Member Info for wyndrum

DGU, you are being a bit precious about the wording. How EVE said what they did is the traditional language of a profit warning. The expectations that they expect to fail to meet are what they told the market previously.

I get you think that actually all is going to plan, just a bit more slowly, but EVE had already rowed back on being profitable this year and then said they would not do as well as that, which means they will post a loss. The loss on current outgoings suggested a solution would be to sell the company.

To tout this as an option is pretty much the nuclear option. They knew EXACTLY what they were saying. It was not badly worded. They have a legal duty to be clear.

In my view, and thats all it is, the SP is at the level it is on the hope a buyer or investor will be found, not on the basis that if this does not happen EVE will just carry on at a slower pace before taking off.

DGU, thats the nub of it.

" I think at long last EVE might have nudged the prices up a little ( though inflation pressures may be responsible too)"

Its not whether EVE will survive or not, its trying gauge what the likelyhood of them surviving or not.

Without knowing the extent of the increased costs we have know way of knowing if the prices rises completely counteract these costs or only contribute towards them.

We don't know how badly sales are comparatively doing. Have they picked up or still running on average 15% down or is it worse?

Without access to this info its impossible to make an informed judgement. It just becomes a random guess.

You may well be right in your view but it will be a guess rather than based on what we know.

The last RNS was bad, we all agree on that, and the market has reacted by halving the SP, will it get worse or will it get better?

Who knows? But there is quite a lot of money at stake and I for one would want some real data to go off first before jumping in.

Again, always look at it from a new investors POV rather than an existing shareholders. There are other opportunities out there. What is EVE's compelling story?

Tim, your paranoia is a thing to behold. If its a view that you don't agree with its a paid troll deramper designed only to force the SP down. And if there are no trolls on the BB then its the MM manipulating the price downwards....

PJ, who says anyone was watching min by min? its been low volume.

My point was that many will have sat on their hands for years and may be no better off then when they started, whereas others who may have paid more attention to short term fluctuations may have done better.

If I misinterpreted your point then I apologise

Ah Pj, there's a can or worms.... What do you mean by short term? 2 years ago on the 15th of June the SP was 101p.

since then it has been between 41p and 273p.

There is more than one way to skin a cat....

Well I think there are some alternatives.

The first one is good news for the worriers here because this surely proves beyond any doubt that nothing posted here affects the SP. (We have had 2/3 days of well reasoned thought so as to show that it still looks very promising.)

Or maybe the MM's don't share the or care about the logic of the dot joining here.

Or so few read this BB that it does not affect the SP.

Its hard to draw the conclusion that it is deliberately being held down as surely the demand to get in at these very low levels would have to push the price up, yet volume was low.

The other possibility is that the current SP is correct inasmuch its the best the market can do to match the 2 opposing outcomes. (if successful the SP shoots up but if it fails the SP collapses).

Hi D: I can't remember specifically the conversation but It was probably in response to the accusation that the MM's were rigging the SP.

If I am right then my view would be that by artificially depressing the SP, so many buyers would want to buy at the unrealistic false low level, that the MM's would end up have to sell at this low price and then to match it they would have to go into the market to obtain the stock to fulfil those orders and buy in at a higher price.

I do think manipulation in shares sometimes goes on but my experience says it is short lived and does not last more than minute/hours.

In a normal transaction which I think having EVE for sale is, then EVE may have a price that it thinks is fair and for the sake of argument, it may be higher than the potential buyer wants to pay. If EVE are confident this higher price will be realised maybe through someone else, then they will hold out. The potential buyer will also have to take the view if they wish to pay more and wrap the deal up in case someone else is attracted. Its much more like buying/selling a house.

What you want and what you get are not always the same and also not always in your control.

And that assumes someone wants to buy it in the first place.

DGU, you are quoting me (which is fine) on old info.

At that time (3p a share I think?) EVe was still "on track" towards break/even/profitability and this new deal looked to be an accelerant pushing the price to I would have thought 5-6p based on the risk of failure being removed, and then a buy out premium to push it potentially to a 10p (all back of a fag packet stuff.)

However its all irrelevant since the LAST RNS.

And as I am assuming you must be completely ignorant of any thing to do with economics or business or any commercial activity, you should know that something is worth only what some one else will buy it for.

It has nothing to do with what you think is a fair price.

If you are so sure why don't you buy out EVE. You could probably get it for 2p a share?

Unfortunately D the charts don't offer anything of hope at the moment. The break below 1.75p was the last key move.

DGU, It's just I think mostly your comments are not based on a reality, in the sense you are asking for the impossible.

EVE have already told you directly and personally there is nothing further they can tell you. All future correspondence will be via RNS.

EVE don't have a moral duty to Shareholders, they have a financial duty.

No one was forced to buy the stock.

This is a tough game and a risky one and its compounded by the extraordinary sums PI's with little or no knowledge of the company, their market, or the financial markets they trade on, are willing to commit.

Here's a thought experiment.

Would you place £5,000.00 to win on an odds on horse at say, 1-2 (ie you would make £2,500) or £5,000.00 to win on a 20-1 outsider?

There can be no material info that EVE/Mark can release to any individual as it would be illegal.

That type of info has to be released to the whole market at the same time as per an RNS

Watching: I don't think testing has much commercial merit on covid unless a much more serious strain develops.

The symptoms are pretty clear and it will be treatments and vaccines rather than testing that will now continue to take centre stage.

DGU, think what you like, although your judgment up to now has been poor in my view so it might turn out I am "trust worthy after all.

Who knows. Who cares?

Me too D. I always remember my pal in the business saying that the costs of Internet and general advertising were horrific and were constantly changing due to search engine algo's arbitarially changing without warning.

