Allied Minds Share Discussion Threads

[bobonumber1] 02/12/2020 15:20

https://www.iiotconnection.com/orbital-sidekick-helps-ipipe-consortium-with-pipeline-monitoring-project/

[flyfisher] 23/11/2020 21:15

''Although the resolution to approve the remuneration report was successfully passed with the requisite majority at the 2020 Annual General Meeting, it received more than 20% of votes against the resolution. After extensive engagement with its major shareholders, the Board notes that shareholder concerns were focused on remuneration schemes in place for 2019 and prior that have since been addressed. Accordingly, the Board believes that the substantial amendments the company made to its remuneration programme for 2020 and onwards, as detailed in its 2019 Annual Report and Accounts, have and continue to appropriately address shareholder concerns and no further modifications are necessary at this time.''

Clearly 37% disagree.

[costi_1672] 22/11/2020 17:47

https://twitter.com/FedWireless/status/1329845392716939264?s=19

[buffettjnr] 12/11/2020 21:22

hxxps://www.federatedwireless.com/federated-wireless-iyad-tarazi-named-ceo-of-the-year-in-2020-mobile-breakthrough-awards-program/

[costi_1672] 11/11/2020 23:43

https://twitter.com/FedWireless/status/1326325098354155520?s=19

[backinblack80] 23/10/2020 00:00

Isn't Bernstein going to try and rectify this situation?

[bobonumber1] 22/10/2020 08:19

https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2020/10/08/bridgecomm-partnership-nokia-5g-technology.htmlA little more Nokia bridgecomm info

[spectoacc] 21/10/2020 07:45

Fair points - at some point the Federated/Spin holdings in former-WEIF (assuming it's still there) needs dumping too. SUPP would also no doubt be keen to exit.

[flyfisher] 21/10/2020 07:43

I can understand that Schroders who inherited the woodford holding would not participate, but if the technology is good, why would Charter Comm, American Tower, GIC, SBA and Commscope choose not to participate and be diluted.

Looking at the CRS s/p. I think that CRS desperately need to have another go.

[spectoacc] 21/10/2020 06:49

"No one seems to have mentioned that in the last federated fund raise, several holders failed to participate. Not a vote of confidence."

Bear in mind some of those holders are ex-WEIF, and SUPP - zero chance of either of them ever participating, they have no (negative) spare money.

Agree re costs, wind-up - we need CRS to have another go.

[kooba] 20/10/2020 18:17

I knew the situation quite well there, I understand Woodford and Barnett still trusted the management to turn it round and they believed the BS they were fed , Woodford along with AM put good money after bad in now closed down businesses , keeping the management in place cost fortunes for shareholders.Bernstein's plan was right at the time and probably right now and Woodford and Barnett no longer rule the roost.This business never worked and has blown hundreds of Ms in its relatively brief life , a large majority of the companies they backed and backed again collapsed..really has been a fantastic how not to do it lesson.Here we are with what's survived of a huge portfolio and what's left of the management are still not aligned with their shareholders and seem far from proactive in winding this down efficiently so everyone can move on.

[flyfisher] 20/10/2020 17:38

Kooba, Overheads have been cut several times to get to their still inflated level, and whilst the phantom bonus plan has been cut, it still remains a potential drain.

ALM has always existed to reward the management team, it needs a radical shake up.

Bernsteins original idea of clearing out the board and installing a new CEO and non exec to wind it up seems the right way to go.
I would like to understand why it was not supported, at the time the woodford stake was large and having a company in wind up mode may not have fit his needs to get out quickly. So that could have been a reason.

[kooba] 20/10/2020 17:24

The structural problem remains the cost base even if admin costs reduce in the second half you could still be looking at $9-$10m overheads this year which for running a portfolio of $175m..means effectively a fund management fee over 5%. They are not looking at new investments just sitting holding companies that have their own managements. Companies in the sector like IP group have overheads less than half that rate, far more successful performance and are moving to self financing model with maturing portfolio as well have broad portfolio with early stage exposure.This situation works far better for management than shareholders and also leaves a question of how keen they would be to seek further early monetisations as this would expose the model further.Meanwhile the discount to NAV 40% (correct) and the situation that ALD is still providing the lions share of funding its holdings demonstrates the markets faith in the "exciting" tech portfolio delivering for shareholders any time soon is less than confident.

[bobonumber1] 20/10/2020 17:21

Forcing the board to do this could prove tricky with only 20% of shares in pi hands. A suggestion could be to contact Pignato and Ambers guy to sound out the proposition. If not maybe a private group could be formed, we could see what sort of numbers we have and then try to force it through an egm.

[bobonumber1] 20/10/2020 17:13

It is time for action really. The three or maybe four top subs need to be floated on the nasdaq. There should be a distribution to shareholders of the shares in each of the three companies at a valuation compatible with the current ALM reserves.These 3/4 companies already have competent management and if and when they float they could raise money to finance the next stage of their development. The plan would be to float 3 exciting, well funded, revenue producing technology companies. The share price has actually declined since Amber became the majority shareholder. I hope they do not have another agenda, otherwise they appear to be an inactive activist. The other subs can be sold off and the proceeds given back to shareholders.

