Tap Global Share Discussion Threads

[sikhthetech] 13/6/2019 15:24

you obviously never heard of limit orders..lol

[hatfullofsky] 13/6/2019 15:22

JonC,You're quiet today. $70m in the bank, $20m annualised savings. Profit in-line. Short to zero ?

[gowlane] 13/6/2019 15:21

Agreed Sikh, that $70m figure kind of jumps out at you as a bit of an anomaly.

It would mean that they generated more cash from operations in their weakest half than they generated last year in H2, with revenues shrinking all the time.

And additional acquisition and integration expenses to pay for.

[Edit: Missing too much key information about working capital movements and exceptional costs to be sure about this]

And of course they have not actually said that it was net cash, whereas they have used the term 'net cash' twice recently, in their Jan and Feb updates.

But we wait and see.

[sikhthetech] 13/6/2019 15:21

there was a 1.65m trade reported as a sell about 10mins ago..

Maybe we'll get a holding rns??

[masurenguy] 13/6/2019 15:19

Buys coming in now above 100p following the end of the AGM !

[pazzuzu] 13/6/2019 15:17

A nasty 1.6million sell.

[archy147] 13/6/2019 15:06

abott - now you've done your maths, how about moving on to the alphabet

A

B

or

C

[sikhthetech] 13/6/2019 14:55

gl,

yes, agree the $70m cash figure is hard to believe...

I too think fy2019 revenues will be closer to $400m

[gowlane] 13/6/2019 14:43

It is very hard to believe that the figure of $70m is a net cash figure, as it would not tie in with anything they have told us about their business in the last 6 months, including today's confirmation of declining revenues.

If it is net cash then why not state that in the RNS – remember in their trading update on 25 February they explicitly referred to ‘net cash’.

But today they referred to their ‘current cash position’ so the altered terminology looks significant.

However a gross cash balance of $70m from which you deduct the $12.3m TAP loan, and the $9.6m RTHM loan to get net cash of $48m, makes some kind of sense.

It looks likely now that 2019 revenue will be nearer $400m than $460m, especially after that Uber business.

[archy147] 13/6/2019 14:34

abott i see you're still unable to answer my point. Let me make this really simple.....At the end of the day, who is responsible for you losing your money here. Is it:

A) Taptica Management with their obfuscation of facts/incompetance/crookedly paying off their buddies with your money (take your pick)
B) Your incompetance in holding a share that's nosediving when all the warning signs are right there in front of you
C) Sikh for placing all those warning signs right in front of your nose


All you have to do is write "A" "B" or "C" in response

[amadeus888] 13/6/2019 14:26

As a result of the rapid progress on the integration of RhythmOne, we now expect to deliver c. $20 million of cost savings and synergy benefits in the current financial year (on an annualised basis) and expect RhythmOne to make a meaningful contribution to the bottom line in the following year. The Company's cash generation also remains strong and Taptica's current cash position is approximately $70 million following the buyback referred to below.

[sikhthetech] 13/6/2019 14:23

for those like the abbot, who are naive enough to believe the auditors...

Here's what Grant Thornton said..


"“We’re NOT looking for fraud, we’re NOT looking at the future, we’re NOT giving a statement that the accounts are correct,” he said, adding that his firm audits 7,000 companies. “We are saying [the accounts are] reasonable, we are looking in the past and we are NOT set up to look for fraud.”">

[sikhthetech] 13/6/2019 14:20

The 4 big auditors are being questioned about their roles....

Here's what Grant Thornton said..


"“We’re NOT looking for fraud, we’re NOT looking at the future, we’re NOT giving a statement that the accounts are correct,” he said, adding that his firm audits 7,000 companies. “We are saying [the accounts are] reasonable, we are looking in the past and we are NOT set up to look for fraud.”">

[archy147] 13/6/2019 14:16

So you are unable to answer any of my points then abbot.

Let me re-post:

Instead of debating who the auditors were why don't you challenge yourself with the REAL question here.......Why the hell didn't TAPTICA spot it BEFORE the merger and (why) did you choose to ignore this huge flashing warning signal??

At the end of the day, who is responsible for you losing your money here. Is it:


A) Taptica Management with their obfuscation of facts/incompetance/crookedly paying off their buddies with your money (take your pick)
B) Your incompetance in holding a share that's nosediving when all the warning signs are right there in front of you
C) Sikh for placing all those warning signs right in front of your nose


Answers on a postcard!

[sikhthetech] 13/6/2019 14:07

I wonder what would happen if a company's accounts need to be significantly restated????

well, the abbot???



Here's an article TODAY on PwC.. PwC!!!


"Audit firm PwC has been hit with a fine of £6.5m, with two of its partners also sanctioned, for its failure to properly inspect the financial statements of Redcentric, which led to significant restatements of the company’s accounts.""






RTHM has warned:
"MATERIAL WEAKNESSES", "SIGNIFICANT" costs, "ADVERSELY AFFECT...OPERATING results..IN THE FUTURE.""

"D. Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

As a result of material weaknesses related to the ......."




Page 43..

"SIGNIFICANT costs", SUBSTANTIAL MANAGEMENT TIME", "ADVERSELY AFFECT...OPERATING results..IN THE FUTURE."

"The combined company will incur significant costs and devote substantial management time as a result of becoming subject to reporting requirements in the United States, which may adversely affect the operating results of RhythmOne in the future. "

[sikhthetech] 13/6/2019 14:05

kcr,

"is that if we cannot believe audited accounts as a fairly reliable source of information, what can we believe?"

That is the problem... who to believe??


Here's an article TODAY on PwC.. PwC!!!


"Audit firm PwC has been hit with a fine of £6.5m, with two of its partners also sanctioned, for its failure to properly inspect the financial statements of Redcentric, which led to significant restatements of the company’s accounts."







kcr6913 Jun '19 - 13:15 - 1316 of 1334
0 0 0
Peargar, without looking back into Cakes details, can I simply suggest you may be right. There are undoubtedly numerous cases of poorly audited accounts, I for one certainly lost money on Conviviality through misleading accounts and moreover inaccurate company statements, along with a some poor judgement on my own behalf.

The bigger question however as investors who in the main are not privy to inside information, is that if we cannot believe audited accounts as a fairly reliable source of information, what can we believe?