||EPS - Basic
||Market Cap (m)
|Health Care Equipment & Services
Netscientific Share Discussion Threads
Showing 526 to 549 of 550 messages
They don't need to raise cash by issuing equity in NSCI - it is perfectly more reasonable for each of the portfolio companies within the Group to undertake a financing arrangement by way of, say, a stake in (Vortex or another of the companies within the Group) in return for funds. In that way the NSCI stake in a part of the Group is reduced but this is not only necessary to develop the different parts but is well documented as the intended pathway in all the press announcements if you actually were sufficiently concerned to read them.
I still expect the first of these financing arrangements to conclude by the end of the year.|
|They need to raise cash.|
|this does look like it could get a bit messy if 60 goes.
a rapid descent to the 40s?|
|Worth a look (published yesterday on Proactiveinvestor)
|but theres little interest.|
|big buys rolling in|
|Looks like he has been well rodgerised on MRS lol.|
|seems YASX has just been graciously rodgered in MRS too.
quite a losing streak for someone with such 'market savvy'.|
|More mouths to feed at the table.|
|That research never came, I guess the market is worried about the high costs, near term losses and possible dilution if cash burn continues.For that, the company needs a high share price, but usually the people running these types of businesses are academics and not money people...|
|Only those who do not understand the proposition will be worried. I, on the other hand, know better...|
|the gracious chap stands with trousers and underpants around the ankles.|
|I don't get it or the market doesn't get it or both?When is the next fund raising?|
|As I pointed out last week, (but Chewin the plum doe snot get it), funding will not dilute equity in NSCI but will dilute the stake held by NSCI in the various portfolio companies depending on the nature of the funding. Chewin really has not looked beyond the ticker symbol.
Without giving away a bit of the stake, how on earth does he think these things end up generating hundreds of millions in revenue?
Chewin is the chap who ignored all geopolitical and management risk and backed Botting the dud by buying Tethys at 50p and failed to note my reservations. The guy ought to come with 'L' plates.|
|Chewin seeks to skew the metrics - Proaxis is just one of the companies within the overall Group, and Netscientific have only invested a million pounds in it and retaiin around one half of the stake in it. What Chewin fails to point out is that this alone is projected to generate £273 million net profit within a decade. What multiple ought to be ascribed to that at this stage? Well, say no more, it really could be one of the most stellar investment propositions out there.|
|I would ignore Chewin - he is as thick as viscous custard, and fails to even understand how the Group is structured, far less the minutiae of what is going on within it.|
It was all ensconced behind a veil of secrecy - but, it was plainly clear that Azima was either booted or left in a manner hardly harmonious.
Remarkably, even though Azima leaving was supposed to lead to amelioration of the process of delivering value(price appreciation for stakeholders), it went the other way. But, the company has since taken great strides and is now at a point where things have statrted to come together. The market looks ahead, and the portfolio of companies are shortly set to deliver revenues or provide visible pathways to the same. that is not priced in.|
I don't get it, this looks dead money for years to come, I don't have the patience to watch endless fund raisings without a good chance of successful outcome.
Slide 23 - another 5 years to get to £6.5m profit for Proaxis - assuming success.
How much dilution (equity or ownership) before then?
It's a 6-10 year horizon here.|
|The slides from the NetScientific Proactiveinvestor presentation are now available:
|What happens if they have to raise capital, probably at discount to current prices?
Another £15m needed soon 33% dilution?|
|I also attended the meeting and had the chance to chat with Ian Postlethwaite (along with timbo003) afterwards.
I would endorse all of timbo003's comments, especially IP's knowledge of private equity investment companies and VCTs. (To be honest I don't understand a lot of the scientific stuff myself so can't really comment on that.)
Of the four companies that presented, I felt that NetScientific were the most impressive, so started to have a look at them this morning with a view to perhaps making an investment.
One thing that stood out to me was the early involvement of Farad Azima and Peter Thoms of NXT infamy. That was a big red flag to me although both have now gone and, judging by the tone of the RNS at the time, Azima left suddenly and without any ceremony. Can anybody point me in the direction of any background information to this please?
Oh, and the free drinks and canapés were very nice. :-)|
|is that the detailed report?
a few lines of bullish puff?