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 | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enteq Technologies Plc | LSE:NTQ | London | Ordinary Share | GB00B41Q8Q68 | ORD 1P |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 3.30 | 14,881 | 08:00:13 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.10 | 3.50 | 3.30 | 3.20 | 3.30 | |
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oil & Gas Field Machy, Equip | USD 49k | USD -2.12M | USD -0.0203 | -1.63 | 3.44M |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08:03:32 | O | 14,881 | 3.36 | GBX |
| Date | Time | Source | Headline |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/12/2024 | 16:13 | UK RNS | Enteq Technologies PLC Replacement - Half-year Report |
| 04/12/2024 | 12:39 | UK RNS | Enteq Technologies PLC Replacement - Half-year Report |
| 04/12/2024 | 12:15 | ALNC |  Enteq "confident" in SABER tool as six-month loss narrows |
| 04/12/2024 | 07:00 | UK RNS | Enteq Technologies PLC Half-year Report |
| 30/10/2024 | 17:38 | UK RNS | Enteq Technologies PLC Holding(s) in Company |
| 18/10/2024 | 13:24 | UK RNS | Enteq Technologies PLC Holding(s) in Company |
| 16/10/2024 | 06:00 | UK RNS | Enteq Technologies PLC Holding(s) in Company |
| 14/10/2024 | 16:42 | UK RNS | Enteq Technologies PLC Result of General Meeting, Director Dealings & TVR |
| 30/9/2024 | 16:40 | UK RNS | Enteq Technologies PLC Result of Retail Offer |
| 26/9/2024 | 14:10 | UK RNS | Enteq Technologies PLC Issue of Shares and Director/PDMR Shareholding |
Enteq Technologies (NTQ) Share Charts1 Year Enteq Technologies Chart |
|
1 Month Enteq Technologies Chart |
Intraday Enteq Technologies Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/12/2024 | 09:25 | Enteq Upstream plc | 2,304 |
| 15/9/2015 | 06:14 | *** Enteq Upstream *** | 2 |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08:03:34 | 3.36 | 14,881 | 500.00 | O |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 11/12/2024 08:20 by Enteq Technologies Daily Update Enteq Technologies Plc is listed in the Oil & Gas Field Machy, Equip sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker NTQ. The last closing price for Enteq Technologies was 3.30p.Enteq Technologies currently has 104,137,115 shares in issue. The market capitalisation of Enteq Technologies is £3,436,525. Enteq Technologies has a price to earnings ratio (PE ratio) of -1.63. This morning NTQ shares opened at 3.30p |
Posted at 04/12/2024 09:00 by optimist4now Yet more "jam tomorrow" messaging from NTQ.$m Net cash outflow in 6 months to 30 Sept: (1.9) Cash raise (after expenses) post 30 Sept: 1.8 Assuming the same rate of investment in both developing the tool and increasing the tool fleet, the $1.1m Sept cash balance will not last long without significant trading cash inflow before 31 March next year. |
Posted at 07/11/2024 23:19 by p1nkfish Overdriliing may occur in US under Trump. Can be bad for oil price but few can afford not to join in.What happens when you have to dance with everyone else but the price of your output falls? You have to become more efficient at dancing. Might be positive for NTQ? |
Posted at 05/11/2024 16:40 by p1nkfish He had 5yrs at Weatherford and about 7.5 yrs at Haliburton prior to that.If he hasn't already, it would be a vote of confidence if he bought a few sub tge placing price. |
Posted at 30/10/2024 08:45 by optimist4now Plus ça change.All we get is how great the market is going to be for SABER and that it is a "natural fit" for the future! I echo ValueHurts comment - at least update us as to when the $100k relating to the Australia testing, which started in May (?), has been earned. The only thing that NTQ has actually achieved this year is the halving of the share price. |
Posted at 26/9/2024 16:07 by p1nkfish 1gw, NTQ is so miniscule and so dependent on one product line that has zero revenue I doubt funding outside of the recent offer or future debt/partnerships has any impact whatsoever. AIM in general, yes.This goes bust or out in a trade sale at a good multiple of 5p imho and AIM cost of equity is of little influence to NTQ. Just mho and I'm often wrong. |
Posted at 25/9/2024 08:41 by pimbake Not really surprised by the raise in general, but more by seemingly rock-bottom price of 5p. Not sure who determined that price but what a huge discount to the value the board itself believes Enteq is actually worth. I recall the mentioning of 'multiples of the market cap' during the InvestorMeet presentation just a month ago (which was also based on a recent valuation of the IP I believe) when Enteq was trading at c. 8p, so feels very strange to raise funds at 5p a couple of weeks later. I also noticed nothing on the basis of the 5p in the announcements of today, might be good to ask some serious questions on that.From that perspective, this offer price is a pure gift to the existing shareholder base and directors who will participate. At least good that they also let retail investors participate as well, but still feels strange. I further also recall that it was mentioned during the InvestorMeet presentation a month ago that there was sufficient cash up to September 2025 based on recent cash flow projections right? Fast forward one month and all of the sudden there is no sufficient cash up to July 2025 without this equity raise, and thereafter more funding is needed? Seems like they have almost no control or insight in the process towards cash flow generation. Might be good to ask some questions on that during the AGM as well. Hard hit today for all investors who will or cannot participate in this offering though. |
