Member Info for Pogo001

One more:..

I also don't believe we'll suddenly be left without television and linear broadcasting. In an era of growing global crises, this method of information transmission will need to be systematically protected by the state and government (just like linear & based on cable transmission of telephone signals). Another major, intentional internet outage will reveal the weakness of relying on this type of information transmission and, at the same time, increase the valuations of linear broadcasters, which are currently overlooked (also in the context of being a source of stable revenues based on reused content).

Moving away from politics, ITV's current financial situation is quite comfortable. The station has secured a solid market share. Advertising revenues should at least stabilize, while online competitors are currently forced to compete with each other. At the same time, it's clear that regulatory bodies in Europe, the UK, and the US will block further stages of their consolidation. No one is addressing one fact: the quantitative increase in piracy and a real retreat from paid services. This stems from the policies of these big services: increasing fees, removing content, limiting streaming quality, and cluttering paid services with advertising. Viewers pay more for increasingly lower quality and quantity, while the increase in the number of paid services creates confusion, increases costs, and forces us to spend more and more to legally access specific content. This is compounded by the decline in the quality of the content offered, often linked to leftist ideology, the falsification of history, and the promotion of garbage programming. This raises objections and simultaneously leads to a return to piracy, even though, in reality, with a widely available, high-quality, and affordable streaming service, customers chose legality. In a similar vein, and for similar reasons, the BBC is losing license fee payers (and let's not discuss its goals, because people aren't idiots and have known exactly what they were paying for for years). This also increases the value of producers of high-quality programming, especially when it's confirmed in its distribution channels. This is the situation we face when we talk about ITV. The largest content distributors, under the influence of their shareholders, are forced to expand. When capacity is limited, some of it will return to linear distributors, and the content itself becomes the most important asset and commodity. Regardless of the "suggestions" coming from "independent publishers," ITV is also in the field of interest of Netflix, and perhaps even YouTube (whose development seems increasingly threatened). Their potential business proposition depends solely on their decisions. With two years to go before the election and impending defeat, the Labour Party will swallow any fish here without even trying to fight the US, especially since the regulator can guarantee a specific framework for its operations. Let's be patient and wait for the competition to move. All the cards are in play, and the green table is still crowded with players.

The BBC has been left-leaning for years, but what it's been serving us for the last seven or eight years is already nauseating. Becoming a Labour Party propaganda mouthpiece has done it in, and either the Labour Party will change something, or Farage will sink this ship in two years. The BBC should be apolitical and impartial. Information cannot be filtered, as this leads to degeneration. Change is necessary and unavoidable. Further market consolidation is inevitable. Of two evils, I prefer it to be based on a capitalist financial model (and even US influence) rather than on a Chinese or Russian version of "freedom of speech."

BigEgo

My general conclusion: it's still cheap, and it will be... more interesting.

Have a nice weekend.

(2)

foul the rejection (in accordance with the principle that it doesn't matter how much you sell for or what happens next, as long as the speculation makes money). As small shareholders, we can't do much about it. However, I believe that the Board, led by Dame, knows exactly what it's doing, and is currently supported by a large group of large financial shareholders who know how to look after their own interests (and therefore ours). So let's be optimistic, let's not be greedy trying to grab a few pounds along the way, and let's simply be patient. We will be handsomely rewarded.

(1)

Returning once again to the comparison between ITV and Warner Bros. Discovery. Although the scale of both businesses differs, they operate in similar markets and areas: linear television and streaming, as well as the production, distribution, and sale of created content. Warner Bros. has a large, but not dominant, share of the US market. ITV, on the other hand, is a European leader in English-language content, dynamically developing and selling its productions throughout the English-speaking world. It is also entering the Pan-American market, Asia, and wherever there is demand (often skillfully built by ITV). From the perspective of generated financial revenue, the scale of operations may not be comparable, but WBC alone is only a part of the market, while ITV already dominates its own, securing a leading position for at least the next five years thanks to signed contracts. Furthermore, the European market is a natural recipient of ITV's content. It's a coveted market for the American film, streaming, and advertising industries, and ITV is perfectly positioned to secure a significant share. After the acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, competition in the US, limited by regulators and the current government, will make further consolidation virtually impossible. Therefore, a wealthy Europe becomes a natural target, allowing companies to sell their product and take advantage of the local market. Business valuations in Europe are also at least half those in the US. All major players realize that this situation won't last forever, and consolidation of the European media market will result in increased revenues, lower costs, and, above all, an increase in valuations similar to the US value. Then there's the issue of listing location. If Europe doesn't improve valuations, companies will flock to the NYSE or NASDAC, where financial markets have higher valuations and greater liquidity. The only way to avoid this is through regulatory and tax issues, which, if changed, will attract capital. Politicians will decide, although they really have no choice. Returning to Warner Bros. Discovery. As recently as early 2025, their stock market share price was around $8. Since then, nothing extraordinary has happened to their profits. However, today the share price is around $30, and the initial offer (ridiculed by WBD) was less than half that amount. Some major analysts, much like we are talking about ITV at the moment, have slept through the valuation increase. I won't suggest why, although certain assessments come to mind. It's worth remembering that ITV also rejected one of those ridiculous takeover offers not so long ago, which some of the local trolls and idiots (who have no understanding of economics and are only hoping for a quick profit) first ridiculed (that the offer wouldn't happen) and then cried foul the rejection (in accordance with the principle that it doesn't matter how much you sell for or what happens next, as long as the ..

