how do people get sucked in by crap.., page-18

re: 'this is it'crap..you id#t... Hi Croupier,

Even I will concede that iiNet has been a success story. Over time, I benefitted from having some shares in iiNet, but not in the same way that your example has illustrated. Then again, I do not quite remember iiNet going out and hyping virtually everything that it did.

Several weeks ago, I was criticised for asking details about the substance of some of the contracts being awarded. Now, I have been criticised in some quarters for querying the details of the Findlay report.

Sooner or later, a business must conduct itself on the basis of substance and capacity. If not, it will implode. We've all seen that in recent times with AMP (notwithstanding the NAB move which, reading between the lines, could well be a smoking gun depending on what the NAB's true target is - not necessarily, AMP).

The point is, MUL could well be the next considered success story. But before becoming this, it must build its capacity, its business fundamentals, and nost importantly, its credibility and integrity.

For too long the telecoms sector has been littered by many also rans which have continually hyped up their prospects only to go down in a blazing heap. And the more that this type of behaviour occurs, the lower the recurring integrity of the business, the sector and of the industry overall.

In business, I see this every day with the number of private, unlisted start-ups that I come across, and through several of my on-ball roles, actually supervise some investments in.

From my perch, I can tell you that the hype is not only evident in listed companies, but also in many privately held companies where VCs invest. The most significant challenge that people like myself, therefore, face is in:
1)
toning down the hype;
2)
concentrating management on building the business;
3)
telling management that there is not a bottomless pit of money to be had or accessed (ie: the more that it is accessed, the more expensive, comparatively speaking, that it gets); and
4)
ensuring that there is a proper and sustainable Busines Plan in place.

Now, with MUL, just what has its cash burn been over the last 12 -18 months, vs its current cash burn position?

And thinking of cashburn, who remembers the former likes of TMN, TLO, ATC, PHW, DVT, NWL, VNX (now a minor part of DFT), etc, all of which promised much and delivered very little before fading out altogether (in most instances). And, that's just to name a few.

Then again, who remembers MLB @ above $16.00 compared to its current 58c closing price.

My point is simple - if MUL is successful then that will be good for the wider industry. But if it is not successful, or if the hype continues in its poorly constructed way, then the harm to the credibility of company and sector alike could be significant.