Why none other than Sorehead, seller of the good ol' Snakk oil, TruScreen (for suckers) and PlusSMS(cam)!
Printable View
A very interesting and encouraging article from Microsoft, on VMob technology, http://blogs.microsoft.com/iot/2015/...er-engagement/ ... with some incredible statistics that lend confidence as to the future successes VML seem certain to enjoy, such as ...
"McDonald’s in Sweden has seen a 700 percent increase in offer redemptions, and customers using the app are returning to stores twice as often and spending 47 percent more."
and ... "New Zealand-based VMob is [helping] McDonald’s transform its customer engagement in the Netherlands, Sweden and Japan, regions that represent about 12 percent of the food service retailer’s locations worldwide"
... or put another way, 88% of MacDonalds worldwide will be wanting a piece of that action!
This is a good way to keep up with the VML news https://www.linkedin.com/company/1192801
[disc: still accumulating VML]
VMob's solutions are right in the sweet spot of mobile marketing:"Top 3 Technology Trends Marketers Should Watch In 2015" http://www.socialmediatoday.com/content/top-3-
VMob ticks all three boxes.
Anticipating some great news on prospects arising from the NRF-National Retail Federation 2015 conference.
Here's some good news https://www.nzx.com/companies/VML/announcements/260004. I was expecting a USA agreement coming up next but they have done one better and gone global!
I wonder if there is anyhthing in their McDonalds agreements which prevents Vmob from deploying the same technology to their competitors, KFC, BK etc..., does anyone have any inside info on that? If it works so well for McDonalds and gives them the edge the other fast food outlets would want a slice of the action as well.
Fantastic news, global McDonalds, much better than expected! Well done VMob, an excellent development, it opens up the 80% of McDonalds that VMob don't already have - 400% increase in opportunity. USA would have been exciting for sure, Global McDonalds is tremendous. The last paragraph is also very encouraging (as is the bid / ask this morning) :)
"VMob is ideally positioned to provide its unique software platform and services to benefit similar clients around the world."
A word of warning to all (yes, history is relevant and does teach us lessons!).The VMob announcement this morning is interesting. On the face of it, it’s great news for a small company that has promised much for a long time.
However, many of the same investors/actors in VML were the same people in Plus SMS, which had a history of ramping news to sell down at big profit while dupes piled in. It all came to a big crash when they acknowledged that their market announcements bore little relationship with actual likelihood of revenue.
Mobile marketing 2006 vs mobile marketing in 2015… so what will be the difference? I am not saying that VML won't make it, I'm just saying exercise caution here and remember who you are dealing with...
Well if nothing else BFG, you are reliably repetitive, like a broken record. Anyone would think you have a vested interest in VMob, but you don't do you?, they can read your warning posts that follow every positive post on here. Oh, we know, you do it out of the goodness of your heart, to save us from ourselves and the boogiemen who you despise so intensely. Fortunately those boogiemen don't have your real name or you'd probably be wrestling a defamation suit. It's easy to hide behind a nom-de-plume. There's no need to keep re-writing your story, just post links to all the similar posts that you've deposited throughout ShareTrader. In the meantime, some may be happy for VMob's success today and the future.
The McD's announcement can only open up more doors one would think.
I'd love to have more robbo but its already fully weighted in my portfolio. 😉
What a bugger of a day to announce it. Auckland Anniversary day and didn't check my messages/market until 11am. Once Auckland wakes up to it more sellers might come out, so there could be a pull back. Mind you, might bring in more buyers!
This can only been great news about VMob securing an international contract with McDonalds and the team from VMob are to be congratulated in securing this holy grail of contracts. I think NZ does not understand the scale of how big McDonalds really is. everyday McDonalds serves 68m customers. They have 35,000 outlets globally. Annual revenues are $27.5b. In China there are 200 restaurants opening each year. McDonald's feed 1% of the world population everyday.
obviously we are not being informed of the commercial aspects of the deal, but in the USA there are 14,267 restaurants outlets.(as at 2013). With Immediate roll out of the USA tranche there will be considerable upside on the financials. As news of this contract broadens I will expect to see VMob finally break away from its penny dreadful status.
