Mediazest Share Discussion Threads

[andre] 15/2/2018 12:10

But Ian Hallett bought shares and now owns 20% I believe. So why would he be required to 'put any significant money in'?

I agree a £70K issue is peanuts. But why both Hallett and Lance buying just £70K of shares at 0.15p?

[frjdnverijtnhj8568934] 15/2/2018 11:46

It could be Ian Hallett refused to put any significant money in. Whatever, it's a "keep the lights on placing" as Shareprophets have reported. They reiterate their bargepole rating.


MediaZest – at 3:31pm “pleased to announce” a placing… because it keeps the lights on?
By Steve Moore | Wednesday 14 February 2018

If you like this, please share this article using the buttons below

Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from ShareProphets). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.


Creative media agency and audio-visual systems company MediaZest (MDZ) “is pleased to announce that it has conditionally raised £70,000 (before expenses) through a placing… at a price of 0.15p per ordinary share”. Hmmm, a ‘keep the lights on’ placing then?

The company states it to “fully take advantage of two specific, recently won opportunities, and others that are still at the pitch or negotiation stage” and for “strategic growth opportunities” that it believes should be explored. It adds it “continues to grow its contracted recurring revenue base and the board anticipates announcing a significant increase in this year on year with the 31 March 2018 results”, but also that “further to the announcement of Mediazest’s interim results on 15 December 2017, the group continues to make progress and is in advanced negotiations on several material contracts. The timing of the closure of these contracts will have an effect on the year end results as referred to in that announcement”.

Hmmm. But it’s two months closer to the year-end from then, and now less than 7 weeks away – and results for the first half of the year showed a loss of £0.15 million (2016: £0.07 million) on lower revenue of £1.3 million (prior full-year: loss of £0.14 million on revenue of £3 million).

The balance sheet showed cash of £0.10 million and net current liabilities of £0.95 million – though the company now also argues it “is aware of the dilutive nature of any fundraising at the current share price and as such has limited the amount raised”?. With the shares having declined from comfortably above 0.20p at the start of 2018 to close at 0.165p on Monday, it still only able to be got away at 0.15p though?

Overall, the half-year financial situation and track record see me very wary here – and the shares remain on the bargepole list.



D_Stone • a day ago
This is pure and simply a lifestyle company. It's CEO has never been aligned with the owners. His remit seems to be to keep all the parasites well replenished and not shareholder value. Things must be getting close to its eventual departure from AIM as this must be one of the lowest placings I've ever come across.

[russman] 15/2/2018 11:35

70k why bother.

[frjdnverijtnhj8568934] 14/2/2018 11:54

They are out of cash hazl. That's the bottom line O'Neill needs to be paid. CCCAL need to be paid the interest on their loan.

If you read the announcement carefully I think they are preparing shareholders for another biggish loss. They go on about the timing of contracts.

Quite farcically they say they are awre of the dilutive nature of these placings! No sh*t. There are now 1.3 billion shares in issue. These guys have averaged a placing nearly every year.

It's always next year when the big breakthrough will occur. Meanwhile they keep raising cash and O'Neill and CCCAL keep getting paid despite the company never posting a profit.

What is Ian Hallett thinking? He's bought over 20% of this company and it's already looking for cash to remain a going concern. I wonder how much he was asked to cough up.

[hazl] 14/2/2018 10:29

Just a natural retracement in my view.

[hazl] 14/2/2018 10:28

I disagree with your initial comments.
The placing was not at a dissimilar price to the current price and recurring revenue sounds good as well as the comments about expectations in March announcement.

'Further to the announcement of Mediazest’s interim results on 15 December 2017, the Group continues to make progress and is in advanced negotiations on several material contracts. The timing of the closure of these contracts will have an effect on the year end results as referred to in that announcement. In addition, the Company continues to grow its contracted recurring revenue base and the Board anticipates announcing a significant increase in this year on year with the 31 March 2018 results.

The reasons for the placing are hence twofold.

Reasons for the Placing

'The Company is becoming more focussed on dealing with large, complex global organisations. This has led to a need to keep a proportion of operating cashflow earmarked for deposit purposes with suppliers. In order to fully take advantage of two specific, recently won opportunities, and others that are still at the pitch or negotiation stage, the Board has decided to execute this small fundraise to meet these requirements.

In addition, the Digital Signage market continues to grow and with the ongoing improvement in Group performance, the Board believes that there are strategic growth opportunities that should be explored and an element of the Placing funds will be set aside for this purpose.

The Board is aware of the dilutive nature of any fundraising at the current share price and as such has limited the amount raised to cover these two requirements only, with a handful of existing long term shareholders..'

[frjdnverijtnhj8568934] 14/2/2018 10:24

The fact O'Neill has subscribed to the placing should be completely ignored. He takes far more out of the company in salary. If he has to put in 20 grand to keep the company going for a bit longer it's a good bit of business for him.

