A bad sign because the media are there to hound Mark Weldon for his resignation from Mediaworks, and aren't interested at all in reporting on GeoOp?
Printable View
The NBR will not do that - the journo will get fired!
The other media reporters were waiting outside to 'interview' him and after actively courting the media in the past, he is now avoiding them like a cat turned mouse!
Sad bad state of affairs for NZX, MediaWorks and GeoP.
Did anyone go to the meeting? How much much BS was feed?
I don't normally pay much attention to tech companies - well outside my area of competence these days - but couldn't help noticing GeoOP mentioned in a recent AFR article concerning a prominent Aust - I think - private equity operator who has had considerable success in turning around the fortunes of certain high tech companies. According to this article GEO is one of his current projects for resuscitation and on-selling.
This is probably old news, but new to me so would appreciate clarification, if only out of curiosity!
What's happening here?, worth a punt?
They have a revenue of a couple of million - which is cottage industry size - and it has taken years to get to that, churned through piles of cash , shareprice that has dropped from like $4 to less than 20c with the 52week low and high only 2c apart so pretty much stuck there- huge turnover in staff and management with a lot of the original guys cashed out and long gone - they appear to have little cash and still burning through it with the need for more very soon pretty obvious - but most of all the product is a bit of a me to type thing, not particularly innovative in any way - with middle of the road customer reviews and a healthy churn of customers each year and dozens of competitors both locally and global sized to contend with.
But hey, people also buy lotto tickets and occasionally they win big and the ROI is in the millions of percent - of course the vast majority just lose everything apart from some worthless bit of paper. So as long as you know what you buying you could be the one ;).
Thanks for this. I'll steer clear.
Cheers,
Wise move!
Adding to JAX's post above they've burnt their way through more than $15 million in investors' money while missing all their IPO forecasts by a country mile => they've achieved about half the projected customer numbers and a third the projected average revenue per customer which explains the lack of revenue.
Early last year they purchased InterfaceIT based in Melbourne, majority owned by GeoOp's major shareholder so it was an insider deal, adding $9 million in debt plus earn outs. The independent adviser's report was based on IIT's customer numbers increasing from just over 2,000 to over 2,500 in the FY ending 30 June 16, based on US growth, even though the core Oz customer base was collapsing suggesting strongly a failed business model and serious customer churn. Little surprise when they reported at FY16 Y/E that IIT's customer numbers had fallen for a bit over 1,300 due to the loss of US customers. How the customer forecast could be so wrong in little over a quarter beggars belief.
The only thing they have been good at is spruiking failure as success via their market announcements, the NZX is asleep at the wheel when it comes to policing continuous material disclosure for the smaller companies. So is Callaghan Innovation who gave them a grant ($1.3 million?) for developing software which to quote JAX's post is "not particularly innovative in any way".
Can someone tell me what is going on here?!
https://www.nzx.com/companies/GEO/announcements/297729
Ryder bailing 50% of their shares and 5% overall or an I reading this wrong?
Is this mean the end is finally nigh?
Anyone have any opinions the Preliminary Half Year Results?
None that are positive, 2.1m in revenue - 2m Loss - for 6 months - with 1.6m of cash in the bank left.
They are claiming 100% growth - but almost all of that is from very strange expensive acquisition which appears to not done anything for the bottom line as profit has gone backwards. Most troubling - the core product had growth of 198k ! in 6 months ! which is peanuts in real terms - and hardly much growth for a tech type startup in percentage terms.
Its hard to believe this company is listed. But that looks like it could change in the future if they keep going as currently they are.
Have to say I wonder about my sanity having invested in this dog when it was over $2.00. Even worse I still own them! Another Wynyard I fear :(
RB, many of us were sucked into this type of company a few years ago, during the hype period. The best thing you could do is to kick this dog out of your boarding kennel for good. PS- You could even shoot it on the way out to make sure it's dead. Disc-Previous holder of mutts like Sli/SNK/IQE and a couple of others that I won't mention in case I offend some.
Thanks Couta I have a few muts that need shooting! My biggest mistake was listening to a financial man who told me to buy shares and hold them and never sell them when they go down. Might be fine for the FPH and RYMs of the world but not the WYN, GEO and SNKs. Lesson learned but a bit of blood was shed in the process, thankfully most wounds heal.
I can sympathise with you couta1 and RupertBear. Got sucked in myself, and finally bailed yesterday at 16c. Had profited from the run up as bought at $1 and sold at $2.50 but then bought back in at $1.50. Silly mistake.