BB, I could have been a lot nastier and spiteful than that, but I chose not to be. I am just telling traders/holders to do their homework and look at the history of the people involved with this. These guys know who I am anyways; I am not as anonymous as you think I am (if you're near Palmy you can in fact come say hi on Friday night!)
If they make it, good on them for giving it a go. In the meantime, I suggest caution.
That is all, I'll leave you alone now.
... and just like that 8 of the top 10 are people who picked VML in Stocktastic for 2015. I wonder if it will hold.
Commercial sensitivities of the contract aside, it's a shame there's not at least a revenue number attached. We don't need to know VML's margin on the contract but anything to quantify how large a deal it is would reassure market sceptics, etc.
If it's as good as what it appears, it may well be timely for a share consolidation to remove the penny-dreadful perception and status.
Yea ha - not even my other crap picks in the comp can hold me back.
Great announcement. A bit sceptical - if they knew they were close, why do a capital raise just two months ago.
You are talking big numbers if the system works like it did in Europe. More disclosure on revenue metrics would be nice. They had a bullish ARR figure announcement a few months back which possibly mean this company is highly undervalued.
I see that there has been a second announcement of 205m shares being issued at a very nominal rate and those investors are now up 100% on their investment. Good on them. I will now be interested to see any financial reforecasts by the likes of Edison who forcastr revenue based on known contracts of around $2.2m in the 2015 year. re-forecast must now be required.
https://www.anzsecurities.co.nz/Dire...spx?id=3793737
Read my warning lower down.
These guys have impeccable timing eh?
DYOR
That is SO awesome for those private placement investors. BFG is just being cynical, there's certainly no way that any reasonably above board company would possibly announce a confidential agreement (which, of course, details of which cannot be disclosed) with McDonalds the next trading day after some big boys get their shares... I wonder how many of the trades today on the way up were people actually interested in the prospects of the company... Where will it close? :D:D:D:D:D
Surely no reasonably astute FA investor would randomly throw their money at VML on a confidential agreement THAT YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO KNOW ABOUT.
Congrats to the big boys :D:D:D:D:D:D:D
Hard luck for the rest of you.
P.S - BFG was right, have fun on the sell down.
Put yourself in the shoes of one of the pivileged few, even if you are sitting on a 100% paper profit, wouldn't you want to wait until this news hits the papers, after AKL's anniversary holiday, before taking some profit? I would, which is why I'm waiting until sometime tomorrow before selling down.
Suggest we all take a look at the announcement from today again (the 1:37pm one):
VMob is pleased to advise that after the close of business on 23 January 2015 it successfully completed a private placement of 205,137,771 ordinary shares at AU$0.01/NZ$0.0106 per share, raising $NZ2,174,166 million. The capital raising was undertaken in both New Zealand and Australia and was supported by a mixture of high net worth individuals, institutions and certain VMob directors.
......A mixture of high net worth investors, institutions and certain VMob directors.
This is even dodgier than I first thought. Quite blatant and disregarding of the rules of the NZX as well.
If I was a holder I wouldn't want to have any part in this company whatsoever after today. :eek2::eek2::eek2:
What, broken only one rule! Surely they've broken every rule in the book and every bone in the small investors puny bodies. Only up 118% today. Crikey, what a disappointment.
Oh well, you can still buy them at 0.024 tomorrow, before the Aucklanders realise what's happened while they were sunning themselves today. That's if you're not a bit busy reporting them to the Shareholders Association and the FMA and whoever else will listen.
Just funning ya.
;):eek2:
I spotted this & was waiting for someone other than you to say something as I agree this is a really, really bad look. The way this has played out certainly seems like a nice way to line your pockets hey? Simply raise capital with prior knowledge of a big contract, then as soon as it is closed announce the contract then sit back and watch the money roll in. Where do I sign up? It all seems too easy.
Also any thoughts on why a company based in Auckland would announce this on a public holiday?
Disc: Not holding - just watching with interest.
