2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
134 päivää sitten
Tarjoustasot
Nasdaq Copenhagen
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 28.5. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.1. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 27.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 22.5.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q3 -tulosraportti 25.11.2024 |
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
·6 t sittenFrom Børsen Sunday: "Børsen can now reveal that Shape Robotics has never seen the shadow of most of the millions that the company booked as revenue in the second quarter of 2025. Two-thirds of the DKK 60 million revenue that Shape Robotics booked in the quarter is, according to Børsen's information, based on a compensation claim for a share of a grant that the company never received." My question: Is it even legal to book revenue that one has not yet received in cash? Surely it should only be booked as a receivable?
·3 t sitten1111111 It cannot be unambiguously stated whether it is legal or illegal. Accounting standards are not like a speed limit, where one can measure whether the law is exceeded. It is an assessment of the individual income. There are some objective criteria such as e.g. transfer of risk, delivery, and not least, is it "predominantly" likely that the income (money) will come in. When one reads SR's cash flow - money very rarely comes in - this suggests that management generally recognizes income very "quickly" or very "aggressively". When I read the transcript from the judgment in Romania - it sounds aggressive to recognize the income (recognize revenue) based on that judgment, and Lars Kiertzner is spot on with the description "aggressive". It is not judgmental, but an estimate from Lars Kiertzner, who does not know the case in depth. But "aggressive", yes, that is well in line with what Mark otherwise does. It would be interesting if Mark would like to describe what SR has actually "delivered" in terms of products or service on this contract, which allows him to recognize revenue and a receivable in this case. Incidentally, one cannot simply record a "receivable", as you write. A receivable follows a transaction where there is a counter-entry, which will often be "revenue", and this is where the question arises. If there is no sale, then there is no receivable either. Mark naturally has an interest in "harvesting" revenue if the receivable can be financed by a bank in Romania. Revenue has also been the basis for the enormous alleged claim of 217 mkr from Mark's girlfriend - therefore, the trustee naturally focuses on whether Mark has manipulated the accounts and inflated the figures. Yes, I already wrote that in November - that it could well resemble a classic example of accounting manipulation. It will be interesting to see if that analysis is one day confirmed by a judgment.
·45 min sittenOk, I will, and thanks for the good advice, but only if you will just consider the personal bickering or perhaps obsession you direct towards Mark Abraham, or those who wish him luck with his endeavor, which is known to be to carry out a reconstruction for the benefit of shareholders and creditors.- 1 päivä sitten · Muokattu1 päivä sitten · MuokattuSaw an article on Borsen https://substack.com/@wildceo/note/c-259966822?r=5lpe1c&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action·7 t sittenI wonder if Børsen.dk and Finans.dk are getting the blame for Mark's bookkeeping? Or maybe Teis? One understands better and better why the auditor declined. #InsightfulAndCriticalInvestor
·1 päivä sittenHello all readers. I am a small investor, still at the beginner stage. I have been following along from the sidelines and have read quite a bit back and forth between some different daily co-investors in here. (Maybe you should take a breather from each other, smiles) I have a question that perhaps is a bit obvious. But should it now happen that shape gets back on track, will the assets we have then become worth something again, or are they already lost and merely awaiting a final decision to be written off as a loss? Thanks in advance and if my question seems weird or silly, then I apologize But as written, beginner stage. 😊
·16 t sittenLet's just assume now that they get the company up and running again, then my assumption is that it has taken so much damage that it almost has to start from zero. I.e. Yes, companies can continue in that case but one must probably expect the stock price to fall 90% (again, that's just my guess). So as I see it, it doesn't matter much which way it falls, I think my money is lost regardless. Hakunamata - and look forward. Regarding buy or sell, it's always easy to see afterwards. Now I don't know when you bought in. If it was at the end of last year then you speculated, and took the risk, but I think many of us saw an opportunity for long-term business expansion with a corresponding price increase if shape could otherwise keep track of their cash flow·3 t sittenAntares The shares are probably also worthless, even if it were to end with a reconstruction. #insightful and critical investor- ·1 päivä sitten · MuokattuThinking a bit outside the box this lovely Saturday Does Mark Abraham deliberately send SR Rumænien into restructuring to ensure the company doesn't get caught by the Danish bankruptcy and Teis? SR Rumænien is formally owned by the Danish company, which is why the value, if any, belongs to the estate or whatever it ends up being. But the move of Mark sending the company into restructuring I cannot fathom. What real business is there in Romania today and is it really just a chess move to ensure Teis doesn't have direct access to the company because Romanian law steps in and "secures" the company? It's otherwise an interesting headline from Børsen.dk today. Unfortunately, I cannot read the content myself, but I would not be surprised if revenue has been pumped and manipulated by Mark, who I assume was CEO at the time of recognizing an uncertain lawsuit.
