Versarien Share Discussion Threads

[wisteria2] 31/10/2016 12:53

Grabbed some this pm only 11k! but will possibly build on that depending! gla

[superg1] 31/10/2016 12:52

Got there re AGM costs.

Employees annual reports

2014 15 staff ciosts £1.1 mill (average £73k)

2015 33 cost £2.6 mill (average £79k)

2016 42 cost £2.9 mill. (average £69k)

Obviously they took on more staff in the year and talked about business managers for Europe etc so those salaries won't be fully accounted for on a full year yet.

So my guess is an average of £75k per employee x 42 which currently has employee costs around the £3.15 mill mark.

[superg1] 31/10/2016 11:38

I've now read the latest results for AGM and note the below whih means in 1 year and £4.5 mill later they were no further on that the previous year.

Nov 2015 results

Early stage of operations - existing capacity and scale up. The Group has not yet demonstrated its existing technology at either nameplate production capacity or increased capacities and is planning to scale up its production processes. Failure to operate at either current or increased nameplate capacities would adversely impact the Group's business and financial position.

CEO comment on the 2015 results

Our plans to expand our production capacity reflect both the considerable traction the business is achieving and our confidence in the breadth of opportunity in the graphene market, where we aim to become a global leader.

October 2016 results


The Group has not yet demonstrated its existing technology at either nameplate production capacity or increased capacities and has commenced scaling up its production processes. There can be no guarantee that scaled up production processes will be operational to any anticipated timeframe or budget. Furthermore, the operation of the Group's production processes following scale up involves risks and uncertainties beyond the Group's control. Failure to operate at either current or increased nameplate capacities would adversely impact the Group's business and financial position.

So in the year nothing happened on the scale up claims but somehow they managed to spend £4.5 to £5 million.

The results end date was July 31st and in November 16 they start about talking of scale up so now the spending will go up too.

[superg1] 31/10/2016 10:44

Re that news

I didn't recall them having debt to them so looked it up. I believe that is derived from a news deal to repay funding in exchange for an agreed 60% of IP ownership and 90% of profits relating to that.

So it seems they have done that by issuing shares at the premium rate and secured IP ownership and the vast majority of profits related to sales from that IP.

Just thinking on that if the UOM wanted in then they could have taken the cash and bought VRS shares. But they can't as they would have been inside so have taken the share at the enhanced rate it seems.

[superg1] 31/10/2016 10:01

Something just dawned on me.

Over the weekend I read a lenghty document on this the topic on GNPs. It was pre recent breakthroughs but very relevant.

One section talked about huge problem with the top down (VRS) process. It's not just about getting to few layers but keeping the properties and purity of the graphene in what can be a destructive process. Many methods (near all of them) fail in that regard. The article therefore largely dismissed the top down process and talked of bottom up (AGM method) as the future.

I could see why the bottom up process could produce high quality single layer gnps/graphene and then thought that sector could serve the top end marklet like semi conductors and so on. It is a difficult expensive process with an estimate of 5-10 years before they break through on that.

AGM obviously do that but in very small amounts as detailed.

So this is what just hit me having read that article. Why on earth have AGM done a deal for their product to go into fishing rods. There are a few multi-layer GNP suppliers that could fill that market no problem. AGM GNPs if you udnderstand it should be in the premium end use of the market NOT fishing rods.

What on earth had gone wrong there then, it doesn't make any sense at all other than the need to sell what they do have which wasn't a lot. Why haven't the R and D players taken the few grams of AGM premium GNPs. ???

For now I'm confused on that, only failure of the premium plan or desperation would have them putting it in fishing rods.

On the flip side the top down (VRS) process is very difficult.

So back to the VRS news on the topic as wordings in the document I read reminded me of wording in that news.

'The resulting graphene has up to 99% carbon and minimal oxygen content, as well as being effectively inert. The graphene also exhibits exceptionally good structure and retains a very high degree of crystallinity ensuring that the risk of contamination is significantly reduced.'

The article want on about destructive nature of top down destroying desired properties of the GNPs.

So it's more than just bulk few layer capability but retaining the properties of the GNPs. The paper said achieving the above was proving difficult and hence they had bottom up as the future.

That further explains why VRS called it a major breathrough.

[tini5] 31/10/2016 09:48

That's a big help, thanks!

[vasilis] 31/10/2016 09:41

tini5

Put simply, U of M have loaned VRS £191,465. Instead of VRS paying this back in cash - a valuable resource to a small but aspiring company - U of M have agreed to take 1,000,389 (my maths makes it 1,000,339) at a price per share of 19.14p. That's in essence what this bit means :-

'The debt for equity swap will be transacted at a price of 19.14 pence per share, a premium of 76 per cent. compared with the mid-market price of 10.875 pence per share at which the Ordinary Shares were quoted on AIM as at close of trading on 28 October 2016, the last trading day prior to announcement of the debt for equity swap.'

