Wonder if Craig checks on ST ...his mate seemed to
Printable View
Wonder if Craig checks on ST ...his mate seemed to
The last 6 months.
https://youtu.be/wswFjuJPbxg
What will the next 6 bring?
The days of CEOs staying in the same job for years are not so common these days. Particularly with progressive companies. The average tenure is approximately 5 years. Beyond that you risk CEOs running out of ideas, becoming stale and out of energy. Sounds like he has “other priorities” ie more $$$$ and more time at home. My guess he will have secured a new position paying more for less hours. Money doesn’t not talk, it screams.
He does say he is confident Plexure is well positioned for future success.
So watch this space. New man, fresh ideas and new drive. Just part of the CEO merry go round.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/07/cram...ly-resign.html
Quit your shares when the CEO or CFO quits unexpectantly & without proper explanation.
IMHO I believe a change of CEO is for the best for Plexure. However, temporarily not having one looks very dodgy and the resignation was quite unexpected. I’ve seen companies turn around first hand from having a change of CEO with a fresh mindset and greater ability to execute (AMD with Lisa Su for example). Worth a hold in my portfolio at least.
3 instances YTD of big volumes being sold down along with the sp :
1. 20 May - revenue downgrade
2. 18 May - CFO resigns
3. 4 Aug - CEO resigns
Credibility is gone (certainly in Australia with the $1.20 placement last year with plenty of undelivered promises) so ....
.... PX1 will either have to scale back growth plans to conserve cash, or do further capital raising (if it's even possible) at heavily discounted prices.
No compelling reason to invest or hold this stock imo.
Plexture chair Phil Norman has been quoted in the media saying:
Since joining Plexture in 2017, Mr Herbitson has lead the business through a significant transition from a loss making entity to becoming cashflow positive and profitable in 2018 and 2019"
Does this reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of where Plexture's true value lies? Or, if that isn't the case, speak to a Plexture's strategy being off the mark?
Those who understand investing in the tech sector would know that tech companies such as Plexture are valued based - at a high level - on a multiple of their revenue, with revenue growth being a key determinate of what that multiple might be.
The basic model for delivering value to shareholders is one of acquisition. With the above valuation context in mind, the strategy of such tech companies is to grow revenue as quickly as possible, so that a) the revenue base to be multiplied is as large as possible, and b) quicker growth = larger multiple.
Growing as fast as possible means investing heavily in all areas of the business - the result of which is, in most cases, a cash deficit and/or trading loss. As opposed to traditional models of value whereby a business is valued based on a measure of it's underlying profitability (eg: a EBITDA multiple), in the case of tech it is more often than not a good thing if the business has a cash deficit
To that end, Norman's words above do seem to be a cause for concern - is there anything that relates to Plexture in particular that people know of, which would mitigate or explain this?