We've known about the capital raising since December 11. The sort of company that makes this sort of announcement on Auckland anniversary day is the sort of company that releases price sensitive information as soon as possible. The 'certain vmob directors' is no doubt your everyday 'let's show them we are in too' that management are always trying to get across. Vmob is probably the only global McDonalds supplier of ANYTHING that has an mcap of NZ$30m. Holding. Obviously wish I'd grabbed more at 10am.
Those of you on the outside looking in need to remember these guys are smart, sharp, and know the limits, but they are certainly not stupid. If FMA or NZX were prompted to take a look, for certain, the ink would have only dried on the formal agreement on Friday USA time. Posturing/protesting will get you nowhere IMO
Don't hold, won't hold, for similar reasons to moosies continuous monotonous drone:sleep:
You didn't want a part of the company ages ago BFG, so this is hardly the tipping point, and considering you're not a holder, you seem to want to have a part of this everyday.
I think we've got the message, you've made yourself clear. You even said today you'd leave it alone, though admittedly you didn't say for how long, so for a couple of hours it was quite peaceful watching the price rise.
In all seriousness BFG, I don't mean to diminish your enthusiasm for justice and admire your passion for the rights of shareholders. You may even be correct! Do you think it's worth taking up the cause and reporting this blatant manipulation and devious plotting to the SA and the FMA?
Meanwhile, some of us will be cracking open a nice bottle tonight and celebrating VMob's outstanding achievements winning the McDonalds Global contract, and of course a nice reward for supporting the company.
It appears Mr Joyce certainly earns his keep for these kind of companies.
Baa Baa, good to know what side of the ledger you are on. Profits at any/all costs eh? Remember, you haven't made a dime until you hit the sell button ;)
Don't worry, there are interested parties in todays actions. Stay tuned.
Until then... :)
Surely raising over two trillion dollars was overkill?
Well, to suggest I have no values is a long bow drawn too far. The difference in our perspectives I think BFG is:
My focus -- that VMob have an awesome product, perfect market timing, great management, excellent customers and huge potential, that's why I bought into the company. I've waited a long time to achieve an average buy-in 0.013, so that's not too far above the blessed few, apparently.
Your focus -- while you graciously acknowledge some of the virtues above, your fixation on the perceived or real skulduggery of 'certain directors', has not only removed you from any possibility of sharing in this company, but is further embittering you towards the directors and their apparent behaviours that in all likelihood you can do nothing about.
By not fixating on the things I cannot change, does not put me on the "side of the ledger" of "profits at all costs". For heavens sake man, your crusade may be well intentioned but maybe you could start a new thread ... something like "Crucify the corrupt directors" ... and then you and everyone who is equally upset as you can post there.
Meanwhile, I'll take my chances that VMob is outrageously successful simply because it is as I said above.
If you are the good man that you say you are then you won't mind me applying this quote to you:
"The only thing necessary for triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
I have no qualms about calling a spade a spade. Suggest you think about your holding in VML tonight ;)
Thanks BFG you're too kind ... oh, hang on ... for a moment I thought you said I was a good man, then I saw the 'If'.
Fancy that, questioning my values, principles, character and integrity, all in one day! Perhaps you have confused me with one of the directors you hate so much, instead of a regular guy trying to make a buck on the sharemarket. I hope not, but I think so, because you have insulted not only me but everyone who has the temerity to own VML as well.
And to toss out an Edmund Burke quote, without attribution, says more about you than me.
Stooping to new lows is unbecoming, though perhaps not unexpected, however I wish you all the best in rooting out the evil you so desperately seek, though will undoubtedly try and use others to execute for you, as no one at the FMA that I know would give you the time of day.
I know this won't be your last word on it, but it is my last word, on this .. to you.
All the best,
BAA
I'm in two minds about this.
Firstly, VML was running desperately short of money and several weeks ago when they announced the share placement at 1 Australian cent, I wasn't even sure they would get money then. A lot has changed since then with the McDonalds Global announcement.
