Investorfile Blog

Category
Investorfile.com (15)
DDS Wireless International Inc. TSX: DD (5)
RDM Corporation TSX: RC (5)
Titan Logix Corp. TSXV: TLA (4)
Questor Technology TSXV: QST (2)
Radiant Communications TSXV: RCN (3)
WANTED Technologies Corp. TSXV: WAN (2)
The Caldwell Partners Int. Inc. TSX: CWL (2)
Galvanic Applied Sciences Inc. TSXV: GAV (1)
Archives
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
Jan
16
2 IR firms and big losses
Posted by: Gerry Wimmer
1/16/2012
Share |

In the small cap market, there are some good practices, some bad practices and then there is Functional Technologies Corp. (TSXV-FEB).

Functional Technologies a development stage company recently hired two investor relations (IR) firms, one in Quebec and one in California, to represent the Company to investors for a reported combined cost of $10,500/month plus expenses and a bucket load of options.

The hiring of two IR firms intrigued me to research the Company. For fiscal 2011, Functional Technologies reported $4.8 million in losses on a paltry $200 thousand in sales.

It appears that the leadership at Functional Technologies has an appetite for hiring different IR firms. They did so in 2010, 2009 and 2008. Consistent throughout these years: the Company continued to meander in the commercialization of its bio-health technology, reported little in revenue and big losses.

I have nothing against investor relations services for small cap companies; in fact, I have provided IR services. But when the equivalent of half of this Company's 2011 revenues are expected to be absorbed by investor relations fees, is the management and board of Functional dedicated to maximizing shareholder value?

This is a good question for investors to put to Functional`s senior management and directors.

Part of the problem is that the Company has seen its share of management and directors change over the past few years. Last week Functional appointed an "interim” Chief Financial Officer and a new Chief Operating Officer. In 2011, the Company's Chief Business Officer stayed on the job for 6 weeks. I am not even sure what a Chief Business Officer does, but it appears that Functional has not rehired one since.

Strangely, given past developments, Functional has a market valuation of over $25 million. Therefore, I hope for investors that the Company's management and directors have a clear plan to achieve profitability in 2012 to continue to afford paying its two IR firms.

In a June 2011 edition of the Financial Post, the buy & sell column quoted a small cap fund manager and holder of Functional stock as being bullish on the Company's share price. When fund managers talk up the potential of concept stocks their fund owns through the media, usually this is the kiss of death for new investors who buy in from this advice. 

The stock price of Functional Technologies is down 37% since June.

Disclosure: TSXV: FEB - No position


Read Disclaimer:

This article is for informational purposes only. This article is based on the author's independent analysis and judgment and does not guarantee the information's accuracy or completeness. The information contained in this article is subject to change without notice, and the author assumes no responsibility to update the information contained in this article. The information contained within this article should not be construed as offering of investment advice. Those seeking direct investment advice, should consult a qualified, registered, investment professional. This is not a direct or implied solicitation to buy or sell securities. Readers are advised to conduct their own due diligence prior to considering buying or selling any stock.

Share |

ENTER YOUR COMMENT:

Name:
E-mail: (will not be published)
Comment: (500 Char. Max)
Verification Code
Code Image - Please contact webmaster if you have problems seeing this image code If you can't read the word, click here to load a new word
Enter the Word exactly as it is shown in the box above:

FREE. Sign up for E-newsletter

Latest Tweets

 

Latest Blog Comments

The valuation on the Radiant deal is flawed and apparently all efforts by other parties to put in bids have been met with resistance from their not very independent committee who was set up to evaluate this deal. I personally know one party who has experience on this first hand. They want to put a bid in over $ 0.85 but have been ignored by the board which consists of Campi''s buddies (The Maxam guy). Sucks to be a shareholder. It would be good to have the OSC and BC regulator actually do something about this. t