Location Sciences Share Discussion Threads

[bradwellbasher] 18/1/2021 22:27

I'm a first time investor so follow me with my beginners luck!

[sunshine today] 18/1/2021 17:26

Direct from the boss :


Location Sciences remove that danger for more than 150 brands, dozens of leading media agencies, and over 60 suppliers.

[sunshine today] 18/1/2021 16:45

c. 80% Verify gross margin.

[sunshine today] 18/1/2021 14:56

Two years old but good easy reading

[sunshine today] 18/1/2021 13:27

Out-of-Home Services Under Review (Applied for MRC Accreditation and are at Varying Stages within the Process, and are Not Accredited)

Ericsson Emodo

· Location Verification



GroundTruth

· Location Metrics



Location Sciences AI Limited

· Location Data Verification Service



PatientPoint, LLC

· Digital Point of Care Services - Communicate, Interact, and Access Components

[sunshine today] 18/1/2021 13:03

Edit of header post 30/1 /21 to produce quick summary ( share price 0.78P)

#######################################################

1/ Tiny market capitalisation, just £4.6M , of that , Net cash £1.2M.

2/ Analyst , two months ago , projected medium term, annual revenues of $50M .



3/ LSAI company presentations, 80% margins on verify software.
( Found on LSAI company, investor page.)

4/ Based on a reasonable growth PE of 20 , that would equate to LSAI having a Market capitalisation of over £500M. ( 100 times plus , current share price )

4/ £19M unused tax loss

5/ New report 2021, from LSAI client, (InMarket) , with annual $100 revenues ( 2nd from last paragraph)

We’re The First And Only Company To Offer Certified Location Audience Data: InMarket is the first
and only company in the industry to offer certified Location Audience data, third-party verified for data
accuracy and precision by the industry leader Location Sciences. Location Certified audiences build trust
and allow brands to buy with confidence, knowing an independent third-party review has assured the
precision and accuracy of the chosen audience.



2nd from last paragraph from the report.

5/ Finally: About Location Sciences Group PLC: (LSAI)

Location Sciences is the pre-eminent global location verification provider to the $160 billion digital advertising industry. Working in partnership with brands, media agencies and suppliers to reduce ad-wastage and improve the effectiveness of location-based advertising campaigns.

The digital advertising market-place remains unregulated and un-monitored, with an estimated $19 billion wasted on ad-fraud in 2018. Location Sciences has developed Verify, the world's first independent location verification product. Utilising sophisticated machine learning and pattern recognition technologies, Verify detects location ad-fraud and shines a light on location data inaccuracy with the aim of bringing back integrity, transparency and trust to the market place


Verify is in the late stages of the process of accreditation, with the Media Rating Council, that will in my opinion see sales explode.

It will also add considerable value to the company.

Note #

LSAI :also have NHS Covid location ongoing contract

[plunge] 14/1/2021 22:02

Here is another company using Verify.

Interestingly, since 2016 Mobiclicks has been the exclusive South African partner for Unilever-funded Blis, with the former still prominently advertising its association with Location Sciences on its home page.

This begs the question - if Blis is so convinced there are material flaws in the product, why hasn't it advised this partner to stop promoting and/or using it? More to the point, it appears Mobiclicks has been using Verify a lot longer and more purposefully than Blis and hasn't found the need to challenge its functionality.

[plunge] 14/1/2021 15:33

For those that don't follow Mark Slade on LinkedIn, here is his latest post.

Location-based advertising set to grow by $36.7 billion.

Despite a global pandemic and multiple lockdowns, the location-based advertising market is in rude health.

Recent research by Business Wire projected that location-based advertising was set to grow by $36.7 Billion, driven by a compounded growth of 20.6%.

The opportunity is huge for advertisers, but the danger of being sold poor or fraudulent data via your programmatic media buy remains very real.

Location Sciences remove that danger for more than 150 brands, dozens of leading media agencies, and over 60 suppliers.👍

Feel free to DM me for more info.

[plunge] 14/1/2021 09:55

Fact check: It seems Blis Media wasn't the first company to publicly announce its use of Verify. It appears that distinction went to Vicinity Media in South Africa.



So Blis's assertion is probably not correct and more reason to discount the statement it put out in the Ad Week article dated 15/12/2020.