However, it seems odd that they couldn't put off the share placement by a few days when this contract announcement became imminent. It had already been delayed once (on Dec 23). It certainly rings alarm bells for me. 1 cps now appears that it might be cheap in which case they could've got away with selling half as many shares. This has been a capital transfer from current shareholders to the new shareholders (including the directors).
Maybe the directors were committed to share placement before the news of the McDonalds deal came to light. But it's not enough to do the right thing: they need to be seen to be doing the right thing.
This whole deal feels a little fishy. Directors enriching themselves at the expense of shareholders. The $2,174,166 invested is now worth almost $5 million. Pretty easy work if you can get it.
They certainly could have extended the cap raising for the benefit of loyal holders like baa baa. There is absolutely no prohibition on doing so.
Baa baa black black sheep has 3 bags of something...
BFG, you a bit unfair making judgement on BaaBaa morals/values
Have you considered that BaaBaa isn't really an investor in VML. BB hasn't put in cash into VML (yet), rather BB is just trading prices of a ticker code.
You seem to make out that BB by trading VML prices has associated himself with those 'dodgy' promoters of VML.
I don't see BB as an 'owner' of VML, BB just trading prices and taking advantage of what is happening in the market (on a considered basis). Isn't that what you do with other ticker codes, you never think of yourself as an 'owner'
If BB needs to think about his 'involvement' in VML don't you need to think about your own ' involvement' in trading prices.
Go for it BB - make zillions from VML
I was passed by Moosie this morning, he said he was on his way to see the guys at the FMA
Isn't this the dilemma with those 10 baggers in the past though? You can't quite believe what's happening with the shareprice and then when you think you've figured it out its pretty much too late? Why not just chuck a free $1000 at it and if its wrong it`ll drop to being $500 (as the price so far had only doubled since announcement) or it could be $10,000 this time next year... just don't go overboard but keep a toe in the water so you don't miss out...
Those buy orders are looking pretty thin... I wonder if the directors are going to take their big windfall and sell down :D I guess it depends on their inside knowledge of the secret contents of the McD's agreement :D:D:D
And so concludes the good ol' fashioned pump and/or dump - nothing to see here, move along...
:D:D:D:D:D
Looks like my comment on the NBR went through moderation. The second sentence re dodgy directors has mysteriously disappeared.
My God, where can I get a suit like that?!?!
Baa Baa, ok fair enough, too quick to judge maybe, but analyse your words for a bit and see how they might be interpreted by someone who places ethics and actions of company insiders above profits.
I'll stop here and reserve judgement for when I meet you one day over several large beers (8%ers if Robbo is present) :D
Yes sir, yes sir, three bags full: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=11393024
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
Sold down yesterday and back in this afternoon. A 50% swing trade makes this one a darling for traders.
"It's understood that the VMob directors participating in the placement were existing shareholders, chairman Phil Norman and founder and managing director Scott Bradley."
...So those most in-the-know participated in the placement. So why would they do that unless one suspects that there is more good news yet to come...
While I think this whole thing looks dodgy, to be fair they probably committed more funds very early on in the process (though they were no doubt negotiating with McD at the time).
If you want to be a real conspiracy theorist, you could suggest they only closed the round once they knew they had the McD contract in the bag.
Particularly like the last paragraph... "VMob remains focussed on implementing the recently announced global agreement with McDonalds and executing further deals in its pipeline as it continues on its growth path."
The timing was always going to be delicate due to several factors converging at the same time.
Given that all listed companies would consult legal on matters such as this I don't really have a problem with it. The main interest is the 1c valuation v 1.5-2c+ for previous raises (need to check). Sure the company could nominate any figure if the SH were willing to stump up the cash, but some information regarding this valuation is what most people are interested in.
Thinking deeper I would guess this figure was directly related to the SP around when the raise was happening 1.2c. Not sure though.
Either way the company is currently massively undervalued due to a GLOBAL multinational contract-imo.
The announcement pretty much states that there is no insider trading because (technically) there is no insider trading laws with private placements.
I think this is the issue. Given what the directors knew, was a capital raise at 1c in the best interests of the company. So potentially not only did they breach their fiduciary duty to shareholders, they took advantage personally of that breach. If they did a SPP at 1c as well as the placement to large investors, this would have been mitigated.
