Intechnology Share Discussion Threads

[matthewa] 30/8/2001 15:22

Only one MM now left on the bid @ key suport - £2.10 Looks a jiucy shiort

[goodfella] 30/8/2001 00:03

Analyst on Bloomberg stating business plan calls for 3000 customer base and at last count thay had 30, consequently he felt them massively overvalued.

[dodddy] 29/8/2001 13:52

shorted more today at 2.11

[matthewa] 29/8/2001 11:16

Shorted today @ 210p Seems like every man and his dog is short of this. IG charging special interest which normally iss a good sign. Last time this happended to me was CPW @ 140p.

[matthewa] 29/8/2001 11:14

Shorted today @ 210p Seems like every man and his dog is short of this. IG charging special interest which normally iss a good sign. Last time this happended to me was CPW @ 140p.

[hobsonr] 17/8/2001 11:16

the agm statement doesn't fully show what an execellant product vbak is. it has allowed companies to throw away the old unreliable tape backups systems and have an on-line off-site backup/security system. i am suprised that companies have not taken up this system sooner.

[charlie] 01/8/2001 00:05

As noted in Goodfella's original posting, this company would need to increase sales by at least 50% this year to justify its price (240p when GF posted, much the same at 215p now).

I note that an AGM statement has just been issued today. Buried in the middle of a lot of waffle from the chairman Cecil Parkinson (??what does he know about information technology?) is the following critical sentence:

"Group turnover in the first quarter of this financial year was up 8% on the
same period last year, with revenue in the established SSS Division up nearly
6%, a robust performance given current market conditions."

So no increase of 50%. Instead, less than 10%.

It seems clear the company has no chance of justifying its present share price. And furthermore the directors seem to agree, since one of them sold 6% of the company last week at a price of 75 PENCE (see RNS 22 March 2001).

STRONG SELL.

[charlie] 01/8/2001 00:03

As noted in Goodfella's original posting, this company would need to increase sales by at leasst 50% this year to justify its price (240p when GF posted, much the same at 215p now).

I note that an AGM statement has just been issued today. Buried in the middle of a lot of waffle from the chairman Cecil Parkinson (??what does he know about information technology?) is the following critical sentence:

"Group turnover in the first quarter of this financial year was up 8% on the
same period last year, with revenue in the established SSS Division up nearly
6%, a robust performance given current market conditions."

So no increase of 50%. Instead, less than 10%.

It seems clear the company has no chance of justifying its present share price. And furthermore the directors seem to agree, since one of them sold 6% of the company last week at a price of 75 PENCE (see RNS 22 March 2001).

Strong sell.

[cat man] 18/7/2001 11:32

Got stopped out today, for a welcome 35% in less than a month.

:-)

CM

[blackday] 18/7/2001 11:10

but it dont work like that charlie. if he had put such a large selling order on the market on retirement that would have put unneccessary pressue on alhigh volitile stock. so hes done the decent thing and sold to a director with a lock in. took a golden handshake id imagine to make up 4 loss on shares and bobs your uncle. so its notthat five percent is worth 75p at all. it just ensures stability in the company and was meant to reduce the treat of the vultures. ok mate.

[charlie] 18/7/2001 11:03

If 5% of the company is worth 75p per share what is the price of 100% of the company to a bidder?

[blackday] 18/7/2001 10:41

yer lock in period to mr wood not a problem really. golden handshake id say dont dump your shares and you can have a nice pension. sensible for a low market cap stock as if those shares could go on market the price would go to 60p. however they cannot go on the market and so your point is irelevant charlie.

[charlie] 18/7/2001 10:36

Well if it was to immediate family the beneficial interest would remain the same, so it wouldn't need to be disclosed at all.

However the statement doesn't say anything about family does it. Surely they would have said that if they could say it.

[blackday] 18/7/2001 10:21

isnt the director selling to family.

[charlie] 18/7/2001 10:11

Blackday has posted a thread about bid rumours.

Anyone buying this on bid rumours should READ THE ACCOUNTS and consider what price a bidder would be prepared to pay.

Why should a bidder pay more than the 75 PENCE st which s retiring director is seling 6m shares?

[dondee] 16/7/2001 11:41

Are those a lot of big SELLS around 10-11am today?

[charlie] 16/7/2001 10:32

Down 20% last 2 days. Remember the directors appear to think this is worth 75p, that's less than half the current price. See above.

[dodddy] 13/7/2001 17:21

Rumours are that Evil Kneivel has gone heavily short after finding that shares were changing hands at 75p


Service: Regulatory News Service
RNS Number:8762A
InTechnology PLC
22 March 2001

22 March 2001



BOARD CHANGE


InTechnology announces that Philip Taysom has resigned as a Director of the
Company, due to ill health, with immediate effect. In addition, Mr Taysom has
entered into an agreement with Mr Jon Wood to sell 9,329,563 shares in the
Company at a price of 75 pence per share, to Mr Wood following the expiry of
Mr Taysom's lock-in undertaking on 26 July 2001, in accordance with the AIM
Rules. Following the completion of this transaction, Mr Taysom will not have
any interest in the shares of InTechnology. Following completion of his
purchase of the 9,329,563 shares, Mr Wood has agreed to enter into a lock-in
over those shares for a twelve month period.

For further information please contact:

Ann-marie Wilkinson, Beattie Financial 07730 415 019
Susan Frost, Beattie Financial 020 7398 3300 / 07790 050 101

END

BOAJBMRTMMJTBFB

[charlie] 11/7/2001 11:10

The more I think about it the more artificial the quotation seems. If the quotation means anything one would have thought the brokers could have found an institution to take the 6m shares at a modest discount. With such a small free float the institutions should be clamouring forshares. But instead all 6m are sold to a private individual at 75p. Very odd.

[charlie] 11/7/2001 10:54

From a marketing standpoint the selling point of the new VBAK service according to the results statement is that back-up solutions have not changed for 25 years and apparently this is an improvement. I know nothing about this (can any techies help?) but on a commonsense view it seems a deferrable purchase since any business can presumably carry on with whatever back-up solutions have been in use for the past 25 years.

[dan_bach] 08/7/2001 22:00

Been looking at this one with a view to shorting after the above comments, I cannot understand the last results and just how they paid £126m for a company with £3m of assets and turnover of £295k.

On the other hand, results were posted on 19th June so it is unlikely that any news will be forthcoming from the company for a while.

Cash is £26m as at March 31st but I can't verify a NAV figure from the results - my book reading skills are not the good.

Any further views out there ?

[moonblue] 07/7/2001 15:06

thanks cat man ....

[cat man] 07/7/2001 15:01

MB

Also, check out dodddy's thread from a few months ago. An interesting read and I have to concur, it's one of the most bizarre balance sheets I've ever seen.



To declare my interest, I've been short for 2 weeks.

:-)

CM