We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
skid
I’m not concerned about ‘fresh’ buyers as, with any stock, if there’s money to be made here folks will find it.
There was an excellent discussion over on advfn over the week end. My modest contribution was that sakes to Tarana last year was $765k. It’s in the accounts, single largest customer had 29% of revs and was US based.
Good job we had them! Given Tarana only really got going in Q4 then the monthly rate is significant. I agree with Dallo’s take, and probably conservative at that, that we can expect c $5m-$6m this year from Tarana alone.
I think we should be able to do c $10m this year and blow the doors off in 2023. The sp should climb significantly this year, I expect to see the warrants triggered in Autumn.
All looks set fair
imo
atb
uhlf
I’m trying to think of possible way that this was not a separate RNS event.
Perhaps Tarana order on a monthly basis, and at the monthly level the threshold for a RNS is not reached, hence they have bundled up the orders and presented the cumulative total for Q1. In which case they could have used RNS Reach, as they halve used in the past.
Just my thoughts in trying to be as fair as possible.
It still smacks of hiding ones light under a bushel.
Are ENET guilty of withholding price sensitive and material information , which is against AIM rules?
We are told that in Q1 we received a further $800k of orders from Tarana. That is almost certainly price sensitive and material news. That should have been released as soon as possible, not on April 8th bundled in with the results. If the results were released in June as in recent years, would we have had to wait till then to be informed of this material order?
It does make you question whether there is an ulterior motive , if it was any other company I would say they want to take it private, or set their share options first or whatever. I don’t think that’s the case here, but why would you not give your shareholders this news as soon as possible, as they are required to do?
Maybe there’s some vital bit of info that I’m missing, but I don’t think so.
Ultimately it makes no difference to the company, although it can and could result in unnecessary dilution from low ball fund raisings if the company decide to delay material news or down play news by bundling it in with the results statement. It’s downright weird. The exact opposite of companies that release fluffy news every day and, in its own way, just as dangerous. I certainly hope they don’t repeat this sort of trick.
Nice post G the G. Bravo!
Dallo, agree with your take and we can hold off storming the ramparts, least for now!
I think you are correct re more contracts/news soon, just a feeling in me waters!
Although how was that $800k Tarana upgrade not a RNS event, very material, I would have thought. Talk about hide your light under a bushel!
dallo
MR would have us believe all we have here is a news hiatus, nothing more.
It's a shame they choose not to engage and involve with investors, so we can better understand our investment.
To be fair the move to larger premises, the hiring of staff and the positive vibes that emanate out of hq (eg BK blog, tweets etc) give some credence to the all is fine theory.
But is it really necessary to make it such hard work? They are in danger of losing a small but significant chunk of pi's with their 'we know best, we'll tell you when we're ready' style of IR.
TBH it's baffling why they persist in this mushroom strategy with investors, they've been told enough times what the problem is, but, despite sometimes encouraging noises, not much seems to change.
atb
uhlf
(continued)
Proposals
Despite all the flowery words like exponential, transformational, finisihing line etc there are no forecasts in the market against which investors can measure ENET. What size and when do management expect to be ‘processing larger orders’.
There should be a suitable house brokers note accessible to all investors, as well as paid for research to make sure the message is widely available.
No one is asking news for news sake, but consideration should be given to regular webinars, meet the company type events. These could be after results, or after a significant contract or when you feel its worth updating investors on new products, current situation etc.
The above list is by no means everything, but a start
I've just put this together as an example of my concerns, there's plenty of others and I'm sure we've all get different points.
But it's along these sort of lines
General
The standard and level of communication with investors and shareholders is intermittent and poor quality, meaning the investment proposition, future prospects and current work are not adequately explained. Whist all statutory obligations may be met, Ethernity is a small cap tech company reliant on a relatively small number of investors. The standard needs to improve to maintain the existing shareholder base and to add to it. This is essential for liquidity reasons, any future fund raisings and to ensure the progress at the company is adequately reflected in the share price. Otherwise the share will continue to languish and existing shareholders will continue to experience unnecessary dilution.