Have held the same mutts as you but managed to profit from SNK and SEA. Sitting on big % loss on IQE and SLI. Not selling IQE at current price as most would go to brokerage, and I still hold out high hopes for SLI. At least SLI have good revenue and have been in business for a long time. Just hoping the old dog can learn some new tricks (i.e. how to make a profit) and return to revenue growth.
Anyway, I hope I am now a better investor as a result.
My GEO holding is now worth $500 so I have essentially lost all my investment in this mut. I dont look at what the sp is doing anymore its too depressing and I cant face selling them for 16c :(
Well done making a profit of SNK you are a rare breed! I also own that mut and have also lost most of my investment in it.
I also hold SLI and live in hope that it will turn around one day soon and make up for those other stinkers ;)
Lifes lessons eh! Oh and I actually own and love two four legged muts so not all muts are bad! :)
Oh and they are planning to list on the Australian stock exchange in 2017! Really! :eek2:
I was joking RupertBear. But what I really mean to answer your question which I do believe you asked seriously.... is this. Buying now at 16 cents is a lot less risky than buying this stock two years ago. So although 4m shares may have been traded, it could well be a very small parcel for a big investor and this is the "punt" part of the portfolio. A lot less risk buying a stock at these levels so it may not be a bad entry point. I guess the payoff/risk matrix is maximum loss = 16 cents, maximum upside 300 cents.
(p.s I would not touch with a bargepole after the latest results but each to their own)
Makes an interesting case study of a failing business, aided and abetted by the NZX’s failure to police its material disclosure rules allowing GeoOp to get away with a smokescreen of spin!
The April 2016 independent advisory report for the IIT acquisition forecast underlying FY16 revenue of about $4.5 million for the combined Geo + IIT entity. Geo now reports an ARR run rate of $3.674 million as at 30 December 2016, it’s doubtful they will actually achieve even the ARR of $3.674 million in the full FY17 year let alone getting anywhere near the advisory report's forecast of an underlying revenue of $4.5 million for FY16.
The latest rabbit out of the hat is the claim GeoServices revenue will grow on the back of increased price points introduced in the reported 6 months. Average revenue inched up to $7/month in the 6 months suggesting they grandfathered the price existing customers pay, while GeoService's growth in user numbers continued to tank (net ~2% user growth over the 6 months). This suggests revenue growth will have to come off the back of new customers who may be loath to pay a higher price, while an unsustainable churn rate (the last time they reported the churn rate it was around 50%) can be expected to increase, which doesn’t auger well for the future.
A lot of GeoService's legacy growth can be attributed to them buying market share with an actual $6 +/-/month average revenue per user compared to the $20/month forecast in the original investment document. While buying market share is a classic SaaS launch strategy they still only achieved about half the users the original investment document forecast were needed to achieve break even (at the forecast $20/month average revenue per user), forecast in the investment document to happen well before now.
To add to the picture of incompetence it seems that on a number of occasions they’ve failed to advise the companies office of the issue of new securities, required to be done within 10 working days of the issue of new securities. Currently the companies office site shows 49.4m shares, except they’ve got 70.6 m shares issued, there’s been at least 3 issues since they last updated the companies office back in June 2016.
Excuse my ignorance but if GEO delists from the NZX and lists on the AX what does that mean for NZX shareholders? :confused:
ODT saying GeoOp are considering delisting on the NZAX and moving to the ASX.
Perhaps we just never really understood their grand vision.
I never saw what was so great about this company, came on the market just as Xero was doing exceedingly well and investors heavily linked it with Xero since it had prior staff from Xero and was in the space of doing tech, which even Wynyard and Sli were highly valued at that time. There was nothing too proprietary about what they did and trying to sign up tradies to use tech? Didn't they know tradies love under the table dealings? Or that tradies aren't the most motivated adopters of tech? If Pacific Edge had a hard time selling a bladder cancer test to highly educated men, how was geo-op meant to get better success?
From their interim report its actually rather shocking to see they needed to acquire another company to make their numbers look good or else they would be at 20% growth from mind you a rather small base of revenue. I've seen Snakk grow faster and yield nothing special, so why would these guys be any better?
For me it's worth $5 million in intrinsic value or 7 cents per share.
Just my thoughts anyway.
Just had this happen to me with OGC. At least with ANZ Share and Bond Trading (and I would guess ASB too), you can place a sell order on the ASX for the shares that have been transferred without needing to be set up with a chess account or anything. But unless you are set up properly, you can't buy them back again.
