Personally, my opinions are independent and are neither hearsay nor affected by media influence.
Simply put, despite an increase of over 100% in revenue and profits over the past year, investors have witnessed a 70% decline in the share price. The success of current management in meeting commercial targets is clearly not enhancing shareholder value. Unless there is a shift in the management's approach to shareholder relations, achieving a $200M revenue will not alter this trajectory; investors may find themselves in the same or an even worse position.
Before delving into macroenvironmental factors and interest rate discussions, it's worth noting that, within the industry, VIT holds the lowest valuation metrics. This is especially noteworthy as these metrics fall below the average on the ASX.
Additionally, the stock price remains 40% lower than the IPO price, even after considering the impact of the merger. Despite management's promises of "sustainable growth" over the last four years, investors are yet to see substantial results.
A fundamental change is needed in how the company engages with investors and the market. The current strained relationship between management and major shareholders, who collectively own around 1/3 of the company, raises concerns about the broader state of investor relations. If treatment and engagement are lacking for significant shareholders, it's reasonable to assume a similar, if not worse, situation for both existing and potential investors.
Perhaps if they intend to continue running it like a private company they should commence a share buyback scheme.
Expand