It means that whilst there will be a little dilution when the new shares are admitted on 4 November, the price that U of M have agreed to pay shows confidence in the future of VRS.

Hope that helps.

[tini5] 31/10/2016 09:26

Forgive my ignorance but what's the significance? I'm a techie at heart and the products I get; the machinations of finance are sometimes lost on me though!

Thanks.

[superg1] 30/10/2016 18:53

2 articles worth reading following on from that. I didn't realise we were going to have an automotive innovation centre. Warwick feature again so I can't help but wonder about composites and the VRS link to Warwick.

[superg1] 30/10/2016 18:45

Shavian

I just listened to the Dyson comment and immediately after that it was said an industrial revelution is coming with the head of Rolls Royce quoted as saying breathtaking technology is coming.

As in a previous post the only possible GB related OEMs partnered With the NGI were Dyson and Rolls Royce. It may not be a current partner of course.

I believe advanced composites will dominate many sectors over the coming years so I do wonder if that is part of it.

[superg1] 30/10/2016 15:57

They will Shavian at some point.

Try to mention graphene to anyone and they think years into the future just like I did. I doubt many that have heard of graphene know about GNPs, RGO and GO which are breaking ground now.

Composites are big news in the motor industry, a desire for lighter parts. So it's perfect timing imo for GNP enhanced composites to start appearing.

I only noticed Dyson the other day re electric vehicles after trying to work out why they are a partner of the NGI. Dyson may well be the OEM. Perhaps they are after enhanced composites for the cars

[shavian] 30/10/2016 10:15

On the Andrew Marr show this morning they were reviewing the papers, and were amazed by an article in The Observer which is bullish about advanced technology in the motor industry. Andrew himself was astonished to learn that UK has a technological lead in advanced materials, and that Dyson is actually planning to produce an electric car! The metropolitan elite need to wake up a bit.

[superg1] 30/10/2016 08:56

I just found an article from mid this year which mentions the nomenclature within the industry and the need for classifications etc.

One study came up with this re GNPs

A few-layer graphene material is considered to consist of 2–5 sheets, while graphene material, consisting of 5–10 stacked graphene layers (sheets) with extended lateral dimension, can be termed as multilayer graphene. Above around 10 layers of sheets, the material is classified as graphite nanosheets or nanoplatelets depending upon the lateral dimensions.

[superg1] 30/10/2016 08:25

Dispersion

I go an about how important that is. If you don't have the tech to mix it properly then it won't work. You need no further evidence of that than the existence of Haydale, that is what they do, they provide the tech to mix GNPs into composites and other products. Haydale do not produce or supply graphene or GNPs they functionalise them.

I mention that as I checked the data sheet on one. Not particularly good GNPs but their advice made me laugh.

They talk of using existing plastics mixers to add the GNPs to the desired composite, and if the GNPs 'settle' perhaps they should try sonication or perhaps the customer put the wrong amount of GNPs in.

Take 'settle' to mean the clumping issue I mentioned previously. GNPs are attracted to each other hence the need for expertise and technology to effectively disperse GNPs in composites.

So come the open day I hope to get some questions answered which when asked were stated will be answered at the open day.

Questions around.

Performance data re the carbon fibre news and plastics enhanced levels identified by VRS.

Bulk GNP capability or what will it take to get there.

Multi layer GNP performance v few layer GNP performance.

Onwership or access to reliable dispersion technology.

Costs

The above points are what is holding the market back, and with that carbon fibre news I'm dying to know what the results of the tests were after the 2 years of research. There is a clear indicator of going commercial on it and you can't go commercial unless you have all the elements that I mention.

Bulk-Few layer(for higher performance)-dispersion-viable costs. Most claiming to be in the industry have none of those.

[superg1] 29/10/2016 10:40

BTW

If you want what AGM have spent £10 mill and produced/sold in 2.5 years then if you order from VRS on Monday morning special delivery then they can have it to you by Wednesday.

That's the current difference of BS v reality.

[superg1] 29/10/2016 09:08

I thought I'd look back at AGM to see why I formed the opinion they were flowering it up and giving out as much BS as they could.

They came to the AIM in Nov 2013 and the aim was to be producing 8 tonnes per year. They are doing the bottom up process which I have as an expensive method (I'll check).

I imagine the price per gram they did sell at was over the £400 per gram rate for the top down process others do.

Anyway look at what they said in full year 2015 results.

More evaluation quantities were provided in the final quarter of the financial year than during the previous nine months combined.

