Intercede Share Discussion Threads

[yump] 04/10/2012 07:58

I think I'll wait until second half and then if nothing markedly different I'll be out.

I don't like the contradiction between the comment that current MyID customers are continuing to expand their installations and the flat turnover. Those just don't reconcile, unless it is actually the case that turnover is dependent partly on existing customers expanding because revenue is lost somewhere else, which cancels out the expansion.

I also don't like the 'challenging market' comment. I thought this business had at least a moderate edge to it, which would allow it to grow modestly at least, despite the economy, government spending cuts etc.

This is supposed to be security after all - hasn't that been a long term growth market ? If so, IGP should at least be growing at the market rate, unless it doesn't have the position and credibility that its supposed to have.

A lot of businesses which sell non-critical products are managing to expand, so how come a business with a world leading product is not ?

But, nothing nasty has appeared, so I'm staying put for the time being.
Also, one large contract announcement and the share price will take off (they've got several bids in and the second half is the critical time).

[fft] 04/10/2012 07:40

Trading update out. on a like for like basis, Q1 2012 sales will be equal or just less than Q1 2011.

Lots of jam in Q2 2012 (or later) promised, but i do seem to recall having heard this before.

Despite the potential, I dont see a big movement in share price until some of the jam becomes reality.

[rambutan2] 03/10/2012 02:27

A trading update is due out shortly.

And i see that Windows 8 is launched on the 24th of this month.

[rambutan2] 03/10/2012 02:20

From IGP's 2012 results...

2) ARM Holdings, together with Intercede's existing partners, Gemalto and Giesecke & Devrient, announced their intention to form a new company to develop a Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) for smart connected devices. This will allow Global Platform standards to be used to inject secure identities into the next generation of smartphones.

- In most cases there will be a need for the TPM or TEE to be bound to the trusted electronic identity of the user. Intercede intends to ensure MyID can be used to manage digital identities within the TPM or TEE environment.

and here's a bit more detail...





The jv is currently awaiting for the EU Competition Comm to give it the go ahead, or not.

[boadicea] 02/10/2012 10:40

R-L / davidosh - Points fully taken and understood.

As a more general point, see my preceding post in reply to Maddox.

[davidosh] 02/10/2012 10:21

Just to reinforce those comments. Shareholders everywhere should be encoraged to immediately notify ShareSoc with a detailed account of the issue facing shareholders and ideally a group of shareholders ready to mount a publicity campaign or prepared to set up an action group. ShareSoc can help and guide in every step but cannot become the shareholder and will not automatically know the detailed history of every compAny

[roger-lawson] 02/10/2012 09:53

Yes boadicea there are lots of transgressions and various kinds of bad behaviour in AIM companies (and larger ones) and reports come in to me on almost a daily basis. Some we do pursue where it looks like we can have some impact and the complaint is clear. As regards SHG and TMW, haven't seen complaints about them before, but it looks like TMW is almost a dead issue now. It is important to contact us immediately a problem looms, not after the fact. We can often give useful advice to shareholders if we are contacted immediately. But we also need a clear explanation of the problem, with some background on the company. Having to wade through hundreds of bulletin board posts (which shareholders in the company might have read, but we have not), to figure out what has been happening is a very time consuming task.
Roger Lawson, ShareSoc

[maddox] 02/10/2012 09:27

Basically, we need to get proper shareholder representatives on the boards of these firms and particularly the remuneration committee to stamp out these Spanish practices. Unfortunately, we need to re-enfranchise private investors to get there - which is not an easy proposition.

[yump] 02/10/2012 09:01

boadicea

I'd second that. I get the impression that once a bod has really turned dodgy, particularly with not reporting what is really happening in a company (there's been a lot of them), there's not a lot ShareSoc or anyone else can do. So we're left with the bod's that step a bit out of line and can be nudged back in the right direction and then given the benefit of the doubt, until it turns out otherwise.

At least instances like this are visible. Boards buying businesses that belong to their mates, moving assets 'invisibly' and messing with the treatment of profits and balance sheet items are unfortunately hidden. Usually until it is too late.

So I hope visible 'errors of judgement' don't lead to conspiracy theories that are out of proportion.

[boadicea] 02/10/2012 08:37

Notwithstanding the success of Roger Lawson and ShareSoc in pressurising the board to moderate the terms of the incentive plan - for which congratulations - IGP's transgressions are one of very many on AIM and not by far the worst.
It has been my unhappy experience to encounter the imaginary stock holdings ofAI., the blatant misrepresentations of progress at SHG (presentation, Autumn 2011) and the latest systematic and carefully planned ambush of private shareholders at TMW, where Mayfair (Joe Lewis) appear to have been handsomely abetted by Hendersons.
It is obviously not possible for Sharesoc to take on policing of the whole market but a scan through and comment on the latter (current final offer closing date 26th Oct) would not come amiss imho.
(Apols for getting slightly o/t.)

[maddox] 29/9/2012 08:36

Well done to Roger and ShareSoc for seeking improvements in IGP's corporate governance. Just the fact that the Board is under rigorous external scrutiny will I'm sure will go a long way to ensure shareholders interests are better protected.

Cheers, Maddox

[strollingmolby] 26/9/2012 23:18

Then it would be worthwhile registering - it is free after all, and all ShareSoc actions are taken on behalf of and for the benefit of individual shareholders like you or me.

You've nothing to lose by signing-up and the larger the userbase becomes the greater the lobbying power ShareSoc will have.

SM

[smartmoney100] 26/9/2012 23:03

Roger, links not a lot of use to non-members.

