Cellcast Share Discussion Threads

[rascalhardin] 20/1/2009 21:21

LS,

MN is just one person. He was just one person in the other companies that were suspended, delisted or went bust. I regret to say that the fact that MN is on the board, albeit as a non executive Director says something about the other Directors also.

[lord santafe] 20/1/2009 21:07

Mike Neville is just one person, and he will not have the power to do this to Cellcast by just himself. Since other investors such as Neil Craven will put him in his place.

[rascalhardin] 20/1/2009 18:33

Unfortunately, whether the company is doing ok or not does not determine the outcome of investments in companies for which MN works.

A common factor is that shareholders are treated as a resource to be exploited. WTV is doing OK, their turnover is growing and they have a number of high profile clients.

The existence of a Concert Party and a Loan Note was the start of the downfall of WTV. Your company also has a Concert Party and a Loan Note. As with WTV, your shares will be diluted in favour of the Concert Party. Your company will be suspended or delisted and your shares will be worthless.

When Mike Neville was Chairman of WTV he sold off a subsidiary called Kamera AG for thousands of pounds to a group of anonymous "high profile investors". Three years later, these high profile investors sold the company for millions. That increase in value was not achieved by organic growth.

The strong belief of WTV investors is that Kamera was undervalued at the time of the disposal. In view of what has happened at MNT under Mike Neville, WTV investors are deeply suspicious of the identity of the anonymous beneficiaries of the Kamera disposal.

Basically, if your company does well, this will not assist the share price. The experience we have gained from the other companies for which MN has worked is that he always does well financially from his Directorships. Investors always lose out.

[the analyst] 20/1/2009 18:12

Cellcast have a 37.5% holding in Cellcast Asia, which was worth $5.1m. At today's exchange rate, that holding is worth £3.6m (4.8p per share), but if we are looking at a down round of funding, I wonder what it will be worth? Maybe they have to take a 50% dilution in this market, which would mean that our holding would be worth only £1.8m...

Still, £1.8m is worth 2.4p per share

My hopes would be that they can flog it and get the cash in the bank. At the same time, I'd like to see them flog the mobile technology, the uk business, the adult websites, patents, the sumo brand, website and EPG slot. Then, distribute the money to shareholders...

I don't even care if the Directors flog the uk business to themselves on the cheap if it means they can distribute 5p per share to us long-suffering shareholders

[the analyst] 20/1/2009 18:00

But at least the article suggest business might be doing OK (if it applies to all their companies)

"So far, we have not seen an impact on the business because of the slowdown"

[21st century media company] 20/1/2009 17:46

yes, i know the offer has dropped, this suggest a seller, an overhang.

if cltv have management that can't manage then it curtains

why don't you buy some at the 'cheap' level of 0.6?

[ldmachin] 20/1/2009 17:41

21st Century Media Company,

It's the offer price that has dropped.

The only company Neil Craven has sold heavily in is LNG.

CLTV have got two possible obsticales to profitability. The ofcome decision and management that can't manage.

The signs are that this business isn't doing too bad.

With a market cap of 300-400k, it's one to watch with interest.

[rascalhardin] 20/1/2009 16:10

Probably people getting out while they can before suspension or delisting from AIM. This has happened to other AIM companies that have been foolish enough to employ Mike Neville as a Director. Look at the MNT, WTV, FLX bulletin boards and you will see what MN has done for those companies.

MN is currently presiding over a massive list of breaches of stock exchange regulations and investors at MNT have referred their case to the Serious Fraud Office.

[21st century media company] 20/1/2009 15:57

Down again

Is it Craven selling?

LDM

Surely you've got your buy order in at 0.6p?

Why not?

Perhaps it's because you don't believe your own tripe?

[the analyst] 19/1/2009 22:49

Cheers LDM,

He must have bought into the old, now binned, BGT businesses (the 'bubble', iDVDs etc) - they never really had any chance of competing with the big boys on those ones imo

The new social network maker business is different, already beating all forecasts as far as I can gather. If they can fund it to break-even, it will stand a great chance of becoming massive...

[ldmachin] 19/1/2009 22:03

the analyst,

Looking at BGT's shareprice graph...



... i can't see how he made money on BGT? Especially with all the share dillusion that has gone on from the multitude of fund raising over the years... i think he was a holder in 2006/2007? But not sure... I definately remember him buying BGT shares when they were in the 20p-30p range.

[stefanos2] 19/1/2009 20:47

rascalhardin

Shame you appeared here so late. The price is now 0.5p and nobody could sell now even if they wanted to. You appearing now and telling everyone how mad they are is simply rubbing salt into the wounds.

If only you have turned up a year ago...

[the analyst] 19/1/2009 19:54

Did he actually lose money on BGT, LDM? - i.e. did he sell the shares?

I think if BGT can manage one more fund-raising, to help them get to break-even, then they could represent a fantastic asc-like opportunity...

[ldmachin] 19/1/2009 19:42

21st Century Media Company,

Yes, thank you pal. Full of love christmas was, as it should be...

... and yours?

I think Neil Craven would do his nut if this went to 0.1p. Poor guy has suffered enough. I think this has got a chance of getting him back some of the cash he has lost on BGT, LNG, MEA, et al...

[stefanos2] 19/1/2009 19:19

One of those duties for that receptionist is 'Updating company Cims Database'

What does CIM stand for?

And why is there a data base for it?

[21st century media company] 19/1/2009 19:17

LDM

A receptionist would be needed to deal with possible administrators.

Isn't it always down to the management?

0.57p

Could be 0.1p soon?

Had a good holiday did we?

[ldmachin] 19/1/2009 18:31

Well, reading between the lines, Cellcast can't be doing too bad... they are still solvent and trading, so H2 of 2008 couldn't have faired too badly.

Also, this job was advertisted a couple of days ago:

Vacancy: Receptionist
Employer: Cellcast Television
Location: London [view map]
Duration: Minimum 12 month position, starts February



Looks like they think there will be a business for the next year at least.

Time will tell, i think they have got a good product (needs work in places though) that can do well in recessionary times.

If the ofcom decision goes well... then it will only be inept management that will stop this company being profitable.

[rascalhardin] 19/1/2009 17:29

zoo123,

You are welcome. If we stick together, we stand a good chance of stopping the man from destroying shareholder value at any more companies.

[zoo123] 19/1/2009 17:20

Hi,

Mike Neville "groupies" - I just wanted to thank you for drawing our attention to the mans previous.



Kind regards,


MN -unrelated!

[rascalhardin] 19/1/2009 17:18

On looking at the history of this company, I see that, in common with WTV, you have a Concert Party, and there is mention of a loan note. This should be cause for concern.

WTV Directors repeatedly diluted shares in favour of the Concert Party, so that they now own the vast majority of WTV shares. The justification for this was when the loan note between the Concert Party and WTV expired, new funding was secured from the Concert Party at the expense of massive amounts of new shares being issued. Shortly after this, WTV delisted from AIM leaving investors unable to sell their shares.

[the analyst] 19/1/2009 16:42

Not sure, zangdook. Perhaps people are just awaiting the result of the ofcom decision and the next results before judging?

Like I said before, I think the Directors here desperately need to PROVE their trustworthiness to investors, rather than relying on people simply believing in they are doing the right thing. Transparency of the accounts is paramount, especially with regard to the drop in margins and the mystery off-shore companies involved with CLTV

I really hope there won't be a need for a full investigation into this company too...