Versarien Share Discussion Threads

[zydecoco] 31/10/2024 18:10

Keeping the lights on / train going is the issue for VRS - survival in the short term is the problem.All the talk of potential and future - the long term - are a diversion and will not happen if it all stops. There are no short or medium term funds or revenues in sight and the company is as PW also now realises, forward selling its few remaining authorised shares, and needs to restructure or call a GM soon.Funds needed somehow and fast.

[1manchild] 31/10/2024 17:39

pwhite - 'It is a lesson for him because he doesn't understand what's going on. He doesn't understand the realities of a nascent business like graphene and the necessary marketing aspects of it. He's viewing Versarien as if its operating in a mature market like the oil industry and he's not the only one here either.'

Its funny isnt it because i think you will find that i have never once deviated from my stance - and my stance is nothing to do with anything you have said above. It is about the management and the fact in a non-mature market they lack networks - credibility - skill - diversification strategies so income can be pursued whilst we wait for the graphene cream to rise to the top - and worst of all for me is integrity - which is plain for all to see because a lot of us LTHs know that the MCK tech sale is a sham - and if you look at the businesses in cahoots pwhite you will see it too. it doesnt take too much digging to work out the inter connections between vrs korea - mck tech and graphene lab.

And so there is no lesson you have taught me. i understand previous emerging technologies more than you realise as well as aim requirements. pretty much everyone on this baord understands it as well as understanding that it is you who has come out and have been found out time and time again. i also understand business. i know that our ceo would have been sweating buckets on what to say hence the bland rns today because the plan yet again failed. I have been there pwhite - have you?

[1retirement] 31/10/2024 17:18

Where there are idiots who will listen, there will always be a bigger idiot who preaches to them.

[1manchild] 31/10/2024 16:23

1manchild - "Our sale was marketed as a sale for which we would get funds"

pwhite73 - "100% correct. That's because VRS is a listed AIM company and needs to keep retail shareholders on board to facilitate future placings."

And so are you saying it is was all a lie - to spin a yarn to a certain type of investor - to then ensure future placings?

Lets just remind ourselves of the rns dated 11 march:

"Versarien Plc (AIM: VRS), the advanced materials engineering group, announces that the Company has, in line with its stated strategy, entered into an agreement (the "Agreement") with MCK Tech Co. Ltd ("MCK Tech") to sell the Group's plant and equipment in South Korea ("Korean Plant") for a total consideration of £604,000, as described below, together with an exclusive licence agreement with MCK Tech for the use of five patents, owned by the Group (the "IP"), for additional fees as detailed below (together the "Transaction").

The Company continues to pursue its stated turnaround strategy. An integral part of this strategy is to dispose of non-core businesses and assets. The plant and equipment acquired from Hanwha Aerospace in South Korea in 2020 were identified as non-core and marketed for sale, the Transaction concludes this part of the Group asset sale process. The Group's mature businesses, AAC Cyroma Limited and Total Carbide Limited, continue to be marketed for sale and the Company is progressing discussions with a number of interested parties, though the timing of any further asset sales and the quantum of the funds that may be received remains uncertain.

The net proceeds of the Transaction will be used for the Group's corporate and working capital purposes. The Company continues to actively seek additional short and longer term funding solutions to support its turnaround strategy."

The bit at the end is interesting as it talks about the proceeds of the transaction and what it will be used for.

[grabster] 31/10/2024 14:46

graphenejen - those savings may well accrue once 3DCP is in routine use. I certainly don't think they will apply at Accrington, which is very much a learning-on-the-job experimental thing, where there will be constant stop-start head-scratch moments - even in just the shifting of printer position (which although it is following a computered path, will still encounter on-site oddities/obstructions.)

I look forward to lots of video footage.

[grabster] 31/10/2024 14:38

The Black Knight fights on eh PW?

[graphenejen] 31/10/2024 14:36

Grabster – re the Accrington project,I too look forward to seeing it happen. Whether or not future projects are designed from scratch or are modifications of existing plans, surely the budget announcement has enhanced the potential for Versarien to be involved in many similar projects?

