We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disperse Tech | DPT | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | - |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 30/1/2005 13:43 by rambutan2 right, now im not the best at jotting down notes at agms, but this was the gist/my take.first things first. i got it confirmed that the agreements with shiseido, nu skin, nice-pak, and cosmetic essence etc can be forgotten about. nothing came of them. they are null and void. so, the two historic licences in action are the two the company mentions ie estee and bbw. the former is ticking along nicely but there is no chance of renegotiating it unless their is a change in the way estee want to use the tech, which unlikely. as we know the bbw contract was renegotiated and that kicked in last april (i think?) with the first cheque arriving last week. the new contract is done on net sales, with the first $50m at 1% (sorry missed the increments after that, but it went up to 2% to a certain point, but if it went beyond a certain point then dropped back down.) i jotted down that perhaps $500k to come from bbw this year. the reason the above two licence agreements came to fruition and others didnt was said to be that estee and bbw do their own production while others subcontract it out and so are not necessarily in charge of their own destiny to the same extent. as the dpt tech is essentially 'disruptive' folks do their best to resist it. it was also interesting to hear that time/money has to be spent policing the two licences, so they are not quite the free rev stream that they might appear. of course, the above isnt to say that one of the big cosmetic cos might not have a change of heart one day and decide to go for it. xme can also be written off, at least for the time being. the tech has not sold and a decision is being taken on its future within the next few weeks. so, now we know what we are dealing with on the historic side, and anything new can be seen as a very big bonus. blue sky. so, onto the new model. and here there seemed to be genuine high hopes of success. with talk of turnover targets of £40-£50m within 3yrs. acquisitions are hoped for, but would have to be immediately earnings enhancing. if liz french performs the extra payments (up to £4.5m) will come out of the profits. ie it will pay for itself. the virgin deal brings in much better margins than the estee/bbw licences. there are very high hopes for similar deals with the likes of asda, tesco, boots etc. while on the liz french distribution side, names touted were superdrug, lloyds chemists and co-op. progress here has been a little slower than hoped for as its taken a bit longer to get in the right personel ie the marketing lady cant start until april. everyone seemed v confident of hitting any stated turnover targets. (my notes slightly muddled for the above but im certain ive got the gist) cash management is going to be crucial for dpt and the fd was happy to point out that the extra natwest overdraft facility has not had to be used as yet. which moves me on to the drug delivery tech/tropical drugs stuff etc. theres been interest from large pharmas and generic cos and all liked what they saw. however, they need phase 1 trial data and of course dpt cant afford to do this on its own (cost of approx £2m per trial). so partners are needed to move things along. same goes for sanitizers. re mrsa, theyve got a handcream which works but dont hold high hopes as nhs system a nightmare to deal with. work done on mosquito and crop stuff was said to be promising. so, my overall take was of upbeatness. and of a new lease of life in the company. theres the potential to do some serious growing on the cosmetics side and theres all the other/blue sky stuff in for free. if things work out over the next 12mth id have thought that a big re-rating was on the cards. im happy to hold. all the above imho. |
Posted at 24/12/2004 19:40 by desert_fox Did anyone else receive the annual report today amongst the Christmas cards?The most interesting part for me is the segmental analysis on page 17. This shows that revenue earned in the US fell from £920K in 2003 to £818K in 2004. Whilst the weakening of the dollar may have accounted for some of the fall, most of the currency depreciation occurred post year-end. In other words what in the hell is happening to EL revenues. No matter how many products they bring out using DPT technology, the revenues never seem to increase. On page 1 it states that DPT technology is used (not will be used) in 50 branded products with an annual retail sales value of US$300 Million. Just for a bit of fun, I have very crudely worked out what this means in terms of revenue