[flyfisher] 20/10/2020 17:11

Ex leaf director mark lerdal is sidelined to the remuneration committee, bernstein was trying to install him as CEO, with stephen coe as non exec, but didn't get enough support from other large holders. Why?

No one seems to have mentioned that in the last federated fund raise, several holders failed to participate. Not a vote of confidence.

[swinsco] 20/10/2020 16:33

Agreed. I think Crystal Amber will be doing something about it - Richard Bernstein suggests further action in their last update.

[kooba] 20/10/2020 12:37

I believe they failed to adjust their Nav per share following the special dividend ex end January ,12.6p paid Feb or they double counted the Hawkeye360 asset and proceeds either way the shares adjusted for the special dividend but their NAV estimate didn't until now so last few notes have materially mis-represented asset value and share price discount.You would have hoped that ALM having paid for the research might bother fact checking it!

[spectoacc] 20/10/2020 11:35

Agree that's bizarre, what are Edison up to? And why only 62.7p now? Presume due to not updating valuations of Federated & Spin on progress made, as well as the previously quiet rump.

Exit strategy should be pushed along by CRS's ex-LEAF director, but agree it needs a float or sale of Federated or Spin to get it moving - had hoped for this year, now hoping for 2021.

[kooba] 20/10/2020 11:03

The Edison note does not explain how they said in June and repeated 3 weeks ago,"The company no longer discloses NAV, but we estimate net cash at 4 June 2020 of $31.9m (adjusted for the 12.6p special dividend, investments and costs) and NAV of 90.9p/share (78.4p/share fully diluted). Based on seemingly conservative valuations, the shares trade at a 56–62% discount to our estimated NAV."We now get "we estimate a fully diluted NAV per share of 62.7p. The shares trade at a 40% discount to this estimate of NAV."The stock went ex in Jan pay out Feb this year and they failed to adjust NAV estimates meaning their NAV per share estimate has been 20% out...this is paid for research fact checked by the company.It's still a meaningful discount and there are some interesting assets in the portfolio but the current structure is very inefficient as they are effectively just holding passive interests and there seems no clear exit strategy.Even if the assets perform well over years to monetisation a large part of any uplift ( if there is one) will get absorbed by costs.I don't think they have shareholder support and should put the for sale sign up to the highest bidder and try to get an auction going with the huge amounts of private equity money out there.

[swinsco] 20/10/2020 10:33

Director buying 80,000 shares today.

[bg23] 20/10/2020 09:55

hxxps://www.edisongroup.com/publication/nav-lagging-the-tangible-progress-made/28033

reads quite well

[bobonumber1] 19/10/2020 16:30

Ft have also done a positive article on Alm today. I think that is the main reason for the volume

[swinsco] 19/10/2020 14:09

Full text taken from LSE (snaffle)Interim results from Allied Minds (ALM:38.5p), a Boston-based intellectual property (IP) commercialisation company focused on investing in early-stage companies with disruptive technologies, highlight just why I suggested buying the shares, at 38.5p ('Exploit Allied Minds' huge margin of safety', 30 July 2020).The company is a classic Ben Graham recovery play, having fallen out of favour under previous management, but is now in the hands of a new board who are mandated to monetise the portfolio and return cash to shareholders. It has some exciting investments that have attracted the interest of heavyweight technology investors in recent funding rounds, too. However, this is not being priced in as $214m (68p a share) of investments held in six unlisted technology companies, and a further $29.2m (9.3p) of cash (adjusted for post period end follow-on investments), are worth double the current share price.The largest investment is in Federal Wireless, a 42 per cent shareholding with a read-through valuation of $92m (29p) based on the last funding round in April (see below). Founded in 2012, Federated Wireless operates at the cutting edge of shared spectrum Citizens Broadband Radio System (CBRS) technology, which supports the explosive growth of wireless data. The company has already delivered the industry's first 4G/5G private wireless solution, Connectivity-as-a-Service (CaaS), a low-cost subscription, high-performance secure private wireless network delivered from the cloud. 4G/5G secure private networks are a must to connect everything from robots, cameras, signage and machinery to virtual reality applications.Federated Wireless's cloud ecosystem now has more than 40 device manufacturers and computer edge partners, thus opening up access to a plethora of Internet of Things (IoT) and other applications. Earlier this year, the company announced a new CaaS offering that enables US enterprises to buy and deploy private 4G/5G networks with a single click through Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Microsoft Azure marketplaces.In April 2020, Federated Wireless raised $13.7m in additional Series C funding to accelerate the expansion and adoption of its partnerships with Amazon and Microsoft. The proceeds will also enable expansion into the 6 GHz band for 5G services, thus providing a new path to 1,000 MHz of spectrum for private wireless networks.It's easy to see why Federated Wireless has attracted the backing of heavyweight investors including GIC, Singapore's sovereign wealth fund, as it is building a significant recurring revenue base from its scalable cloud enterprise solution. All the signs point to a highly profitable realisation for Allied Minds in due course. It's not the only one, either.