Clearspeed Technology Share Discussion Threads

[supernumerary] 12/1/2009 17:49

Holders might find this interesting - it's a trailer for the Creative Labs Zii processor. I came across it by accident - the intro is rubbish but it gets more relevant as it goes on. I've got no idea what the state of commercialisation is, but it's obviously serious competition.

Given the claims they make, it's just about possible that they're licensing CSD technology, although I think csd would have had to announce if there was a contract in place.



There's lots of other related stuff to browse if you care to look.

[andrew1664] 02/12/2008 08:48

Indeed, that is the key question now.

[hugepants] 02/12/2008 08:32

There is no debt. Simplest to view Clearspeed as a pile of cash (now slowly depleting) and technology that may or may not have considerable value.

[andrew1664] 01/12/2008 23:53

Nice one, I was very rough working it out! :) The technology excites me and implementing into blade farms is a cool idea, except i work with P class blades! Some of the worst! C class are far better.

Tempting to get into this but a small amount say 5000 shares at 8p target entry. Have all their debts been absorbed through there cash assets and share placings of the past? I.e. are they debt free operating? It looks that way but best to check.

Cheers HugePants

[hugepants] 01/12/2008 23:08

Andrew I get 17p net cash at end of December 08. There are 2 separate cost cuttings implemented since the interims.

They had net cash of approx £15.5M at end of June (there is nearly £2M tax receivable)

Then first restructuring to cost £0.5M but will knock over £3M off running costs. So that would bring annualised costs down to £9M per annum.

Then theres the big cost cutting in September to bring running annualised costs to "under £3M". This will also cost £0.5M (I got that direct from the FD)

So at end deceember net cash I think will be approx £10.5M or 17p per share. Then ongoing business wont need much in the way of revenues to breakeven because the margins are high and interest on cash and tax credits willl be relatively high.

Also CSD have mentioned they will be licensing out their patent portfolio shortly. Hopefully they can generate some extra revenues form that.

[andrew1664] 01/12/2008 00:03

Rough working out equates to a cash burn of 950,000 a month based on statements of cash ballances from last interim (The Group's cash position at 30 June 2008 was £13.9m (31 December 2007: £19.6m) so 6 months of 950k. I did a rough nav calculation and get 13pence per share. So they are trading under cash at the moment. Think i will wait as from my working they have 8,200,000 left to play with before profits or a placing are needed again. 8-9 months until something needs to be done or probably a little longer due to cost reductions and r&d cut backs.

They probably have a year of opportunity before they are doomed in my opinion. Decisions decisions....

[andrew1664] 29/11/2008 19:23

Currently still researching this one. Drove to their office today to take a look around. They're in a business park and looks like they are either renting one side of an office building or a particular floor. No big sign saying "Clearspeed" just a small piece of text that is easy to miss. Haven't bought in yet, if i do i think it's extreme high risk but upside could be huge. Not sure what placings have done to dilution of shares, anyone know what todays price would be if same value as original high point after IPO?

Have to admit, Farleigh's million plus buys have swayed me a little but he has backed failures before so interested to hear someones views.

Going to check out their contract rns's now. Cheers all

[hugepants] 25/11/2008 08:48

I think the majority of CSD's recent revenues has come from the $1.5M licensing deal to BAE. So I doubt the downturn in the banking system will make much difference to their revenues. CSD need to find a niche market where low power is key. Sticking them on satellites makes sense but they need other applications. Are they too high end to build into laptops?

[supernumerary] 24/11/2008 22:02

mdrans1 - I don't think the capital cost is less than the alternatives unless you consider the alternative to be a supercomputer. In practice it's probably whatever IBM's or HP's latest offering is, or an addon from Nvidia or whomever.

At the moment do nothing is the default option. It's overly complex systems, that gave their users the illusion of knowledge and control when all they actually had was software that supported their prejudices, that have caused much of the recent damage, so going back to simpler methods that rely on time-worn heuristics such as maintaining adequate capital ratios would probably be a very good thing.

I could argue about the control systems (it's management that's mostly at fault not computing power) but since banks no longer have money or access to it, they're not in a position to spend it, so the issue is irrelevant. csd's major market has just disappeared, and I see no signs either of it returning or of something else replacing it.