per unit. With turnover of £1,040K for the Guildford side of the business at say an average 2004 financial year exchange rate of 1.60, equates to a cost of 0.55% per product value. Given that Idealist says for £30 alone this equates to 16.5p per bottle. Does anyone else think that this is reasonable given the production cost savings ATD offers EL? I looking forward to see how CH will explain the continuing lack of take off for the Guildford business at the AGM. Before anybody attacks me, I have been a holder since day one and will continue to hold for CH's vision of how the EF business will develop, but now hold the view that if Guildford washes its own face, anything else is an unexpected bonus on licensing as the real action is using the technology to develop Warrington. Any views? |
Posted at 08/12/2004 20:16 by blank frank In view of the constant negativity and partiality of BigT20 it's no wonder that investors are gaining a distorted view, and are considering leaving. Please be aware that I have a good idea of the identity of BigT20, which I will keep confidential, but will say that he is a notoriously negative person. The very fact that he apparently went to the results presentation (which he has not denied) and is too selfish &/or lazy to give one word of feedback speaks volumes for his mentality. [In contrast, I posted a very lengthy write-up of the July floatation presentation. ]The unique thing about DPT (for its valuation) is that it has a lot of jam tomorrow AND plenty of jam today, whereas normally you would have to make a choice. The important here and now things are:- * Regular Estee Lauder licensing income of c. £1M. p.a. * Successful launch of Elizabeth French's VIVO range, which should mean EF profits of c. £2M. in 2006. * Launch of new BBW product range, which could double Disperse's licensing income; and new Estee Lauder product launch. * The imminent Virgin Vie product launches. These things alone should give DPT millions of pounds of profit and good multi-bagger status within two or three years, even if none of the jam tomorrow starts to roll in. It's rather ironic that DPT would apparently be viewed more positively, and perhaps have a higher valuation, if it only had the here and now stuff, and the other possibilities didn't even exist, so that people couldn't worry about them not happening (soon enough)! So please don't go! B.F. P.S. DPT also owns 10% of K B Innovations Group, which stake alone, even ignoring all DPT's own technologies, could be worth very many times DPT's current capitalisation. |
Posted at 06/12/2004 18:43 by blank frank BigT20,In my last post on this thread I was actually commenting upon your post 127, which was in response to my post 125 (which addressed DPT's income as a whole). Your response in post 127 was selective, because you're not giving DPT credit for:- * new licencee product launches by Estee Lauder and BBW; * non-licence developments, i.e. VIVO and Virgin Vie. Of course, it's your perogative to only post negatively re. DPT and to ignore all the good, just so long as readers recognise that, so they can put your posts in context. B.F. |
Posted at 01/12/2004 18:10 by blank frank "I dont think you can assume that a time lag relating to one company (BBW) and its circumstances automaticaly apply to the other licences ."BigT20, I'm not assuming that the time lag does automatically apply. The words I've used are:- "rule-of-thumb, "may", and "if". I.e. I'm not claiming any degree of certainty. I'm simply trying to point out that to develop and launch products using DPT's technology may take a few years from the signing of the licence, according to the BBW example. So just because a few years have elasped, it doesn't necessarily mean that anything has been abandoned; and that on the contrary, it may mean that something MAY be drawing close. You can see the DPT glass as half full or half empty. I prefer to see it as half full, which means that in addition to the regular Estee Lauder licensing income of c. £1M. p.a., I look at:- * Successful launch of Elizabeth French's VIVO range, which should mean EF profits of c. £2M. in 2006. * Launch of new BBW product range, which could double Disperse's licensing income; and new Estee Lauder product launch. * The imminent Virgin Vie product launches. This being the case, it's unnecessary to focus on what HAVEN'T actually come to fruition yet. If and when they do, they could provide yet further huge upside. And in the meantime, a profitable DPT can grow perfectly well without them. What other company can provide this much blue sky (ish) upside, but with the downside protected by existing profitable business? If this isn't good enough for you then maybe you're better off simply selling your shares and leaving. I personally am happy to stick with a company that could easily provide good year-on-year growth for another 20 years. B.F. P.S. BigT20 - nothing wrong with a negative viewpoint, but I can't help wondering why you are staying in if you are so unhappy. In addition, if you went to the results presentation, is it so much to ask for a few words of feedback? |