[roger-lawson] 26/9/2012 20:30

Intercede Group AGM - substantial votes against all the non-executives.

There were about 10 shareholders turned up today (26/9/2012) for the Intercede AGM in Lutterworth. As readers may know, ShareSoc ran a campaign against the terms of an LTIP introduced in 2011 and on other aspects of this company (see www.sharesoc.org/campaigns2.html for details). The LTIP was revised recently and we welcomed the change in a press release. But there are still many concerns about the corporate governance in this company as you will see from the following report.

The Executive Chairman, Richard Parris, opened the meeting by declaring that all resolutions would be taken on a poll (as opposed to the usual "show of hands" vote). This meant that the results of shareholder voting would not be known until much later. On behalf of ShareSoc I objected to this procedure (as I did at another AGM recently) because it stops the members present from knowing how other shareholders feel. It undermines the function of an AGM which is to have open debate, and a poll alone does of course avoid any possible embarrassment for the directors which might well have been why Mr Parris chose to do it this way (as you can see later).

He then invited questions. There is a full, 3-page, report on the AGM covering the detail questions and answers on the ShareSoc Members Network (see ).

Brief notes are:

I pointed out that the whole affair concerning the LTIP could surely have been avoided if the company had an independent Chairman. An experienced public company Chairman would surely be preferable. In addition I pointed out that although there are no legal obligations in AIM companies to adhere to the UK Corporate Governance Code, the Quoted Companies Alliance (QCA) do lay down some guidelines for AIM companies and one of them says "the roles of the Chairman and Chief Executive should not be exercised by the same individual". Mr Parris obviously contradicts that guidance.

I asked when the company was going to appoint such a Chairman, and Mr Parris made it clear that they did not intend to do so. He also said that the company adhered to its legal obligations and that the "independent non-executives" and major shareholders were happy with the arrangement.

But I then pointed out that none of the non-executive directors were actually "independent" according to normal corporate governance rules; i.e. there are no independent non-executive directors at this company. Mr Hoggarth and Mr Sikorski have been there more than ten years (which means they would not be considered independent under the UK Corporate Governance Code), and Mr Tredoux represents the Azalia Trust and also has a personal interest in that and another large holder. One shareholder suggested they did not want to spend money on a separate Chairman, but I pointed out it would be very low cost.
There was some interesting information disclosed in response to other questions on "mobile" developments, on the Microsoft partnership and on sales activities. There was also some debate about the company's "MyID" trademark and the amount spent protecting it.

The Chairman was then about to conduct the poll, but another shareholder questioned the share buy-back resolution, and whether it was needed. The Financial Director said they had no current intention to do any buy-backs but were advised it was worth having it available. I said to the shareholder who raised the question that he should vote against this resolution, as I always do at other companies.

At that point Mr Hoggarth butted in and said it was wrong for me to advise people how to vote in an AGM. He seemed to be suggesting it was technically wrong or even illegal. In essence I said he had no legal grounds to suggest so, and that I also advised shareholders to vote against the directors. See the full report for further comments on this.

I then said to Mr Hoggarth, and to Mr Parris, that I thought this was one of the worst companies I had come across as regards corporate governance. Comment: anyone who has invested for long in AIM companies knows that one is taking a big risk in such companies. There is also published academic research that shows that good corporate governance is correlated with good company performance.

In summary, a very disappointing AGM. This company is undoubtedly in need of an independent non-executive Chairman and a refreshed slate of non-executive directors.

Postscript: the company did publish the poll results late on the same day in an RNS announcement. There were about 9% of votes (1.7m) against resolutions 2, 3 and 4 (to re-elect the three non-execs, Mr Parris not being up for re-election at this AGM). It is clear therefore that a considerable number of shareholders did follow our recommendations. It is of course unusual for any directors to get significant numbers of votes against their re-election, so let us hope they take notice.

[pyman] 24/9/2012 15:01

2vdm - well indeed ta! it's been a long haul here eh. Frustrating as they have had some great contracts and tech but its lack of traction has been a shame.

[davidosh] 21/9/2012 10:55

The US companies in particular seem to be sniffing around our market for deals and it would probably not be a surprise to find Intercede on a target list. Shareholders and ShareSoc have highlighted the weakness at managing and directing which may in itself have thrown up the suggestion that a new owner is the way forward. Just a wider view and only my perspective.

Top marks to Roger and ShareSoc btw who stuck at it like a dog with a bone and I hope everyone here has taken out a full membership to help in future hard work for shareholders everywhere.

[2vdm] 20/9/2012 17:04

Hi pyman. You see it worked! Just keep doing it and we'll soon be re-rated!Hope you are well.

[boadicea] 20/9/2012 13:48

Is something leaking?
Perhaps they need to check their access security!

[jacksona] 20/9/2012 12:59

Barclays quoting 69.2p to sell

[pyman] 20/9/2012 12:55

this is great- ok - let's continue! dead in the water, poor sales, outdated tech. Dog with fleas. This stock is going nowhere!
That should add 10p!

[yump] 20/9/2012 12:01

Anyone got any other shares that were stagnant and need a 'this share is boring' post to kick some life into them ? Seems to work a treat ;-)

[smartmoney100] 20/9/2012 11:27

Getting rather less boring by the day! I've also no position here at the moment but it remains near the top of my watchlist.

[pyman] 19/9/2012 19:33

hahhaahah- and we get 2p!!! lets keep up the negativity...all the way to a quid

[pyman] 18/9/2012 13:10

Hate to agree with you fft but I m almost there too now. Denial and all that.
Sharesoc- yes! good stuff.