As for the other unnamed major shareholders who have subscribed I'd be guessing CCCAL are one. CCCAL's links with O'Neill are well documented. They could in fact be one and the same but we don't know because no-one even knows where this mysterious entity is domiciled never mind who actually owns it. We do know though that a Lance O'Neill was the registrant of the CCCAL domain name. Haha.

[frjdnverijtnhj8568934] 14/2/2018 10:14

Not really. There was a placing announced yesterday at 0.15p.

The announcement contains the same relentless bullsh*t that shareholders have been subjected to for the last 12 years about the potential, customer base, material contracts in the offing etc etc.

I still believe these shares are completely worthless.

[ch1rp] 09/1/2018 16:16

Well done the buys at 0.19p

[counting cards] 28/12/2017 12:33

hahaha cheers

[benson384] 28/12/2017 12:19

Does help !!! Have you got right stock !!!

[benson384] 28/12/2017 12:00

CC my email bounced back ? Please confirm ?

[benson384] 27/12/2017 11:56

It would then be pension company making RNS as nominee for his holding. It was in his name so therefore personal. He based in Luxembourg which is pretty tax wise !!

[benson384] 27/12/2017 11:55

It would then be pension company making RNS as nominee for his holding. It was in his name so therefore personal. He based in Luxembourg which is pretty tax wise !!

[russman] 27/12/2017 09:13

Could be a self invested pension plan; that would not need a LEI.

[livup967] 26/12/2017 12:41

well done for that info BEN happy Christmas to you and a prosperous new year
keep up the good work

REGARDS

[benson384] 25/12/2017 21:39

Merry Xmas to you all..................Take it no one noticed Ian Hallett's company IWG Plc got a bid approach late Friday night from a Canadian company.......IF it goes through maybe a lot of his time and contacts etc maybe funnelled into MDZ..........?
Looking forward markets opening and how it pans out..

[russman] 24/12/2017 10:08

Maybe it is related to Mifid deadline.
CCCAL has not registered a LEI yet.

[russman] 21/12/2017 17:28

Volume has been relatively strong this week.Be surprised if there is not another rns Friday.If only to say a holding has declined.

[counting cards] 21/12/2017 15:10

courtesy of RKBeekeeper from LSE

Some basic facts.

Current market capt at £2.6 million (£0.0021) and at the recent low in September market capt about £0.99 million.
Ian Hallett owns 20% (as per last Fridays RNS) so his stake is currently worth about £520,698 (this is over 50% of our market capt at our low point in September.

When did Ian Hallett first TR1? 27/11/17 with 4.37% and shares acquired about 0.11

Next TR1? From Ian Hallett 29/11/17 with 5.84% and shares acquired about 0.11

Next TR1? From Ian Hallett 01/12/17 (but shares acquired on 30/11/17) with 7.68% and shares acquired about 0.11

Next TR1? From Ian Hallett 06/12/17 with 10.22% and shares acquired about 0.13

Next TR1? From Ian Hallett 07/12/17 (but shares acquired on 06/12/17 see below) with 11.52% and shares acquired about 0.13

Next TR1? From Ian Hallett 15/12/17 with 20% and shares acquired up to about 0.24

I am looking at when the TRI was RSN’d and when a particular threshold was crossed. The first TRI on 27/11/17 is RSN’d at 14:59 and the shares were purchased on the day. I conclude Ian Hallett wanted to fire an initial warning to the Current BOD. Then the next TR1 is RSN’d on 29/11/17 after hours on the day but this is a physiological threshold that has been crossed as he was now over 5%. Could it have been communicated to BOD before the close and BOD had to decide what they were going to do and needed time to think?

Next TR1 is RSN’d on 1/12/17 at 10:50am but the TR1 was crossed the previous day and BOD notified the previous day, but they do not let the market know till later the next day and not at 7am. This seems unusual as it now is starting to appear the BOD are delaying issuing the RNS for about 3 hours. There could be a perfectly good reason for this delay (so Mr H can continue to top-up?)

Next TR1 is RNS’d on 6/12/17 at 15:05 and the shares were acquired that day. So Mr H is letting the BOD and the world know he is building but the price is not moving up, strange that you can acquire 10.22% and share price does not move. It almost seems like Mr H and BOD want us to know he is building but nobody is taking any notice.

Next TR1 is RNS’d on 7/12/17 at 16:57 but strangely Mr H crossed this threshold on the previous day but Mr H did not notify BOD till the 7th. Could he be getting frustrated with Current BOD?

Next TR1 is RNS’d on15/12/17 at 16:04 and he now controls 20%.

What does all this mean? On the 15/12/17 at 7am our Interim Results were issued. I conclude Mr H was looking to get on BOD and he has been prevented so he has taken a substantial position of 20% and will I expect be in negotiations.

Footnote: When was Ian Hallett appointed to his current position? 7/12/16 (Regus Management Ltd) and what is unusual about this company? They take 9 months to file at Companies House when a director resigns. Has Ian Hallett resigned on 7/12/17?

[russman] 19/12/2017 14:39

Recurring revenues 600k.Fcasting a first ebitda positive.