Member Info for BouncyDeadCat

Is he still telling everyone on iii how good he is and how he knows everything about everything? The plep can't even read a balance sheet.

You may be right, there may well be a streamlined and ultimately (dare I say it) profitable business under what has become the reconditioned Blinkx. The business clearly needed to be changed and it's a good job the changes have finally come and have been quite dramatic in scope (although why some kid themselves and refer to this as a start up when we're 9 long years in is beyond any sort of accurate analogy for me). The change has been slow to realise and BM as the man in charge was caught napping. It was during his watch that the 3 year collapse ensued. He may have fixed it now (who knows - time will ultimately tell), but someone more dynamic would have reacted quicker and with more force. The way he reacted to the paid short was amateurish and he's always awash with bungling management buzz speak whenever presenting or issuing statements - Bungling his way through statements that need to be clear, concise, considered and detailed - he offers none of these qualities. I would like to see someone quite dynamic (who can talk with a straight mouth) come in and take over from here on out. Hi to gdog, becky, bmac etc

His rhetoric just doesn't align with the poor results he keeps on producing. He has been largely impotent as a CEO during the last 3 years. Revenues continue to decline and even more worryingly; this appears to be the first time we have a sequential revenue decline from the first half of the year to the 2nd half. HY revenues for this financial year were $91 million and FY revenues are anticipated to be $165-$170 million which indicates revenue of just $74-$79 million for the 2nd half of the year (which, traditionally, has always been the stronger half). Admittedly; this has been a year of fundamental change, but it's not just this year that we've had to put up with woeful performance, it's been too poor for too long. It's now time for a new CEO & Someone more dynamic than S. Brian Mukherjee.

rusty, although you titled your post with my name, I now understand you were aiming your comments at 1GW.

I'm not saying people won't vote period, I'm saying I don't think the majority of shareholders (75%) would vote in favour of a 30p takeover of it were to materialise.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. It's all hypothetical anyway. If a cheap bid were to come, I'd suspect they wouldn't get 75% shareholder approval for a 30p takeover anyway. Not with $82 million in the bank and a road map to profitability underway. It would cause BM reputational damage, especially as he stated as recently as last week "We have done exactly what we said we would do and we will continue to put more measures in place to achieve our goal of reaching profitability" To then throw the towel in a week later.... well... people can make their own minds up....

Hardly apples to apples 1GW. In that instance Arco shareholders swapped their Arco shares for BP shares on an almost 1 for 1 basis giving a premium uplift of 26% . Each 0.85 Arco share was valued to be worth 1.00 BP share.

plus, you also have to factor in the reputational damage a cheap-detrimental-to-shareholders-sale would do to BM when they're 1) Cash Rich 2) Debt Free & 3) On the road to Profitability (so we're told). He would never manage a PLC again.

there bleeding ipad

Wow 1GW, you're even more cynical than me ;) imo. it wouldn't and couldn't work like that for the following reason; As poorly governed as the AIM market is, there is some protection given under the T/O code that gives shareholders certain rights. Deals with Mgt can be made, but they cannot be made if their is detriment to other shareholders. After all, this is a cash-rich company with no debt, so it's not as if a deal-at-any-cost is required here.

I don't think it helps when the intraday trades don't match up, which suggests ii to ii trading has gone on behind closed doors within dark pools. Nothing illegal about that (unfortunately) , but it all adds to the suspicion of what exactly Tosca are up to and the fact that they have been able to buy a third of the company without increasing the share price - you try that and see if you can do it - I think you'd struggle ;)

should have read Do you think BM would welcome a T/O that would ensure he lost out on his options? I don't.

1GW, It doesn't work like that. Do you not think BM would welcome a T/O that would ensure he lost out on his options? He is on the BoD as well as CEO.

It's doubtful that a takeover would be able to go through without the support of Mgt and the BoD. This is quite a sophisticated tech company and if a bid were to go hostile then there would be a very real danger that the brains who operate and know how to pull the leavers to make the software work - would leave. The deal, if it were to come, would need to be collaborative. BM has over 7 million options that are trigger-able at anything over 50p, so it is doubtful that he would agree to a buyout at anything below this. He has a $5.25 million vested interest. Dwight & Co will also have options. Shafting them wouldn't work. If Tosca became the owners, a new deal for BM would be unlikely as if they think he is the man to run this company - they would simply stay invested - it's less risk. As far as BM is concerned a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush when it comes to a $5.25 million payday, I think he'd prefer that guarantee.

