I would have thought 2 degrees and 30 years of experience would have produced a timeline that was a little better than the one produced by a chimp with a dartboard. Well we all live and learn (or not as the case maybe).
There is a book open offering odds at 20:1 that an apology is forthcoming with an acknowledgement that it was all similar to the stuff coming out of bulls rear ends. Think the odds need to be higher to take that bet.
Might be part of back slapping brigade, but my motives are more the product in itself is pretty neat.
My main concern is financing production at volume. 100 dollars a unit 10,000 units to cover say a fair whack of Schools only in uk and that’s a hunk of money. “They will be everywhere” needs a explanation at some point how that happens. But 5 weeks in, it’s innovation etc etc
I don’t look for answers here. More I am hopeful the team can come up with a financing model. China is mentioned, numbers get silly, competition steals tech, risk etc etc like I say either we have faith in team and hold or we don’t and sell, unless we want to trade(how does one get the cojenes for that).
Best of luck all, this is no safe bet but boy is it interesting ;-)
RE: RE: Two Years to Get Here - Perspective26 Sep 2020 06:57
I disagree about the video. Not massively and you make a good point (before this turns into bun fight just a different opinion).
It left many questions unanswered eg funding of reader production(not too worried).
But having a slick presentation would have made me worried. As a small investor my biggest grumble is lack of information. Often it’s like buying a pig in a poke. Slick is hiding stuff. I thought the team did great, no Oscars, but I kinda went “these guys could make this”. Cooool
Sell it.... that’s another discussion but I think the product will work. I got that from the video.
I had a much better feel where the company is after 5 week project. 5 weeks. Wow proud to be a share holder.
I would have led with derisked stuff more strongly, got everyone waiting. Made the meeting an hour and got the CFO boring everyone with excel(love you really).
Then gone with our “innovation project”. Would I have had a slide after with risks and mitigation yes. Mr B ....the plus’ are lovely to see but we want to make risk choices so need to see both sides when you do thinks like this. You see potential, many are scary cats and need to feel good, be critical of the plan, and work from there.
But a slick video nah, seeing raw bones was way more useful to determine investment case. Big companies do due diligence, video is not much use.
For the actual product and signing up retailers etc, yeah fill you boots, get George Clooney etc
The SP got heated, many head 2+2 and made 1M.
Omelette, eggs, etc
Fast bucks yeah be nice wish I’d sold and bought back in:-). But so long as we don’t dilute like hell to gamble I’m fine. If we need cash let those of us holding shares have first go (Avacta....). Then goto II.
Anyway, I agree perception is important, but risk slides rather than George C would be better.