Dx (group) Share Discussion Threads

[my retirement fund] 04/2/2022 10:45

Good luck to you all still holding is all I wanted to say.

[fenners66] 04/2/2022 09:37

"Grant Thornton has provided the Company with the reasons connected with its resignation "

" DX will send a copy of the Reasons to shareholders within 14 days of their receipt. "


So DX has the reasons - and knows they have to publish within 14 days
So why not give full and frank explanation of those reasons with this RNS?

Why delay ?
Again.

Does not smell right - after all they are not going to change their minds on the reasons they have resigned.

[stemis] 04/2/2022 09:27

That's a bit of a wowzer of an RNS but at least we got a bit more colour on the issue; that's it's not a financial matter affecting performance or position, it's a disciplinary matter (although that was pretty obvious to anyone paying attention). So that rules out many of the ill informed conspiracies being peddled that it involves misstatement of the accounts, DX. are going bust, they've run off with all the money etc.

Ultimately it's financial performance which will determine value here (although the route may be a little volatile). Since new management was appointed I've been of the view the end game will be a takeover. Indeed, if I was trade buyer, I'd be making my pitch now as a solution to the current 'difficulties'...

[amaretto1] 04/2/2022 07:58

They will find one ... leeds But it will be very costly And risks been delisted ... which again will become complex!!

[my retirement fund] 04/2/2022 07:56

This has to be reaudited and signed off. I suspect Grant Thornton have discovered legacy issues going back till when this debacle originally floated and have been pressured and refused to cooperate. What are the chances of finding a new auditor who is happy to keep the plates spinning?

[amaretto1] 04/2/2022 07:51

Your very lucky imo

[qs99] 04/2/2022 07:50

fascinating: disciplinary not trading related and NEDs leading inquiry have gone, GT resigned as not getting full information.....new active fund manager has IMO obviously helped go in, slam heads together, few casualties and at least now we have a little comfort around trading and financial situation being ok from that RNS no?

DYOR

[my retirement fund] 04/2/2022 07:49

This is turning out to be a shadow that is cast infinitely long! ooh that's bad I so pleased I elected to dispose of my holding before suspension. This looks very damaging and even if the finances are not affected it could set the business back a very long way.

[paulisi] 04/2/2022 07:43

Not at all good.Long enquiry and then auditors resign. Will the accounts ever be signed off...

[p1nkfish] 04/2/2022 07:35

It reads very poorly.
Suggests something rotten towards the top not being addressed.
Is something being covered up to avoid legal ramifications?

[nigelpm] 04/2/2022 07:32

They've probably learnt a few lessons post that debacle.

[mw8156] 04/2/2022 07:27

looks as though the auditors were asked to sign off the accounts, refused to do so after reaching the conclusion that they hadn't been given the full story over the disciplinary and instead resigned. Now they must find another auditor prepared to sign off the accounts and happy enough to do so in the full knowledge of any ongoing corporate governance issue. Is there a power struggle at Director level with individual(s) refusing to resign?
Meanwhile, time ticks on....deadline for production of accounts approaching.

[onjohn] 04/2/2022 07:25

Sack the whole board

[nigelpm] 04/2/2022 07:24

Yuck. Auditor resignations are rarely where the auditor is wrong.. dx have a lot of explaining to do.

[molatovkid] 04/2/2022 07:13

This RNS is all over the place. It wasn't 2020 when the 2 non-execs directors resigned it was 2022 and it was announced on the 2nd not the 1st (this week!). If this is the level of attention to detail then DX does have issues.

The only good thing (if true) is:

'The Board reiterates that the Inquiry is a corporate governance investigation and, in addition, notes that it is connected to a disciplinary matter. It does not relate to the financial performance or the financial position of the Group, consistent with the trading update released on 2 February 2022.'

Starting to look like we need a managerial clear out here and start afresh.

[amaretto1] 04/2/2022 07:07

This latest RNS ... is NOT good at all

[marktime1231] 03/2/2022 13:28

If they don't print AA by 1 April not only will they be delisted there could be fines and strike off / legal action. It is up to the auditors now, who are unlikely to be cowed like the non-execs who were just bullied off the board. Unless there is some super news in the meantime not sure the end of suspension is something to look forward to, there might be a pending cliff fall in the price.

[mjb252] 03/2/2022 13:20

To the learned collective - any guesses (max timeframes etc) - as to when this will be trading again?

[everton448] 02/2/2022 16:42

Liberum are at 412.6 for the year

[ls24] 02/2/2022 16:07

Could be close to £450m with a very healthy margin imo

[stemis] 02/2/2022 15:40

I guess they are saying that H2 2020/21 was very strong and a tough comparative to grow against.

I don't know what Liberum's forecast is for 2021/2 are but FinnCap have £409m.

H1 2020/21 was £182.7m so 11% growth gives around ~£202.8m.

To hit £409m for the year would require H2 of £206.2m. That's only 1.7% more than H1 and only 3.4% more than H2 2020/21.

Doesn't look over ambitious but I'd rather they came back with an 'above market expectation' at the same time as a resolution of the corporate governance issue. So better that brokers maintain their estimates at this time.

[everton448] 02/2/2022 14:41

They are not offering a recommendation or a target price at the moment until the return to trading of the shares and the result of the investigation, about which they say nothing.

[everton448] 02/2/2022 14:40

They have left their estimates for the full year unchanged not withstanding that they had previously assumed 8% revenue growth against 11% as indicated by the company. The explanation for not changing the figures is because they say that the second half showed revenue growth of 25% between 2020 and 2021. I don't quite understand why that is relevant given that they had it seems previously anticipated uniform 8% growth across the 12 months and that assumption has been shown to be conservative.