Sky High Share Discussion Threads

[whites123] 20/2/2009 17:52

Hi gogoneko,

It appears to me that you prefer to doubt the written word than believe it.

Roomove has so kindly provided written evidence and in light of the fact that nothing has been reported to state that it has changed, it is not just fair, but right to assume it hasnt changed.

The Directors do not take wages..
In fact if you trawl back through past rns statements you will in fact find they also dip their hands in their own pockets to buy more shares.

No profit = No wages.

I am biased. I hold stock.

[gogoneko] 20/2/2009 16:19

As you're quoting from an earlier RNS source I think that it's safe to assume that the directors are being paid (in fees rather than salary). As such I'm not convinced by your argument and consider that some of the company's money has been wasted to maintain the directors pay.

[roommove] 20/2/2009 15:36

From the last set of full results:

"The Directors do not receive any remuneration for their services to the Sky High Plc Board"

Nobody works as a director for the fun of it and these guys will be no different but a brief clance at their business history will show you they know what their doing. Take the dividends for now, maybe the odd bit of expenses but keeping large salaries off the books will allow much faster growth and much larger returns on their investment in the future.

[gogoneko] 20/2/2009 15:12

Hmm! I await proof of them being unpaid.

"... and there has also been a reduction in the fees paid to Plc directors"

In the meantime I'll consider re-reading the company's Articles of Association section "Directors' remuneration, expenses and pensions" ;)

[roommove] 20/2/2009 14:47

'Top up' the directors pay? They are unpaid. In effect the dividend is their payment. No profits = no dividend = no directors pay. Seems fair to me.

[gogoneko] 20/2/2009 14:41

My contention is that I would agree with the company being indebted, but only so that they can achieve a better return than the charges incurred by the debt, not to effectively top up the directors' pay (which they appear to be claiming to be keeping under control as part of plc costs).

In effect it gives me cause for concern about the conduct of the directors.

[roommove] 20/2/2009 13:58

Of course you could also mention

On 26 September 2008, the company renewed its overdraft facility with its bankers at a rate of 2% over base which the directors feel is
very competitive in the current market. Working capital continues to improve and the renewal of our banking facilities will allow the
company to continue its plan to look for further acquisitions.


And the of course they held £54k in cash...saying the company has a debt, whilst factually correct, is not an issue for this share.

[gogoneko] 20/2/2009 13:45

From the RNS (Dec 8th) :

"On 26 September 2008, the company renewed its overdraft facility with its bankers..."

"Bank borrowings (104)"

Haven't heard anything since to indicate that they don't still use the facility and are therefore paying charges on it.

I acknowledge Feb sales have returned - but I think that it's safer to assume Jan's unexpected revenue falls are a precursor to further problems rather than something never to be repeated.

Can't argue with the last statement either, but I hadn't doubted that.

[roommove] 20/2/2009 13:32

gogoneko, what debt could the company have paid off instead of a divi? It has no debt! The announcement also states that sales in Feb have returned, company cash positive and generative etc etc. The fall in sales also only occured to one part of the company, the others have continued to trade as expected.

[gogoneko] 20/2/2009 13:06

I think that this share should be considered as being worth as much as the directors could get away with paying to take the company private. As they own 80% of the company and there doesn't appear to be anyone else with a significant stake they could walk all over PIs, e.g. offer 5p and be delisted within a couple of months - this is an AIM share regulated by a ball of cotton!

I'm also critical that the directors wasted money on a dividend when it could have been used to reduce debt charges - seems to be just one motive for doing that.

I'd also be a bit cautious about yesterday's news and the expansion announcement. The timing indicates that they've pressed ahead with the opening the new office, which is something which would have been decided last year, but yesterday's trading indicates a sudden, albeit temporary, loss of earnings during Jan. in the same business. In a worsening financial environment it would perhaps be more appropriate to consider this loss of business as a precursor to further delays/cancellations, rather than a once-in-a-lifetime setback.

