Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Simigon Ltd. LSE:SIM London Ordinary Share IL0010991185 ORD ILS0.01 (DI)
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -0.50 -8.33% 5.50 0.00 08:00:00
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
5.00 6.00 5.50 5.50 5.50
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Software & Computer Services 3.68 -1.09 -2.26 3
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
- O 0 5.50 GBX

Simigon (SIM) Latest News (2)

More Simigon News
Simigon Takeover Rumours

Simigon (SIM) Discussions and Chat

Simigon Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
25/9/202010:54Train your eyes on Simigon725
03/1/201501:07Another software play609
27/12/201311:05SIMIGON LTD. ORD ILS0.01 (DI)13
31/10/200716:41Simplifying finances735

Add a New Thread

Simigon (SIM) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
2020-09-24 11:36:455.343,845205.13O
View all Simigon trades in real-time

Simigon (SIM) Top Chat Posts

Simigon Daily Update: Simigon Ltd. is listed in the Software & Computer Services sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker SIM. The last closing price for Simigon was 6p.
Simigon Ltd. has a 4 week average price of 5.50p and a 12 week average price of 5.50p.
The 1 year high share price is 9.50p while the 1 year low share price is currently 5p.
There are currently 50,868,618 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 14,423 shares. The market capitalisation of Simigon Ltd. is £2,797,773.99.
rivaldo: Results out: Https:// The good always, lots of great-sounding contract wins and renewals. And no effect yet from Covid-19. Plus loads of potential. And $6m net cash to fulfil that potential. The bad news....everything else :o)) There really isn't much left to say about this company. The CEO talks about a return to profitability. It's time for him to reflect this in some decent H1 numbers. Perhaps the legal action (which SIM deem immaterial even if they lose) will cause him to reconsider the compensation packages to reflect recent losses and performance. It's worth noting that R&D costs are huge, over $2.1m again, and these all get written off. I suppose there is one brownie point to SIM for not hiding some or all of this expense on the Balance Sheet as many companies do. This would at a stroke dramatically improve profitability on a presentational level.
varies: Brummy-git If and when there is some "visibility", it may be too late to buy the shares. it may also be, of course, that visibility will take the form of a death rattle but I hope not. Uncertainty and distrust of the directors are built into SIM's present share price as into many others.
rivaldo: Good to see the new US Air Force Virtual Reality contract win and the successful Israeli Air Force contract news recently whilst I was on hols. The £4m m/cap is now less than the $6m net cash at the last year end. This is plainly bonkers in terms of valuation, but is more understandable in terms of market sentiment given the downturn in performance and, as I've said before, the valid concern over the CEO's package. Last year's H1 showed a $0.3m loss. We (and Finncap!) currently have no idea of what H1'19 has brought, other than more optimistic noises in the prelims outlook and an increase in the rate of contract win announcements. If SIM can post improved results and a renewed sense of momentum from the new contracts, completion of the transition to SaaS, progress in VR/AR etc, then the current share price will be very good value. If not then obviously there will be more stagnation. I'm pretty sure there's no problem in terms of de-listing - imo the AIM listing gives SIM much-needed credibility in terms of its blue-chip customer base, both current and new. Could be wrong of course. OT : I've recently had four companies in my portfolio taken over, three at large premiums above the prevailing share price - PTSG, EUSP, SCH and SND. Three of these had varying doubters/trolls/moaners/cynics etc on the threads whose gripes (some valid, some not) were proven incorrect as regards the share price. I've learnt to trust my own judgement, but I have, do and will obviously get some stocks wrong over time. Isn't it strange how some posters feel the need to personalise things and follow other posters around to have a good moan about them rather than concentrate their energies on the stocks themselves? Weird. I'm off with my daughter to see an exhibition in London and enjoy the sun. See ya!
rivaldo: Of course the CEO's salary is large, and undeserved given the under performance. But at the end of the day (cliche alert) the potential remains huge here. Some credit must be given for the way this micro cap retains and increases business with a bluer than blue chip client base, and in these days of VR/AR, airline growth etc the potential is obvious. If SIM can pull off the transition to SaaS with high recurring income and increasing profitability, then the share price potential will completely outweigh misgivings over the CEO's salary package.