Been watching the shares over the past few days and now up to $0.20. Who TF is buying? It seems "their" only plan is to short their own shares on a ASX release if that is even possible?
I smell a rat but not one based on a successful business, innovative solution or company or anything to do with profit. It simply seems to be boiler room tactics?
Do they even qualify for the ASX? Too many questions for my little brain.
Does anyone have any thoughts on the
GEO Interim Results HY17?
-100% margins and rising debt.
They're in a highly competitive market and their customer growth is not sufficient enough to hit that "critical mass" in the next 5 years.
A basic valuation is sitting well below the current SP as we see share dilution dump shareholders value for the next 5-10 years.
6. SHARE CAPITAL
Balance at 30 June 2016 -- 49,393,299
Balance at 31 December 2016 --- 70,574,926
Wait till you see something really turn around before you put a penny in there.
That's the issue. Not buying but selling. I'm one of the idiots that swallowed the hype so now stuck with a massive loss of tens of thousands of dollars if I sell.
Having sold a few of these Dog stocks over the last couple of years for a loss of a six figured sum in total, sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and exit no matter what it takes, your not an idiot, you were just blinded by unrealistic possibilities at time of purchase.:cool:
I bought a few parcels around the $3 mark.
Ya poor bugger! I sympathise I bought more than I should have at $2.80 so you are not alone!:(
I cant bear to sell mine for next to nothing either. I still live in hope the share price might just might start to creep up again although that approach didnt work so well for me with my Wynyard shares where I literally lost both my arms and my legs :scared: but ya never know! ;)
Geepers, there were only 5 weeks that the price was even in that range, during the first 13 weeks of listing. Feeling for you now, have you thought of a way to signal when it's time to get out of a loser, like an exit strategy maybe, or stop loss orders, or something? Bit past it though with this one I admit.
Thank you for your advice. Geo Op was one of my very first share purchases so I was stupid on many levels. I mistakenly belived the buy and hold strategy was the right thing to do. WRONG! I have learned a lot from my mistakes, I cant say I wont make more mistakes but I look at the graphs now and I get out much sooner. I probably jump ship to early now but its better than loosing your limbs! ;)
It's simple with hindsight though isn't it? There's a heap of people who have lost a truckload on XRO buying above $20 or so where it has finally crawled back to now, after years of decline and so far a relatively modest recovery.
I think you're probably right though, that a few years ago there was a real hype in the NZX/AX with pre-profit tech listings, but that's all pretty much gone now with only a small few that have delivered sustained SP growth (like an Amazon does for example, that confounds logical or traditional investor psychology). XRO isn't one of them. PPH has, but even that has gone sideways since the consolidation, DIL did OK eventually after giving investors the sh1ts dropping to 0.05(!), not sure if there are any others. SLI no. WYN dead. PLX stagnant yawn. GEO fecked. TTK spruiked on buyout potential otherwise boring. And on and on.
I think my point, which is not really advice but more a personal reflection on 'investing' in startups, high-growth, and pre-profits is that it requires ACTIVE management (that means being right on top of your money at all times):
- enter with as much conviction and knowledge as possible,
- never enter blind or on someone else recommendation,
- extensively research the promoters, executive, management, products and customers, look for prior successes,
- detach completely from any emotion or confirmation bias (easy to say) as nothing the company does is as relevant as how the market values it,
- keep a very close eye on what the market actually does, the market is key,
- monitor sentiment here and elsewhere, but don't buy into it,
- invest very modest sums as a % of portfolio,
- run up with the gains and progressively take profits to a freehold position,
if it's working out, great, but even then ...
- know what you're looking for to get out, and if it happens get out (refer stop losses)
- cut losses quickly (refer stop losses).
- put stop losses on any buy-in, automate your unemotional exit
Charts help a lot because none of these companies will have any solid combination of fundamentals that traditional investors look for when deciding to invest.
Good post Baa Baa, and very true re Xro. I bought in at $42 and then it dropped back into the low teens, had to do a balsy chuck the kitchen sink at it to obtain an average price of $22 and escape with only the smell of smoke on my clothes. I wonder how many as still sitting on large losses, I'd say many.
