We all like a nice fudge cake. But there really isnt any room for one in financial reporting.
The current Brewdog raise now live on Crowdcube is highly misleading when it comes to the money that is actually being raised by the platform; as opposed to Brewdog's own pitch platform.
With only 15 days to go, the target has not yet been reached and by our calculations, using, it has to be said, the dodgy information supplied by Crowdcube, they have only raised ~£392k on the platform. There is another ~ £150k to go. For Brewdog on Crowdcube that is astonishing. Maybe the lights have finally been switched on and people can see that this is a rich valuation at £1.8bn, from which its hard to see a good return.
It would have been so much more honest and upfront if the brewer had opted for a simple £500k or £1m raise on Crowdcube - no fudging just a straight number. Instead they have stated a target of £22m of which the company has on its own, raised a figure that changes each day as the brewer has kept its own raise running. So it is almost impossible to see what they are doing on Crowdcube.
The forum is full of queries about how this is laid out and how that valuation is justified. It just smacks of dishonesty and if this fails to reach £22m (which is unlikely as this is BD) it will serve them right. Whatever happened to the real punks of brewing?
I fully expect this to be another comment that you don’t post on your heavily moderated discussion forum. You should be careful accusing platforms and companies raising capital on them of ‘fudging of figures’. This would be yet more content from you that is probably actionable.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that the platforms have open discussion forums is critical in the fairness of the raise process. Investors can (and do) ask whatever they like and questions are answered in open forum - unlike your endless, negative pieces.
PS - it is also worth noting that taking their average daily investment as stated on Crowdcube, there is no hope of Brewdog getting to £22m in the next 14 days. We all know that BD will get to £22m so will that involve more fudging? Maybe you would like to comment?
DeleteHi Anon - we only delete or spam comments if they are obvious bots or are not relevant to the post. We get a large number of bots so it is possible that the occasional comment is deleted by mistake - for which apologies if this has happened to you. As an Anon it is surprising you make this comment. As to actionable comments that we make - in your opinion. You seem to have little experience in this. A comment made by us is actionable if it is not true. We never make any comments we cant prove to be true - that's why is 2 years we have been threatened with lawyers on many occasions but these threats have quickly evaporated. The sole reason this blog was created was because Crowdcube had banned my comments from their forums on many occasions and had banned me. I get regular supporting emails from investors and sector commentators so I know we are doing the right thing. Very occasionally we get your type commentating and providing the comment is not rude, we publish it. I always suspect that they are from the platforms or disgruntled founders who have been found out. You may not agree that figures have been fudged here - in which case you might want to explain why? The fudging is so obvious that it hardly needs examination - £22m target could be your starting point. That would be a comment worth posting. You might also like to use a name - Anon is so lazy.
ReplyDeleteHow strange that you would assume that anyone who disagrees with you is from one of the platforms. Don’t get paranoid, Rob. Maybe just consider being a little fairer, clearer and less misleading in your commentary. You’ll find it will help with credibility and engagement.
ReplyDeleteYou are very ill informed. If you have a real complaint Im very happy to see you in court. If not please practice trolling elsewhere.
ReplyDeletePersonally I very much value Rob's posts, which most of the time he is spot on; I've reviewed by investment in BD and cancelled it, well overvalued.
ReplyDeleteThanks.
DeleteI'm a BD shareholder from a much earlier round and while it is a phenomenal business I find the current valuation eye watering. I hope I am wrong of course but the amount I would have to put into this to make a material change to my overall return is so big (and I think the downside risks are significantly underestimated) that I wouldn't contemplate putting more cash in. I too am mystified why BD have gone on crowdcube so late in the day and where it was only likely to make a very marginal difference to what has been a pretty successful raise, you can't argue with 22m quid. The only thing that I can think of is that CC have incentivised BD to do it so that CC can claim some credit for a huge ECF raise and a well known name when they've done nothing to really contribute to it; wouldn't be surprised if we see the full raise amount in future CC 'success' claims. Perhaps they are even paying BD, I'm pretty sure BD aren't paying them.
ReplyDeleteAs a long time BD investor and fan of their products I do get irritated by the way that the company's acolytes, and the high priest himself, treat any questioning of the business, plans for global domination or its insane valuation as beneath contempt; it reflects badly on a business that doesn't actually need to bullshit any more and will get pretty short shrift from institutional investors when/ if the great IPO ever comes around.
Thanks - i think that is about right. Time will tell.
DeleteAverage investment per day in Brewdog's funding round has increased considerably since the CC raise started (according to data i have seen on BD's investor forum). So they have called it correctly; driving additional investment direct through BD as well as on CC.
ReplyDeleteThanks Jim. I think we can all agree that the speed at which they managed to raise just over £500k on Crowdcube is well below where the previous Brewdog raises on CC were. In fact had they not amalgamated the two investment streams (CC and the Brewdog white label campaign), the pitch would NOT have got to £22m (£22,200,000 minus £500,000 is well below £22m). Whether people are sensible to be supporting this as an investment (rather than as free beer) at this valuation, only time will tell.
Delete