Versarien Share Discussion Threads

[astralvision] 04/7/2017 11:03

Although it reduces risk the plain fact is investors don't like the blue sky/boring mix, so I agree with phoenixs, but is it what it is so we are stuck with it. it may reduce the down-side, it probably reduces the upside as well.
Regarding sales activity, certainly VRS were upbeat in their view that their would be more sales in a relatively short time following the £100K order. It's the nature of small companies to be optimistic, but the reality is we will have to wait a bit longer than they first anticipated.

[phoenixs] 04/7/2017 10:56

ridicule, I get what you are saying but I have been involved in the world of engineering for a long time. What I do know is not much yet I will say that the testing procedures for already established products is a very long and arduous one. It took over a year before my product was given the green light by one of my customers.
Big companies have procedures which take an awfully long time. Even their paperwork can take weeks when a small company like mine can do it in days. So your comment about "tangible business activity", whilst correct may well proved to be misplaced given how long timescales are especially with state of the art technology.

As I see it one of the problems for VRS is perception. As stand alones the engineering business has a value of x and the graphene blue sky business has a value of y. In my view if the businesses were quoted separately the share price of the two would be a multiple of the share price of the combined business today. It is in my view illogical but there it is. At least the company has some tangible assets for which there is value. At the investors day at Cambridge, it was mentioned that the company as a whole is expected to break even later this year. That would mean a year on year increase of £1.2m profit.

[superg1] 04/7/2017 10:03

The one unloved she that I always mention is ITM power.

Hydrogen creating tech and it simply never caught the imagination of the masses even in the mad bull market.

Still they churn on trying to build a business but in hype terms in theory they should have done the £100's of mills M/C too but the following is simply no there at this time.

However that said the figures have it as a £50m M/C with a £1.9 mill turnover so not completely unloved.

The market is nuts truing to understand it is pointless. Trying to engage with it when all others are is a tough game to call.

[superg1] 04/7/2017 09:31

I spend hours looking at all the facts and try to back up everything I say with data and public documents then you get some ridiculous comment like that.

I have no desire to post about things I have picked up on which are potentially huge as I can;t back them up and all it does it create hope on the back of something big that can't be determined if if will come or now which is exactly what VRS want to avoid.

VRS could make big of some things that ARE in play, BUT until the dotted lines are signed they are meaningless yet in some cases huge. They may come to nothing at all.

It's company choice to hype that up or not. It's the style of the team not to do that. Funds and everyone else are not used to not hyping it up. Most PIs want hype and hope but history shows just how high some companies went on that.

Typical Aim behaviour no one wants them when some shares are cheap but then clamour after them when many want them and often on the back of no concrete reason just pure hype.

Just one big name and they go nuts, I've seen it. VRS are talking to dozens of such names and if anything material comes of the talks then we'll get to hear about it via an RNS.

Many also forget where cash can come from but for that you will have to DYOR.

[luckyorange] 04/7/2017 08:48

Love it when someone does all the groundwork and makes life easy with the calculations, thanks superg, some very encouraging figures there.

[superg1] 04/7/2017 08:30

Revenue

H1 £1.635

YE £5.93 mill. AAC is £2.5 mill of that.

H2 ignoring AAC £1.795 mill.


So assuming all things equal for this year with a static position on revenue it will be about £8.5 mill as it would include a full year for AAC.

The plan suggested was about break even in 12 months time but it excludes any material interest on all the talk going on.

So what we know they will be moving into the £8 mill to £10 mill revenue bracket without too much effort but have the potential to fly through that.

So back to the valuation JH. You have all others beside graphene valued at £8 mill but their yearly revenue rate is higher than that.

Can you share the figures and details you used to come to that decision and why you value the GNPs with virtually no revenue so highly and double all the rest put together.

It seems an odd conclusion.

[superg1] 04/7/2017 08:15

Good old FUM.

A regulatory RNS to say they are doing a presentation. ???

On the lines they are talking VRS have been doing that to many companies bigger than the FUM ones.

