||EPS - Basic
||Market Cap (m)
|Construction & Materials
Applied Graph. Share Discussion Threads
Showing 251 to 271 of 275 messages
|See article/pod cast below (active link) from this week's Investors Chronicle|
|Found another synthetic GNP supplier and the same issue gain re lateral size. That's 3 now.
I need to establish if the lateral size is a major issue. One top down producer lists 500nm to 1000nm as suitable for sensors and the like but not composites and other uses. The best synthetic I've found has a max lateral size at the low end of the top down range of 500nm.
Logically if the other synthetic producers can't do large lateral sizes then it's likely AGM can't either.|
|Spreadex lets you short . Only problem is spread. Should have taken one yesterday on bounce! Versarien is a much better place to be long|
|I did warn you the risks still say they haven't got the tech working yet and poor sales exactly as I said they would be.
It rather conflicts with the news before this talking of significant progress but that's what AGM do hype after hype with an unproven tech.
Yet after selling and only able to demonstrate grams per day production they are going to scale up again over the 1.6 tonnes capacity. Lol
That's the sales pitch for the fund raise to come BTW, which should in theory come later this year once they click into less than 12 months cash left.|
I've just done a lot of research on the importance of lateral sizes. While AGM will stick their head in the sand or not know what the flip I'm going on about then that's their fault for not doing research.
Lateral size it seems after many hours of reading is just as important as being under 10 layers thickness.
EG one good company quotes a product as suitable for composites as it has a lateral size of up to 5um.
Anything they have up to 1um they describe as good for sensors and the like.
Now Cambridgenano have a top down method BUT the lateral size is listed as a max of 500nm with a range of 150nm to 500nm and an average of 300nm.
In um terms that's .15um to.5um average .3 um.
It's the lowest lateral size by some way that I have found in all products reviewed and it's the only production method with data that I have seen so far that uses the bottom up process like AGM.
AGM don't seem to list any data that would help a buyer or scientist. But if they have managed to get the tech working then is the lateral size going to be an issue. If it's anything like Cambridge nanaosystems lateral sizes then they have a serious problem with the limited market their GNPs can go into Imo.
(based on reading science papers on the topic and descriptions given by a well known supplier)
In layman terms a bigger diameter slows the Gnps to where to composites so for the full range of GNP performance you need under 10 layer AND a good range in the lateral size diameter with the science paper quitting 5um tested to get the result.
5um is 10 times the size of Cambridgenano and 16 times the average size quoted.
So IMO AGM investor should ask AGM for data on their GNPs to see what they quote on sizes but such data should be independently tested Imo. If they are low lateral sizes Imo you may have a serious issue.|
Is there an option to short the one I used said not available?|
|Damn . Nearly shorted this yesterday but spread put me off!!|
|Haven't heard a good word about agm. Can anyone sell them to me?|
|Agreed SuperG, one to steer clear of, I'm into VRS now, as of today.|
I keep trying to warn PIs but I'm giving up and have posted elsewhere to make sure some I know don't fall for it.
I do hope GAM sort it for PI sakes, but in 5 years they have not got the tech to work
AS DETAILED IN YE RESULTS 3 YEARS ON THE TROT.
but in the risks small print. The 2 week 24 hour run said it all. How can it be a 1 tonne unit when it did what looks like less than .5 grams per hour.
None of the facts will stop AGM pumping out hype though, what they need to do is get the tech working and not one thing said from them since float suggest they have. In fact it states the opposite.
The tech currently carries a value of zero as it doesn't work AND it's all AGM have.|
Bargepole on this one and folk need to do their research. Tech not yet proven to deliver (as in annual reports) and some obviously in blind due to BBC news on graphene|
|Hmm....Nice move up today..not a holder, but interested in this sector..
This maybe pushing prices higher today..
With MU had patented this material...or would that have been difficult..|
I agree but had a decent conversation with an FCA guy recently, they can not in any way acknowledge in what we report to them so you never know what goes on. I haven't mentioned AGM to them
I also spoke to others and although we don't see it, nomads are paranoid about being caught out.
I heard of one spotting the one they represented was a fraud but certain obligations prevented them from resigning immediately so in some cases they get just as p'd off as us.
This isn't a beef with AGM I just happen to research the sector and early on thought AGM put out a lot of hype BS. So when they claimed a launch on fishing rods it made no sense re claims of the best graphene for a niche sector.
Rods weigh grams and Century only turnover about £1 mill Toal for all products, so Imo opinion it was hype news that should never have got past a nomad as qualifying as material.
Then when I discovered it was a lie that p'd me off as once again we have an AIM company misleading the market abusing the rns system.