Specifically
A few examples:
The annual results are issued almost 6 months past the period end, this is too long and the results are close to meaningless for investors at this point. We should not have to wait 6 months to find out the turn over, profit/loss and cash position of our company. It’s worth noting that in the update of 14/12/21 that revenues were anticipated to be $2.8m for 2021. Despite several further updates from the company, no further updates on 2021 have been issued.
Cash raising.
‘The interim result on the 19th August stated:
the Company is satisfied that is has sufficient financial resources to meet its ongoing obligations and operating requirements for 2022’.
Then just over a month later, on the 27th September the Company raised £4.2m, saying
‘The net proceeds of the Fundraising of approximately GBP3.94m (excluding any additional funds raised through the Broker Option or the exercise of Warrants) are to be applied to strengthen the balance sheet, providing additional working capital to allow the Company to support the growth and delivery of the recently secured contracts and engagements for its 5G offering towards successful field deployments.’
In the time between the interim results and the fund raising, there had been no new contracts, so why the change of mind?
On the 25 february 2022 a further $2m was raised
‘to further extend the Company's market presence in the programmable system platform market and to enable the processing of larger orders by the Company.’
Shareholders accept loss making tech companies like ENET need to raise funds, but a clear and unambiguous narrative should be given to shareholders, rather than one that appears to be made up on the hoof.
There are plenty of other examples where the company’s communication is less than clear, eg the component issue, interviews onpro-active where we are told we at the ‘finishing line’, forecasts of cash flow positive which then disappear without a trace.
Hi dallo
ENET's IR really is the pits, all this can't comment/against the rules stuff just feels like a smokescreen to me.
We've said before that posters on this site probably account for a fair % of the shares, perhaps we should joing together and make our views known? What's the % to call a general meeting and put forward resolutions concerning the conduct of the company? Would be open to a meeting with mangement before we reach that stage.
We are just kept totally in the dark, I've got a least of c 20 questions that they should be able to answer without breaking any rules of commercial confidentiality, but I draw the usual blank.
The good thing is they should be ok for cash and surely they wouldnt be doing all these hires if they had no business.
Fairview
You’re correct, no mention of the number of chips.
It could be the number has not changed, just accelerated.
From the May release:
The orders include $740k for delivery in 2021, which represents an increase of c. 50% over the previous expectations of the customer. The remaining $1.26m in orders are for 2022, based on Tarana's current 2022 sales commitments, and this amount could increase as demand for Tarana's G1 fixed wireless product continues to grow. Additional orders are expected for 2023.
So we have no idea how long the $1.26m will last them for this year.
It seems odds on we will get a further order for this year, but perhaps not as much as some folks have mooted.
It’s all guesswork, the price per unit could be anything from $100 to $500.
We can vaguely estimate. An initial call off from the 5,000 was worth $400k. If we said 1,000 was a reasonable initial number then the price per unit would be $400.
Tarana will require the ENET SOC in advance of their roll out plans. Given they expected to shift 5,000 in the first year, perhaps 10,000 in the second year. Add in that it appears Tarana experienced some delays then my finger in the air suggests we could get another $2m order for second half of this year, giving c $3.2m for the year as a whole.
Given the rate of acceleration suggested in the press, then perhaps $6m+ from Tarana next year is not unreasonable.
It’s all guesstimates, with a lot of info missing.
But Tarana should be a more than useful income stream to ENET.
All imo
atb
MR waxing lyrical re 5G on 1st November.
Managed to get a transformational and exponential in there as well! Nearly 5 months later we’re none the wiser as to what this actually means in terms of $’ers for 2022.
Mark Reichenberg, the Ethernity CFO said "The Company would like to thank 5G Fund for committing to the agreement in September last year and for their continued support through the duration of the agreement to this final investment. 5G Fund has been a supportive and flexible funding partner for Ethernity, and its investments have provided the Company with significant working capital during this transformational period of time during which the Company's activities increased exponentially."