questions aked. The only point of real difference is that Maxwell resorted to financial shenanigans, more or less, from the outset whereas Elon is just beginning to catch up.

That said, it's highly debatable whether Tesla was indeed solvent when it went for its IPO and, if the IPO had failed, it would have had to declare bankruptcy the following day (it had already spent its customers' deposits on R&D and had no funds to deliver its contracted EV sales) and it's quite probable that Elon would still be serving a long custodial sentence for fraud!

So, some of us might suggest that Elon has already long surpassed Maxwell on the financial shenanigans front ;-)

Daveincent,

Until (perhaps) it's not (unfortunately). The fact that the share price has risen does not make it a foregone conclusion that it will continue to rise following the AGM statement and the H1 results in due course (they served to disappoint last year).

Have a look at the share chart for the last 12-18 months. We've seen very similar rises before previous RNS releases. I'd accept that this rise does look more pronounced than previous rises but that may be down to a general improvement in UK market sentiment over the last 3-6 months. I don't know about your personal portfolio but, apart from the investment trust sector which appears to be suffering it own specific problems at the moment, my predominantly UK based portolio has generally been showing a significant improvement over the the last 3-6 months.

I'm not knocking OMG's recent share price rise, just pointing out that the rise may not be down to raised expectations alone; the re-allocation of funds into the UK market in the last 6-12 months has seen, I would hazard, a very large number of UK companies simply "rising on the tide" if nothing else i.e. some of the rise will be down to raised expectations and some of it will be down to the funds shift. I leave it down to you decide how much of OMG's share price rise you think is down to the former or the latter (some of the share price rise will be inevitably be down the latter, like every othe UK company, but I couldn't give you a percentage).

As Courdelion suggests, momentum is with the share price at the moment and, if your in, I don't see any reason to sell just yet. However, I would give some consideration to selling before the AGM statement and/or the subsequent H1 results (or before if the share price rise looks to losing steam) if you are only in this for a short-term profit.

The AGM statement and/or H1 results might surprise to the upside, in which event you might think yourself foolish for selling or slicing beforehand but it's never wrong to bank a good profit rather than rely on the vagaries of press releases that you can't control or discern beforehand (unless you have insider knowledge).

GLA.

It's just a pity for Imogen that simply "mobilising the English language" (to borrow a phrase from the Darkest Hour) doesn't in fact pay the bills; if it did we'd all be £billionaires by now ;-)