Posted at 29/11/2004 19:43 by blank frank The 19/11/04 "Investors Chronicle", which tipped DPT as a buy, also contained an interesting article entitled "Exceptional Returns" which is also relevant to DPT.The IC's research suggests that firms with exceptional losses tend to beat the market:- " ... investing in shares of the 10 companies with the biggest negative one-off items [relative to their adjusted earnings] would also have made good returns. Overall, this strategy beat the market by an average of 7.5 per cent in the following 12-month period ... Hanging on to either group of shares for longer produces even better results. [Actually, average of 10.2% total outperformance over 3 years (i.e. not 10.2% p.a.).] ... The lessons here seem clear enough. While investors focus on the earnings figure and ignore the exceptionals, out findings suggest it would be better to concentrate on the exceptionals and ignore the earnings." High exceptional costs have reduced DPT's 2004 results. These should not recur, but I don't think that fact is yet being reflected in the share price. B.F. |
Posted at 21/11/2004 18:29 by blank frank I.C.: "BEAR POINTS* Tech licensing business is low-margin" Low-margin? EDELIN - 14 Jan'03 - 15:11 - 50 of 74 "AGM Feedback ... Chairman quoted he forsees £M15 profit at £M25 turnover. ..." What the IC means, but has rather misleadingly put, is that DPT's slice (or margin) of the LICENCEE'S revenues is comparatively low. But these licencee revenues that come in to DPT are very HIGH margin for DPT - it may have to do little more than sit back and receive the money. And because the licencees can be such huge companies with sales in the hundreds of millions of dollars +, even a small cut can be quite a lot: i.e. c. £1M. p.a. income to DPT from Estee Lauder. In addition, Disperse is revising its licence agreement with Bath & Body Works: in broad terms, this will give Disperse a four-fold increase in revenues. I believe that this is the plan for other licencees too. Arguably therefore an IC bull point should be "tech licensing business is HIGH-margin" ... = 3 bull points, no bear points! That would certainly be the view that I would lean to. Of course, DPT has now broadened its types of income stream to include selling final packaged products to retailers (Elizabeth French products at present), and providing finished products to other companies to package (Virgin Vie initially). These will give DPT a higher share of the final product revenues, but lower average margins on its actual income, though still quite good. Having said all this, the IC buy tip is clearly fantastic news, as it will help to put DPT onto more radar screens - important, as it's still comparatively little known. DPT's only been on AIM for about four months, and with the flood of AIM floats this year it's easy to get widely overlooked. 'Copycat' tipping may follow in due course, as the IC is so influential ... in previous years Disperse has been tipped on Ofex (at far higher prices) by the Independent and the Telegraph, so they may now see it as legitimate to revisit it. Watch out for DPT nap tips at New Year. [Health tiddler Zi Medical (ZIM) was picked by the Mail on Sunday as a tip for 2004, and the shares immediately went through the roof - DPT looks far superior to ZIM in terms of both results and licensing.] And the IC itself follows its tips, and repeat tips them as appropriate. DPT certainly looks a good bet for this if existing progress is maintained. All of which is clearly good news for the long term, as a healthy share price will make it easier to make an additional acquisition with less dilution - e.g. a cash-'rich' pharmaceutical company, as was suggested at Disperse's 13/7/04 presentation. B.F. P.S. DPT should rise further tomorrow (Monday). IC tips usually do, because lots of people don't see it until Friday evening. And as a recent AIM new issue DPT will be newer to more people ... and, I believe, attractive to lots of people. |