·1 päivä sittenFrom Mark:·15 t sittenBQRS It's a shame you're so busy patting Mark on the back and retelling all his angles. You should be asking some critical questions instead, but that's naturally not your job as Mark's personal IR assistant. - 1 päivä sitten1 päivä sitten“Shape Robotics Romania Has Entered Reconstruction Proceedings. The Battlefield Has Just Doubled In Size.” https://open.substack.com/pub/wildceo/p/game-over-day-69-romania-enters-the?r=5lpe1c&utm_medium=ios
·1 päivä sittenYes. If it is rejected, then we will have a deduction for the loss at some point. A claim of 550 million against the company is also a significant part.·1 päivä sittenKloun Thanks for the choice of words for "The illegal bankruptcy". In round figures, there is approx. 250 mio. kr to Mark's girlfriend, nephew (or similar) and the father In addition, a small 200 mo. kr. from the Romanian bank that "financed" the company's receivables. That leaves 100 mio kr for all sorts of other things, including Danske Bank, Eifo, the state etc. It is probably only the approx. 250 mio. which are a direct consequence of the bankruptcy The 200 mio. kr. could potentially have been mortgaged with fictitious figures, now that we also hear Børsen.dk mention, what I also said in November, that revenue and debtors resembled something that could well be inflated/fictitious. Therefore, it cannot unequivocally be said that it arose as a result of the bankruptcy.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
134 päivää sitten
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·6 t sittenFrom Børsen Sunday: "Børsen can now reveal that Shape Robotics has never seen the shadow of most of the millions that the company booked as revenue in the second quarter of 2025. Two-thirds of the DKK 60 million revenue that Shape Robotics booked in the quarter is, according to Børsen's information, based on a compensation claim for a share of a grant that the company never received." My question: Is it even legal to book revenue that one has not yet received in cash? Surely it should only be booked as a receivable?·3 t sitten1111111 It cannot be unambiguously stated whether it is legal or illegal. Accounting standards are not like a speed limit, where one can measure whether the law is exceeded. It is an assessment of the individual income. There are some objective criteria such as e.g. transfer of risk, delivery, and not least, is it "predominantly" likely that the income (money) will come in. When one reads SR's cash flow - money very rarely comes in - this suggests that management generally recognizes income very "quickly" or very "aggressively". When I read the transcript from the judgment in Romania - it sounds aggressive to recognize the income (recognize revenue) based on that judgment, and Lars Kiertzner is spot on with the description "aggressive". It is not judgmental, but an estimate from Lars Kiertzner, who does not know the case in depth. But "aggressive", yes, that is well in line with what Mark otherwise does. It would be interesting if Mark would like to describe what SR has actually "delivered" in terms of products or service on this contract, which allows him to recognize revenue and a receivable in this case. Incidentally, one cannot simply record a "receivable", as you write. A receivable follows a transaction where there is a counter-entry, which will often be "revenue", and this is where the question arises. If there is no sale, then there is no receivable either. Mark naturally has an interest in "harvesting" revenue if the receivable can be financed by a bank in Romania. Revenue has also been the basis for the enormous alleged claim of 217 mkr from Mark's girlfriend - therefore, the trustee naturally focuses on whether Mark has manipulated the accounts and inflated the figures. Yes, I already wrote that in November - that it could well resemble a classic example of accounting manipulation. It will be interesting to see if that analysis is one day confirmed by a judgment.·45 min sittenOk, I will, and thanks for the good advice, but only if you will just consider the personal bickering or perhaps obsession you direct towards Mark Abraham, or those who wish him luck with his endeavor, which is known to be to carry out a reconstruction for the benefit of shareholders and creditors.
