Batm Advanced Communicat... Share Discussion Threads

[echoridge] 25/5/2022 20:08

Tell you what genius, you answer my question first, since you've made the dopey assertion in the first place

[kooba] 25/5/2022 20:06

Are you simple?

[echoridge] 25/5/2022 20:06

The worst part of all of this is that it looks like you're a shareholder in Nanoco as well. shame

[kooba] 25/5/2022 20:05

Yes I saw you had made comment over many years ago..you do have a thing about shore cap and maybe quite right , my opinion on them is somewhat complicated. Howard Shore is a clever man he delisted Puma Brandenburg forcing shareholders out at a big discount , he delisted Shore Capital..similar situation. He just moved up on the Times rich list a bit , worth £1b plus.. so seems to know how to make money if not look after shareholders in companies he is involved with. He has known Zvi for over 25 years and BATM was the making of his brokerage all those years ago...hence why Zvi is still on the board of Shore Capital I guess. The links between them ..Ador shareholdings , Milken etc all made me hypothesise as to whether if they thought the company was significantly undervalued they might look to take it private..simples. Not impossible and yes if it was just taken off market then shareholders could stay on board and benefit further down the line as things matured to relist in other markets. That's it.

[echoridge] 25/5/2022 20:00

Instead, tell me more how a conventional UK long-only is going to help enable a founder's low ball bid for one of their fund's biggest holdings, take an enormous mark-to-market hit in the process, so they can wait in the background as a minority shareholder of a now private company in the hopes of it re-floating sometime in the distant future. Better yet, tell it to the fund's investors!

[echoridge] 25/5/2022 19:55

yeah, quality comeback. I left out that, furthermore, your use of Shore Cap's transaction and connection was meaningless trivia and borderline conspiracy theory.

[kooba] 25/5/2022 19:53

Just run me through your Ador numbers again..go on show off! Numpty.

[echoridge] 25/5/2022 19:51

My point now is my point then: your flag pole scenario can't and won't ever happen at these valuation levels and with this controlling shareholder. It is nothing more than intellectual masturbation from an inveterate show-off. Clear enough?

[echoridge] 25/5/2022 19:45

I do love how you managed to loop in Lombard into your fantasy scenario (show me the last such transaction a traditional long-only manager like LO was involved in) and then how you are now just 'running it up the flagpole' all of a sudden. classy

[fse] 25/5/2022 19:45

Its not the first time I have waved flags about Shore Capital.
I am not saying that this is necessarily the case for BATM but I think the race needs the blue flag and some explaining done.

FSE25 Nov '11 - 22:09 - 104 of 135 Edit
0 0 0
Don't have shares in this company so not going to ramble on much except to say to any holders that they might want to have a look back in the thread.
Shore do as they please and are incredibly out of touch with reality.
Unless they have made some dramatic changes to their style and attitude I would stay well clear of them.... all IMHO

!

FSE - 20 Mar'09 - 14:36 - 74 of 104 edit

The way Shore Capital is run guarantees it a place with the dinosaurs, quite simply the world has moved on and they are stuck back in the mid 1980's.
They seem to feel they can do what they want and put a finger up to all concerned .....
what effect is the share buy back having ?
I would agree with the 8p price as best guess ...... but who knows what is going on here it could be worse.
By the way they handle PGB Pilat Media which has just been taken over so theres another client gone... not that its that big a deal but ...

Added: Not old BATM news but Above is from SGR shore capital thread on ADVFN prior to they're leaving AIM and some rather low ball offers they countenanced.

[kooba] 25/5/2022 19:45

Schooled by you would be the day sunshine.Check shore capital again see who were the controlling interests that pushed the delist..concert party controlling over 60%.What is your point as it goes?? I have no idea you are jumping around in such a random way and never make a coherent point once.

[echoridge] 25/5/2022 19:39

oooops. guess you really didn't understand how corporate actions work with a controlling shareholder. don't like being schooled, do you punk?

