Member Info for Wigwammer

We must be fair and accurate, mr nolupus. The market cap at the beginning of the trial was £30m - similar to now - and proceeded to rise 8 fold over the ensuing 2/3 years, just prior to readout. So to be fair, accurate and not particularly upbeat at all, the precedent is for the shares to multiply many fold if/when the trial proceeds. ATB

Ah, in short, there aren’t any very good reasons why £60m valuation would be considered upbeat. It was called IMM and on AIM a few years back when it was valued at well over £200m+. ATB

Why would £60m valuation for a fully funded ph3 be considered upbeat?

Re dilution. The current market cap is around £30m fully diluted. I would guess on trial approval the price will double and the market cap will rise to £60m+. At which point a £3m dilution to see them through to post trial result is total peanuts, circa 5%. It’s a total non consideration at this point, IMO.

Pmm - you are quite right with your previous comments. There are positive aspects to the LVCG narrative, but a lot of gaping holes. The latest RNS statements give little detail as to the size of the contracts or the margins left to shareholders once management fees have been deducted. I find little of substance in the posts here to clarify any of it. The market clearly remains to be convinced too. I remain a hopeful holder but recognise it is very high risk. ATB

The 1H interims should look fantastic - the year on year numbers will be based off the very weak H120 covid comparables, and we have seen decent sequential growth each half since then. Only the noobs who only saw value after the shares 10 bagged will now be running for the exit. This is a great story and am happy to continue holding. :)

0.16x sales and little debt. Your view on the fundamentals isn’t gonna score highly for originality. ATB

I have also been adding, SK. No certainties here but the risk reward looks good. My ongoing concern relates to the US parents - 2026 - but there should be a material period of data exclusivity. ATB

Here’s a thought. Instead of sitting here bickering with me about things which even a child can guess is relevant, why don’t MB and TSG have a chat with DC, and encourage the company to put out a set of targets for LCSE? This could include fees as a proportion of GM or OP and revenue? If LVCG do this and we get visibility, the market may start taking it seriously. If DC refuses, you’ll probably know why! There we go, something proactive from all this unpleasantness :)

TSG/MB - I have several million shares here, and it represents a pretty small portfolio position. That should indicate to an intelligent person that over time I have got far more things right than wrong. If MB has provided some great backlog of info on the fee structure, then he certainly lacks the basic skill of saying anything of substance about it today. I rather suspect that neither he nor TSG asked any basic question about fees, hence they continue to have nothing of substance to say on it. Quite important - the profitability of the contracts, you know ;) ATB..

Tell me, in the hours and hours that you and TSG have spent chatting to DC about LCSE, have you never asked him what fee he intends to take on an ongoing basis?

You keep adding nothing of substance, and using different words to do it! We have no idea what fees DC will take - as you concede - and consequently have no idea what the margins will be for the company. That evidently isn’t true for most companies, where we either have a history of fee/margin progression over time or a series of targets we can value a deal by. The point that multiple holders here have no interest in either the fee structure or targeted margin on this project is odd to say the least :)

All you have done is repeatedly avoid the point. On the vital matter of what the fee/margin structure will look like at LCSE you have nothing to do add whatsoever. You should apologise to all the posters you have misled here over a long time period with your misplaced confidence. All I have done is make people aware of it. Bye bye :)

Thanks TSG. As a matter of fact I do own millions of LVCG shares, and I’m here to discuss the stock with (hopefully) intelligent people. I can see that on the objectively vital matter of what the margin/fee structure at LCSE is going to look like, you have nothing to add either. At least I can be comforted that at some point I’ll have a greater fool to sell on to. ATB

My initial question on Wednesday - which remains entirely valid - is what fees is DC going to take from the LCSE division? MB’s answer was that according to multiple RNS statements, his international fees have been capped. The TRUTH is - DC’s fees have been capped for this year only, a year in which revenues at LCSE are likely to be marginal anyway. I will rely on the intelligence of the reader to work out who is presenting false information. ATB

Fair do’s pmm. I think my post to TSG is pretty balanced. ATB

Lol MB. If it rises another 200% you might get back to your entry price (along with all the other poor mugs you’ve pulled in).. :)

Hi TSG.. I really like the BrickLive story and that’s why I bought in. Agree - great potential there especially when the market cap was trading below tangible equity. But I have to tell you - I was warned by several posters on here before I bought about governance issues, and they were bang on right to do so. The story you paint about LCSE is largely based on trust. If the contracts are so highly lucrative, why have we only paid £1.5m for them? Perhaps DC brings a lot to the table hence we got the contracts at a lower price. But bear in mind the amount that goes to him in fees, and the amount that goes to other holders is almost entirely at his discretion. He hasn’t capped his fees beyond 2021 (when the revs will be marginal anyway) so we have little idea what will flow through to us. It’s all about trust, and he hasn’t done a great deal so far to engender it. Also bear in mind that ordinary holders have given up far more than the £1.5m paid for LCSE, because we were diluted at a significant discount to the booked assets of BrickLive (then diluted again for 16% of StartArt). DC has a lot to do to regain the trust of the market, assuming he is that interested in doing so. ATB

So after multiple attacks (I can’t say I read it all), MB now concedes my main point - a lot has to be done to restore trust. Regarding LCSE - the only assets LVCG have bought to the table are £1.5m cash and DC. I don’t believe in magic money trees, so my guess is DC will ensure the return on that £1.5m is commensurate to the amount we put in ie. it barely moves the needle. But bear in mind that £1.5m was raised by diluting our holding in BL near the all time lows - ie . expensive for ordinary holders. To repeat - the damage has been done as you concede, and the ball is now in DC’s court. I hope for the sake of my several million shares that it works out. ATB

Simple fact is - I own several million shares in LVCG, but unlike MB, I’m not going to BS people into buying the shares just to suit my own book. Since purchasing and monitoring, I have been alarmed by the way the company has behaved in several regards, and suggest any reader consider the following. 1) the only “asset” LVCG have in LCSE is the Chairman himself, and as a consequence he is likely to take a large part of any revenues as fees. 2) beyond this year - when LCSE revenues are in their infancy anyway - he has not committed to cap his fees. Bottom line being - yes, there may be significant revenues from these contracts, but we have little idea how much will flow to us post his fees. Given we were given just 16% of the arts business for our £1m, I would say DC’s generosity is not evident in abundance. Damage has been done and work is required to restore trust. ATB