All I know is in the tech sector, most of the investment is swallowed up in overpaid management and staff. They are only worth their money if the company makes that a profit, or profit is in sight. I had a friend who worked in analytics and was disgusted the company did not offer a free gym membership....? Sounds like sour grapes and probably is lol. I won't enter into any start ups again. Also I am still a happy individual who lost money on Wyn, luckily I made money on other great companies like summerset, infratil and heartland. Hope all is not lost for the tech sector completely
Thanks Couta, it's good to share our learnings even though we all have to find our own strategy and methods that we can live with and work for us. I watched (read) your moves with XRO and I'd have to say in all honesty that I cringed, you had way bigger balls than anyone else, making the moves you did, you read the chart and the tea leaves and when it shAt itself to $13 bucks and recovered, you made your moves.
Great recovery strategy, I'm glad for you it worked out, a small loss is better that a big loss or total loss. Tough lessons though eh? For my part I couldn't pull the buy trigger even though tempted at $13, I thought $11, yeah I'm in, but it never got there. It's still my biggest ever upside win though, but that was from early days and an exit which now seems very conservative. I can't see myself buying a $20 share that doesn't make a profit and hasn't cracked the all important USA market, but history will eventually say I'm either a woosey or prescient. I prefer more certainty nowadays.
I agree though, I know quite a few folks who are accidental millionaires from buying XRO in the early days, and sadly others who are nursing massive losses and will be for however long it takes to get to $30-$45 or higher. They all still hold, none are 'active' investors. None have any of the skills we see discussed here every day. They just buy someone else recommendations and despite watching their fortunes every day, they don't do anything about it. They don't know what to look for and wouldn't know what to do anyway. Even the big winners seem strangely happy enough to have lost millions of unrealised gains on the promise that one day it'll all come back. Weird. Maybe they're right but they have no idea about opportunity cost.
But back to GEO, this is a spectacular market dog. It illustrates extremely well that the actual performance of the company whether good, average or bad, has little or no correlation to how the market actually values it. For most investors, they could take their eye off the company completely and just monitor the market reactions and decide how to manage their investment. Nevertheless if they knew how to do that, then they would have been out of this mess a long time ago.
I hear you Ggcc.
GeoOp has spent millions of our money on high salaries for their own benefit. Flash office space and a huge amount on a useless CEO.
They have had no innovation that I can see, no point of difference. If it will take to kill them off is one or two of the competition giving away free migration and accounts for 3 or 6 months.
It's now being used as an examaple of how not to do a startup and IPO in a few universities I have heard.
Fricken joke.
One thing that gets me is that I want to invest to get a dividend not necessarily from buy sell. It seems most companies are not focused on profitability at all.
Geoop only real news is who or how any keeping the lights on, not strategy, growth or profitability. It's a joke. Their results look like they are flat lining with a high churn.
When walking past a cinema a few years ago one of my friends pointed to the train wreck movie poster. He said does that look like The CEO of your GeoOP investment.
My only reply was, yup. And I paid for the champers.
Good list there although I disagree with SLI being called a mutt. Yes the sp performance has been terrible, but it is not in the same breed as the others. It has real revenues and a proven product. SLI Market cap is currently $22.4m on revenue of $31m whereas GEO has market cap of $12.7m on revenue of $2m. SLI have not needed continual capital raising since IPO and have a long 15+ year history as a company. When you compare that to GEO it makes the current GEO sp seem crazy. How could it ever have been valued at $2.50+ per share?
I guess it all comes down to how you classify a mutt.I bought SLI in 2013 for $2.25, it hit around $2.90 during that period, I sold it in 2016 for $1.14 and it's currently trading at 36c. It's chances of ever getting back to my buy in price of $2.25 are miniscule IMO, hence my classification.
Is it because many investors feel that they ought to be in tech-type stocks - blame Google, Amazon, Facebook etc - but don't give sufficient thought to the low success rate for startups in this sector? Hence a tendency by many to jump at whatever comes to the lists. Personally, I'm with W Buffett - I don't understand the stuff so I keep out!
Question on market manipulation. If I use my circa $3.00 shares and sell a few small parcels to drop the share price down to say $0.16 or lower then buy some bigger parcels at that rate and sell at $0.20 ish.. making around 15%... is that legal?
Someone is buying. Only God knows why. My only guess is some GeoOP main investors trying to increase share allotment prior to the ASX. I can't see them pulling it off and they will have a restraint of one or two years so unlikely to make any money anyway.
Thanks Harvey. At the moment my stock is worth on average 5% of my original buy price.. Just looking for options to reduce the hurt. It's a low six figure loss. Should have bought the boat....