That's the BS difference on the AIM.

[superg1] 04/7/2017 08:13

A point.

What if an AIM like this was sitting on potential yearly orders within one of it's businesses for £5 mill, £10 mill or £15 or more mill per year.

That I suggest would make a major difference.

But obviously if one such order was never to appear then it's completely worthless so why talk about it. However many AIMs thrive on BS just like that.

That's why NDAs and talks are worthless. There can be huge figures sat behind them if they go ahead/ That's what some AIMs hit such high MCs like Nano and QFI did because the potential was there because the names were there for all to see.

VRS don't do that, they do not want an M/C running off to have the pressure of getting the deals to meet the market cap. Better to stay low key and let the deals do the talking.

Hence for me it does not matter where it goes on the share price as I'm in long term looking at the obvious and not so obvious parts thinking anyone one of those will send this flying.

It may be that none come at all but small steps which most are oblivious to are already in play.

I don't want the herd here or the mad gamblers I have experienced in the past, so I like the way VRS keep things low key.

I know it doesn't fit with what PIs are used to on the AIM but that's because they like to build a solid business not build a pile of BS or a house of cards.

[luckyorange] 04/7/2017 07:47

Quantum Base, a Lancaster University spin off, got some interesting graphene patents in and looks like they are ready for commercial production.

[superg1] 04/7/2017 07:47

As said I was here looking with interest well before graphene came along and wrongly criticised the company for getting involved in it.

I visted the Carbide factory 3 years ago and I see they now hint at an open day there. So if that does pop up then personally I'd say it's worth going as you may get to see or hear about the new products and then get how highly lucrative that could be.

A year ago I'd have said nice to have Carbide as a back stop, a steady decades old company but hit by the oil market.
They have started to diversify into other sectors.

If anyone recalls it at one event the CEO said he was surprised to learn Carbide was mot in aerospace. It is now with parts anticipated to be in play Sept this year. I believe that's what the CFO said on Cambridge day.

So my point is take off the blinkers but beware it may throw up a fence to stop investing progress.

[superg1] 04/7/2017 07:39

So to clarify that JH

You have AAC with £5 mill revenue snd profits. Carbide now going back into profit, Cambridge ink, Thermal side, ABS launch and Cambridge ink having a total value of £8 million.

Then GNPs with little revenue at this time valued at £14 million.

AGM with an apparent unproven tech just GNPs £34 million.


As said by the time we get news we are 6 months behind on the knowledge, but if you dig deep you can find things and if you have integrity you then can't buy or sell on the back of it.

So Dyor and I disagree with your valuation split.

There IS big potential on Carbide to my surprise, same on copperfoam especially due to one new major name recently looking at it, others too.

The copperfoam fits things like set top boxes through to electric vehicle and wind turbine heat management. Just ask.

[luckyorange] 04/7/2017 07:36

So many times I see this statement:-

'However, its progress has been impeded by our inability to mass-produce it — a problem which this process could solve. Rice chemist James Tour stated in the press release, “We have shown how to make 3D graphene foams from non-graphene starting materials, and the method lends itself to being scaled to graphene foams for additive manufacturing applications.”


Tell them it can be mass produced Neill,you have the tech and the quality, tell 'em :)

[superg1] 04/7/2017 07:25

JH

How can 2/3rds of the business be graphene when it's MC was higher without it.

Then how can others have gone £40 mill plus with virtually no revenue and no valid tech.

MCs are all sbout sentiment and the buy sell situation in the market.

EG
AGM have GNPs that they can only profuce in small amounts it seems. The business ends there.

VRS have a lead on ink (source prof Ferarri) and as it stands about £7 mill plus revenue per year throught using investor cash not to pay lucrative salaries but to build businesses and revenue.

[luckyorange] 04/7/2017 07:24

Now NR has finished the 'touring' and promoting the products it's good to note that he is getting into a graphene push with the companies that have expressed an interest. Won't be long before there is a significant pace change I would think.