[mdrans1] 24/11/2008 20:55

super,

I thought Clearspeed was about the ability to retrofit into existing systems, at a lower capital cost than the alternatives, and with less running costs. The trade off is then between Clearspeed and the cost of the do nothing (David Cameron) option.

Financial markets might be contracting but you cannot say they don't need better control systems.

[supernumerary] 24/11/2008 19:41

If we put aside the celebrity culture discussions the important question is whether csd has a viable business at the moment.

They've majored on the financial market, and I doubt there's a bank in the world that's currently thinking of capital expenditure on add-on fp units. The csd trade-off was always higher capital cost against lower running costs giving net cost of ownership benefits, but that hardly stacks up in the current climate...

[masurenguy] 24/11/2008 18:26

"If his "60 odd million" is what's left over from a much larger inheritance, then maybe not."

Farleigh was fostered as a child and inherited nothing. His net worth today was entirely obtained by his own efforts when he was a Hedge Fund manager.

[mdrans1] 24/11/2008 18:19

Please don't be offended Andrew. You prefaced your question with reference to Farleigh's record. This made me think you were looking for a generic, rather than a specific technology based answer.

My question was also a "genuine proper question". If his "60 odd million" was made from investing in and developing tech based companies, that might be one answer to your question "why is this company going to be successful?" If his "60 odd million" is what's left over from a much larger inheritance, then maybe not. I suspect it is the former, but having done some research you probably know the answer to that one.

[andrew1664] 24/11/2008 15:27

Cool, thanks for the info. Have read back quite a bit and notice farleigh sold at 255 and then re-purchased a lot lower using part profits. So he is under no risk if this company fails. He's also done quite a few ipo's in the past and common sense says to sell up your shares straight away and then buy back later. It proves an excellent way to eradicate all risk from the transaction, unless he is forced not too by arc for example. The IPO there was nearly a billion market cap and he couldn't sell and only made 5 million in the end. wish i could do that!

Remains an interesting proposition. Newport networks was a bright star once but is doomed to failure so unsure of risk and reward with clear speed. Will have to give it some thought.

[hugepants] 24/11/2008 15:14

Andrew
The technology is good IMO. Its had a hell of a lot of money thrown at developing it (£45M in tax losses gives an idea). Its high performance processing with extremely low power requirements. That why BAE have licensed it to use in satellites. Clearspeed have given up trying to compete with the likes of nVidia (the Clearspeed solution required developers to purchase expensive development software) and are now focussing on project work.

[andrew1664] 24/11/2008 14:50

Take it you're invested here then?! And have no real answers to genuine proper questions. The technology excites me but speaking to people here will give me far more info because they have likely done considerable research which i've still to do. I thought that was the idea of these message boards anyway.

[mdrans1] 24/11/2008 14:47

Andrew

Maybe the answer to your question can be found in the answer to another question.

Where did he get his 60 odd million from?

[andrew1664] 24/11/2008 12:18

What is richard farleigh's success rate, from the looks of things most his companies go through IPO and then become penny shares with humongous spreads. Why is this company going to be successful? Genuine question.

I quite liked him on dragons den but his half a million share buys are over shadowed by his reported 60 odd million wealth means he is risking about 1% of his wealth on this co.

[hugepants] 05/11/2008 23:29

No sign of Farleigh buying more despite sub 10p share price. Maybe thats him finished.

[hugepants] 17/10/2008 16:04

supernumerary
Yes agreed Farleigh may have no intention of going above 30%. And if he does and makes an offer then Im pretty sure he has to get 90% before its compulsory for the remaining shareholders. So making a derisory offer wont work.

[theband] 17/10/2008 06:54

Point taken, my scenario does look a bit far fetched this morning. From now on i'm sticking to fruit juice.

[supernumerary] 16/10/2008 19:53

theband - more likely he'd just sell it. I don't get the impression that Farleigh would allow some dead batty spinster to dictate his investment strategy, do you?

Mind you, if you know her number, perhaps you could pass it on to me before it's too late?