Member Info for bald_eagle

Janus, I was joking about the conspiracy thing. In reality it's probably the market waiting for concrete proof that ITVX is going to be a success.

"'if all that you say is right and the potential can be realised why do the financial institutions (not) take the same view" with this being reflected in the share price?"
=======================================
Janus, I think I had a go at answering that. It's a conspiracy!

"The pension fund managers who bought them are experienced qualified professionals who should know what they are doing."
================================================
Mongoose, possibly they are 'experienced qualified professionals' but probably not in LDI's. It is why such people employ professional advice when investing in such complicated things.....should they have known more? Probably not, indeed there was speculation that even the treasury didn't understand the risks in the LDI market (or were ignoring it).

I suspect it is more difficult to spot increasing risk after a period of relative low risk investing. Everybody like an easy life - even fund managers - and wont go looking for trouble. Should pensions be invested in highly leveraged investments?....that is probably fair question after 2008.

"Would you blame Porsche for putting a high powered engine in a car, or the driver for not having the experience required to drive it ..should it end up in a ditch ??"
======================================================
Pokerchips, maybe not the best analogy. I would blame the car manufacturer if they didn't install sufficient braking to control the power of the engine.....i.e. 0-60 mph in 5 seconds, 60-0 mph in 30 seconds!

It is also slightly irrelevant. When their is a problem then almost everyone looks for someone else to blame. At which point the lawyers get involved and it's a calculation between the legal fees and the cost of settling. There is also the added dimension that you will want to keep doing business with the 'upset' customers. So you come to an 'agreement'....whether that's a reduction in fees that keeps the 'settlement' off the books.
BTW I have no knowledge of such dealings, just makes sense to me.

"....ITV start using analytical cookies and then using that data in conjunction with advertisers so that when the family move away from ITV they are then targeted with adversiting in their usual browsers or other apps where they are not ad free."
=========================================================================================
Tom, would that be legal?....I'm not sure a company could sell the data it collects to a third party.

When one signs up to use a platform you agree to the use of your data. If that data is sold to third party companies then you lose control of your data.

As was pointed out. ITV gets the subscription fee for those who are ad-free (although 10 million would be a lot). The balance of the viewers (probably majority imo) would get advertising and their data could be monetised I presume.

btw 10 million at £70 per annum is £700m....more than enough to cover costs at ITVX.

Sir Nige is aiming his comments at Jeremy Hunt I imagine. Trying to pressure him to relax Insolvency rules to free up cash for investing elsewhere.
The governor of the BoE said that relaxing the insolvency rules would increase the lilkihood of an institution failing by 20%. The probability of a failure would increase from 0.5% to 0.6% (or from something very small to something else very small)....got to love statistics.

Tom, the family that shop in Aldi might subscribe to ad-free TV, so Tesco wouldn't be able to target them.
Obviously Tesco & holiday campanies can advertise on terrestrial ITV but their ads aren't targetted, If people subscribe to ad-free streaming then they are now inaccessible to advertisers. Would ITV be able to monetise those viewers in other ways?

There comes a point when the hedge funds start to take notice.
There is also the option of a share buyback as someone mentioned earlier.

He seems to have lost what little sanity he had. I feel sorry for him. Must be desperate coming on here to promote one of his failed investments.

There are quite a few rules about offers, I don't know them.
My hunch is they don't have to issue an RNS until it is a formal offer. But when your SP is low it seems 'sensible' to issue an RNS - even if the offer was rejected.

Of course Apollo know it is worth >300p. that's why they are offering £2.37. They want it as cheap as they can can get it. If there are other potential bidders they may be spurred into action if they think Apollo will get it on the cheap. I suppose the big question is: "Is anyone else interested in WG?".....if anyone else throws their hat in the ring then the next question becomes: "What are they willing to pay?"
Probably somewhere over 300p would be quite tempting.

The really good firms get stronger during a downturn. I suppose we will have to wait until 2024 before discovering if that applies to TRMR. Would that count as cream on top of the jam?!

trupcard, you're like a broken record m8.

I guess the market is waiting to see where the viewing figures at ITVX level off over the next 6-12 months. Like most things there is usually an initial surge and then things settle down. Hopefully the platform continues to attract new users...I suspect that's what the market wants to see.

On a positive note, the share buyback gets more bang for its buck after todays results....and using that logic I guess I'm almost looking forward to SP of <100p.

We seem to have wound the clock back 5 years and are back in 'jam tomorrow' land. Meanwhile management have been highly rewarded. But at least we have Fincap targetting £13....that takes some doing.
Amobee purchase doesn't appear to be helping at the moment, but I suppose it keeps them busy.

If there are any other potential bidders then this is going to smoke them out. Apollo have probably suggested that their maximum 'cash' offer is 237p. So a new bidder could swoop in and snap it up for a little over 250p (unless Apollo significantly raise their offer).

Andy, are you in the process of changing tune?!
would be nice to hear something a little more uplifting.

Sid, I am sure some some people have tried it. Quite difficult to consistently come out ahead. Probably easier with some stocks than others. I would be interested to find out the difficulties or successes they have had. If it was easy then everybody would be doing it. Also rather defeats the point of owning shares that can appreciate in value. There are always ISA's & SIPP's for a tax free haven.
Probably easier to invest in an income generating fund, IT or ETF (I'm guessing)....which may achieve a similar thing for zero headache.
DYOR...sorry about the guesswork.

I suppose the obvious question is "What does the next 10 years hold for BARC?"
- The last 10 years have been low inflation, low interest rates and continous series of 'alledgedly' illegal activity by Barclays. Perhaps with a more beneficial macro-economic environment for banks Barclay wont feel obliged to operate at the very extremes of legality. Perhaps it will become a long term investment instead of a day trading dream. Perhaps!!....although I suspect it is written into the DNA of Barclays that they like a frontier wild west banking system.