Posted at 19/11/2004 19:26 by blank frank The full "Investors Chronicle" article:-TIPS SMALLER COMPANIES cosmetics DISPERSE TECHNOLOGIES (DPT) ^BUY Disperse was originally formed in 1995 by Derek Wheeler to exploit technological advances made in the cosmetics industry that enabled more efficient production and a lower concentration of additives and preservatives. Since then, the company has signed up several high-profile licensees, including Estee Lauder and US personal-care retailer Bath & Body Works. But with margins for licensing the technology low, Disperse decided to move into the retail end of the market with the acquisition of cosmetics brand owner Elizabeth French in July 2004 for a maximum consideration of £9m. That deal was combined with a move from Ofex to Aim and a £4.7m fund-raising. It's still early days for that acquisition, but the signs are already encouraging. Full-year figures for the year to 31 August 2004 include only one month's trading from Elizabeth French but, in that period, it accounted for more than two-thirds of total sales. Broker JM Finn forecasts that Disperse's sales should jump to £16m in 2005 and nearly £18m in 2006. Much of the growth will be achieved through rationalisation. Disperse's management already has experience in implementing cost savings, having cut nearly £1m out of the technology business. Once it gets to work on Elizabeth French, the improvements should be marked. At the same time, extension and development of the existing Elizabeth French range is planned. The 2005 PE ratio of 10 falls to just 6 for the following year - that's cheap for a company with such huge growth potential. Buy. BULL POINTS * Recent acquisition has generated significant potential for growth. * Costs have been cut. BEAR POINTS * Tech licensing business is low-margin. DISPERSE TECHNOLOGIES Aim ORD PRICE:19p MARKET VALUE:£11M TOUCH:17-20.5 12-MONTH HIGH:20P LOW:16P DIVIDEND YIELD:nil PE RATIO:10* NET ASSET VALUE:12P NET DEBT:6% YEAR TO TURNOVER PRE-TAX EARNINGS PER DIVIDEND PER 31 AUGUST (£M) PROFIT(£M) SHARE (P) SHARE (P) 2004 2.81 -0.57 -2.62 nil 2005* 15.99 0.74 1.95 nil % change +469 Market makers:4 Normal market size:10,000 *JM Finn's estimates Last IC view: 13 Feb 2004, page 69 |
Posted at 11/11/2004 14:33 by blank frank Rambutan2,You say that: "im sure that once you get into worldwide mkts/us mkts the el model will produce much higher margin." Do you mean margin, or revenue? A company with worldwide sales may well give DPT more revenue, but from a lower margin on the sales. It stands to reason that DPT are getting a bigger slice of the revenues where they are doing more of the work by providing the finished products; this was certainly my understanding from the 13/7 DPT event. And with a Richard Branson company, who's to say that UK won't eventually become Worldwide?! And with DPT along for the ride ... |
Posted at 07/11/2004 16:43 by blank frank Tomorrow we enter the 'fifth dimension', as Disperse unveils its fifth set of final results since its 3/00 Ofex float. So, will it be a 'bunch of fives', or will we be 'high fiving' in delight? Just for fun, here are a few 'speculations' for Monday by myself. [DPT's last four LSE announcements have been out of market hours, so the results may well be announced before market opening].The fact that DPT's share price has edged up to 19.25p ahead of the results is clearly a good sign. In fact, looking at my Disperse Ofex chart, a similar thing has happened before each of the last three sets of finals, and in each case was the start of a swift (i.e. within about a week) jump of about 50% or more. Of course, on the LSE liquidity is greater than on Ofex, so it would take more buying to trigger such a rise; but equally, more people are willing to buy on the LSE than on Ofex, and also tend to buy in larger amounts. The recent Hoodless Brennan research note implied a second half DPT profit of c. £100K. (full year loss £0.4M.), which I believe would be great news. The fact that the note was published after the year end, with no downgrade, is encouraging. In addition, the interim turnover to 29/2/04 was better than the previous half year turnover to 31/8/03 ((£515K. v. £471K.), despite the weakened US$ in the more recent period; could this mean that new licensing income from product launches was starting to feed in towards the end of the last interim period, with a full second half contribution to follow? There's also the possibility of a bonus announcement with the results, or shortly afterwards. E.g. news on the second oral drug delivery test (results were expected in the summer), and (if successful) news on selling/licensing of that technology? The last new licence agreement was way back in March 2003, so we are certainly due another one, and previous such announcements helped Disperse to achieve multi bagger status in the past. Might we also see some more director share buying, but in the market this time, e.g. by the new Finance Director?! B.F. |
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