I feel for you too. Its never nice losing money on the markets or elsewhere. However what was your thought processes putting the potential of a 6 figure loss (that hurts) in a risky stock? A stock such as GEO should not make up any more than 5% of a portfolio (maximum 10% if you are young and a risk taker). If that were the case your 6 figure loss would not hurt. Unless of course it was a punt and then you might as well have put $100k plus on black or red at the casino.
Whether you lose a six figure sum in a risky stock or a not so risky stock like CNU, the pain and loss are both the same.
Definitely, need to cut losers, hard to do but a must. Agree with you there. My point is that these losers should not hurt, and if they do... then you are not diversified enough and/or not suited to having only a few stocks in your portfolio. Not meaning you personally here, just in general.
Thanks for the replies. I'm not crying poor, we have other bricks and mortar investments and assets so it's more pride than anything else.
I feel that the GeoOp team did a real doozy on the investors. There is not one part of their original prospectus that has materialised. Sure they have some big user numbers but they slashed the user price to try to buy the market. They they are struggling against all the competition, churn, insane executive salaries, expensive development team. I can't believe the size of the team for the (lack of) complexity of the solution.
I still am scratching my head on how they seem to keep getting $ in the door to keep it afloat yet it's turning over less than a corner dairy store. Excluding the BS acquisition revenue.
I think Leanne thought it would be easy as Rod did it. She was wrong.
Hmm so whats going to happen with this stinker share?
Personally I would like to see them rejected by the ASX even if that means I lose money. Sick of this BS company.
Does anyone know how it is possible to allocate shares when trading has been suspended prior to a new ASX IPO?!?!?!
Just read the latest updates allocating shares to CTO and CIO.
They are currently listed on the NZX so can do what ever they want Attachment 8982
Has anyone read the GeoOp prospectus. https://nzx.com/files/attachments/263802.pdf
Thoughts?
Had a belated look, first impression it is more of the BS disclosure they’ve heaped on NZ investors. Expect the ASX to do a much better job protecting the small shareholders than the NZX.
What struck me most is the letter from the Chair states …. Immediately prior to Geo taking over ownership and management of GeoSales, this product lost a major customer at the end of FY16. This customer loss, which was fully disclosed at the time of the acquisition, causes pro forma year-on-year revenues to appear to be flat [emphasis added].
The veracity of this statement is important because the GEO Sales (then IIT) acquisition was a related party transaction, the Chair and related entities were the majority owners of IIT. My recollection is the IIT acquisition was completed on about 1 June, but there was no disclosure of the loss of the major IIT customer until well into July, more than a month later. I can’t absolutely confirm the dates as they’ve pulled the announcements from their website. It stretches credibility to believe the IIT vendors didn’t know about the major customer loss well before the acquisition completing, you would think they kept closely in touch with a customer representing perhaps as much as a third or more of their user base. Also, the customer implemented an in-house solution, the shift wouldn’t happen overnight, in normal circumstances there would have been a migration plan including getting the customer’s data across from IIT to the new system.
Then there’s the question of how come the auditors subsequently signed off the FY16 annual accounts without impairment given the major customer equated to possibly a third or more of IIT’s users and a massive hit on the revenue line.
The reality is GeoOp’s minority shareholders had a related party transaction dumped on them that Blind Freddy could see was a dog, their customer base had collapsed in Aus, a good indication the product was flaky and the US would follow. IIT’s revenues still haven’t recovered to anywhere close to pre-acquisition levels, the share price has suffered accordingly!
There’s a lot of other stuff that should scare off investors.
Helpful info' Survfer...... good warning for potential investors. Perhaps your info' should be passed on to NZ Shareholders Assn?
https://www.nzx.com/companies/GEO/announcements/307732
Just prior to the end of the Offer period, ASX advised GEO that it required significant additional capital to be raised above this minimum to satisfy its own requirements.
Looks like ASX doesn't want a bar of GeoFlop?
https://nzx.com/companies/GEO/announcements/308773
Sounds like a very expensive U-turn!
ASX clearly skeptical, and there wasn't enough support to remove this skepticism.
Wow, reduced cash burn to $140k a month.. and had only $250k in cash left.. had to borrow another $1 mill from the available $1.5... Am I missing something here??? Why won't this company die?
https://www.nzx.com/announcements/314951
http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-websit...951/275538.pdf
[QUOTE=mushroom;706515]Wow, reduced cash burn to $140k a month.. and had only $250k in cash left.. had to borrow another $1 mill from the available $1.5... Am I missing something here??? Why won't this company die?