- 1 päivä sitten · Muokattu1 päivä sitten · MuokattuSaw an article on Borsen https://substack.com/@wildceo/note/c-259966822?r=5lpe1c&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action·7 t sittenI wonder if Børsen.dk and Finans.dk are getting the blame for Mark's bookkeeping? Or maybe Teis? One understands better and better why the auditor declined. #InsightfulAndCriticalInvestor
- ·1 päivä sittenHello all readers. I am a small investor, still at the beginner stage. I have been following along from the sidelines and have read quite a bit back and forth between some different daily co-investors in here. (Maybe you should take a breather from each other, smiles) I have a question that perhaps is a bit obvious. But should it now happen that shape gets back on track, will the assets we have then become worth something again, or are they already lost and merely awaiting a final decision to be written off as a loss? Thanks in advance and if my question seems weird or silly, then I apologize But as written, beginner stage. 😊·16 t sittenLet's just assume now that they get the company up and running again, then my assumption is that it has taken so much damage that it almost has to start from zero. I.e. Yes, companies can continue in that case but one must probably expect the stock price to fall 90% (again, that's just my guess). So as I see it, it doesn't matter much which way it falls, I think my money is lost regardless. Hakunamata - and look forward. Regarding buy or sell, it's always easy to see afterwards. Now I don't know when you bought in. If it was at the end of last year then you speculated, and took the risk, but I think many of us saw an opportunity for long-term business expansion with a corresponding price increase if shape could otherwise keep track of their cash flow·3 t sittenAntares The shares are probably also worthless, even if it were to end with a reconstruction. #insightful and critical investor
- ·1 päivä sitten · MuokattuThinking a bit outside the box this lovely Saturday Does Mark Abraham deliberately send SR Rumænien into restructuring to ensure the company doesn't get caught by the Danish bankruptcy and Teis? SR Rumænien is formally owned by the Danish company, which is why the value, if any, belongs to the estate or whatever it ends up being. But the move of Mark sending the company into restructuring I cannot fathom. What real business is there in Romania today and is it really just a chess move to ensure Teis doesn't have direct access to the company because Romanian law steps in and "secures" the company? It's otherwise an interesting headline from Børsen.dk today. Unfortunately, I cannot read the content myself, but I would not be surprised if revenue has been pumped and manipulated by Mark, who I assume was CEO at the time of recognizing an uncertain lawsuit.·1 päivä sittenFrom Mark:·15 t sittenBQRS It's a shame you're so busy patting Mark on the back and retelling all his angles. You should be asking some critical questions instead, but that's naturally not your job as Mark's personal IR assistant.
- 1 päivä sitten1 päivä sitten“Shape Robotics Romania Has Entered Reconstruction Proceedings. The Battlefield Has Just Doubled In Size.” https://open.substack.com/pub/wildceo/p/game-over-day-69-romania-enters-the?r=5lpe1c&utm_medium=ios·1 päivä sittenYes. If it is rejected, then we will have a deduction for the loss at some point. A claim of 550 million against the company is also a significant part.·1 päivä sittenKloun Thanks for the choice of words for "The illegal bankruptcy". In round figures, there is approx. 250 mio. kr to Mark's girlfriend, nephew (or similar) and the father In addition, a small 200 mo. kr. from the Romanian bank that "financed" the company's receivables. That leaves 100 mio kr for all sorts of other things, including Danske Bank, Eifo, the state etc. It is probably only the approx. 250 mio. which are a direct consequence of the bankruptcy The 200 mio. kr. could potentially have been mortgaged with fictitious figures, now that we also hear Børsen.dk mention, what I also said in November, that revenue and debtors resembled something that could well be inflated/fictitious. Therefore, it cannot unequivocally be said that it arose as a result of the bankruptcy.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Nasdaq Copenhagen
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt
Asiakkaat katsoivat myös
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 28.5. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.1. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 27.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 22.5.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q3 -tulosraportti 25.11.2024 |
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti
134 päivää sitten
Uutiset
Tämän sivun uutiset ja/tai sijoitussuositukset tai otteet niistä sekä niihin liittyvät linkit ovat mainitun tahon tuottamia ja toimittamia. Nordnet ei ole osallistunut materiaalin laatimiseen, eikä ole tarkistanut sen sisältöä tai tehnyt sisältöön muutoksia. Lue lisää sijoitussuosituksista.