Posted at 17/9/2024 12:43 by sturmey My shares have been in the "bottom drawer" since November 2013 when I bought a fair chunk at over 50p. The IPO price was 100p and well-subscribed by serious institutional investors. At 50p, I thought I was getting a bargain. What a deluded fool I was!Aggressive "buying on weakness" over the years has left me with a substantial holding at an average price of 22p. We clearly need good news on SABER. Additionally, it would help if some of the gunslinging punters got on board and set a rocket under the share price |
Posted at 17/9/2024 08:43 by rivaldo Thanks for the news re the "very successful" operations.Buying yesterday and today has brought about a reasonable share price rise. Any further news re commercialisation will hopefully result in a big squeeze on available stock: "Commercial operations are scheduled to commence in the coming months, in line with the customer’s operational programme" |
Posted at 13/9/2024 09:02 by optimist4now With all these successful tests and "hundreds of hours of downhole time", isn't it a little strange that NTQ are waiting for just this one Australian customer to start paying for it "in the coming months".I've just re-watched the latest presentation and Law showed a picture of four tools being built in their Houston location. He also stated that a number of potential customers have visited and are "wowed" by how simple the tool is. Given that it has been 5 years and, according to the March 2024 accounts, $8.3m has been spent on SABER, how much more time/cash/data/run-t |
Posted at 23/10/2023 13:59 by somerset lad Novision, we don't know the targets, which is not unusual, but not ideal. Thinking about incentives, Martin Perry has a 6.7% stake but is not a beneficiary of the awards. Whilst Martin is not chair of the remuneration committee, his presence on the board means (I think) that existing shareholders are protected when incentive schemes are put in place. Martin would presumably want to minimise dilution whilst strongly incentivising the core management team to get NTQ to major growth (see previous discussion about how much NTQ could be worth). Andrew has a fairly large shareholding (2.7%) so has an incentive also to think about the downside of taking too much risk. I'd like to see Mark buying in the market as well as receiving options that incentivise focus on the upside, but of course we don't know how much free cash he has.Returning to 1gw's posts from earlier, I agree that we need to see what Cavendish say. The previous finnCap forecasts (from the July 21 initiation) were not ideal because (i) they did not match up with NTQ's calculation for the impairment analysis - if we cut through the theory and recognise that the house broker is a vector for the company's own forecasts then what the broker says and what the company says should match (subject to any changes over time); and (ii) they made no sense because they used scenarios but applied a "risk factor" to the revenue line in each scenario(if they want to do scenario analysis they should run the scenarios on their face and then weight the probabilities of each to get a blended view). I don't think Cavendish will publish a GM forecast though, because Andrew has always been very coy about that (although eventually the numbers will be clear to all in the accounts). In terms of competitive response, I asked on the call whether SABER's offering a 30% saving meant that it would be priced at $3.5k per day vs market rates of $5k per day and was told that it would be priced in line with market at $5k. This surprised me a bit as I'd expect a novel technology being launched into a conservative industry to have to offer a headline discount to drive uptake / utilisation. But their answer was given with the benefit of one signed contract and lots of discussions with potential customers. Thinking about the incentives of the incumbents, there's no reason for them to reduce their standard prices in response to a competitor who is heavily capacity constrained (I modelled 5 units from 1.4.24 and looking again at the AR23 I think NTQ are modelling 10) because the profit sacrifice would be huge. Since prices are set individually, the competitors could in theory bid lower when they know they are up against SABER but the danger is that offering individual discounts pulls down rates across the market as a whole (Andrew has said previously that news travels fast in the US O&G market). Overall, the incentive for the incumbents is to continue to pull in the profits from their existing business (a bit like the Innovator's Dilemma discussion). If SABER gets traction, the competitors could try to kill NTQ by acquisition but antitrust is now very attentive to killer acquisitions (mainly in tech, but generally). Like 1gw, I do, though, see potential (in a success scenario) for NTQ to supply SABER to larger industry players, enabling the rivals to keep control of their customers and NTQ to improve distribution without much investment and NTQ seemed open to something along these lines when they were answering the IMC question about discussions with competitors. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
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