rivaldo: Indeed. The transition to SaaS has inevitably slowed progress, along with contractual mishaps. But given the trading at essentially break-even, the blue chip clients globally, the potential in simulation training, unmanned aircraft, VR and AR, and the $6m cash pile relative to a £1.5m EV at the current share price, let's see if this year justifies the increased optimism in the outlook. Finncap have updated today and hope to relaunch forecasts asap. They conclude: "Transition: the on-going transition to SaaS impacted sales as license revenue is spread over 5-12 year (reduced by 85% this year) yet 2018 was one of Simigon’s strongest delivery years. This should improve the long-term financial security but leaves the current valuation looking extremely cheap on core metrics."
rivaldo: Pretty decent results today, particularly as regards H2'18 compared to H1. SIM made a loss of only $0.3m excluding the one-off bad debt provision - and in H2 this loss was just $0.04m. So SIM is now trading essentially at break-even. And this outlook reads well in that respect: "By increasing SaaS-based contracts for more recurring revenue and better long term visibility, together with intensive R&D investment and business development efforts on multiple market opportunities, the Company expects to quickly resume cash flow positive activities and profitability." This £5.6m m/cap has $6m net cash plus around $2.4m net trade receivables/payables. SIM have written off $2.34m of R&D expenses - and this increased to $1.3m in H2, yet SIM still almost achieved break-even. And of course there's also today's other extremely interesting news re the commencement of an AR training programme with Israeli Air Force: Https:// "SimiGon kicks off Augmented Reality maintenance training research with the Israeli Air Force SimiGon (LSE: SIM), a global leader in providing simulation training solutions, is proud to announce that it has commenced a ground-breaking Augmented Reality ("AR") research programme with the Israel Air Force ("IAF") (the "Programme"). The Programme will utilise SimiGon's R&D investments in the Virtual Reality ("VR") and AR domains with respect to aircraft maintenance training by providing the invaluable ability to test and refine technologies in the demanding, up-tempo operational environment of the IAF. SimiGon designed and developed AR and VR enhanced products and technologies will be used by the IAF in the research programme with the IAF providing logistical support and subject matter expert feedback. The Programme is expected to place SimiGon at the forefront of technology and it will enable the Company to use this technology in various domains. As the market for AR and VR enhanced training takes off, it is expected that this Programme will have positive impact on the Company's business opportunities. SimiGon Vice President of Research and Development, Hagai Piechowicz, said: "SimiGon's training technologies will be making a great leap forward with this Programme. Our R&D team will rapidly design, develop, prototype and test our newest training technologies for the AR and VR aircraft maintenance environment in the IAF F-16 squadrons."
rivaldo: Cheers BG. I feel the same as Daz - there's a good core business here, but the upside potential given SIM's notable influence in one of the leading geographies of technology in the world brings hope that SIM can indeed grab a slice of what's available. Encouraging to see today's RNS re the beginning of the buyback programme. Even only just over $100,000 of buybacks would probably have a big effect on the share price since liquidity is usually pretty tight.
rivaldo: Results are out and are bang in line with reduced forecasts: Http:// The £8.7m m/cap at 17p (51.4m shares) plays $8.14m of cash and $2.92m receiveables too - of which I note over $1m has been collected since the year end. The share price might stagnate for a while until SIM can prove that the forecasts for this year (2017) are realistic, say in the H1 trading update or results - unless there's contract news in the meantime. The outlook statement continues to emphasise the lower short term revenues from the high value long term license contracts, so caution regarding those forecasts may be appropriate. Nevertheless, there are a number of reasons to be rather positive about SIM's future in the narrative, and it still looks a very interesting company to me. I'm happy to hold for the medium/long-term with hopefully the capacity for upside surprises/contract news flow.