[kooba] 25/5/2022 19:38

Echo..apology accepted.FSE.. no my point is that sometimes managements take action that they determine is in shareholder interests when private shareholders do not..private client shareholders do not like holding illiquid private companies and often can't. Yet see the shore cap price reaction when announced fell sharply then the company bought shares back once off market i believe at a big discount. It worked very well for those inside the tent not for those forced out. Big institutional shareholders like L. Odier however may chose to be part of a process as they think the company can benefit and restructure under a period off market ..then re float subsids a few years down the line. I do not know this is planned at all just running it up the flagpole..the lack of buy back , the share price decline do not say this is not a possibility. However long a shot. In the mean time I think the company putting some narrative about why a shareholder approve buy back is not being implemented when they believe it to be in the interest of the shareholders..an explanation might shut me and others up not trying to fill an information void.

[fse] 25/5/2022 19:33

or are you talking about Shore Capital



or both ?

[fse] 25/5/2022 19:25

kooba.... the shore article is from several years ago.
BATM "were" trading on AIM at realistic multiples for a company of their peer group.
Now they are not despite publishing excellent fundamentals that underpin an FMV of around 80p irrespective of how much cash they have or the value of their IP.
Are you trying to say that AIM is to blame.
I assume thats what you are getting at ?

[echoridge] 25/5/2022 19:23

oh ffs sake man, this is ridiculous. LOMBARD ODIER own 30+% and control this company. There is not going to be any 'low ball' anything. you can list any number of obvious points you want if it makes you feel clever, but there is not going to be any MBO, take-private or any other similar transaction at a 'low-ball' price. Not now, not ever. That is why I rubbished the suggestion the first time you made it, but that is so blindingly obvious, so ridiculously basic, that I was sure a genius analyst of your calibre, one that never makes a mistake, would never need to have it pointed out to him. Guess I got that wrong too. Sorry

[kooba] 25/5/2022 19:08

Cut and pasting facts yes,,facts something you have a difficult relationship with. Now you cannot say any part of previous post was indeed gibberish but factual you now go with it's got nothing to do with BATM ..ignoring the CEO and advisors interest. Couldn't make it up..but I'm sure you'll think of something.

[kooba] 25/5/2022 19:06

I'm waiting

[kooba] 25/5/2022 19:06

The London stockbroker – which advises small companies that think there is a benefit to being listed – said its Aim listing undervalued the business and comes at "considerable" expense. It also costs management time to maintain the company's public admission, outweighing the benefits of retaining it.The company added that it now "has sufficient and significant capital to meet its growth ambitions".

[echoridge] 25/5/2022 19:05

Excellent cut and paste, but otherwise meaningless as to the current situation for BVC.

[kooba] 25/5/2022 19:03

What part is gibberish pray tell.Maybe Zvi did not look at the pros and cons of delisting as a director.Maybe the company did not delist then make low ball offer when off market.Maybe the company was not trading well and have a strong balance sheet.The answer to all these points is I'm sure he did , they certainly did , and read the scores.I await examples of gibberish or apology.

[kooba] 25/5/2022 18:59

The news was accompanied by half-year results showing profits fell 46% to £1.3 million in the six months to 30 June due largely to its purchase of Stockdale.Revenue was up 12.2% to £24.3 million and the interim dividend was maintained at 5p. Revenues within its investment division, which includes its private client services, jumped 10.8% to £8.1 million, with assets under management rising above £1 billion. Howard Shore said his firm 'continued to demonstrate the strength of its diversified business model, exploiting opportunities for growth across its primary areas of operation as larger market participants retrench, and produced an excellent outcome, given the market condition'. https://citywire.com/wealth-manager/news/private-client-broker-plunges-on-plans-to-quit-aim/a1273180

[echoridge] 25/5/2022 18:51

jeez indeed; since the gloves are now off, this is gibberish: '....Shore capital was trading very healthily just didn’t want listing as had sufficient funds to take it forward and considered the market undervalued the company ..Zvi of course was on the board of Shore Capital at the time when they decided to delist..must have looked closely at the pros and cons..so not a rare event for listed companies he’s on the board of i guess!!....'