I wonder what definition of "eligible persons" they use in their announcement on 11 December 2014, which says:
Because if it's the definition of "eligible persons" in s 8(2) of the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 [to which the company refers to in its announcement today] then the definition suggests to me that the offer was only made to the directors and employees :D:Quote:
The offer to be made by VMob will only be available to eligible persons in New Zealand and sophisticated investors in Australia.
Jolly good fun! :D:D:D:DQuote:
Section 8 (2)
In this clause eligible person—(a) means an employee or a director of the issuer of the specified financial products or of any of its subsidiaries; and
(b) includes a person who provides personal services (other than as an employee) principally to the issuer of the specified financial products or any of its subsidiaries
Cheers for that Rob.
Heads they win, tails you lose. It may nit be illegal but sure isn't ethical is it now? And if these guys aren't playing by the same rules, what chance do the small guys have?
As I said before, Sean Joyce is well compensated for all this and knows how close they can sail to the wind...
That didn't do much to clear up any "market speculation" about insider trading.
It doesn't really confirm that there wasn't inside knowledge and sort of says that "it wasn't illegal so what are you going to do about it"?
Eligble investor (from an angle investor perspective which I am pretty sure is the same) is generally one that has investments over $2m, income over $200k for the past 2 years, is in the business of investing, or knows the investee. So basically HNWI and their friends.
Let's take it a bit further too...
Clause 20 of Schedule 1 of the Financial Markets Conduct Regulations 2014, entitled "Insider Trading" says:
Regulation 2 of the Financial Markets Conduct Regulations 2014 defines the "transitional period" as:Quote:
Clause 8 - Insider trading
(1) During the transitional period, sections 241 to 243 of the Act do not apply to a trade of a financial product if the trade is an acquisition of the financial product by way of issue.
(2) Subclause (1) does not apply to an acquisition of financial products under an offer made in reliance on clause 19 of Schedule 1 of the Act.
So we can say from the announcement that the company relies on the fact that ss 241, 242 and 243 would otherwise apply but for the transitional period. Let's take a look at what ss 241-243 say:Quote:
transitional period means the period starting on the commencement of these regulations and ending on the close of 30 November 2016.
Quote:
Section 241 - Information insider must not trade
(1) An information insider of a listed issuer must not trade quoted financial products of the listed issuer.
(2) An information insider in relation to quoted derivatives must not trade the derivatives.
(3) In this subpart and subpart 3, trade—
(a) means acquire or dispose of; but
(b) does not include acquire, or dispose of, by inheritance or gift.
Quote:
Section 242 - Information insider must not disclose inside information
(1) An information insider (A) of a listed issuer must not directly or indirectly disclose inside information to another person (B) if A knows or ought reasonably to know or believes that B will, or is likely to,—
(a) trade quoted financial products of the listed issuer; or
(b) advise or encourage another person (C) to trade or hold those products.
(2) An information insider (A) in relation to quoted derivatives must not directly or indirectly disclose inside information to another person (B) if A knows or ought reasonably to know or believes that B will, or is likely to,—
(a) trade the derivatives; or
(b) advise or encourage another person (C) to trade or hold those derivatives.
Can we infer from the announcement that the eligible persons partook in insider trading (and potentially the conduct prohibited in ss 242-243 as well)?Quote:
Section 243 - Information insider must not advise or encourage trading
(1) An information insider (A) of a listed issuer must not—
(a) advise or encourage another person (B) to trade or hold quoted financial products of the listed issuer:
(b) advise or encourage B to advise or encourage another person (C) to trade or hold those financial products.
(2) An information insider (A) in relation to quoted derivatives must not—
(a) advise or encourage another person (B) to trade or hold the derivatives:
(b) advise or encourage B to advise or encourage another person (C) to trade or hold those derivatives.
Did the company just make an announcement that its directors partook conduct that would otherwise be insider trading?
I question, would they do the same thing after the transitional period? What would Jesus do?