There is certainly a mis-match between the current share price and what is happening with regards to stake building by Tosca. Even if they came in with an unacceptable low ball offer, at this price, shareholders could still expect to make a 30-50% profit. It seems strange that the wider market hasn't picked up on this.

There are an allowable 28 days to consider making a bid once the 30% threshold is reached, but it is not compulsory to do so. There are a myriad of reasons why a 30% holder could waiver (or be forced to waiver) their right to make a bid for the rest of the company. One such example is; "False markets must not be created in the securities of the offeree company, of the offeror company or of any other company concerned by the bid in such a way that the rise or fall of the prices of the securities becomes artificial and the normal functioning of the markets is distorted" there are many many more...

Tosca don't have to make a mandatory offer if they reach 30%. But if/when they do get to 30%, they will have to make their intentions clear and come out and tell us - i.e. if they don't want to buy the company - they have to come out and publicly declare they won't be making an offer for it. I hope they don't make an offer and just see incredible value as investors at the current valuation (taking in account where this industry will be in a few years time).

It's a hedge fund, so they will have access to dark pools which would allow some of their trades to be hidden from the market. Whilst the trading of securities can be hidden from view, the RNS's regarding the stake they've been building is public knowledge. I'm surprised the near 30% stake they've built hasn't peaked the interest of speculators

MM’s don’t/won’t hold stock for more than a couple of seconds. This looks like it’s in the final throws of a takeover to me. The question is – at what price? BM’s options can be exercised at anything over 50p, which, one would hope, would prevent the BoD from recommending shareholders accept any derisory offer (i.e. anything under 50p) from Tosca. The problem is; Tosca’s been employing a tactic of acquiring big chunks of the company at low prices for some considerable time, which they may try to persuade shareholders sets a precedent for a low offer price (not as far as I’m concerned it doesn’t!) My concern when less-than-honourable hedge funds get involved, is they tend to want to offer less than a fair price for the company and they may now want the rest of the company for a very very cheap price. To give you an example; if Tosca were to offer say 30p for each outstanding share that would value the company at just £56.5 million once you strip the cash out. Current Valuation = £92.5 million Cash in Bank = £55 million Today’s Enterprise Value minus cash = £37.5 million or 9.4p per share. Enterprise Value minus cash at a 30p takeover = 16.4p per share. If they did offer a derisory price of say… 30p and it was accepted, Tosca could effectively buy the rest of Blinkx for just £24.5 million in cash, as they would recoup £55 million in cash from Blinkx’s bank account. (Acquire remaining 265 million shares @ 30p minus £55 million cash in bank = £24.5 million spent). £134 million a year in revenues with a 45% gross margin for £24.5 million = An absolute fvcking steal!!! And 40p wouldn’t be much better. DO NOT - EVEN FOR ONE SECOND - ALLOW YOURSELF TO BE TEMPTED BY ANY DERISORY LOW-BALL OFFER THAT MAY BE MADE. YOU HAVE WORKED TOO HARD TO ALLOW OTHERS TO MUG YOU OF YOUR INVESTMENTS ON THE CHEAP! It has to be a minimum of 50p. End of.

As per BM's Conf Call comments that Rhythm is now one of the largest programmatic platforms in the world and would easily make it in to the top 10 or even top 5 list - I say to him this - Please hurry up and prove it by showing up in the list! There is no point in people trying to follow quantcast numbers for Burst plus Adkarma plus Rhythm New Media plus Grab and whatever else we acquired since 2009 as it reveals very little. The advertising industry takes note of Comscore or Nielsen rankings and if we aren't in either of these lists, then we aren't relevant - Period. We have a large footprint and considerable reach, so I don't disbelieve BM when he states that we're likely the 5th largest programmatic platform, I just hope he is working quickly to consolidate the measurement of the whole platform so it can be proved in Comscore's rankings and thus proved to the advertising industry - i.e. Their potential clients. In 2012 we were the 6th largest SSP (Ad Network) and were turning over $245 million in revenues. Post Edleman we slipped down the rankings and our revenues suffered. We need to be back up there again and we need to be 'seen' to be in the Top 5. Come on Brian - get us on the list as a unified entity - RhythmOne!