-- Two full week periods of 24 hour continuous running have been undertaken to support customer demands for graphene;

BUT the important bit of revenue for such samples was $41,000, divide that by the going rate of £400 per gram and you have 101 grams of GNPs. I suspect AGM prices will have been higher as said.

Go back to the news of more in the final 3 months which was abviously the 2 week 24 hrs period and a production rate to hit at least 75 grams.

2 FULL weeks at 24hrs per day is 336 hours or in gram terms .25 of a gram per hour.

They also released news saying they were ahead of expectations of the year and the year end result that followed came up with £41,000 of revenue. Well worth the pump rns then.... NOT.

Then read 2016 interims and it's full of hype and excitement with obviously dozens of big names chatting to AGM and terms used that actaully cover the world scene NOT what AGM are doing.

Look at the wording

"The Board is pleased to report that Applied Graphene Materials is striding ahead"

Then look at the revenues which imo doesn't desereve a 'striding ahead' claim

Revenue for the 6 month period from GNPs £18k in gram terms 45 grams.

I'll have to go through the recent end results as it says.

In excess of 120kg of graphene dispersions supplied to customers in the year in over 170 evaluation samples

Disperisons are about adding GNPa to a liquid so 99% plus is the liquid weight so it may take some digging through.

I did have a quick glance and noted this

Although demand for our graphene is growing, at this stage we still have limited visibility over the timing of customer take up rates. Therefore, we believe that flexing our strategy to adopt a modular basis of capacity expansion is a prudent response, whilst still allowing us to scale-up in time in order to meet expected growth in demand. The first phase of capacity expansion was recently completed and commissioned. Combined nameplate production capacity has now been extended to 1.5 tonnes.

On the last bit what happened to 8 tonnes when they floated.

AGM so far has been a lot of hot air and over-hype in news and that's what switched me off complelty with them.

2013 arrival claiming they aim for 8 tonnes and by the interims 2016 they had produced and sold about 150 grams at best.

The first year they did about 10 gram going by the £40k revenue.

To achieve the above they have churned through £10-£11 million of losses. What on earth have they spent all that money on???

[superg1] 29/10/2016 08:11

On that recent news just announced I did contact the company stating that news had been out a while via other routes.

Their response was that they were getting questions as to why it had not been announced as others had listed it.

EG from the other one involved



On that news to me as stated I think it's a good advert for VRS GNPs but a big earner for now. As someone wnats to spend £5 mill on it and wants VRS products and expertise then it just a an additional revnue stream and a great advert for VRS quality and expertise.

VRS won't be spending on that on it they just get paid for product and services. Anything that appears from that project obviously has the VRS name on it. I can imagine such bio tech will capture the attention of the media over the years as and when matters are reported.

[superg1] 29/10/2016 08:06

Spooky

The AIM is litterd with AIM companies with ideas, have been going for over a decade in some cases and still have not monitised their product or idea.

That's why I like the VRS approach of taking acquisitions that fit, that have revenue and have the factors that fit with VRS to monitise their tech.

But on that point, they are start up on both the heat sinks and graphene. They got 2D tech 2 1/2 years ago. Just over a year that they gained scaleable few layer GNP production. If some forget (I have mentioned it a bit) they are the only company worldwide with that capability as far as I'm aware.

The heat sink vehicle side stated it would take 2 years. The recent carbon fibre study talked of tests over 2 years.

I can list dozens that are nowhere in 10 years. Nearly all of those start from scratch with a hope a deal with this company and that will appear. VRS have already bought themselves into the markets they wish to target with some big name customers attached to those. On the AAC side they have customers that they can now offer enhanced plastics which may of course be lighter we'll find out on the 9th re the potential there

[shavian] 29/10/2016 00:26

Watch this space. We should know more about this after the open day on9 November

[spooky] 28/10/2016 19:30

The company is very interesting but they have never really answered how they are going to monitise their capabilities.

[shavian] 28/10/2016 19:13

Again, NR is making the point there that VRS is not going to be unduly distracted from the main focus of enhanced materials by the new medical project. I think he's really talking to the carbon fibre decision makers, reassuring them of his priorities.

[affc21] 28/10/2016 17:40

Directors TalkVersarien Plc (LON:VRS) Chief executive Neil RickettsVersarien Plc (LON:VRS) subsidiary 2-DTech is involved in a new project to develop a new generation of medical technologies, using graphene.Chief executive Neil Ricketts tells Proactive: "We've been put forward as a material supplier for this project. It's very good for us because it's not going to be too time consuming for our team and it gets our material out into a much wider audience".The project is funded by the UK government's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), and it aims to explore how graphene can improve treatment of diseases including cancer, diabetes and dementia.hTTps://www.directorstalk.com/versarien-plc-lonvrs-chief-executive-neil-ricketts/