‘HTL [Harcourt Technologies Ltd] explains the rationale behind the use of this technology: a 30% reduction in build costs, 50% reduction in print times and 60% reduction in comparable construction wastes. These financial gains mean that the benefit can be transferred to the consumer, making the 3D printed homes affordable.’



The project on Building for Humanity’s website:

[pwhite73] 31/10/2024 14:23

RNS 11/03/24 - "Under the Agreement MCK Tech is paying £604,000 for the Korean Plant, which comprises the assets of the CVD (Chemical Vapour Deposition) graphene business carried out by Versarien's subsidiary, Versarien Korea Limited, and owned by the Company. £60,400 has been paid and the remaining £543,600 will be paid in full by 31 July 2024 through the following instalments: £120,800 60 days from the date of the Agreement; £120,800 120 days from the date of the Agreement; and £302,000 payable on 31 July 2024."

The full amount was expected by 31/07/24. VRS have been doing business with MCK Tech long enough to know the financial status of the company and whether it could meet the deadline in four months time.

Hands up even I in my earlier calculations had taken the RNS at face value and had budgeted for full the £602k being delivered on or by 31/07/24. Indeed it was the placing of £550k on 24/07/2024 when I had to shamefully admit I had called the financial timescales wrong.

MCK are not broke the CEO was over in Korea with MCK last week. The remainder of the money if it arrives is being spread out but it is not intrinsic to the prospects of VRS.

[1retirement] 31/10/2024 14:04

If they are not broke why haven't they ponied up the quarter mill for the 'assets'?

[1retirement] 31/10/2024 14:01

Do you expect to make a profit on the shares you hold? Given the reduction in value of the shares you currently hold, what percentage increase do you need to break even/make a profit on them? 100%, 200%, 500%?

[pwhite73] 31/10/2024 13:55

It is a lesson for him because he doesn't understand what's going on. He doesn't understand the realities of a nascent business like graphene and the necessary marketing aspects of it. He's viewing Versarien as if its operating in a mature market like the oil industry and he's not the only one here either.

[grabster] 31/10/2024 13:44

"Here endeth your lesson for the day."

Pompous ass.

[pwhite73] 31/10/2024 13:32

1manchild - "Our sale was marketed as a sale for which we would get funds"

100% correct. That's because VRS is a listed AIM company and needs to keep retail shareholders on board to facilitate future placings.

So retail shareholders are deliberately left asking themselves - "how much will they get for AAC £500k, £1 million £2 million?. CVD graphene £604k?. Total Carbide £2 million, £3 million?"

Someone like myself who has decades of experience in trading AIM stocks know AIM companies give away failing parts of the business for free and that's only if they're lucky. The inability to jettison failing parts of the business is often the catalyst for the whole group filing for administration.

Here endeth your lesson for the day. Forget AAC, CVD graphene, Total Carbide and move on.

[grabster] 31/10/2024 13:28

The Accrington project was designed with established construction methods in mind. The decision to switch into building it with 3DCP technology isn't just a case of rounding off some square corners - it ideally needed designing from scratch as a 3DCP structure . Attempting to convert the existing floor plans as an afterthought does make it a fun challenge. I suspect they might end up using a hybrid combination - such as using 3DCP for the outer shell only. Enough to be able to boast that 3DCP was employed - but reducing the hassle.

Either way, I look forward to watching it happen. It is very useful that BfH is a not-for-profit enterprise. If this had been a developer project with a sellable end product in mind, they would have walked away from such a dramatic change of specification.

[1manchild] 31/10/2024 13:19

pwhite - Of course you can. Many loss making businesses are sold for a nominal value of £1.00. The buyer then takes on the loss making business and tries to turn it around. This happens all the time in business.

"Sir Philip Green sells BHS to Retail Acquisitions 'for £1'"

Completely different context. Our sale was marketed as a sale for which we would get funds - with the thought process that this was all above board.

thing is pwhite - you know you are wrong on this. it is quite funny really because a few of us knew you would try and sweep this under the carpet - make it all trivial. it is a failure - and yet another failure after failure which means - there will be even further failure whilst these are in charge. they are not telling us the full truth of the operations either.

