The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
120712
Those who really matter have more than showed their support for the company, DL and to a lesser extent SB.
I think there is a school of thought/code that says non execs should not really be shareholders as well.
Least of worries, imo.
GH
I’m afraid there is quite a long history of unclear RNS but that one takes the biscuit! You maybe right, but there has been no attempt by MR to correct any of the worst errors/mistakes/indecipherable bits of the RNS beyond the bland catch all that they can’t give a running commentary on the daily activities of the company, which is absolutely not what I and many others have been asking for.
There questions the RNS raises are numerous.
Eg, what does the $20m include, what does very successful for financial growth mean? Which UEP product is ‘the best’, it can’t be both versions. What is a ‘pipeline contract’ .
Is Tarana included or not in the $20m?
There’s a list as long as your arm, and whilst MR may not have written it, he is responsible for IR and we’re not getting anything of any use back. That’s not good .
They must improve, simple as that.
Dallo
Posts crossed.
Agree with much of what you say, but ENET to need to do better communicating, there’s no doubt about that. The poor valuation for where they’re at predates the current bear market in small caps. They’ve been an object lesson in how not to do it since they’ve been listed. Vaguely amusing that MR apparently advises other Israeli co’s how to list!
I’m not happy but I don’t need to sell and believe they will come good, eventually!
atb
Ok, these are bad markets, but even allowing for that I agree skid, crazy valuation.
But the guys don’t do themselves or us any favours with the take it or leave it attitude to IR, which in itself wouldn’t be too bad if they issued clear, concise information backed up with broker forecasts and things like webinars as and when.
You’d think they would get the hang of AIM and being a listed company by now.
JamesDNO, fear not, as ENET told us only last week that :
"Our recent efforts to consolidate our progress, both in our R&D and in our sales, and to ensure that we are on a path toward financial growth have been extremely successful,…’
Tells you all you want to know, doesn’t it! You can’t get better than ‘extremely successful’.
And if investors have the temerity to ask what this means in practical terms, the response is they can’t give a running commentary on the day to day activities of the company.
Unbelievable eh?
Dallo
I got a similar sort of message back from MR re ‘ cannot give a running commentary on the daily activities of the company’.
I don’t think any investors are asking for the above, indeed it’s something I definitely don’t want to know. In the rns they gave far too much info on the UEP product when they just could have said ‘the product has now been optimised to the satisfaction of our contracted customers’ instead of the waffle they came out with.
The trouble is , when you say something like:
"Our recent efforts to consolidate our progress, both in our R&D and in our sales, and to ensure that we are on a path toward financial growth have been extremely successful,…’
then it’s not unreasonable at all for investors to ask how have the recent efforts been ‘extremely successful’ for financial growth? What does this actually mean, eg ok for cash in 2022, or near term cash flow break even? Without an explanation it’s a meaningless sound bite.
We don’t want a running commentary, but when they have something to say they need to explain it in a clear, concise manner.
That RNS should never have seen light of day in that form. Practically every sentence was either unclear, ambiguous, lacking meaning etc.
They need to address these points within the organisation as a matter of urgency. We can’t have any more releases like that.
Thanks for that dallo , appreciate your input.
I would assume then that the $20m must include further contracts from , say, existing UEP or PON customers as clearly we have not announced anything like $20m worth of contracts. So new customers for these products should be excluded, along with Tarana whom they’ve chosen, for whatever reason, to exclude further contracts.
One does wonder why this can’t all be clearly explained, on what basis the $20m is calculated, the degree of confidence they have etc etc. As with all things ENET, it seems clear, unambiguous communication is a bit of a stretch!
dallo, you say
‘The in excess of $20m EXCLUDES licencing and royalties and any upgraded sales to Tarana and others.’
Yet the RNS of a week ago states :
The Company anticipates significant growth in 2022/2023, and successful delivery of existing and pipeline contracts would deliver in excess of $20m over the next 24 months. In addition, the Company continues to benefit from royalty and licensing revenue streams.
So your comment re excludes upgraded sales to Tarana and others , is that correct? As the phrase ‘existing and pipeline contracts’ would seem to suggest it does indeed include ‘contracts’ that are yet to be signed , re ‘pipeline’. I’ve tried to ascertain from the company exactly what ‘pipeline contracts’ are but they will not comment. Not exactly helpful to a non price sensitive query!
I think the bod have to take a long hard look at themselves as clearly they have not been successful in getting investors on board with the investment proposition here.
Not that I expect anything to change, they go their own sweet way, like it or lump it!
Dallo
Thanks for your musings, interesting to read. We are surely reaching the sharp edge in all things ENET where demonstration of rapid revenue growth is required otherwise they look a sitting duck for a take out and DL might struggle to prevent that given the dilution to the directors stake’s over the last few years. A buy out at this juncture would be very opportunistic, it could make a lot of sense to the right company. Current valuation is in the loose change sector for some potentially interested companies.
atb