[lazygun] 11/1/2021 14:33

I’d like to know more detail around this comment from blis, and LSAI’s response to it...

Blis has always been committed to accuracy, transparency and verification, and we were the first to support Location Sciences’ entry into the market in 2019 when Verify was a new, untested product. We alerted them to a bug in their system in February 2020, which they have acknowledged, but as of today still have not fixed,” said the Blis spokesperson...

L

[plunge] 03/1/2021 21:46

Thanks Canarris for this further insight. As you say, it could certainly aid LSAI's cause in getting MRC accreditation.

As a long suffering shareholder, let me express my appreciation to Blis for what seems totally arrogant and foolish behaviour on their part. I feel that after unsuccessfully attempting to resolve matters privately with them, LSAI was left with no other option but to go on the offensive. What an opportunity for the Company to embarrass and disrupt one of the key location data suppliers in the market plus prove to the whole ad industry what it has been trying to tell them for ages! Clean up your acts.

Furthermore, if Blis cannot provide evidence of MATERIAL FLAWS which they allege in the Verify platform, then what is to stop LSAI returning the favour of whacking them with a defamation claim and seeking appropriate compensation?

Perhaps this has already happened, given the statement by the directors that they are confident in the position taken by the Company and have taken EVERY STEP to protect the position of Verify in the marketplace.

I eagerly await the next instalment of this gripping saga.

[canarris] 03/1/2021 21:05

Great posts as always Plunge!I was recently thinking about Location Sciences efforts to receive MRC accreditation and why it takes so long as it could immensely help with unlikely court case with Blis and came across following: https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/358777/mrc-to-focus-on-data-source-quality-unveils-new-e.html"The Media Rating Council (MRC) this morning announced plans to launch a new subcommittee focused on the quality of data sources used in various media currencies, measurement and verification systems"Also Eric Warburton from Horizon Media was appointed a new digital committee chair and I believe he is a good mate with Location Sciences non exec director Donnie Williams.We will see what will come out of it.

[plunge] 30/12/2020 13:24

Questions from me that hopefully will be dealt with by LSAI's lawyers.

1. Why didn't Blis Global identify these 'material flaws' in the Verify platform during its user acceptance testing, i.e., prior to going live?

2. Were these flaws subsequently fabricated because Blis needed LSAI's help in screening out and/or fixing dubious location data it was knowingly supplying customers and didn't want any prior audit thereof affecting its quality scores and, more importantly, revenues? A case of putting money before ethics?

3. Although denied by Blis, LSAI clearly states the former was actively attempting to learn the proprietary nature of Verify. Why?

4. In failing to get the software changed presumably for its own self serving purposes, and in fear of being caught out, is this why Blis deliberately chose not to utilise this verification tool?

5. Furthermore, has Blis made misrepresentations to customers that all location data sold to them since partnering with LSAI had been independently vetted for accuracy and quality, when in fact this wasn't true? See my earlier posting 556.

6. Then, and only when it was specifically mandated to do so by LSAI's own customers, why did Blis manipulate location coordinates and anonymise device/publisher IDs supplied on these two high profile advertising campaigns, i.e. by altering and trying to hide underlying supporting data?

LSAI has put into the public domain a detailed explanation of its defence against this legal dispute, which goes to the heart of the questions raised above and suggests to me it is very confident of its position. Also, its offer to share significant evidence with an independent arbiter reinforces that view. True to its word, TRANSPARENCY is the name of the game here.

On the other hand, Blis appears to be fighting a rear-guard action and has a lot of explaining to do. As well as proving it has been defamed, it now seems it has to defend itself against potential ad fraud charges.

No matter what the outcome is of this case, it could generate a lot of publicity for Location Sciences. Perhaps location data customers of Blis may also start asking awkward questions and seek redress if it is proved they too have been misled.

[cyberbub] 30/12/2020 12:25

Thanks Plunge.I wonder why LSAI wouldn't have fixed a (seemingly) small bug that Blis claim to have pointed out to them? On the other hand LSAI say there is no bug and no-one else has pointed it out.It's all a bit messy and without detailed inside knowledge of the facts from both companies it's difficult to come to a conclusion.So I guess an investment in LSAI is quite speculative at this stage due to the dispute, with something of a 'binary' outcome, boom or bust.

[plunge] 30/12/2020 11:57

cyberbub

This is the only article I can see in the trade press.