[pwhite73] 31/10/2024 12:37

1retirement - "Are MCK broke"

No they are not broke but they are facing the same problem that all graphene companies are facing. The technology is ready to go but there is no government agreed regulatory frame work as yet. Governments are liaising with universities, major industry players and high tech know how companies like Versarien to establish a regulatory framework.

This is what the CEO is doing in Korea at the moment.



"After a few days away, it was a pleasure to return to Korea and present at the 2024 International Standardization Forum on Advanced Materials in Seoul🇰Ӻ79;. Versarien® plc will be supporting Sungkyunkwan University in developing new standards for defect measurement in wafer-scale 2D materials. With perspectives from other industries, such as carbon fiber and advanced ceramics, these joint standardization efforts will drive greater precision and innovation across advanced materials as a whole."

If the BFH Accrington project collapses in a heap a week after it was built who is to blame. What building standards have BFH and its partners like Versarien failed to meet?

must dash

[1retirement] 31/10/2024 12:21

Are MCK broke, it's a quarter if a mill, hardly big bucks to a growing business

[pwhite73] 31/10/2024 12:17

zydecoco - I think you mean licensing not royalties. Licensing revenue will be the major source of the company's income when the turnaround strategy is complete. They have stated they intend to be a light manufacturer so there won't be tonnes of anything or millions of anything coming off the production line.

Licencing revenue will come from the use of Cementene, graphene products and 3D concrete printing.

Speak Later.

[zydecoco] 31/10/2024 12:10

Grabster that Python - Black Knight reference made me laugh; very aposite.

[zydecoco] 31/10/2024 12:08

PW, let's establish your position.Are you also writing off / not putting any emphasis on Royalties inflow.I haven't heard of any of those so far?

[pwhite73] 31/10/2024 12:02

1manchild - "absolute tripe in fact because when it comes to business you cannot just give it away."

Of course you can. Many loss making businesses are sold for a nominal value of £1.00. The buyer then takes on the loss making business and tries to turn it around. This happens all the time in business.



"Sir Philip Green sells BHS to Retail Acquisitions 'for £1'"

[pwhite73] 31/10/2024 11:57

zydecoco. I'm not sure I ever put any importance on funds from divestment. When CVD graphene, AAC and Total were owned by VRS they were all loss making. When you sell a loss making business you sell it for tax purposes and to stem further losses.

Who is going to buy a loss making business off you. There has to be an incentive for a buyer to purchase your loss making business or the losses are simply passed onto them.

[1manchild] 31/10/2024 11:57

More nonsense from you pwhite. absolute tripe in fact because when it comes to business you cannot just give it away.

here is the story - no one wants to buy anything to do with vrs because they don't trust the management. it is why they did an insider deal between vrs korea - mck tech and graphene lab - the same people in the mix - to make it look like a sale - and now as they all haver that same love in that you have with our ceo - they will allow dribs and drabs of money shifting from each other to make it look like a proper sale. do your research and have a look at the companies involved and you will see the connections.

and here is the truth - we need a new management in place for new networks and new ideas which I keep saying. vrs has exhausted everything when it comes to top table talks. they have nothing to offer but market and product failure - and a future where they are responsible for huge debts.

im not having it that you can just brush this under the carpet. it is another major failure and in fact it has shown that the full truth of everything to do with the deal has not been told.

[grabster] 31/10/2024 11:49

"That Cantor Fitzgerald and Spreadex have taken holding positions suggests they believe there is going to be sufficient activity over the short to medium term to make some money and not with a market cap of just £1.3 million." (PWhite post ----726)


Cantor and Spreadex haven't "taken positions" (as in made a judgment themselves) - they are merely agents. Their own belief doesn't come into it.

You are sounding more and more like The Black Knight is the Monty Python sketch.

[zydecoco] 31/10/2024 11:48

PW, That very much sounds like you've shifted to writing off all potential funds inflow from divestment. Surely you are in denial now. No funds incoming