Learning Technologies Share Discussion Threads

[toffeeman] 26/8/2024 14:23

A premium of 50% would still leave me under water !

[1ultimate] 26/8/2024 10:56

I wouldn’t take any notice of these types of websites, there are plenty of them

Imho, DYOR

[paul frank] 26/8/2024 08:48

Finally.. looks like there may be light at the end of the tunnel.. well informed newsletter undervalued-shares.com published LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES GROUP – AN UPCOMING ‘FORCED’ TAKEOVER? over the weekend.

Its a really good article with several prescient points (link below 4 of them):

"Learning Technologies Group is certainly vulnerable to a bid, even a hostile one. American control of the company would automatically make the issue with Uncle Sam go away."

"A potential acquirer would be incentivised to make a bid soon, if you give credence to industry rumours about a potential upcoming sale of Affirmity. If Affirmity got sold at anywhere near the rumoured valuation, Learning Technologies Group would have revealed yet more about the higher underlying value of its portfolio. The company would then have an even stronger balance sheet and a more streamlined portfolio – all factors that could lead to an increasing share price and large shareholders being less willing to sell out, making a potential bid more expensive."

"Taking the mid-point of the EBIT guidance leaves the company valued at just over 6x EBIT.An estimated 30-40% of the group's revenue is from its software business, which tends to be valued at closer to 12x EBIT in M&A transactions. Its consulting divisions would probably fetch around 9x EBIT. Learning Technologies Group stock should attract a premium of 40-50% if (or when) someone decides to bid."

"What's potentially unique about this situation is the compelling rationale for a change in majority ownership. In addition, a potential pending sale of Affirmity might help speed up decisions. After all, Affirmity is already a separate operation, and management's incessant indications to streamline the portfolio does make a sale of this subsidiary look like a logical next step."

hxxps://www.undervalued-shares.com/weekly-dispatches/learning-technologies-group-an-upcoming-forced-takeover/

[12badger] 25/7/2024 16:17

Your first para captures the meaning precisely. Quite what triggered "non compliance " we can guess at, but maybe a bureaucratic lapse of record keeping or as you suggest too much influence from the UK.

[somerset lad] 25/7/2024 10:41

IMO there are two audiences for the second half of yesterday’s T/S. The message to the US Government is “We are very respectful of your rules and the importance of compliance - look at the prominence we gave it in investor comms”. This seems like good regulatory strategy. The message to investors is that the security restricted business is small and we have not lost any contracts, just (temporarily) the opportunity to bid for new ones so the issue is not material to the share price.

The issue is not described as clearly as it might be, but it sounds IMO as though the UK management has been exercising too much influence over the restricted business (I imagine by pushing efficiencies that has put the back up of one or more employees) whilst US rules presumably require information within, and control over, the restricted business to be held by security cleared US citizens.

[wad collector] 24/7/2024 21:48

I think it is a subtle way of saying that those contracts were so badly negotiated that they were not expecting to make any money out of them anyway!

[jeffian] 24/7/2024 21:43

OK, well what do you think it means? They have a (hopefully temporary) problem with one of their American subsidiaries but (I think they are saying) even if it goes against them, the financial impact on the group as a whole would not be significant. Other 'interpretations' welcome.

[phillis] 24/7/2024 15:26

That is certainly what the BOD expect people to do

[jeffian] 24/7/2024 14:26

#3033,

Yup, but then I'm not one to search for hidden meanings. I tend to take things at face value.

[12badger] 24/7/2024 08:58

This really is a company that can't catch a break. Another very gloomy update and whilst they deserve applause on margin enhancement and debt reduction, the absence of organic growth is troubling. They are not alone in struggling with sales (see Mindgym) there are others doing much better (Skillcast, Wilmington etc)

[phillis] 24/7/2024 08:04

Jeff
Are you saying that it’s plain English and has no hidden meaning…..?

[jeffian] 24/7/2024 07:35

If the problem is that the US don't like foreign ownership of companies with sensitive Government contracts, I suppose LTG could always sell it again?

I might have to think again about my Avon shares, as they provide most of the helmets and protective gear for the US Army!

[bigboyblue] 24/7/2024 07:34

Perhaps it refers to any potential new contracts that might have been in the pipeline, or does it refer to the possibility of losing existing contracts. I agree it's not clear

[jeffian] 24/7/2024 07:33

I think it means that the value of the contracts is not material in the context of total Group revenue and profit.

;-)

[phillis] 24/7/2024 07:30

What do people think this means?

“ The Board believes that the value of the contracts is not material in the context of total Group revenue and profit.

[bigboyblue] 24/7/2024 07:27

On the face of it, doesn't sound like a huge problem (only applies to new contracts, value of the contracts not material, working to resolve relevant issues etc). However, we are told twice in the rns that this is 'serious' and we don't really know why we are no longer compliant or how easily we can become compliant. There must also be the possibility that some of the existing customers decide to terminate their contracts. I'm out (at a loss) for the moment. Perhaps I'm being unduly timid, but to me there are warning lights flashing.

[hazl] 24/7/2024 06:17

Speaks for itself above.
Not neccessarily permanent, but explains the problem further down.

imo

[paul frank] 22/7/2024 14:01

Share price dropping like a stone! Could LTG be affected by the Crowdstrike outage?

[staysum] 22/7/2024 09:45

This company is profitable. It has a reasonable dividend and has cash in the bank and more assets that could be sold so why so low.

[hazl] 08/7/2024 06:32

What I believe we are seeing is a steady rise since October 2023.

Long might it continue.

How the geopolitical landscape progresses , is not ours to know, yet,however.

imo

[hazl] 08/7/2024 06:28

Interesting discussion between you above.
I see merits in both sides of the comments.
I would dispute 'got us nowhere' comment'.
I think the overview...macro... has affected every company out there, for better or worse, depending on the sector as well.

It is complicated and one size doesn't not fit all.

IMO

[hazl] 03/7/2024 17:51

Nice rise.