Allied Minds Share Discussion Threads

[blueball] 09/4/2019 15:55

Looking great here for a re=rating.

[cf456] 09/4/2019 10:54

"Based on the disclosure regarding individual investee company holding values, we estimate that Allied Minds’ net asset value per share currently stands at around 123p."

Significant discount to NAV.

[blueball] 09/4/2019 08:50

Interesting thanks for that kooba.

[kooba] 09/4/2019 07:28

Crystal Amber investment commentary out this morning on AM.Allied Minds plc ("Allied Minds")Allied Minds describes itself as an early stage investor in technology and life science companies. In 2014, it listed on the London Stock Exchange at 190p a share, valuing the company at £398 million. In December 2016, it raised £64 million at 367p a share.In the period from 1 January 2014 to 30 June 2018, Allied Minds reported total operating losses of $418 million.Since its formation, Allied Minds has invested in over 40 companies. In 2017, it discontinued funding several portfolio companies to focus primarily on its six largest remaining portfolio companies.The net asset value of Allied Minds comprises these six entities, another five much smaller investments, plus $50 million of cash as at the end of 2018. Based on the disclosure regarding individual investee company holding values, we estimate that Allied Minds' net asset value per share currently stands at around 123p.Last autumn, the Fund initiated a position in Allied Minds and currently owns 2.7% of its issued share capital at a cost of 60p a share, equivalent to a discount of more than 50% to net asset value.In February 2019, the Fund met with Jill Smith, the Chief Executive of Allied Minds. On 2 March 2019, the Fund wrote to Allied Minds expressing a number of concerns regarding its parent company running costs which, at around $13m per annum, are in the Fund's view, both excessive and inappropriate.The Fund also wrote asking on what basis the board of Allied Minds believes it is appropriate that officers of the company are to be paid 10% of gains arising from any investee company whilst the listed company will bear all losses. The Fund regards this practice as both unprecedented and wholly unacceptable. Despite follow up correspondence, the board of Allied Minds has failed to respond to the Fund on this matter.The Fund also wrote to the board of Allied Minds requesting to understand on what basis it was continuing to award long term incentive shares to staff. In the first half of 2018, the cost of these was $3.9 million. Despite follow up correspondence, the board of Allied Minds has failed to respond to the Fund on this matter.The Fund believes that there is an urgent need for the board of Allied Minds to re-align its cost base. Eleven companies with negligible revenues should not require an overhead of $13m per annum to manage. The original incubator model that Allied Minds adopted has clearly failed to deliver. Whilst Allied Minds invests in early stage companies, the Fund notes that its core remaining portfolio investments were each initiated several years ago: for example, Spin Memory in 2007, Precision Biopsy in 2008 and SciFluor in 2010.The Fund believes that a board that has presided over such poor long-term performance at Allied Minds and that sanctions a culture of egregious total compensation payments is not aligned with shareholders, nor is it best placed to deliver for shareholders.The Investment Manager to Crystal Amber has identified a US-based lawyer with direct experience of running-off and realising assets in a US-based, London-listed investment company. As a consequence, the Fund has therefore written to the Board of Allied Minds suggesting that Crystal Amber's Investment Manager, in conjunction with the identified US-based lawyer, take over the management of the portfolio of Allied Minds, with total annual costs of running Allied Minds being limited to 1 per cent. of net assets of Allied Minds as at 31 December 2018. The Fund also proposed that in the event that the total portfolio realisations exceeded 80p a share, a performance fee of 10 per cent. would be payable on any excess. On this basis, the Fund believes the annual costs of running Allied Minds would fall by around 70 per cent.

[blueball] 08/4/2019 12:52

A very quiet day so far.

a 4p rise would do nicely though.

[lastoneout] 04/4/2019 18:50

Got this from the LSE boardhttps://www.thinksmallcell.com/Femtocell-Interview/iyad-tarazi-federated-wireless-updates-us-about-cbrs-progress-and-potential.htmlThanks to AquaeSulis01

[lastoneout] 04/4/2019 17:12

They sound the right people

[kooba] 04/4/2019 17:03

Notice they also beefed up the board the other day...prelude to float??https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/hawkeye-360-strengthens-advisory-board-with-two-new-members-300815312.html

[investordave] 04/4/2019 15:40

They're probably too busy counting their salaries to think about issuing an RNS.

[lastoneout] 04/4/2019 15:35

Yes someone should introduce the good people at ALM with the concept of the RNS.

[kooba] 04/4/2019 13:35

Maybe should rns reach these things ?HawkEye 360 Inc. today announced that it has launched RFGeo, a first of its kind radio frequency (RF) signal mapping producthttp://www.alliedminds.com/news-article/hawkeye-360-launches-first-commercial-product-rfgeo/

[kooba] 01/4/2019 11:51

Better news for Woodford today Oxford Nanopore looking at IPO and Circassia which has been beaten down looks like it is turning the corner.If he can find a way through to some major monetisations could be a big bear squeeze on some of his holdings that have been targeted by short sellers.Have to agree with CA that the management structure and the basis of renumeration does not align the board and senior management with shareholders.Quite a few of the remaining holdings are now quite mature for an incubator model so costs should be more in line with traditional asset management fees.An incentive scheme where management share on the good ones and not the bad ones is extraordinary on such venture companies and is highly ill advised.. encourages higher risk taking imo as they have no exposure to to failure.Needs a proper shake up and a sustainable structure that at least would allow shareholders to benefit from an orderly liquidation of remaining assets.Unfortunately the discount to stated assets evidences the markets view of current management being able to deliver.See what the results bring but if there is no short term catalyst demonstrating the board's intent and ability to deliver on the underlying value then the board needs to be challenged.

[catscats] 01/4/2019 11:24

when will Woodford be a forced seller - maybe he already is...Crystal amber might take the lot of him and get some real leverage....hopefully

[investordave] 01/4/2019 10:49

Twice as many buys as sells and yet we are down 7%. Isn't life great being a shareholder in ALM?

[jonwig] 31/3/2019 08:10

Snippet in The Times:

The activist fund Crystal Amber has accused Allied Minds, the tech incubator backed by Neil Woodford, of wasting investors’ money on high executive pay.

Crystal Amber also hit out at a bonus scheme that handed chief executive Jill Smith $1.3m (£1m) in 2017.

“The notion that staff will earn 10% on any winners while all losers are ignored is farcical,” said fund manager Richard Bernstein, who has built a 3% stake.

Allied Minds shares trade 91% below their peak and closed at 63.8p, valuing the company at £153.6m.

[blueball] 29/3/2019 14:04

Good news as well as Amber this week. explains a lot.

[lastoneout] 29/3/2019 13:09

Hmm so Invesco upping their stake

[investordave] 29/3/2019 11:20

Did you mean Friday as in today?

[investordave] 29/3/2019 11:12

It looks like normal service has been resumed here.

[investordave] 28/3/2019 16:51

Aye. Tis true that.

[volsung] 28/3/2019 16:19

Summat's up and that be's no word of a lie

[blueball] 28/3/2019 16:18

Yearly report due Friday Dave could be the reason.

[investordave] 28/3/2019 16:11

Could be. Maybe a flotation or two is due soon?

[blueball] 28/3/2019 16:10

Yanks buying..?