Yhtiötapahtumat
Datan lähde: Quartr| Seuraava tapahtuma | |
|---|---|
2026 Q1 -tulosraportti 28.5. |
| Menneet tapahtumat | ||
|---|---|---|
2025 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.1. | ||
2025 Q2 -tulosraportti 27.8.2025 | ||
2025 Q1 -tulosraportti 22.5.2025 | ||
2024 Q4 -tulosraportti 3.4.2025 | ||
2024 Q3 -tulosraportti 25.11.2024 |
Foorumi
Liity keskusteluun Nordnet Socialissa
Kirjaudu
- ·6 t sittenFrom Børsen Sunday: "Børsen can now reveal that Shape Robotics has never seen the shadow of most of the millions that the company booked as revenue in the second quarter of 2025. Two-thirds of the DKK 60 million revenue that Shape Robotics booked in the quarter is, according to Børsen's information, based on a compensation claim for a share of a grant that the company never received." My question: Is it even legal to book revenue that one has not yet received in cash? Surely it should only be booked as a receivable?·3 t sitten1111111 It cannot be unambiguously stated whether it is legal or illegal. Accounting standards are not like a speed limit, where one can measure whether the law is exceeded. It is an assessment of the individual income. There are some objective criteria such as e.g. transfer of risk, delivery, and not least, is it "predominantly" likely that the income (money) will come in. When one reads SR's cash flow - money very rarely comes in - this suggests that management generally recognizes income very "quickly" or very "aggressively". When I read the transcript from the judgment in Romania - it sounds aggressive to recognize the income (recognize revenue) based on that judgment, and Lars Kiertzner is spot on with the description "aggressive". It is not judgmental, but an estimate from Lars Kiertzner, who does not know the case in depth. But "aggressive", yes, that is well in line with what Mark otherwise does. It would be interesting if Mark would like to describe what SR has actually "delivered" in terms of products or service on this contract, which allows him to recognize revenue and a receivable in this case. Incidentally, one cannot simply record a "receivable", as you write. A receivable follows a transaction where there is a counter-entry, which will often be "revenue", and this is where the question arises. If there is no sale, then there is no receivable either. Mark naturally has an interest in "harvesting" revenue if the receivable can be financed by a bank in Romania. Revenue has also been the basis for the enormous alleged claim of 217 mkr from Mark's girlfriend - therefore, the trustee naturally focuses on whether Mark has manipulated the accounts and inflated the figures. Yes, I already wrote that in November - that it could well resemble a classic example of accounting manipulation. It will be interesting to see if that analysis is one day confirmed by a judgment.·45 min sittenOk, I will, and thanks for the good advice, but only if you will just consider the personal bickering or perhaps obsession you direct towards Mark Abraham, or those who wish him luck with his endeavor, which is known to be to carry out a reconstruction for the benefit of shareholders and creditors.
