Wandisco Share Discussion Threads

[cc2014] 11/7/2023 07:20

Well.

An RNS for a £6k order.

The stock market never ceases to surprise me.

[spectoacc] 11/7/2023 07:14

Lol - barely worth the RNS fee.

Theoretical b/e, which will also require a 2nd fundraise after this stalled one, needs c.422 of their usual $100k deals. Not sure I'll bother doing the maths for a $6k one. But taking 240 trading days a year, they need pushing two deals a day, every working day, in the £100k range.

Could argue they've a lot of those already for current year, so one $100k RNS a day at least needed.

[bookbroker] 11/7/2023 07:12

No, but that is great news, 7K, should give the company a great boost, just need about another twenty thousand of those kind of orders to get anyone excited!

[dgbell7] 11/7/2023 07:08

Not sure I’ve ever seen a £6k contract win get an RNS before.

[spectoacc] 10/7/2023 15:27

@Scutable - who believes WAND was valued at £2m - £200k is chickenfeed for a co with a forecast cost base, forecast by the new CEO, of $22-23m. Do you think the new management is wrong? Too pessimistic?

Tesco has a £65bn t/o. $100k (a year) is chump change to them.

So "..More than 200 customers globally.." equated to $9.6m of revenue and $28m of losses? Gets surprisingly near to my 422 customers estimate to approach cash b/e. Contracts must all be equally tiny.

[scrutable] 10/7/2023 15:21

melton john and Owenski
You are both treating the subject objectively. Thanks. But can you explain why Tesco has elected to spend £200,000 or so to renew their contract today, at a time when retailers are under such cost pressures as is known, and which the jeering naysayers on this board hold out as chicken feed.

Nor has anyone made a guess as to why Accenture, known to exact eye watering fees for their advice, have recently signed up for at least a year; and why is the following page heading now 100% obsolete because the Cloud now dominates ...


"WANdisco currently has more than 200 customers globally, a number of which are in the US Fortune 100. Customers include some of the world's most well-known and well regarded companies across a broad range of industry sectors such as AT&T, Aviva, Barclays, Hewlett Packard, Honda, Intel, John Deere, Johnson & Johnson, Juniper Networks, Motorola, NCR, Nokia, NTT and Wal-Mart......"

[scrutable] 10/7/2023 14:42

bones:
your irony is misplaced.

I doubt that WAND have anything like £40m of unavoidable costs/annually ahead of them. Any CEO controlling £10-15m p/a revenues which WAND had before the fraud began, should be able to justify a capital value of >£10-30m as a multiple of sales. Wand surely has intrinsically low cost of sales, especially in the second year of any contract. What will today's Tesco repeat order cost them during the coming 12 months?.

Would someone who really knows such a business at least e hazard a guess of the running costs if any at all?

[bones698] 10/7/2023 07:13

Lol unless they start signing deals for millions and lots of them this will run out of cash fast . Whilst being transparent is a change from previous it also is showing the slow and minimal progress and that they will fall far short of what's required to increase turnover before more funding is required .
Don't forget the losses are around 2m a month even with revenue of 9m . So revenue needs to increase to around 40m to break even and in about 11 months . Very very unlikely

[bones698] 07/7/2023 20:36

Scriptable I totally agree and think you should invest everything you own in wand . Afterall this is a sound profitable company with no baggage and sound business .30m will definitely see them to profit and can see this rising to 1500p Inna few days .
Clueless

[johnjames876] 07/7/2023 15:34

So 50p open on relist

[melton john] 07/7/2023 12:44

Well credit to you for not spending your days dreaming of past glory Scrutable, but that, as owenski and I have said, is what Wand are doing. Trading on a niche business that solved a problem for a few customers with massive data collections who wanted to migrate to cloud computing while still providing a running system.

That in no way equates to the world and his cat being prospective customers because they are already using cloud computing and data storage and any new data generated by whatever user group can find its way to the cloud without any help from Wand as it has been doing for years apart from users of an obscure niche system that probably no-one outside of that circle has heard of. Why do you think sales people lied about prospects, we maintain because they were flogging a dead horse that users no longer had any need for.

As I said before, what is their USP for the future, never mind what they did.

[scrutable] 07/7/2023 11:47

melton john and Owenski

I have to give way to someone with such deep experience of the technology. I am steeped in the past, inevitably, at 95 when most of my contemporaries are 'babbling of green fields' but I do spend five hours a day keeping up as far as is possible with the accelerating changes in the business world, mainly in the USA: Quantum computing (x200m times faster than the fastest supercomputer yet); liquid battery technology to deal with variations in solar,tidal and wind energy, autononomous transportation by E.Vs on land and in the air, robotics and AI etc etc.
I can recommend it to extend the normal life span by 20-25 years.

So to fully accept your propositions that Wand has absolutely nothing to offer why does an Australian Bank shell out, endorsed by Accenture: as per this RNS:
"......... a new two-year agreement valued at $113,125 ......to use WANdisco Data Migrator to support the data modernization program for a leading Australian bank".
And why in NOv 2020 did Microsoft's AZURE introduce a major US Telecom to spend $3m or in that autumn; and did AWS announce contracts with three of the largest global telecoms and one of S Africa's largest banks; or did IBM use their four year relationship to integrate Live Data migrator with their Replica?

There are too many examples of £M genuine contracts with global leaders in too many countries and too many industries with just too much data growing exponentially to accept that Wand has nothing to offer.
.

[owenski] 07/7/2023 08:15

I posted this 3 years ago -

"owenski - 12 Jun 2020 - 11:33:04 - 5191 of 6128

This is a geek company, loved by and enthused over at US tech conventions by shed loads of other geeks, clever product and very clever people all in love with each other's 'awsomeness'............ But, that doesn't necessarily translate into a business.

