One thing became very clear to me in today's discussion with Chairman Peter Clare. They do read HC actively.
This was the most distasteful AGM I have had the displeasure of being present, and the comment earlier with it being amateur hour is none-the-less spot on. Never have I seen a company continually miss the mark with one of it's key audience, the investors, than RFN. It's been a known issue posted on here since the earlier releases of the ANN's that in particular, the clarity of the information is lacking. We know this because of the yee-haw yo-yo that the SP has gone through by the avid speculation that it opens itself upto.
The AGM would have, and should have been, the perfect vehicle for the board, in it's very first face-to-face, to engage the audience in a forum like manner and therefore invoke shareholder confidence. This wasn't the case. What we got was the quick resolution vote, and curtain call.
When the meeting did abruptly get adjourned, one/two board members were getting out of their seats; there was an obvious awkwardness was in the air. People were asking about raising questions, or a presentation. One gentleman in particularly stormed over the door and left, not before shouting to the effect 'This is the one opportunity to engage with your shareholders, etc'.
The board's reply was that they had no new information to announce but would answer any informal questions. It was an odd transition, at that time no one really felt comfortable raising questions in my opinion and I personally, like the rest of the room, didn't feel like there was an opportunity to ask anything unless it was resolution related when those items were raised. In what appeared to me as a confused trance that the audience was in more than half the room proceeded to leave. I stuck around to ask my questions.
When I spoke to Peter and Jamie, the reasoning behind not doing a presentation was that they felt it would just be going over public domain information that was already available. I told each of them, I really think this was a mistake.
I handed your questions over directly to Peter and Jamie when I spoke to them individually. When Peter saw the questions he immediately requited 'oh you're the Hot Copper guys' - hah. Here's your answers:
i) When do they anticipate partnering with Allegis in the US?
No comment.
ii) What was discussed when Johnson and Johnson introduced Reffind to their global headquarters in New Jersey?
No comment.
iii) How many clients worldwide do they expect to come from the TurboRecruit partnership over the next couple of years?
Turborecruit has a total of ~6k clients, would want all of them but did note that it's wishful thinking
iv) Have they found strong interest from existing clients using their 'Employ' pillar also adopting their 'Ebrace' and 'Engage' pillars?
Strong suggestion that all pillars for clients are being picked up after introduction.
v) How many leads do they have now in Australia and how many in the US?
'bring up the fact that we have very large US tech firms (Apple, Amazon and Oracle that we know of) trialing our product.'
Jamie was entertained and had prior knowledge that people were trying to run the app with fortune 300 domains but gave no lead if they were actually trial accounts, authentic or test accounts.
I followed this up by saying, if they were just test accounts, why would they not just use a dummy domain. He basically gave nothing away.
Overall Jamie came across as very genuine and emotionally invested in RFN. He has little to no time for speculation, and made it clear the company is hitting the targets they/he envisioned. He wants investors backing the company who believe in the product.
(20min delay)