In the last couple of ays I was told nomads now tell companies they are obliged to read these BBs to ensure no employees or non public info appears. Hence my post now calling them out.
I will go through their accounts when they release them. Imo so far it's a hype only failing plan and lies to PIs in particular does not fit well with me as they are easy targets.
I do wonder why Oliver the CFO left, perhaps he was not happy with the way cash is spent so freely.
I'm expecting revenue form the rods to be very low and indeed if you look more deeply AGM have a meaningless graph with no figures on the left column BUT they do have the rod revenue as very low. All it its is big circles on future stuff where you have to work out what X is but with no date available to get to a figure.
Imo purely created with the attention to mislead. I'm not short BTW I'm not into that and it's dangerous Imo to short any company that seems to report what they like.
No doubt AGM will have some glowing things to report as always but as they didn't mention revenue in the year end update and the share price is being dragged back it seems highly likely revenue performance is going to be poor.
Companies need to keep spin promise going otherwise they can't get funding when needed. AGM have a stupidly high cash burn with a number of unnecessary highly paid managers Imo. All they have is the same story to spin at the next fund raise but so far what they have reported over the last 3 years is the technology is not working and bonuses linked to that dropping.
I haven't posted the rumour I heard about the CEO as it's hard to back those things up.|
|superg1 - I really would not bother to report companies or their NOMAD to the regulator. I reported Graphene Nanochem and Panmuire Gordon to the regulator under rules 10 and 11 - guess what? Nothing. Apparantly not issuing an RNS following a winding up petition is OK. Statements purporting to be winning orders here there and everywhere, which do not translate into either WIP or revenue is not false or misleading information. Taking 18 months not to realise that revenue has fallen 90% again is not false reporting.
The regulator coold not be more useless and companies can be run by rogues and this is considered OK. As for the position of NOMAd - well, they have no duty from what I can see to ensure that their client does anything at all. Money for old rope.|
|AGM are supposed to monitor these BBs
So AGM (John) I'm thinking of reporting your false century news to the FCA along with the nomad. I know it was false and can prove it.
So I'm toying with waiting to see if your revenue reflects my thoughts. Interesting that you didn't mention anything at all about revenue in the year end update. If sales had been up I'm sure you would have signing the praises about it so it seems the revenue as before should be low.
Just my opinion of course.|
|I did see an idiotic comment possibly further up this thread which said 'I only buy penny shares in the 20-50p range. It did make me chuckle!|
|With that mindset you should also know that the PI herd like low numbers when it comes to an share price They don't seem to understand that it's percentage rises that matter.
EG they can see a .1p share going 10p a 100 bagger with no appreciation of the outrageous market cap that would create. They can't see a £7 share 3 bagging let alone 100 bag yet the MC may be the same as the .1p share.
Then there is the how many shares they can get for £500. 500,000 in one case and 71 in the other.
Why they think like that I don't know but low SPs offer up bigger dreams it seems with the maths being irrelevant.|
I can't argue with that one, good reply.
'When has fact ever got in the way of a good story?'
Yep hype is a big driver of share prices but unfortunately or fortunately depending on your view graphene is not exciting the punters at this time as can be see by volumes on all participants.
AGM had a run on that bit in the FT and Moneyweek imo, I watch them all closely. Lot's of small buys suggesting hype punts on AGM. The volume could soon die off and cause it to drift. No material news for a month at least due to the CFO buy.
Free options today hmmmmm nice if you can get them and it fits with my thoughts on the multiple highly paid positions.
With an share price incentive to get their options that leaves the BS channel firmly open.
If there is to be a hype run on graphene then Versarien has the facts to support such a run as will be seen in the very near future, the world leader in the sector.
Room for all, not pitching against AGM. I'm just warning you that after a lot of research it seems the AGM tech isn't going the way they want and they seem to be spending most of the cash raised on salaries for a raft of unnecessary senior positions (25 of the 45).
Good luck, I agree the share price has little to do with fact and if you stir up material interest in graphene, then in share price terms all graphene related shares should get a boost.|
|Thank you for the advice
Well it hasn't got in the way of the enthusiasm today with it finishing 23% up.
When has fact ever got in the way of a good story?
I rode the internet wave which saw some of my shares rise 60 times on hype. I like a bit of hype. Something good will come out of it - eventually.|
You need to do some research tech is failing to live up to claims and the volume is clearly a number of low value punts after seeing the article.
They have gone nowhere on their tech in 3 years it's not producing what they thought hey could do. 45 staff 25 of which so far have been identified as senior or manager roles.
The average salary costs is coming out at £70-£75k. It's a big wage bill will very little showing for it.
It's important to understand this sector or folk will get caught on false hype.|