Berkeley Technology Share Discussion Threads

[hugepants] 05/2/2007 11:40

Finals next month.
I can hardly wait.

[hugepants] 29/1/2007 13:23

Heres a recent discussion from another site.

[fireball xl5] 25/1/2007 16:59

Yes I noticed adam ;-)

[adam] 18/1/2007 21:06

HP - It already is laughable IMHO.
Trueger owns 30% and the "Trust" owns 20%. If as seems likely the Trust is in the pocket of Trueger... he has effective control. I have not spoken to the company or other shareholders for some time. I have been buying stock though, but there is little to no trade. It would be nice if a business were reversed into BEK as it is fully listed. I doubt that is the plan, but you can dream...

[hugepants] 18/1/2007 12:25

If you include Gyllenhammar then theres 22% versus Treuger's 30%. Id bet that something will happen soon. Treuger has maybe got away with this foolishness because LPAL is still winding down but when thats sorted then its going to become quite laughable for BEK to continue trading as it has done the last few years

[hugepants] 18/1/2007 12:02

Can the 2 value funds call an EGM and table a winding up motion. Jointly they have more than the 10%? thats required. The raison d'etre would seem to be to keep going until there is nothing left. But that doesnt make sense since Treuger is only taking $300 grand per annum out the company. Hes losing more than anyone if this state of affairs persists with his 30% shareholding.

[adam] 18/1/2007 10:22

i doubt they have that large a stake, maybe 5% or so. It's book value seems fair unless they float. On the + side, Alacritwch are still in business, and have been going a few years. On the minus side the iSCSI didn't take off as they hoped or as quick as they hoped, so can their forays into new areas keep them going? In any event the cash burn of BEK is about triple the book value of the Alacritech stake, so it's kind of silly to woner about it. WHat matters is what is the raison d'etre of BEK? Can't see one...

[Abuse team] 18/1/2007 01:33

Post removed by ADVFN

[doniv] 17/1/2007 23:41

"January 21, 2002- Alacritech®, Inc., the innovator of accelerator solutions that enable fast and efficient servers and storage systems, today announced the completion of its Series C financing. Led by returning venture capital investor Berkeley International Capital Corporation, the $13 million round also includes Munder Capital Management, Needham Capital Partners and Quantum Technology Ventures. This round brings the total investment in Alacritech to more than $35 million, demonstrating the confidence investors have in Alacritech's continued leadership position with innovative TCP acceleration solutions for networked storage."

THERE WERE NO FURTHER FINANCING ROUNDS.

According to FBR in their Sept 26, 2000 Research Brief, BEK (as LPG) had already then invested $10m in Alacritech (and $19.5m in Ceon). They led the Series C round, so they must have invested about $12.5m ......a 35% stake or am I wrong, Adam?

[hugepants] 16/1/2007 09:20

I think this is the only private equity they hold now. Dont know where I saw the it was valued at $850,000. Cant find it now. Maybe it was a few years back

[stewjames] 15/1/2007 22:41

And how much do they still hold? Weren't there further fundraising rounds? I wouldn't be surprised if their stake has been severely diluted.

[doniv] 15/1/2007 20:45

From the Akashic records:
"At the end of period 31 March 2003, the book value of its private equities (Alacritech & Agility) was given as $5.6m; it also held Ceon. JDS Uniphase acquired Agility Communications in Sept 2005. Alacritech (founded in 1997)is still held."

How long before an Alacritech IPO is the $ question!

[hugepants] 15/1/2007 16:15

Have BEK said when they expect the assets in LPAL subsidiary to be available for use by the Group? Surely with the liabilities tending to zero it must be soon.

Also the private equite is worth $850,000 but I cant see a list of the investments. Is there one anywhere?

[adam] 14/1/2007 21:09

"Policyholder liabilities as of September 30, 2006 were $6.3 million million of which $3.2 million is scheduled to mature during the remaining three months of 2006."

[hugepants] 14/1/2007 17:50

If you base cash burn on the last set of results (Q3) then annualised it works out at about 2.5p per annum. So 6 years until cash runs out? (I think most of the fixed maturities will be redeemed this year) There was an exceptional charge in the interims for $300,000 which was to reassign a lease on their Jersey property. The lease expires in 2010. Q3 costs down about $90,000 so Im assuming they'll save about $270,000 costs per year.

[bones698] 13/1/2007 12:35

this looks interesting,had a quick look through the results and looks a good buy although not much happening and losses pa quite high for a company not doing much. still 3 years before the cash fritters away and surely something must happen before that

[orinocor] 05/1/2007 14:27

too illiquid for me
online can only buy 3750 shares

[hugepants] 05/1/2007 09:05

Heres the renumeration for the executive directors


Treuger is on $300,000 which is slightly more than Whitehead the CFO. It doesnt make much sense for him to watch the cash burn continue given he owns 40% (excluding employee trust shares) of the assets.

[fireball xl5] 03/1/2007 12:00

Agreed HP and there are still the 2 rather prime looking investments left within is it LPAL, so long ago I have forgotton all the twists.

[hugepants] 02/1/2007 16:29

At end december 2005 insurance policy liabilites were $13.5M. 9 months later this had dropped to $6.3M. At that rate all policies should be paid up by end of May 2007

[adam] 02/1/2007 11:25

agreed. current cash burn is unjustifiable in regard of the lack of business they are doing.