(Copied from Sharescene in reply to a very critical post by...

(Copied from Sharescene in reply to a very critical post by jessica)
I don't agree with much of what you have said Jessica. One thing I do agree is that the management has been poor, very poor in fact. This has been reflected in a BAD business plan which has now been fixed after 4 years. I'm not sure that LUM has deliberately misled their shareholders or the market, however I'm open to your opinion as to when you believe this has occured.
They announced between 30 and 50 prospective sign locations approximately 1.5years ago - this was the truth. These were locations that Megagroup had the rights to - except Megagroup nearly went bankrupt and didn't promote the LUM technology, hence the joint venture was terminated and LUM lost all of the locations, including the other locations in Moscow (was a Megagroup partner).
Totius were working their butts off to try and get an advertiser, however, they had no advertising experience and no clients, so they were always going to battle to sign someone. Lumacom a long time ago wanted to build the sign, however, being in a joint venture relationship with Totius they needed Totius to put half the money up, which they refused to do. The joint venture partnership was terminated, Lumacom started building the sign, requested CCU's services (a very respectable partner), and within 3 months, they have one of the most high profile company's in the world requesting a trial.
Yes Disney may not sign, and the Turkish company may not pay a deposit, but LUM can do no better than get them to trial their signs and show the interest that they appear to have shown.
It is also worth mentioning that it was never Lumacom's responsibility to find advertisers for their signs - they were the ones that were supplying the technology. Their joint venture partners, being Totius and MegaGroup were the ones that were supposed to find the advertisers - these 2 companies have failed dismally and have been one of the main reasons for LUM's downfall, until now.
Yes, these signs will not make LUM earnings positive, but it appears that all signs that have been manufactured and nearly installed have got advertisers. Once March is over, and hopefully contracts are signed then LUM can go about finding new locations for signs and start making a profit. My calculations are that LUM are still about $500k short per year on revenue to make a profit. IF Athens gets finalised and possibly 2 more signs in Turkey get finalised, LUM will be well in profit - can't ask much more of the company than that.
Yes their first 3 listed years have been terrible, but the past 6 months have shown a big turnaround, now they have got to sustain it and they will get the shareholder's confidence back.
Spec. funds will be very interested in LUM if they start making a profit because the contracts in outdoor advertising are traditionally 3 years.
Regarding the technology getting older - true - but they are still the only ones with this technology. Its main benefits being cheap to manufacture, run and maintain. The new LED screens "in competition" primarily have curved faces and and are made into a range of shapes.
I'm not suggesting LUM is a buy Jessica, just illustrating the reasons why LUM hasn't performed to shareholder's expectations.
(NB I am a shareholder in the company)