:D
I attended an investor presentation late last year. At the presentation and update there was advice that there would be a capital raising round coming up. Of course the McDonald's contract was discussed only in so far as what was already in the public areana (re McDonalds Japan, Netherlands and Sweden). It did not take any genius to understand that of course VMob were trying to establish more contracts with McDonalds. there was no mention that the Holy Grail of a Global Contract with McDonalds was in the wind. In the informal conversations after the meeting there was no mention of the big contracts in the pipeline. If I had known then what I know now, I would have purchased more shares.
The reality is that VMob is a company to watch. They have been working hard and are now achieving some very good results. A read of the investor presentations and reports published on the NZX web-sites gives a very good background to what is happening.
I intend to increase my rather modest shareholding. I personally like this company and expect to see some good things in the coming months and years.
Indeed, section 5(2CC) of the Securities Act 1978 is much wider than s 8 of the FMCA 2013 :D:
I wonder which category the directors fall into? ;)Quote:
For the purposes of subsections (2CB) and (2CBA), a person is an eligible person if the person is 1 or more of the following:
(a) wealthy (as defined in subsection (2CD)):
(b) experienced in investing money (as defined in subsection (2CE)):
(c) experienced in the industry or business to which the security relates (as defined in subsection (2CE)).
Agree with what you are saying about Vmob and I like that they have their own platform and have exposure to these large global corps .... but, I'm with Moosie and co on this one. I have viewed what I can only ascertain as offloading in the past and this recent action, even though they seem to have acted within the legal requirements as set out by the FMA, it reeks. I am out and will stay out regardless of their performance .... I also stay away from DIL for management reasons also, but there is more for incompetence. Once again a promising coy, just not acting in best interests of all shareholders.
I suggest holders do some "historical" research on Plus SMS this weekend, as well as the characters behind it.
A tiger never changes its stripes (sorry if you're reading this PT)...
"The participation of directors in the private placements is entirely appropriate. It is expressly allowed, and catered for, under the NZAX Listing Rules.
The new insider trading rules in the Financial Markets Conducts Act 2013 do not apply to the issue of new shares by private placement (refer clause 20 of Schedule 1 to the Financial Markets Conduct Regulations 2014).
This was also the case under the previous insider trading rules in the Securities Markets Act 1988."
I cannot help but read this as......
...... We knew what we were doing wouldn't look great when it came to light so we called a lawyer (probably paid with shareholders funds) who told us that what we were doing wasn't illegal.
I guess some shareholders won't be happy this but what can they do? We didn't break the law? What does integrity and honesty have to do with this???? .................
I have several sets of stripes which I do change regularly and also I have them laundered so that they are clean and have that nice fresh furry smell.
Easy to see why the moose became extinct and we are down to the last moa.
Best Wishes
Paper Tiger
Hey W69, thanks for your support.
Even though it was tempting, and easy to scalp a 100% profit at the time (avg 0.013, sell 0.025), I didn't. Why?
Well as some might agree, despite the best analysis and charts, no-one knows for sure what's going to happen tomorrow, and selling out in front of potentially another bolt upwards would have been a mistake. So some probably made a handsome gain on the day, but I didn't, except on paper. What I did do though was buy some more when the price pulled back to a mere 45% gain, and hopefully has stabilised. Sigh, yes, it appears that I prefer to position as an owner. Traders may laugh at that, that's their prerogative.
So to be clear, I'm not trading this stock. I'm buying it. I have a day job and can't sit around with my finger on the trigger minute by minute. Time will tell whether I'm right to accumulate but this week has been encouraging. I do think I'm right though, I've made that abundantly clear in earlier posts. VML has a tremendous product, in a huge market, with perfect timing for entry, is making money, signing up customers, and will reap the rewards.
This .. and only this .. is what makes VML different, and appealing, from the wanna-be products/companies that have failed, that some now choose to by ergo, deride the directors.
I fully expect the ethics police to rain on my parade, but in time I suspect their envy willoutweigh my rewards for supporting VML, let alone the big holders.