rivaldo: Back from hols, so pleasing to see the share price has performed extremely well given the disappointing contract delay and additional costs. SIM are a microcap who've (for their size) won extremely large government contracts. We all know what can go wrong with such contracts. so delays and spec changes are hardly a surprise, but to a company of SIM's size the effects are highly material. The saving grace from a shareholder POV is of course the cash pile of more than $8m, plus other assets, which nicely supports the current £10m m/cap. Even with this setback SIM will still be profitable for last year with "at least" $0.3m PBT. Finncap have retained their 45p target price. For this year Finncap now forecast 3c EPS, i.e 2.4p EPS, based on $1.6m PBT. Given the contract revenues now deferred into 2017 this looks highly achievable. There will also be 0.7c dividends each year. It's also good to see the intended share buyback programme. The timing of this will be interesting - I don't think SIM currently have permission for such buybacks, so they'd have to wait until the next AGM or hold an EGM to introduce it.
red ninja: Open letter to shareholders :- Open Letter to Shareholders by Gordon Miller, CEO of Simmer & Jack Mines Ltd 2006-03-17 Dear Shareholder, I am writing in response to the many queries we have received over the last few days as a result of a public attack on Simmers by Vulisango, a group of Simmers shareholders, which has dented investor confidence at a time when our prospects are so good. It is deeply regrettable that in a bid to gain a larger stake in Simmers without paying for it, Vulisango has resorted to tactics, which have unfairly and negatively impacted on Simmers. In the interests of transparency and good governance, I will set out below how this situation came to be; it is based on a sworn affidavit made by me to the High Court of Johannesburg in our application to have Jaganda, a major Simmers shareholder, liquidated in terms of Section 346(1)(e) of the Companies Act no 61/1973. What started this? Two shareholder groups control Jaganda, which holds a 44% stake in Simmers: q Vulisango, a BEE company led by Valence Watson, holds 100% of a subsidiary (Richtrau 47) which in turn holds 51% of Jaganda; q A group known as the Voting Pool owns 49% of Jaganda. The Voting Group consists of Simmers' executive management, myself, Graham Wanblad and John Berry and former chairman Roger Kebble and Valence Watson's brother Ronnie. At the end of 2005, negotiations began between the two groups to unbundle the control structure. These negotiations failed because the two parties could not reach consensus. Since then the relationship has broken down irretrievably - for reasons set out below. The Voting Pool members, with the exception of Mr Ronnie Watson, decided the only way to resolve the issue was to apply to have Jaganda liquidated and its assets - the Simmers' shares - divided between them on a just and equitable basis. Under normal circumstances, the unbundling of a controlling shareholding structure would have no impact on the company under its control other than to change the proportion of shares the parties hold. Vulisango decided to oppose the liquidation and has requested the JSE suspend the Simmers share pending an inquiry into various allegations against Simmers' management. Background Simmers is a remarkable story of a successful turn-around. The 2004 Annual Report shows that the company was barely solvent. It remained in business only because its operating losses were funded by JCI Limited, which owned approximately 86% of the issued share capital. JCI had a substantial claim against Simmers because of all the money it had advanced the company to keep it afloat. A new Simmers board was appointed which decided to embark on a revitalization programme to be funded through a rights offer. Existing shareholders were given the opportunity to subscribe for new shares at R0.25c each. JCI, however, had neither the capital nor the appetite for the revitalization process and waived its right to subscribe for the new shares in favour of new investors. Jaganda was created to warehouse the interests of BEE and management and to take up the subscription rights renounced by JCI. By this time JCI's claim against Simmers amounted to some R89-million. Jaganda settled this claim by issuing to JCI Limited 357,374 000 preference shares in Jaganda. In the meantime, management had lent a further R5-million to Jaganda for it to on lend that sum to Simmers as well, so Jaganda then had a claim of R94-million against Simmers, which Simmers settled by issuing Jaganda 377 million shares. This process carried no risk for ordinary Jaganda shareholders because the transaction was so structured that if the Simmers' share price collapsed, then JCI would be limited to recovering what it could from what would have been the wreckage of the Simmers' share price. In a worst-case scenario Jaganda ordinary shareholders would have gained nothing and lost nothing. Those at risk are the Simmers' executives and others in the Voting Pool who had invested the R5-million toward operating costs. The rights issue was a success. At its