- 1 päivä sitten · Muokattu1 päivä sitten · MuokattuSaw an article on Borsen https://substack.com/@wildceo/note/c-259966822?r=5lpe1c&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action·7 t sittenI wonder if Børsen.dk and Finans.dk are getting the blame for Mark's bookkeeping? Or maybe Teis? One understands better and better why the auditor declined. #InsightfulAndCriticalInvestor
- ·1 päivä sittenHello all readers. I am a small investor, still at the beginner stage. I have been following along from the sidelines and have read quite a bit back and forth between some different daily co-investors in here. (Maybe you should take a breather from each other, smiles) I have a question that perhaps is a bit obvious. But should it now happen that shape gets back on track, will the assets we have then become worth something again, or are they already lost and merely awaiting a final decision to be written off as a loss? Thanks in advance and if my question seems weird or silly, then I apologize But as written, beginner stage. 😊·16 t sittenLet's just assume now that they get the company up and running again, then my assumption is that it has taken so much damage that it almost has to start from zero. I.e. Yes, companies can continue in that case but one must probably expect the stock price to fall 90% (again, that's just my guess). So as I see it, it doesn't matter much which way it falls, I think my money is lost regardless. Hakunamata - and look forward. Regarding buy or sell, it's always easy to see afterwards. Now I don't know when you bought in. If it was at the end of last year then you speculated, and took the risk, but I think many of us saw an opportunity for long-term business expansion with a corresponding price increase if shape could otherwise keep track of their cash flow·3 t sittenAntares The shares are probably also worthless, even if it were to end with a reconstruction. #insightful and critical investor
- ·1 päivä sitten · MuokattuThinking a bit outside the box this lovely Saturday Does Mark Abraham deliberately send SR Rumænien into restructuring to ensure the company doesn't get caught by the Danish bankruptcy and Teis? SR Rumænien is formally owned by the Danish company, which is why the value, if any, belongs to the estate or whatever it ends up being. But the move of Mark sending the company into restructuring I cannot fathom. What real business is there in Romania today and is it really just a chess move to ensure Teis doesn't have direct access to the company because Romanian law steps in and "secures" the company? It's otherwise an interesting headline from Børsen.dk today. Unfortunately, I cannot read the content myself, but I would not be surprised if revenue has been pumped and manipulated by Mark, who I assume was CEO at the time of recognizing an uncertain lawsuit.·1 päivä sittenFrom Mark:·15 t sittenBQRS It's a shame you're so busy patting Mark on the back and retelling all his angles. You should be asking some critical questions instead, but that's naturally not your job as Mark's personal IR assistant.
- 1 päivä sitten1 päivä sitten“Shape Robotics Romania Has Entered Reconstruction Proceedings. The Battlefield Has Just Doubled In Size.” https://open.substack.com/pub/wildceo/p/game-over-day-69-romania-enters-the?r=5lpe1c&utm_medium=ios·1 päivä sittenYes. If it is rejected, then we will have a deduction for the loss at some point. A claim of 550 million against the company is also a significant part.·1 päivä sittenKloun Thanks for the choice of words for "The illegal bankruptcy". In round figures, there is approx. 250 mio. kr to Mark's girlfriend, nephew (or similar) and the father In addition, a small 200 mo. kr. from the Romanian bank that "financed" the company's receivables. That leaves 100 mio kr for all sorts of other things, including Danske Bank, Eifo, the state etc. It is probably only the approx. 250 mio. which are a direct consequence of the bankruptcy The 200 mio. kr. could potentially have been mortgaged with fictitious figures, now that we also hear Børsen.dk mention, what I also said in November, that revenue and debtors resembled something that could well be inflated/fictitious. Therefore, it cannot unequivocally be said that it arose as a result of the bankruptcy.
Yllä olevat kommentit ovat peräisin Nordnetin sosiaalisen verkoston Nordnet Socialin käyttäjiltä, eikä niitä ole muokattu eikä Nordnet ole tarkastanut niitä etukäteen. Ne eivät tarkoita, että Nordnet tarjoaisi sijoitusneuvoja tai sijoitussuosituksia. Nordnet ei ota vastuuta kommenteista.
Tarjoustasot
Nasdaq Copenhagen
Määrä
Osto
-
Myynti
Määrä
-
Viimeisimmät kaupat
| Aika | Hinta | Määrä | Ostaja | Myyjä |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | - | - | - |
Huomioi, että vaikka osakkeisiin säästäminen on pitkällä aikavälillä tuottanut hyvin, tulevasta tuotosta ei ole takeita. On olemassa riski, että et saa sijoittamiasi varoja takaisin.
Välittäjätilasto
Dataa ei löytynyt