The CEO resigned in late January, today they announced the CFO is going at the end of March, the coincidence raises warning flags. This triggered me to have a look at the half year accounts. A few takeaways:
- There’s no mention of how revenue for the half year to 31 December 2017 compared to the 6 month period ending 30 June 2017, which should raise a flag. It looks like their operating revenue fell by around 5% and possibly a lot more depending on how much grant money they actually got. The IIT (GeoSales) acquisition the major shareholder dumped on them continues to collapse in the US just like was happening in Oz prior to the acquisition, GeoServices growth has tanked which isn’t a good look for a SaaS startup still hemorrhaging serious cash.
- The much hyped reduced cash burn hides the fact creditors rose by $337k while receivables fell by $142k relative to the prior comparable period ending 31 December 2016, a negative movement of $479k.
- The P&L shows grant + interest income of $160k, less $3k interest shown in the cashflow statement, making the grant income $157k for the half. Adding the $479k negative creditors/debtors movement to the net $1,672k cash consumed in the period, then winding out the grant income of $157k and crediting the $660k ASX/restructuring costs, suggests an underlying operational cashburn for the half of around $275k pm. However, the cashflow statement shows grant income of $239k, not sure why the difference to the P&L’s $157k. If $239k is the true grant number the underlying operational cashburn was around $290k pm.
The end can't be far away?
Deferred grant income from the FY17 statements, nothing out of the ordinary having CFS differ from P&L.
GEO OP FY17 1H18 Grants Received on P&L 382 157 Grants Received on CFS 236 239
Why the government spends millions of dollars on this kind of business is lost on me...
Without some meaningful growth or huge reduction in costs will they ever get away from cash burn.
Margins are expanding which is a sign they are at least headed in the right direction...
Another director bails
https://www.nzx.com/announcements/315598
GEO Interim Report HY 18
And more lies?
http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-websit...645/276357.pdf
Like the use of the word ‘intended’ in the headline
https://quoteapi.com/resources/da986...g2LZtGs_YhH5qI
All seems a bit cloak and dagger is
http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-websit...855/281611.pdf
Geo adopts new brand identity
Geo Limited (formerly GeoOp Limited) today launched a new brand and identity for its products and committed itself to a mission to “make it easier out there” for its customers by offering highly relevant, easy-to-use mobile workforce solutions with stand-out customer service.
“The new identity, vision and purpose have formalised our strategy within a framework that clearly articulates our proposition to customers, differentiates us from our competitors, engages our team and makes our value proposition clear. We believe it will accelerate customer acquisition and will be a key initiative in driving increased shareholder value.”
“Geo enjoys an enormous opportunity. The market for our products is huge and growing. Gartner estimates the global market for SaaS services in 2017 was US$60.2 billion. It also forecasts the market will grow at a compound average rate of 18.1% a year to reach US$117.1 billion by 20212.”
Oh goody us poor suckers who bought into the hype with this crappy company might get some of our money back, yeah right :lol::lol: Geo flop :t_down:
I don't understand why reducing cash burn was a priority if they could have grown revenue by 30% instead. In fact if they could grow revenue at that rate over a year, regardless of cash burn, we'd be having a very different conversation right now and probably be in up to our eyeballs (and in my case eating a very big slice of humble pie.)
Worth a punt? 1H19 out. Growing revenues 24%. $2m in bank no debt. $12m market cap. Cash burn and profitability still on the weak side but this seems likely to go into positive territory once a full year of the new pricing has taken effect. Surely an obvious takeover target for some digital company once in positive profitability?
To be honest, I'm surprised they have survived so long. They are still lacking in innovation, are still loosing $150,000 a month. I don't know anyone that would want to buy it as it doesn't really offer anything that someone can't get with either a slightly lower price or a better product offering that all the other players already have.
GeoOp is still a get rich quick scheme and seeing as their ASX listing failed miserably I don't think there will be any huge traction soon.
Probably still worth a punt at 11 cents though.
geo
$0.085 ....
Not a lot of positives here on this thread. Am I missing something? Subscription revenue positive, moving in the right direction and not too shabby, sitting at $4.9 Mil for YE 2019. Burn about 100K per month but sounds like they are close to break-even. Current customers now spending $10 more per month then a year ago. Dont really know much about the product but would appear current customers base likes it and its growing by around 24%. This thing should have a market of at 30 Million as opposed to 6.5 million. I think that is why the current chairman is putting forth a 1.5 million conv note on very reasonable terms.