[jointer13] 04/7/2017 07:17

bit of publicity

"Engineering group sees rapid rise in worldwide enquiries"

[luckyorange] 04/7/2017 05:51

I don't get that john henry, it was publicly listed before the graphene came along? Other companies out there with just a graphene business and nothing to prop them up so it's live or die on graphene.

That is what it's about though, lots of companies 'want to be first' with the innovative use of graphene, it will take one, just one large company to take the plunge. Each will be watching the other to see which way they are going to move and then once one does they all will to keep up. In 10/20 years graphene will then be old hat (maybe) and it may take some time for the next leap forward.

o/t somebody spoke about EKT, if smooth gorilla is part of the management of that outfit then take no notice , he has no idea how to build a company but is an expert at running one into the ground at the expense of shareholders. Not a good person to be giving advice!

[john henry] 04/7/2017 02:06

Results where conservative and fair, at present there is just a great deal of talking. Imho 2/3 of the MKT Cap is Graphene and speculation, rest of the business will do very little just plod along delivering a little bit of revenue. Without the Graphene business i would question the need to be publically listed.

[superg1] 03/7/2017 21:41

TBH I thought those results read OK.

I don't quite know what I was expecting but with all the costs due to the move and acquisitions I though the market may knock it back a penny or two on open but I read it and felt quite good about what they said but also recognised they could have said quite a bit more.

EG I was chatting with the company and they said they could release collaboration news more or less weekly but unless it's significant what is the point other than feeding some that demand news. Collaborations are often the next move up from NDAs

There will be news of course but we'll just have to wait and see what it's all about.

EG Making one up let's say VRS were in a plan with Samsung to review whether graphene in smart phone screens and casings was a viable option and that was news. My common sense tells me some chancers would make big of that but actually such news in real terms has no value whatsoever.

While that is just a fictional example it's not so fictional in terms of the prospects ahead on various fronts with similar sized companies. However they are all worthless as NDAs but then it depends which Aim company is talking about it on the hype value where to them it's transformational if you read their news.

[superg1] 03/7/2017 20:00

It's no secret I have a dim view re AGM and have clearly declared my concerns.

What then if things are as suggested with the IP group Chief investment officer on that BOD. Complicit or incompetent if I'm right, it has to be one of those.

It will all pan out as they say and I have no idea what the outcome will be at this time. On that one again I know things many don't and I can't share them.

[superg1] 03/7/2017 19:56

Krowlet

Modern water was the flyer on the BBC graphene news along with AGM. Modern water is in that sector so no surprises there. They have been knocked back since that died down. That was a nuts reaction as it was a lab test with that type of technology being many years away yet. Hey ho that's what a bit of graphene PR does along with the nutty herd, that herd has been and gone well back.

Both of those are heavily backed by the IP group making shares tight which is part why they have high MCS and is is part why IP group has a crazy M/C by backing many high risk companies.


It's ok then for Nano to fly because of DOW which went slightly wrong and QFI to fly so high due to trials with Maersk which has gone wrong. As said better Imo that it bounces along and reacts to the any developments.

I don't want VRS to fly on hype. I want it to build on the back of progress. They have the team and tech acquisitions to do just that but there are some left field things people here can't even think of, let alone forecast it. Some want to get rid of some things which in fact have underlying gold mine potential.

If it happens it happens. That's the way I see it. I get waiting for further evidence of performance before investment. We are all different, Some are heavily into some shares that I wouldn't touch with a bargepole.

I had friends in PRG and tried to persuade them to sell, hey ho we are all different and we all make our own decisions.

[superg1] 03/7/2017 19:40

On the accounts side I have had long chats with Chris Leigh and he is as solid as they come.

Ask the finance PR company ask others that have had the Chris Leigh treatment and you will find if ever there was a diligent CFO you want looking after your accounts then he'd be one at the top of the list to choose.

Well I say that but only if you want to be a tightly run business and not some wide boy type lifestyle share AIM, with an investor fleecing lying BOD.