Earthport Share Discussion Threads

[silkstag] 06/4/2016 19:33

Management's FY15 and FY16 profit and loss missing Sept-14 forecast by -£34.7m, justify negative market sentiment!

Wild losses mean EPO does NOT have cash to fund 12 months from accounts sign off so IS approaching 'broke' and MUST raise disaster funding - may have already started marketing.

The 2005 disaster rounds were at 32p (market cap £8m). The 2010 disaster rounds were at 11p (cap £10m) and 18p (cap £20m). EPO has x6 issued shares since 2010. Dire dilution that disaster rounds cannot absorb. If next disaster round values EPO at £20m due to wild losses then that is 4p x 500m shares; plus 4p x 500m new shares = £40m post-round valuation. Expect 1 for 6 share consolidation (like 1 for 7 in 2005). EPO's history of investor slaughter continues.

EPO 1997-2016 'all pain no gain'. 4p (3rd) disaster round here we come.
All imho

[homerdude] 06/4/2016 16:52

No need to swear. I cant see 4p. They are not broke, they have a plan and growing accordingly, just not as quick.

[silkstag] 06/4/2016 15:41

Reason tests: yes or no?
1) Should the share price logically go down when management finally admit the third downgrade to -£18m loss FY16, having stuck with -£0.5m until February 2016?
2) Would this late £17.5m shortfall paint management as crooked and/or grossly incompetent?
3) Given FY15 saw the same pattern (late serial huge crooked downgrades from +£0.5m profit to -£8.7m loss) does that suggest EPO is unfit to merit shareholder cash staying invested?
4) If PG resign as nomad or broker having been serially deceived by EPO management would that logically add to the seller overhang, stab confidence and bomb the share price?

Yes, yes, yes and yes so MANDATORY SELL imho before getting butchered like the previous management failures (1997-2005; 2005-10 and now 2010-16).
Readers can post their own answers to give themselves advice.

[chadders] 06/4/2016 13:34

you're not qualified to give investment advice.

[silkstag] 06/4/2016 10:19

4) If PG resign as nomad or broker having been serially deceived by EPO management would that logically add to the seller overhang, stab confidence and bomb the share price?
Yes imho.

[chadders] 06/4/2016 08:41

Good to see you've listened and dropped your MANDATORY SELL advice at the end of each emotional post.

[courant] 06/4/2016 08:37

Unless you believe that EPO's IP has zero value (this is a valid position BTW, just not one I agree with!), then EPO's merits as an investment are simply a function of share price. I've been involved with a few early-stage companies and, without exception, the business plans have gone out of the window for a whole range of reasons, it's the nature of trying to do something new. The question is not what the management forecasts are, but what investors' expectations are, as this is what's baked into the share price.

I personally looked at EPO for the first time back in 2014 after the initial jump up in price, and concluded the valuation was crazy but it was an interesting company. Fast forward, and while I'm not sure it's cheap enough to pile in, it's certainly disappointed enough investors so as to make the share price interesting at these levels. My approach with something like this is to build a position slowly because I'm unlikely to catch the bottom, and want some firepower to buy more at lower prices. How much lower will this go? I'm really not sure, but it's attractive at these levels as a higher risk play.

Frankly, all this bleating about crooked management is pretty meaningless.

[silkstag] 06/4/2016 07:35

Reason tests: yes or no answers please.
1) Should the share price logically go down on the third downgrade to -£18m loss FY16, management having stuck with -£0.5m until February 2016?
2) Would this late £17.5m shortfall paint management as crooked and/or grossly incompetent?
3) Given FY15 saw the same pattern (late serial huge crooked downgrades from +£0.5m profit to -£8.7m loss) does that suggest EPO is unfit to merit shareholder cash staying invested?

Yes, yes and yes imho. Please post your 3 answers for posterity.

[silkstag] 06/4/2016 07:16

Arf's and my relevant 'positions' are the will and ability to deploy reason.

[chadders] 05/4/2016 16:09

Interesting comparison and conclusion there Arf.

Just out of interest are you short/long or got no position in EPO.

[silkstag] 05/4/2016 11:12

After 2 downgrades from -£0.5m, the market expectation fy16 was -£6.5m loss and then -£5m blunder =-£11 5m loss. PG withdrew that on 21 March but the market has not yet priced in SS expectation of -£18m. Worth -3.5p to 12.5p.
PG resiging as nomad could bust more than that toward 7-10p. Seller overhang agrees with me.
All imho

[silkstag] 05/4/2016 11:04

Thanks to Arf for noting that chadders and reason are complete strangers.
Another non-regulatory announcement today which by definition has been assessed as commercially immaterial. We have seen a few of them. Maybe funding round marketing and pumping has already started. Price slide beckons. All imho

[arf dysg] 05/4/2016 10:19

chadders (12098) "always giving investment advice which you are not qualified to give."

Would you be referring to yourself? ...like the following:

"Non exec director buys 500,000 shares. Perfect time to buy maybe"

[bittermint] 04/4/2016 23:51

SS has been repetative for so long, the word "filtered" next to their name serves just as well as the text they wrote. I definitely still get a sense of mood in the SS camp. I, like many others, took some profit from this share long ago and am now riding it out on free money to see what might happen. Really don't know why you're even still posting SS. Talking about corrupt management in a company that deals with millions of dollars is like talking about the chilliness of ice cream. DOH!!!! get over it.

Hope EPO can recover from this slump and get their business model into a profitable state. Fingers crossed for all the investors out there.

[silkstag] 04/4/2016 18:00

Dear mug and non-mug punters,
Mugs lost money investing on serially dishonestly inflated EPO forecasts, despite being warned.
The tech was designed 21 years ago (IPO 1997 i.e. 19 years ago) and management failed. The first turnaround team came in 11 years ago and failed. The second turnaround team came in 6 years ago and failed. 3 strikes and you're out!
Yes, valid tech can take 'twice as long' and cost 'twice as much' but when it has been x5 in time and x10 in cost, savvy investors conclude the tech and/or business model is flawed. Management being apparently dishonest is an extra problem that will force failure in all scenarios.
I don't care what mugs think of me, I can only help non-mugs from being ripped-off by crooks who breach AiM rules.
All imho. DYOR and then save 16.5p or kill that as well. Up to you!

[chadders] 04/4/2016 16:51

Courant,

Agreed. I know the risks with this type of company and I get it wrong as often as I get it right.

I believe they have fantastic technology and the management decision to invest in developing a global business rather than going for short term profit is the right thing to do in my view. Time will tell.

[chadders] 04/4/2016 16:45

You're too emotional, so even if you have something insightful to say you devalue it by slagging off "mug punters" and then always giving investment advice which you are not qualified to give.

You were just as emotional when you were a raging bull on this a while ago until you took a bath and you've taken it personally since then.

I repeat, you are not qualified to give investment advice so don't and maybe people like myself will take you a bit more seriously.

[courant] 04/4/2016 15:37

New tech always takes at least twice as long and costs twice as much to materialise. This is new tech. That it's behind some business plan and still costing money is not surprising. If you're an investor in this kind of company, you need to expect that and bake it into your expectations/valuations.

[silkstag] 04/4/2016 14:07

Do you admit that SS forecast results have been serially insightful and truthful but EPO management have been serially wrong and dishonest?
If yes then you are not 'nursing' a large loss, the patient died. Face the truth.
You should be grieving and acting to protect the 16.5p you could still save from death.
What price do you think failed dirty management will secure at the round they have likely started to raise? Why would an institution pay more than 7-10p given the impending -£18m loss?
All imho