As it has emerged this week, no rules have been broken, no 'ethics' have been compromised, all that has happened is an excellent success story and a board who chose, and are entitled to choose, for whatever reason, to raise $2m from outside the public shareholder pool. For me, I say 'whatever', I'm not going to cry about a spread of 0.0106 to them vs my avg 0.013. In fact, I'm really happy that "high net worth individuals, institutions and certain VMob directors" are prepared to put their money where their mouth is. It in fact re-enforces my confidence, not detracts from it.
If anyone has a problem with that, rather than judging minion shareholders, and having the temerity to suggest they spend their weekend researching failed companies that have no relevant product, market, revenue or opportunity comparisons , they should fully disclose the specific criteria that their compromised ethics are founded on, including naming precisely which directors they charge with whatever misdemeanors, and what those charges are, and submit hard evidence - not supposition - to back their case, here, in the open in the face of scrutiny.
And on that matter, they should then submit a formal complaint to the NZX, the SHA, and the FMA, instead of whining about it here. If they do not, then their whining is but an annoyance and to no good effect in an anonymous setting. It is illuminating that the news reports that NO complaints were laid with the NZX. So much for ethics!
This goes for anyone whose precious 'ethics' have been bruised, in my opinion. Sure, beat up the messenger if you like, but if someone has a real case to put forward, put it forward in a manner that will either vindicate your position, or not.
BAA
Well said Baa_Baa, coincidentally I too did the same as you this past week and bought more... :)
I'll just add that I knew nothing of this stock until Monday when I looked at the share picking competition live results and saw that all these people had whizzed past me.
Needless to say I quickly did a bit of research of the ole VML.
After reading about insider trading - (from an outsider coming in - sure it looked a little dodgey at a glance, but looking into it more I could see it could be legit :)) - I was expecting too see more here about the announcement of Maccas itself but oh well. Anyway, all this combined - I bought a parcel of 500,000 at close on Wednesday. This pushed the price up from 0.017 to 0.018 and even shifted me from 1st to 2nd place in the competition because it put Bobcat. in front of me :P
Anyway, I like and agree with some guys comment I read earlier that went along the lines of you can put in $1000 and it might become $500 or it might become $10,000. Sorry I can't remember who said that.
Baa baa. You could have bought a 1c during the time the private offer was open so there was no premium. The question is where those private investors told of the McD worldwide contract? Timing suggests maybe, not fully subscribed suggests maybe not.
I've been in a while and holding - the company has promise and I just hope that dodgy dealings (perceived or actual) don't hold them back.
Don't worry Rob, it seems those with vested interests will argue blue in the face that Directors are "all gud, chur bro" (at least while there's a blue arrow next to their shareholding...) while us outsiders will constantly bludgeon them with morality and ethical considerations (the holding of which precludes owning shares and therefore having the "right" to negativity about it).
It seems the unmoveable rock has met the unstoppable force!
Weird how the human mind works eh? ;)
After some internal deliberation I have decided to share my thought of the day. In this article here we see that Scott Bradley may or may not have a mullet.
In my view, if Scott Bradley has a mullet then this may be an indication of his business practices.
"Business in the front, PARTY IN THE BACK!!!"
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000350427
I think VMob can really help with a few things here....
Hey guys,
I've been following this VML thread for a while. After I saw the recent VML announcements some members sought to presume VML was dodgy and guilty of breaches against the FMA which I felt it was unfair (Admittedly I also questioned the statement myself).
I office shared with these guys when they were first starting up. (The company I was in was start up as well).
During that time Scott Bradley was very explicit about compliance with the FMA and he took a very serious position regarding any sort malpractice.
I don't know Scott well, but have been present when he has laid down some very direct warnings about any insider trading or any other sort of carry on.
Our company relocated office before the product was properly released, but I have worked with some of the developers there in the past (in other companies). I know these guys have been working bloody hard to get to where they are. There are some smart and dedicated guys there I know that for sure.
I'm certainly hoping that they can take things a lot further, it sounds like the McDs global contract was a real win for them. By the adoption rates it sounds like the product has been successful, at least in the pilot countries.
IMHO the < .02 price to acquire stock might carry high risk. But could also yield a great return.