conclusion, the debt that Simmers owed, originally to JCI and subsequently to Jaganda, had been settled; its share capital had increased dramatically; it had raised cash resources of some R59-million, and Jaganda owned 51% of Simmers. The trouble started when Simmers needed to raise working capital. The most efficient way of doing this was to issue more shares to outside investors. One effect of doing this would be that Jaganda's shareholding after the rights issue would be reduced from 51% to 44%. As Vulisango owned 51% of Jaganda, it effectively controlled Simmers, so raising hard cash for new shares meant that Vulisango would lose that absolute control. After a thorough discussion by the Simmers' board it was decided that, in spite of this, a placement of new shares was the only practical way forward. The Vulisango representatives on the Simmers board expressly supported the decision. Investors enthusiastically received the share placement, the share price began to climb and the required capital was raised (allowing Buffelsfontein to be recapitalized) and Jaganda's share in Simmers was diluted to 44% as anticipated. Vulisango had the opportunity to ensure its continued control of Simmers by purchasing shares in the placement. It chose not to do so. Even though Vulisango had supported the process, fully realizing it would be diluted; it now demanded that, at no cost to itself, it be given a bigger slice of the Simmers pie in order to maintain absolute control of the company. We obviously did not agree to this for legal and ethical reasons and it was then that the Vulisango attack began. Firstly, Vulisango attacked the transaction with JCI, claiming the JCI loan had been overstated and the deal engineered to the benefit of JCI. This despite the fact that Simmers' debt to JCI Limited had been properly documented and audited by Grant Thornton. Vulisango's motive for making the baseless allegations is clear. If the amount of JCI's debt is reduced then JCI's preference shares holding in Jaganda would be correspondingly reduced. This would give Vulisango more Simmers' shares. The thinking is also simplistic: Jaganda only got the Simmers shares, because it bought the JCI loan claim. The allegations ebbed and waned – Vulisango was oddly reticent to bring the matter to any finality. In November last year, in a bid to resolve the issue, executive management proposed independent forensic auditors investigate the allegations. It invited the Vulisango representative on the Simmers board to provide a clear set of instructions regarding the scope and reference of such investigations. Vulisango chose not to pursue this route and to date nothing else has been heard about the alleged overstatement of the loan. Vulisango then embarked on a new course of action saying it would stop making deleterious allegations if Simmers simply gave it additional free shares that would bring Jaganda's shareholding back up to 51% in Simmers. This would have been illegal and obviously management would not entertain such a proposal. Vulisango then adopted the tactic of trying to prejudice and discredit Simmers' application for the 4 Shaft Mining Right, which forms the basis of the Ezulwini Project. When Simmers applied for this New Order Mining Right, Jaganda held 51% of Simmers. Two subsequent share placements to raise funds reduced this holding to 44% - a fact of which the DME is well aware. Vulisango also attempted to pressurize Simmers into voluntarily withdrawing its application for 4 Shaft to enable Vulisango to make a different application in its own name. Vulisango said that once it received the rights, it would sell them to Simmers in return for more Simmers shares. Because of the many corporate governance issues this raised and the prejudicial effect it would have on Simmers' minority shareholders, Simmers management refused to countenance the suggestion. In August last year Vulisango announced to the board of Simmers that it intended applying for the Mining Right to 4 Shaft – in spite of the fact that Simmers' application had already been accepted in May. Vulisango implied it was in a position to successfully influence the DME to revoke Simmers' successful application and grant the rights to Vulisango instead. Simmers now found itself in the untenable position of having a major shareholder turned competitor. Accordingly, when Mr Ronnie Watson, demanded a copy of Simmers' detailed application for 4 Shaft he was asked to put his request in writing. Vulisango then stepped up the campaign against Simmers' management to include allegations of deliberately attempting to mislead the DME about Simmers' BEE status. Simmers took these allegations so seriously that non-executive independent chairman, Nigel Brunette, requested Chris Loxton SC, to review Simmer's application and give an independent opinion on Vulisango's claims. Advocate Loxton found there to be no basis for Vulisango's allegations. On 1 March 2006, a full board meeting of Simmers was held at which the issues were thoroughly discussed. The board was informed that an application for liquidation of Jaganda was in the process of being prepared. On advice from the company's sponsor, Sasfin Capital, a