Apart from that, and the lack of liquidity, it's definitely interesting so I'll buy for a fun punt if it ever gets back to 3p.

[whites123] 20/2/2009 12:45

Thing is the drop yesterday was a non event drop.

I was the only person making trades yesterday and the quoted 3p to buy was laughable..
I asked for 50k which should have been £1,500 at quoted price.

The best firm price i could get was........ £10,000

The market makers are criminal in there activities and place false valuations on companies like this and ruin all tradeability.

Buy buy buy..

This is worth £1.30 a share any day of the week..

[mmelody] 20/2/2009 12:10

arab3 here's the link. More info here than you'll ever find on Sky High's site! They don't do PR....

[2magpies] 20/2/2009 12:10

the bid has risen by 1000% since the low point yesterday!

That's volatality!!

[roommove] 20/2/2009 12:07

Happy days here again lol!! Good to see you can still dig up some info mmelody! I noticed the other day they were still advertising for part time surveyors all over the place. Hopefully this time the share price can hold up although who knows what will happen with illiquidity. If I had £10k spare I could probably get the share price to triple!

[arab3] 20/2/2009 11:49

mmelody
where and when did they announce the new office ?
all i read in the trading statement was the cutting of working hours for staff

[mmelody] 20/2/2009 10:51

that's some recovery from yesterdays mark down!

[whites123] 20/2/2009 09:27

Phenominal News...

[mmelody] 20/2/2009 08:54

19 February 2009


Sky High Technology has announced that it has opened a new office in Luton to cope with the company's rapid expansion across the Midlands and South of England.

Sky High's Luton office, which is located at Base Point Business and Innovation Centre in the Great Marlins area of the city, offers such services as video and manual data collection techniques, and market research. Bedfordshire County Council is among the many clients to utilise Sky High's traffic data collection and reporting services in the UK.

"I look forward to expanding Sky High's UK client base by building on the momentum that we have already gained, and look forward to working with new prospects interested in using our services in the UK," said Mark Mattison, MD and founder of Sky High. "Sky High has been collaborating with leading consultants and university research departments for the past 20 years, providing them with the forefront of video collection techniques, helping both private and public organisations make informed decisions about their transportation issues. Launching the Luton office is a natural progression for Sky High's continued growth and commitment to the UK market. With a rapidly expanding team of data collection experts, we are confident that our UK footprint will expand over time."

"Sky High provides professional, top quality services in a timely manner," said Ian Tyers of Bedfordshire County Council. "Its ability and willingness to work with our needs far out-performed our expectations. Any jobs we request are completed promptly and accurately, providing us with the information we need."

The company, which already has UK offices in Maidstone, Halifax, Tadcaster and Edinburgh, also has overseas operations in Australia and recently completed an acquisition of Halifax Computer Services, a UK based complimentary data collection and analysis business.

[rkjones] 19/2/2009 16:22

Where do you get that from? ADVFN trades state 7p!!!!

[john henry] 19/2/2009 11:18

Buy order at 2p

[roomove] 06/2/2009 20:13

I havent tried but I expect you could buy upto 20k for 10p if you wanted them.

[whites123] 06/2/2009 18:39

Very desperate for cash by the looks of it.

Profits are now likely to exceed the market cap of the company.
That in itself is pure madness.

Wish you could actually buy qty's, but unable to aquire more than a couple of hundred quids worth without sending the share price higher.

[roommove] 04/2/2009 14:31

Someone is obviously desperate for cash, cant see any other reason to sell at 3.3p.

[roommove] 02/2/2009 15:03

Its only a good price if you want to be out, you try and buy them back for less than 12p, you wont! Im in for long haul, directors will hold all their stock and will not worry about the price because they know what the final outcome will be. You need to be in for the long haul or stay out.

[8trader] 02/2/2009 10:00

That 50k sale at 12p dont look so bad now does it !