Holding (small).
Allotment day today. 205,137,771 ordinary shares
https://nzx.com/companies/VML/announcements/260030
Why would Scott Bradley, the Director of a company, be talkimg FMA compliance etc with a pleb from another company that happens to be office sharing with his company (who, you admittedly said, barely knew you!)? Why would he also be laying down the law with this other company???
I smell something here, and it ain't an EPA approval! :D
BFG - you have obviously never worked in an open plan office (shared with other businesses). You can't use quiet rooms for everything.
I have met scott and a few other guys a few times at investor presentations. I am very interested in this company and I do intend to continue to build upon my rather modest shareholding. My impression from the investor presentations (and the discussions that happen after) is that this is a credible company, with a long term vision and ambition to be the best in what they do. I believe the way the McDonalds contract has gone from the Netherlands, then expanded into Sweden, then the presentation at the McDonalds international Conference as best practice, then securing the Japan contract and then the Holy Grail of a Global McDonalds Contract with immediate roll out in the USA and in a relatively short time frame speaks volumes for the credibility of VMob. McDonalds simply would not sign a Global contract with a minion company from NZ unless they were sure of the credibility of the Company, the CEO, the directors and all associated with the company.
But for my part I believe McDonalds is tip of the iceberg. It gives VMob strong credibility, and together with the work happening with Microsoft, I intend to continue to invest in this company, especially as shares are sub 2 cents each. I believe any company that has a global contract with McDonalds must be worth a lot more that the current capitalisation of $20m (based on share price right at this moment). I do not believe they will stay there for long and the prospects are good. Maybe if some of those who are quick to criticise took the effort to attend investor presentations and talk to the very approachable CEO and directors then they may have a different view of the world of VMob
The Edison report suggests at 3.8 cent share price for 2017, assuming 43 customers by then. The overall number of customers may increase beyond that assumption if you include the various McDonalds countries out there. Would be interesting to see their research including full details of the confidential McDonalds agreement.
I wouldn't read too much into the valuation. The company announced an indicated Average revenue figure a few months back which is purely speculative. The important thing to focus on is the revenue growth and if they disclose combined customer metrics. Most interested in customer usage average basket purchased and % impact on overall retail sales.
I am not expecting them to tell us. Maybe this will be revealed a few years down the track.
I wonder if the valuation considered the prospect of a global contract with McDonalds or instead considered each customer as a mcdonalds about he size of Netherlands / Sweden. If that is the case then the announcements made recently including the Global Brewer Anheuser Busch, Esso in Norway (Global expansion opportunity here as well) plus the companies they listed in their 11Dec2014 investor update (IHG, Avis, Macys, Nike Estee Lauder as prospects) and the benefits of the Microsoft partnership for Azure may blow the predictions out of the water.
In the same update in December VMob advised Annualised Contracted monthly revenue of $2.4m to year end 31 March 2015. I wonder if this is exceeded. I would not be surprised. For instance the monthly licence fee for store is $25 to $50. In Japan there are 3200 McDonalds outlets. that single customer and income stream of Japan there would be between $1m and $2m just from licence fee per store. In the USA there are 14,267 McDonalds outlets. Once the roll out has completed the annual licence fee per USA outlet using the same formula will be between $4.3 and $8.6m per annum.
And this ignores income from the other vmob streams including set up fees, push messaging and redemption commission. Add in down the track the rollout of McDonalds in Europe and Asia (Initial focus will be on the countries with the most McDonalds so approximate 30,000 restaurants and just in annual outlet licence fees from McDonalds the revenue stream would be between $9m and $18m per annum. My question is how long would it take to roll out to the USA and Japan and Europe and Asia. 2-3 years would be my guess.
Awesome isn't it, tremendous results, wait till the market wakes up to VML!
In the meantime some people are giving away their shares today for 1.6-1.7 cents. Go figure, I'm shaking out the piggy bank. Wish I had more cash, Sigh.
(That's not meant to be troll bait, but I expect they'll quickly hear the trip trap trip trap of feet over their cynical bridge.)