Good morning!

Thank you for the feedback last week, re timing of these reports. The consensus (of those who responded) seems to be that readers prefer us to take our time, and get it right, rather than rush for a deadline. I think the existing 1pm email deadline is a good compromise, so I've resolved to have early nights on school days, and get at least the bulk of my reports out by 1pm.

You've probably already realised that a conventional 9-5 work schedule never suited me. That's why I bowed to the inevitable, leaving full-time employment for the last time in 2002, to become self-employed.

Anyway, on to today's results & trading updates.

Telit Communications (LON:TCM)

Share price: 145p (up 17% at time of writing, but is volatile)
No. shares: 129.8m
Market cap: £188.2m

(at the time of writing, I hold a short position in this share)

Resignation of CEO, and Board to be reinforced - I'm not really meant to write about companies where I hold a short position. However, that rule was only introduced because Stockopedia lost some (idiot) subscribers, who objected to me ringing the alarm bells about Globo some time ago. So every now & then, I do flout this rule, because it's so important to discuss such a topical & controversial stock.

As I predicted, the allegations against the CEO (of having committed fraud in the USA, years ago, and fleeing the country) have been admitted to be true;

Oozi Cats, has resigned from the Board and his employment with immediate effect. The independent review has found that the evidence shows that an indictment was issued against Oozi Cats in the US and that this fact was knowingly withheld from advisers...

The Board's indignation that a fraudster failed to tell them that he was a fraudster, strikes me as quite comical;

...It is a source of considerable anger to the Board that the historical indictment against Oozi Cats was never disclosed to them or previous members of the Board and that they have only been made aware of its existence through third parties...

Surely the company, and its advisers should have checked the background of the former CEO, years ago? Isn't that their job, rather than Tom Winnifrith's (who was the whistleblower in this case,…

Unlock the rest of this article with a 14 day trial

or Unlock with your email

Already have an account?
Login here