Ever since I took an interest in following these they actually had to keep changing and revising the business model, the IBM sales force direct marketing opportunity never came to anything, Hadoop was the future until everyone transitioned to the cloud, the rate of uptake in cloud adoption has underpinned most tech focused businesses revenue, except for WAND's, which is strange considering how they market their product's necessity.

Oh, and so much for the biggy that is/was JEDI.

Maybe WAND just aint the must have element that they believe themselves to be.

Anyway, maybe Azure will come good, but WAND's track record isn't convincing and occasional $1m a pop announcements just aint what's expected and is small potatoes."

Looks to me like Richards has been conning the market for a long time or is self deluded.

[owenski] 07/7/2023 08:08

Being that this is now the age of cloud services, I don't see the point of WAND, I think they had a solution that more suited hadoop architecture, but hasn't the move now been to cloud services. Their chance came and went and the tech has moved on.

Richards has been conning everyone for a few years now.

[melton john] 07/7/2023 07:56

I just watched a YouTube video with an ad for AWS handling a ton of data per second from F1 racing cars. So what is Wand's USP Scrutable? The had something that suited a small number of users of a niche application and tried to con everybody that they alone could handle lots of data in the future. I worked for 3 major US computer manufacturers, the first being instrumental in building ARPANET which was the military predecessor of the Internet back in the Eighties and I know quite a bit about moving data around. Do tell us what is Wand's proven technology that the world can't possibly manage without because many potential customers are missing the point if there is one.

[spectoacc] 07/7/2023 06:59

Taking new management at their word on costs:

"There is still strong underlying potential profitability from high gross profit margins of 93% (FY21: 91%). Furthermore, in H1'23 there has been significant reduction in overheads, reducing from $40.1m (FY22) to a projected run rate of c.$25.0m per annum. This is now expected to be further reduced to an annualised run rate overhead cost for FY24 of $22-23 million."


They've already cut staff, but still have an "...Annualised run rate overhead" planned of $22-23m. Isn't clear how much that varies with delivery costs etc, but taking a very basic calc with 93% margins, they'd need to get t/o to c$25m with no further overhead increase (ie no more sales or delivery staff) to get to something approaching cash b/e (not profit, not even EBITDA).

To put that in perspective - that's 221 Accenture deals. I'd also suggest those margins are difficult to improve upon.

Not saying it can't be done, but nothing that's gone before suggests it'll happen. They'd also need to raise money/dilute further before they got there.

[owenski] 06/7/2023 22:03

Pretty much declining revenue with increasing costs.

Jeez

[spectoacc] 06/7/2023 20:52

All pre-fraud:

y/e 2018 - $17m revenue, $23m loss (loss figs before interest income or debt costs)
y/e 2019 - $16m revenue, $27m loss
Y/e 2020 - $10.5m revenue, $34m loss
Y/e 2021 - $7m revenue, $40m loss
Y/e 2022 - $9.6m revenue, $39m loss

Valued at nearly a billion quid before the fraud was exposed.

Never £2m.

As I say, good luck to the new management, but what went before wasn't viable.


"Provided that they are able in future to change the payment terms.."

Accenture deal says not, natch.

[bertiebingo] 06/7/2023 19:56

Isn't 220p is now worth 40p given shares outstanding increases from 67m to 367m

[dr biotech] 06/7/2023 19:15

Whilst I admire your attempt to swim against the tide of popular opinion, there were 50m shares in issue last year, so it’s valuation would have been c£100m

Edit :actually there were approx 60m, so about £130m


SCRUTABLE6 Jul '23 - 18:34 - 6120 of 6120
0 0 0
SpectoAcc:
at least get your facts right:

in May 11 2022 the shares touched absolute bottom at 211p making WAND'S valuation around £2m. Is that supposed to be "nearly a billion Quid"

[scrutable] 06/7/2023 18:34

SpectoAcc:
at least get your facts right:

in May 11 2022 the shares touched absolute bottom at 211p making WAND'S valuation around £2m. Is that supposed to be "nearly a billion Quid"

But that's not relevant to my argument ,which refers back to a time when genuine orders were being placed, two or three significant, each month, via introductions from the likes of AWS, Microsoft, Oracle,IBM, Infosys, Snowflake and so on and so on from Canada, USA, S Africa and the EU.. These genuine orders were attracted by the unique quality of Wand's product, which still holds: as endorsed/expressed by Accenture, which us why their modest six figure order is so valuable..

Well before the fraud began, international retailers, banks, insurers,telecoms and automotive suppliers were getting good value honestly from Wand at Wand's expense. Their business plan was naive, just silly in cashflow terms and it continued to pile up debt with each order beyond the full year.

Provided that they are able in future to change the payment terms, they should become a good investment. Now that the technology is proven they should be able to exact normal terms, and prosper, which prospect seems to annoy so many contributors swarming here like so many Draculas at a Transylvanian feast.

[spectoacc] 06/7/2023 16:17

Are you kidding, no sign before the fraud of valuation craziness? It was being valued at nearly a billion quid, and the more deals it signed, the more money it lost! WAND has been a money pit, even before the fraud turbo-charged the madness.

Show me any profits, any EBIDTA, and cashflow positive-ness.

Yes, it has a keen new management, and good luck to them. A name change, $30m, and perhaps they can start again and finally make something of WAND. But that's around where the valuation should be IMO.

$113k deals (revenue not profit!) don't counter that, they prove it.

And to top it all, they fluffed the fundraising by not following Jersey law.