And I think I posted (as others did for sure), on some result date, that it seemed that if you could not breakeven or sustain even a small profit in real terms on a £25m turnover that something was wrong.

I can only surmise that the "technology" that EVE uses is more expensive to produce than Emma does?

MY "idea" DGU was to be wary of this stock as it had not devised a business model that had so far worked. (I mentioned this years ago here.). It has not stopped me trying to trade this stock as its perfectly possible to buy and sell even on an overall declining SP (i have no facility to short stocks).

My "idea" is to by way of personal experience suggest a model when buying shares is to have a plan of which a fundamental part is to sell when the stock moves down against you rather than hanging on until it effectively becomes worthless or the financial pain is too much to bare.

As for EVE? who knows ? I don't remotely have enough info on any key metric to make any judgment.

The only info we have is is hat there is not enough money to likely sustain the company and that without new funds the company is likely to dissolve.

I accept completely that EVE could still be "saved" I just think it highly unlikelly

DGU,

I am not advising anyone to do anything.
I question your views because to me they make no sense based on the info we know about.

You suggested Eve don't know how to price their products, that the Finance dept don't know about cost control, that the marketing/sales dept don't know what direction to take EVE (ie overseas), and that they have few ideas about new products.

You previously suggested constantly that prior to the latest RNS that the solution was a share buyback to bolster the SP.

And now the latest idea is for PI's to band together to have some "clout".

Clout to do what exactly?

Eve need money. Unless you are suggesting a RI I am not sure what you expect Pi's to do?

Honestly DGU, I can't work out if you are for real or just taking the peiss.

You have emailed EVE directly they have responded by telling you that they can say no more than the previous RNS for legal reasons.

Forget the one before the latest RNS.

The last RNS said that due to a change in economic conditions EVE would not meet its previous targets you keep referring back to. Thats it. Thats the latest position.

What more do you need to know?

And finally (and this is yet another example of why I wonder if you are just taking the ****), do you really, honestly think a PLC does not employ a finance director who actually knows about finance?

If you are genuine then please I beg of you learn more business before using your hard earned picking companies on their fundamentals. If you are going to use that approach you must to have a good grasp of company accounts, EPS, PEG ratio's, barriers to entry and a whole host of other indicators that will help pick the wheat from the chaff.

Aim, its not about pointing fingers. I hate to hear of people being wiped out and also through one reason or another, becoming over committed, if for no other reason it causes anxiety and unhappiness and life's too short.

The brutal facts are we over extend because of fear and greed. Fear we will miss out on great winnings, and greed that we imagine the SP going up ten fold and what difference that would make to our lives etc etc.

Its that emotional pull that is so strong in buying and selling shares.

Had all the SH's currently on this BB, had only money they could COMFORTABLY afford to lose then these turn of events would not be causing all this angst.

Anyone doing this for any sort of time will have likely fallen into this emotional trap at some stage. It seems unkind in the extreme having gone through it in the past not to try to warn people about it for the future.

DGU can't currently square what the situation is now given as to what was said by the BoD previously.

My personal experience is that this is fairly typical and listening to BoD's should be taken with a pinch of salt at the very least. They always exaggerate.

Then you have to double time lime line they tell you (for the same reasons).

Then it dawns on you, how little you actually know about the company other than in the broadest terms, of what the situation is. Then you in turn realise, for all the diligent research the individual does, it turns out to more a matter of luck than judgment if it goes to "plan"

Some people say they are "investors" and I say we are all gamblers and we don't win all the time in fact most PI's don't win at all. There is a reason for that.

You want to increase the chances to make money? Buy less risky stocks. re-invest the dividends. Have a long-er term plan.

Its no coincidence that the most active BB's are around high risk, speculative stocks. There are exciting for the potential returns. But boring stocks hardly get any chat on them at all.

Think about that.

Truly these BB's hinder wealth creation with too many misguided views, misunderstanding or ignorance of basic economics and that's before the seemingly "natural" spite and degenerative attitude of many that any form of social media seems to unleash.

Right, for a start we don't know anything. (Other than the latest RNS which was a profit warning asking for new investment or a sale of the company. So things are bad cash wise and cash flow wise.

The only benefit of a higher SP would be if a RI is being contemplated. (I suspect not).

Therefore the "solution" to EVE's problem is new cash.

That leads to, will more cash turn things around?

So far in the history of EVE they have never made any money, so new money has to mean a different business model. Or a drastic cutting of costs.

I unfortunately don't see EVE staying out as a public entity, at best it is taken private. If that assumption is correct (and it may not be), then do you wait for administration or put in a very low offer (0.5p per share or lower.)

I don't see eve carrying on just with more money because all that would happen is you put the clock back 2 years, Eve have £8m in the bank and 2 years later of "small" annual losses, you are back where you started.

Remember its not about Eve any more, its about is there a business model, that taking over EVE, would produce a good return on say, a 10m investment.

In a recessionary climate where descressionary income is going to be largely curtailed, how much more money will be lost before profits are made? Anyone?

So the nub of it is can Eve convince new money that there is a business model that works. Assuming they can does not necessairaly help Shareholders.

They are the very least of the concerns of both the BoD and any new owner right now. (imo dyor)

DGU, what bit of here email do you not understand?

They need cold hard cash either through an investor or a RI (good luck with that), or a new owner.

She cannot, as she incredibly, politely and patiently replies, tell you anything the market does not already know.

The only thing the current shareholders can do is to donate money directly to EVE (not buy more shares as that just goes to the seller and not to EVE.)

If that's what you and other shareholders want to do, then knock yourselves out.

I do understand the frustration/anger at the way this has turned out thus far, but, it was always an option that this would happen .

Any loss making company that goes through different management but still struggles must make share holders at least be aware of the worse case scenario that is possible?