How much better would have these responses been from an Investor Relations Manager? Please note the answers are NOT what the company presented but the sort of answers I fee would give investors a lot more confidence going forward
Hi Eric,
I am a long term shareholder in Zyber and would like to know what are our prospects going forward.
Can you please give a response to the following.
'Do you think it is fair to have our CEO give regular updates (fortnightly) about what work he and the co. is undertaking as a priority, and at what stage each part of the work is at?
As you know Daly has only been in the CEO role for a relatively short period of time. Early in his tenure he gave an in-depth review of his plan for the future. We admit the original pathway directed by previous management was flawed and Daly has been working extremely hard to rectify that and push forward with a business plan we think will create a successful future for our company. We understand the importance of our investors and that they are in effect our owners and pay for our wages in the formative stages of our organisation and we therefore do treat equally the priority of keeping our investors fully informed on progress but right now I hope you understand how hard Ben has been working.
Where is Ben D?
Ben is in the US as this is where our best potential is as far as progress and customer leads and trials are concerned.
Do you think shareholders may be entitled to know the companies and stage of their trials? If any.
Of course we do. As you know if you have been following the ASX announcements, the market has been informed of the commencement of the current trials:
http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20160616/pdf/437xsglk4z3t9x.pdf
http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20160711/pdf/438h3h3p5cgx5m.pdf
The trials are expected to take longer than originally estimated but this is a positive, the feedback we have been receiving is positive and the delays relate to extra functionality and fine-tuning of the requirements. None of our trial customers have been disappointed with the progress or indicated they do not wish to continue and we expect to conclude the trials within the next month or so. Whilst we haven't announced any new trial customers we've had very positive responses from our marketing effort so far and we expect to be able to announce more trials soon.
Do you think shareholders should know why the company is continually trying to raise more money? What is this for?
Based on the significant reduction in cash burn we do not expect to need to raise any money within the next 12 months. We do concede however that as we do ramp up our marketing effort that it will be important to also quickly monetize our current leads to further reduce to future chance of a capital raising. We fully understand the side effects of capital raising for current investors and we are committed to doing everything possible to limit the need for a future capital raising.
Should the company be communicating clearly with shareholders?
We believe we have been communicating well over the last few months. Over the past 3 months we have had – investor presentation, CEO interview video, strategic plan update and 2 separate announcements for new trials. Unfortunately at this time we are in a bit of a lull news wise but we expect that to change in the near future. In fact let me talk to Daly and see if what we can do to update you with a clear concise picture of where we stand with our current trial clients and prospects. It is clear that the share price indicates to us that the investors aren't fully understanding or believing our story yet, at the coal face we certainly do, so we will endeavour to improve our update information to give a clear picture, after all long suffering shareholders (did I tell you I've been buying and my current average buy is over 3c) deserve it.
Do you think that directors of a company that is going through difficult start up pains, should be confidant enough to purchase a share of the company on market?
Every director's circumstances is different. But there is often a misconception that directors have money to burn when in fact many directors do not have the cash flow. Many earn a lot less than they could as employees in the free market. Many have large mortgages or have to put children through private schools. I would envisage that any director that did believe in their company would purchase shares if they could afford to, but many also are 'invested' in other ways, for example through performance shares (in lieu of salary) and their success depends just like every investor on the success of the company.
Do you think that investors can find a company that they have less trust in than Zyber and its directors?
Do you think that it is fair that this trust has been lost? If not fair, what is the co. doing to rectify this complete lack of trust?
Trust is earned. I'm not blind, I know as well as any of you as a DUO investor that trust has been lost in the past. And rightly so. But I wouldn't work for a company if I didn't have trust in their management, I have morals just like you and I can tell you by my association that we have a great management team and they are working as diligently as possible to grow our company for the benefit of us all. But as I sad trust is earned, and we have not yet earned it. Only positive results will get us that trust back.
---------
Dunno might be just me but I though Eric the Investor Relations Manager could have done better, much better.
