Stockcube Share Discussion Threads

[davidosh] 31/3/2010 11:01

I am not impressed either and that is not the FAIR way to leave the market when the cash level is 27p per share ! They also have property assets.

The company needs a good reputation to sell its product into the City institutions and this is not the right way to go about it IMO.

[johnstonp] 05/3/2010 16:31

A. R. Ashman resigned as a Director yesterday.
Wonder why ?
sinking ship - jumped before he drowns ?

[johnstonp] 22/2/2010 13:48

the bad news is out. massive profits drop, but thankfully still in profit.
a delist is almost certain

[davidosh] 16/2/2010 14:48

My concern would be if they are going into losses and the business is no longer profitable so draining cash. I would have thought the directors would have been buying a few months back and certainly before the closed period if this is a buy 'one pound cash for 50p' situation and the company generating further cash. They should ensure a dividend gives shareholders a return as even at just 0.75p which was the level last year that equates to nearly 6% yield at the current price .

[davidosh] 11/2/2010 20:26

You could argue that it should never have listed in the first place if that were the case. Why would they choose now ? They sell into the City professionals so probably like the visibility of the listing.

[hugepants] 11/2/2010 19:58

I think its a fear of a delisting that is causing this to drop. With one large shareholder with about 40% thats always a possibility in AIM.

[johnstonp] 22/12/2009 15:48

very illiquid
just spotted some small buying in the last 24 hours.
is it on someone's tipsheet ?

[liarspoker] 05/11/2009 18:00

Looks interesting.

Bonds plus cash less all liabilities equals 19.87p.

A buy of 7,500 went through at just over 17.9p earlier.

The receivables plus tangible fixed assets, which add up to 6.5p, are thrown in for free at the current price.

[stewjames] 18/9/2009 17:31

What are these "available for sale investments"? You'd think they'd have something to say about it considering they've ploughed 2/3 of the cash into them. (I may have missed it though...just scanned through the results)

[windass] 18/9/2009 16:03

Reuslts out today. Not very good but not a complete disaster.

[hugepants] 11/5/2009 11:08

Net cash is effectively 23p per share here.

Earnings 0.9p but they state "normalised" earnings are 1.9p per share. That excludes cost for stock options and one off tax charge.

As regards the stock options charge (42 grand) I dont really understand this. The shares in issue are the same, I was expecting to see more shares in issue to account for this. Why has this cost been added. Anyone know? And is it a one off?

[mctmct] 12/2/2009 10:01

Quiet lately. Any news about?

[hugepants] 19/10/2008 17:00

Its difficult to explain. I moved my cash out of Icelandic banks months ago.

Still they've not done as badly as STZ. They had nearly all their cash in Kaput-thing.



They say they may be covered for the 1st 50 grand by compensation scheme. I guess it all depends on how much cash there is after the liquidators have sold the assets. Who knows, they may get most of it back in time.

[not manu] 19/10/2008 15:49

"Stockcube is one of the world's leading providers of independent financial research".

10% of cash in Kaput-thing.

doesn't inspire confidence in the manglement does it?

[hugepants] 10/10/2008 15:47

10% of cash deposited with Kaupthing on a 1 month term. Hindsight is great of course but the future problems with Icelandic banks were well anticipated.
I wonder if any other companies have made the same mistake.

[davidosh] 12/9/2008 09:03

deanroberthunt....exactly. Any spread above 5% for a small cap is criminal in my view.

I am currently involved in discussions with a stockbroker to try to resolve these issues by providing something similar to what you describe. Almost an Ebay for small illiquid stocks shall we say. In the perfect world all stocks would be on the SETS platform of course.

[deanroberthunt] 12/9/2008 08:47

there must be a better way...lets hypothesize

say someone this morning wants to sell, say 10000k worth, the MMs only offer 21p for that amount, but the seller is desperate to offload....now I want to buy and would be willing to pay 24p, instead of the 30p on the offer...

Now here's my theory....

I set up a website offering to possibly buy shares off distressed retail investors....so this guy comes along and I offer to take his shares for 24p/share...3p better than he's been offered...now of course I don't have DMA etc.. so I offer to BACS him the money (same day transfer) equivalent to the number of shares he holds x 24p (£2400), minus a small commisssion for my costs....then under contract he CRESTs his shares to me, so I will have 10000 shares bought at 24p, and not 30p + a small commission.

maybe the bank would do instant transfer, if the companies trading/profit depended on this...??

thoughts???

[davidosh] 12/9/2008 08:38

The spread will not encourage buyers or sellers. I am happy to buy stock off anyone at 24p which is nearly 10% better than the MMs are buying at. The business model should be fine so long as they trim costs for a year or so.

[deanroberthunt] 12/9/2008 08:24

hmmmmm, has the mcap in cash and profitable (even if not much)....

I suppose the only caveat is if trading deteriortaes significantly and they fall into loss making...

otherwise it might be worth a small punt....but as per usual the spread is ridiculous.

[simon cawkwell] 05/6/2008 21:29

DesWalker,

I would remind you that the burden in law is upon you to categorise gains/profits/income in terms of the self-assessment legislation. HMRC will accept in the first instance whatever treatment you elect. The question is what will they think on enquiry. I rather think that a capital gain is in point.

Simon Cawkwell

[deswalker] 29/5/2008 12:51

Hi All,

A quick question for you regarding the B Share scheme that happened last year.

At the time the Scheme documents clearly said that all distributions from the B Shares would be treatable as Capital Gains and liable to CGT. However, I have been given information that for all such returns (B Share scheme redemptions for AIM traded companies), the HMRC will treat the returns as dividend income and tax them accordingly, irrespective of what the Scheme documents actually claim. This information isn't professional advice but it has still got me wondering.

Can people confirm that they've heard nothing to say that HMRC will actually treat the redemption of the B Shares as Income and not as Capital Gain as the Scheme document claims ?

Very many thanks for any assistance with this.

Des

[mctmct] 06/5/2008 08:53

Can anyone explain this? L2 said the spread was 32-38 for 2500 shares. I placed an order to buy 5000 at max. 36p and it was dealt immediately at 35p - the mid price. The MM on the touch immediately raised their offer to 39p, and a minute later to 40p.

So how come I could deal at 35p? (Not that I'm complaining!)

McT

[mctmct] 06/5/2008 08:41

The IC write up on the results says SKC could benefit from regulatory pressure (in the US but heading East) for independent portfolio reviews. Also that "charting, sector momentum and data on overbought and oversold positions are more useful in a bear market than in a bull market." Still a Buy.

[davidosh] 28/4/2008 17:48

No comments on the results ?