Surface Transforms – discounted fundraising, how delighted are Chairman David Bundred and CEO Kevin Johnson?...
Air Partner – after previous ‘COVID-19 related work exceptional trading’, now argues its performance is “despite global travel restrictions”!...
High Street Group – at last some clarity emerges over its financial position and it's ugly & still the FCA does SFA
The short answer according to Matt Earl, the bear raider known as the Dark Destroyer, is No!
One of the signs that all is not well at a plc is when directors pile in for share purchases of a poxy amount to try to show confidence. And that brings me to Future plc (FUTR) which has been on the receiving end of a duffing up by our own Tom Winnifrith and the Dark Destroyer Matt Earl at Shadowfall. Of course, as Tom Winnifrith points out, Future’s response would have made the US fraudster-turned-fraudbuster Sam Antar proud: the report and criticisms were totally ignored.
We have been all over Future PLC (FUTR) this week with a three part special as you can see HERE. But now Matt Earl, the UK's smartest bear raider has gone short and published a major and damning dossier. You ignore the Dark Destoyer at your peril. His report is below.
Britain's tiop fund manager, my pal Mark Slater, has said that he will vote down annual reports where he sees unacceptable executive greed yet his largest holding is Future (FUTR) which not only has major fundamental “funnies” but is a case study in obscene executive greed.
Yesterday I demonstrated quite clearly that what Mark Slater and others think is a growth stock is nothing of the sort. Mark suggested that I speak to Future PLC (FUTR) before writing more as my FACTS were wrong. But the facts in the article, the numbers, came direct from Future PLC itself! And thus I persist with the second part of this series and, Mark, I warn you, there is far more to come.
Future PLC (FUTR) floated on AIM in June 1999, in the midst of the dotcom bubble. It listed at 385 pence per share, raising around £173 million, and valuing the company at £578 million. Within a year, its shares had risen by more than 100%. Within 2 years, its shares had fallen by almost 95% as its investments into new magazines and web sites failed to pay-off. While revenue jumped, it began to rack up losses.
Search ShareProphets |
Recent Comments |