Prior to the legal dispute becoming public knowledge, Blis clearly referred to Location Sciences in the technology/transparency section of their website. Interestingly this was hastily removed after the story broke.

Furthermore, according to Blis states it is listed on the Trust Accountability Group (TAG) registry of known and trusted players in the digital ad ecosystem. However, I wasn't able to VERIFY this on the TAG registry site

[cyberbub] 30/12/2020 11:14

Very interesting developments.Unless they have a suicide wish I doubt that LSAI would have publicly poured more fuel on the fire of their Blis conflict, unless they were certain? Ultimately it's all computer data and I would have thought that it would be relatively easy to prove/defend in court, if it gets that far?*If* LSAI is right *and* can afford to successfully defend itself, then it could be the making of the company! Over time it could multibag from a £2M valuation...On the other hand if neither of those conditions is correct then LSAI will crash and burn...Does anyone know if this conflict has been featured in any trade publications?Is the company continuing to trade with its other partners?Thanks for any info.

[plunge] 21/12/2020 15:54

Prior to LSAI's 5/09/2019 partnership announcement with Blis, its CEO made some interesting (now seemingly embarrassing) comments for this article. For emphasis, I have copied them below.





Blis CEO Greg Isbister said: “Understanding real, human behaviour by analysing mobile location data gives brands the truth about what people actually do. And it is this real-world intelligence that delivers real consumer engagement and a measurable sales uplift.”

However, he said it is important that brands choose a partner who is "scrupulous with its data sources". "Being transparent with the veracity of the data, scrubbing it for inaccuracies and ensuring it complies with GDPR helps build certainty that the insights gleaned can be trusted,” added Isbister.

[richie32] 21/12/2020 12:32

Dipped my toe in here (small toe).

Could be eaten up by vested interests but on the other hand the verification service is badly needed and you would have thought the big advertisers would recognize this in time.

GLA & merry Christmas

[plunge] 21/12/2020 09:54

Adding more grist to the mill:

In June 2020 GroupM (the world's largest advertising agency) told its customers that location verification is critical to brand safety, a milestone which was celebrated at Location Sciences - see Trading Update RNS dated 27/07/2020. For more background of GroupM's brand safety requirements see page 20 of this link:



Then in LSAI's Half Year RNS dated 15/09/2020 it announced the team were in active communications with the GroupM team to help support this initiative.

We now know from the RNS dated 14/12/2020 that at the beginning of September GroupM and others carried out a location-based advertising campaign, utilising the Company's location verification technology.

Sometime thereafter Blis Global was called out and so it started a damage limitation exercise, which appears to have backfired.

Eagerly awaiting the next instalment!!!

[lazygun] 18/12/2020 10:09

Time will tell once the full facts emerge....

L.

[plunge] 18/12/2020 08:43

lazygun - two great posts.

Obviously there are two sides to the story.

Mark Slade did state in the RNS that they would have preferred to keep this contentious matter private. Does this suggest attempts were made to do so? However, it seems to me Blis thought otherwise and chose to 'bully' the Company with undermining assertions about its technology and issued a 'threatening' letter.

Therefore, the Board presumably under legal advice decided to go 'nuclear' and now it is out there for the whole world to see; something Blis probably did not expect and is possibly regretting.

[lazygun] 18/12/2020 00:10

After reading that ad week article, I think it will be interesting to know more about this flaw that blis allegedly made lsai aware of in February, and whether that required blis to alter data to compensate for that flaw.

It would also then be interesting to understand what subsequent communications occurred between lsai and blis around that flaw, and what consequences that would mean for both companies.

Did blis indicate that the existence of the flaw would mean they’d have to adjust their data supplied until the flaw was fixed, and was this communicated to the end user at any time between February and now.

And, has this flaw been fixed in verify’s latest patches?, and if so, why was it not fixed earlier, if it meant that there would be a material impact to data quality being supplied to the end customer? Or is the flaw des ruined merely a red herring by blis?

Mark slade and blis both talk about transparency, well both companies now have an opportunity be open and transparent about all of this..... I wonder if they will...

L

[galaxy enforcer] 17/12/2020 20:32

Looks like the seller cleared today and hence the rise. Closed with no stock available online so negotiated trades only.

[tt2oo5] 17/12/2020 15:33

Agreed. Loading up here.