cautionary announcement to that effect was issued. Accordingly, on 2 March 2006, an application to liquidate Jaganda was lodged with the Johannesburg High Court. Two days later, without informing Simmers, Vulisango applied to the JSE to have the Simmers share suspended allegedly "in the best interests of the shareholders". By some means that document found its way into the media, promptly sending the Simmers share into free-fall. However, the Simmers' share price has since recovered from a low of R1.15c on 3 March 2006 to close at R1.25 on 16 March 2006. So what happens next? Sasfin Capital has responded to the JSE on behalf of Simmers regarding Vulisango's request to have trade in Simmers shares suspended and a ruling is expected shortly. The application by the Voting Pool to have Jaganda liquidated remains in place. The court will be asked to decide on what basis it is split – if at all - and Jaganda's only assets, the Simmers' shares, will be divided between the parties on a just and equitable basis. Whether these parties keep or sell their shares is up to them, although some may have to be sold to redeem JCI's preference shares. Clearly, it would not be in any shareholder's best interests to "dump" shares on the open market and in previous discussions with Jaganda shareholders they have indicated that their intention is not to do so. Will this affect Simmers' net asset value? The liquidation process will not affect any of Simmers' present projects because funding for them has already been secured. However, Simmers' growth strategy is heavily reliant on new investment capital and it is a fact that the investment community does not respond well to uncertainty within a listed company. It is therefore imperative that the shareholder dispute be resolved speedily given that Simmers has other new and exciting projects in the pipeline. What will happen if the DME withdraws approval of Simmers' application for Ezulwini? Simmers has two options: to accept the decision or to take the decision on review as provided for by the Act. Prior to Simmers obtaining the rights to Four Shaft, the DME had approved a proposal by Harmony Gold Mining Company, which had been pumping water from Four Shaft to protect operations at neighbouring South Deep, to commence controlled flooding of the shaft. Should the application now be unsuccessful that mine closure plan would come into effect and the mine would be flooded, unless the DME found someone else to take over the pumping costs that Simmers has been paying in anticipation of being granted the rights. If the shaft is flooded, the asset will be neutralized, 3000 potential jobs will be lost along with the potential foreign direct investment. For a detailed update on the progress of this application, please refer to the SENS announcement on this website issued on March 10. It is very important to note that based on Simmers' own assessment of its market value, little, if any, of Ezulwini's potential is reflected in Simmers' current share price. Details of Simmers' forecasts are contained in documents posted on this website under the heading "Investor Information - Resources and Reserves". Will the winding up of Jaganda affect Simmers' BEE status? Simmers' is committed to BEE and to fulfilling the requirements of the MPRDA and the Mining charter. To this end, discussions with other BEE partners who share Simmers' vision for growth and sustainability have been initiated. Simmers has also received unsolicited approaches from a number of BEE companies keen to invest in Simmers' growth strategy. Simmers' BEE status should Jaganda be liquidated will also depend on whether the members of Vulisango decide to retain their shares in Simmers or not. It should also be noted that Vulisango is not the only BEE company that Simmers engages with. Waterpan Mining Consortium and MRS (Mining Reclamation and Supports) are two BEE companies actively involved in Simmers' operations. So what is Jaganda attempting to do? Jaganda is the subject of a liquidation application. If successful, Vulisango will become a minority shareholder in Simmers and is therefore attempting to achieve the following before Jaganda is liquidated: To override the rights of its own minority shareholders; To take control of the Simmers Board; To put in place a mechanism to issue more free shares to its controlling shareholder, Vulisango. What is the executive going to do about Jaganda? The executive intends to resist the misguided pressure from Vulisango and its advisers and to continue to use its tried and tested skills to run the company for the benefit of all shareholders. Conclusion My fellow executive directors and I assure all Simmers stakeholders of our commitment to this company and to transparency in our dealings. We will not be party to any decision that does not meet the highest standards of corporate governance and we will continue to act in the best interests of the company, its employees and its shareholders. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us directly. Gordon Miller Chief Executive Officer Simmer & Jack Mines, Limited
Simigon share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20200925 10:29:26