Member Info for M007

MMX should be viewed as a private company. there is no float or flow to move the shares on good news. where shares trade today is basically meaningless. value will only be realized on a sale.

they would be stupid to pay a cash dividend. they're either growing in which case they should be reducing share count/buying more back. if they're not growing, they need to conserve cash.

I'll bet shares take a hit after results are posted. 1H will be unspectacular. exhausted holders will bail on less than stellar results. they will extend the buyback window and buy shares sub 5p. they will authorize a larger budget for repurchasing shares

"Any Ordinary Shares acquired as a result of the Buyback Programme will be announced to the market without delay."

My interpretation: will be announced without delay AND concurrent with the business update later this month. It would be moronic to publish details on every repurchase trade. The reason for the 500k share purchase disclosure is probably because it was from a related party.

I just looked through the Lombard Odier website. They are a large money manager based in Europe. They surely manage a lot of accounts and Henry could easily be selling for the account that holds the large investor's shares in the company and buying for another account that maybe has no shares. There is no way shenanigans are involved. #Occhamssimplicity

* at least thats what I think is the case.

but in the case of MMX's flows, 100% of the cash comes in up front. it's just the revenue that is booked over the contractural period. that's better than the inverse, which can be the case in other situations where revenue is booked up front, but cash follows during incremental periods.

Is cynicism required to have an in dependent voice on this board?
I bid you 5p for your shares. Sell to me and take your pain.

Same effect, but gives the company the flexibility with those shares in the event a future equity financing might be necessary (to raise cash) or to reissue shares to fund an acquisition. That said, I believe the company wants to demonstrate the current operational model and sell to a consolidator (and not reissue shares).

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/treasurystock.asp

bakky - when a company does a buy back, the shares are effectively retired (cancelled). for example, if a company buys back 10% of itself, the remaining shares outstanding are worth roughly 10% more. that is why buy-back are referred to as a return of capital to shareholders, like dividends.

Being in the stock for 7 years with no appreciation is your fault, not management's. The simple fact is that the current board saved the company and its prospects to be acquired by simultaneously redirecting the business into an asset-light model by outsourcing domain sales while giving Fred the boot and righting his wrongs. The life-blood to fund these maneuvers was proceeds from lost auctions, for lack of a better way to put it. MMX has a ****-small market cap with a very attractive recurring revenue business model that is desirable to larger operators that are consolidating market share by acquisition. The BOD's decision to return cash to shareholders via the buy-back is an expression of confidence in the company’s current operations. My strong preference would be for the the company to be run for another 12-24 months before “exploring strategic options”. The share count will shrink via more buy-backs and we’ll do better on an exit. Managements lucrative grants are a reflection of 1. a successful redirection of the operating model, 2. the cost of doing business — Toby should get rich for his labors. I hope the stock remains stuck in the mud for a while longer so a greater number of shares can be retired. How many shares do you own? I bid you 5p for them all. You can take your loss and get back in after the realization time lapses.

You guys are all such sour grapes. Conspiracy theorists. You probably think the US astronauts never actually walked on the moon. The glass is half full.

silver - much better to have a buyback at this moment in time than a dividend. a £ spent retiring shares will provide a better return to shareholder than a dividend (especially if u r buying bunds - lol!!!). seriously, the company is rich on schedule with its return of capital referenced 18+/- months ago.

bakky - this is just a start and there will be more £ authorized as time marches on, IMO.

MaccGaz - much better for shareholders to have the company retire more shares than fewer under a set budget for buy-backs.

MaccGaz - you want to company to buy at the cheapest price and not to drive price higher. The cheaper a company buys with a set budget, the more the share count can be reduced. That reduction accrues to the non-selling shareholder. The fact that the company is in position to initiate even a modest return of capital to shareholders is very encouraging. In this case, there is no conflict of interest between the company and its shareholders.

This is a small handful of investors. Lombard is a nominee investor highly unlikely to be buying for the bank's account.
The others are one-off investments from small funds or family offices vehicles with filing sized positions. All are likely close with the board.

RE-POST: 11 Jun 2019 20:33
This company doesn't have enough market cap to draw relevant attention to the shares. They should spend cash to grow the business, retire shares and eventually sell to a strategic buyer or financial consolidator. TH and the team/board should keep on the current path and eventually there will be a catalyst. Until then, no one cares.

£1M is symbolic only of the board's confidence that the business has matured to a point of being cash generative. £1M is nearly 2% of the company's market cap, not an insignificant start to the program. Further, if the board and management are correct in assessing that legacy issues are fully in the past AND the recurring revenue nature of the model is taking hold, then buying back shares (at current levels) is a far better use of cash than a dividend. Additionally, the stock is not reacting because it's a micro-cap. It's too far below the radar of nearly any institutional buyer. IMO, there are three possible outcomes: 1. the company is sold to a consolidator or some competitor doing a tuck-in acquisition; 2. the stock slowly grinds higher over the next couple years as the company, being the primary buyer, methodically reduces the share count while still growing through losses and building retained earnings; 3. this ends up being a total fail because of an unforeseen occurrence - always a risk.

May 2018 + 18 months = 2H2019. You do the maths.

Re: quoted post below
Commenting on a prospective dividend 18 months out is as ridiculous as the US Fed telegraphing three rate hikes over a set period. It might have an effect on short-cycle markets, but 18 months out is an eternity for this company and in capital markets.

"2017 has been about proving out the business model: firmly locking-in the operational gains of 2016 to ensure a profitable base, and developing a long-term growth strategy. The acquisition of ICM, announced today, marks a major step forward in our ambitions both to scale and introduce a progressive dividend policy over the next 18 months."

They raised capital at 13p and you could tender at that price (as some director wisely did - follow the insiders). A great deal for the company and shareholders, not yet so great for that investor who remains underwater. From most perspectives, a well executed deal.