tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9008707982090470413.post8231676031323823957..comments2024-02-19T18:05:26.513-08:00Comments on Stock analysis and other stuff: Avanti (AVN) ... Eh? 2.5 x run rate required?Matthew Earlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10684772444875206973noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9008707982090470413.post-13615353255356804152013-10-10T13:04:41.002-07:002013-10-10T13:04:41.002-07:00Hi,
Thank you. In my first posting on AVN, I men...Hi, <br /><br />Thank you. In my first posting on AVN, I mention how I emailed the Investor Relations contact in March 2012. However, they didn't respond to my email. The group appears to have a fairly unhelpful approach, whereby you have to be an investor and prove it by detailing which broker holds your shares, in order for them to contemplate answering any queries you may have. http://avantiplc.com/content/investor-relations-feedback<br /><br />I have never received any correspondence from AVN with regards to my blog or other. <br /><br />Best<br /><br />Matthew Matthew Earlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10684772444875206973noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9008707982090470413.post-59018767801243652472013-10-10T09:26:51.366-07:002013-10-10T09:26:51.366-07:00This is very interesting work. As you seem to be ...This is very interesting work. As you seem to be the only bear of the stock who publishes anything have you sent it to the company for their view or have they contacted you to get it corrected if it's wrong?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9008707982090470413.post-22538127732095758712013-10-06T10:58:15.266-07:002013-10-06T10:58:15.266-07:00In theory maybe, but as the figures and AVN policy...In theory maybe, but as the figures and AVN policy suggests, in practice not necessarily so. Firstly AVN has never reported a non-current receivables line within its balance sheet. It is therefore probable that the bad debts I refer to are not related to any invoices despatched during 2011, nor likely 2012 (see below). Further if they were to relate to revenue from 2011, then what kind of company delivers its service and then invoices and declares those invoices invalid two years later? <br /><br />More enlightening may be the fact that the group supposedly has a policy for trade receivables so that "Generally when the balance becomes more than 60 days past its due date it is considered that the amount will not be fully recoverable." When considering that over 99% of the £1,679,000 bad debts was thought of as void during H2 2013, then it is likely that these relate to 2013's revenue. I have more to say on the movements in receivables and payables but will put it in a full posting. <br /><br />Best<br /><br />Matthew<br />Matthew Earlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10684772444875206973noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9008707982090470413.post-70530717135619133562013-10-06T06:58:33.933-07:002013-10-06T06:58:33.933-07:00You misunderstand bad debts - your comment "I...You misunderstand bad debts - your comment "In other words, the group reckons 8.2% (2012: 1.8%) of its sales will not materialise." is a little bizarre. The bad debts may well relate to services provided but invoices not paid in 2012 and 2011. You cannot and should not relate bad debts to revenue in any single period. It is therefore wrong to adjust 2013 revenue for bad debts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com