BigEgo:

Translating this into a specific ITV share valuation... you're a pessimist. I would definitely double your valuation. And I don't think that, in the current situation, SKY's withdrawal would cause anything more than a temporary, maximum 5% correction in ITV's share price. A specific base valuation has emerged in the market. Moreover, similar businesses are already valuated several times more. The Warner Bros. Discovery case has become not only a media but also a financial fact.. So this valuation, this £1.6 billion, won't simply disappear; it will become the minimum basis for defining this part of the ITV business. Its rejection will be interpreted by the market as another example: the management's lack of determination to sell off assets, confirmation of the business's financial strength, and the fact that ITV itself is valued much more highly than potential buyers looking for happiness & financial bargain. My £1.50-£2.00 is a base-case scenario, entirely realistic. If another strong player emerges, an offer to take over all of ITV will likely be on the negotiating table, with the price reaching the £2.50 to ???? range. The real limit will be the buyer's desperation. The financial ratios acceptable to American shareholders are much higher than those in Europe. Given ITV's financial projections for 2026 and the need to outbid or block a competitor, I think that, although it may seem ridiculous, a figure in the range of £12-15 billion would be realistic.

Thanks to FILTERS I guess that the current changes and fluctuations in the ITV share price in its upward trend, are only triggering "reflex reactions" among our trolls. For diarrhea, I recommend taking charcoal. For vomiting, a large bag will come in handy...

All the best for the real long term ITV shareholders.

BigEgo

In reality, the current share price, above 80 pence, doesn't matter. A good sign is that liquidity allows any small shareholder to withdraw their investment simultaneously without affecting the ITV share price. Although it's clear that larger orders above 10,000 shares cause temporary (up to 0.5%) bilateral share price movements. This illustrates the current main trading parties. In reality, the closing of the day depends solely on market makers and larger investors, who will likely complete most of the agreed-upon transactions by the middle of next week. Year-end settlement is a big unknown, but since "pressure will increase" and January should be interesting, I think we'll end up in the 83-85 pence range for ITV shares. Of course, if a "big fish" doesn't want to book losses on the balance sheet, but the risk is lower than a year ago. Liberty Global, which has been dictating terms so far, is no longer able to do so. There are too many interested with ITV shares price at the end of the 2025 that guarantees a profit. Will anything interesting emerge from Sky before the end of the year? I doubt it. The game is currently centered around Warner Bros. Discovery. Once the deal is decided, it will be ITV's turn, a takeover, or even just sham offers designed to drive up the price the competition will be forced to pay. In any case, as I wrote, I believe Warner Bros. Discovery has increased the conservative market valuation of Studio itself from the previous £3-3.5 billion to at least £5-6 billion. This also means that Sky's offer must increase, as it likely inevitably involves the possibility of using Studio's resources. If I'm correct, then ITV's conservative valuation (based on profits to mid-2025) has risen from £1.2-1.5 per ITV share to around £1.8-2.3. If ITV confirms the expectations placed in it based on its results and forecasts for 2026, it will further strengthen its attractiveness, and exceeding the £1.2-1.5 level of the share valuation on the LSE will occur regardless of any negotiations with potential buyers.

BigEgo

Understanding that you're an idiot is very expensive on this forum. Of course, unless those writing about the current cheap buys for Wizzair shares, have long since taken the opposite position.

Everyone is slashing Wizzair's share price, writing about looming threats, management errors, and the need to scale back operations. Large rating agencies, banks and independent experts do not hide their concerns. But on this forum, our experts, the village shamans, are doing their thing... I'll leave it without comment.

Does everyone here realize how a $30 Warner Bros. Discovery share valuation translates to the asset valuation of all multimedia content producers, including linear television network owners? And how does this translate into increased valuations of the ITV business? Regardless of the outcome, this transaction has at least doubled the valuation of this business (content production). And I think this isn't just my humble assessment. The market is finally returning to its normal path, stopping ignoring what many have been saying for a long time.

You can inflate the share price in any way you like. You can also find all sorts of positive opinions, interviews, forecasts, and comparisons. You can write lofty poems about these stocks or paste links. But that won't change the facts. For stocks to rise, you need determined buyers, and there aren't any here. There are a handful of small speculators, dreaming of wealth and more and more often only of making up for losses, proudly calling themselves investors and experts. And the market, and the share price performance, remains unmoved. Small speculators take advantage of others' naivety.... Ignoring the negative opinions of external experts describing the current air transportation market, its prospects, and threats is foolish. Wasting time in a market where there are actually many opportunities to earn even a few percent monthly is a misallocation of capital. And this usually ends painfully. I repeat. My prediction at 1050 pence per Wizzair share at the end of this year was a truly optimistic scenario.

RISK.

Is there a significant risk of loss when buying ITV at a price close to 82 pence or above? Of course, my opinion, given the stake in ITV shares I own, will not be unbiased.

YES, it may be possible to buy ITV shares even cheaper, around 80 pence. YES, because it's difficult to predict if, when, and at what level further agreed-upon transactions will occur. YES, because, after all, the acquisition transaction is still pending.

NOT NECESSARILY, because in reality, the volume on the selling side has practically dried up and the market is dominated by the accumulation of ITV shares. NOT NECESSARILY, because agreed-upon transactions are forced to appear at increasingly higher prices. NOT NECESSARILY, because the SKY offer is actually a foretaste of what awaits us next year, when advertising results significantly improve and all valuations based on them will soar by 20-30%.

NO, because current investors, large financial shareholders, won't sell their shares at the current price, and every correction is treated as a buying opportunity. NO, if we invest more than £20,000, because then liquidity becomes important, and the risk of not being able to buy back the shares exceeds the paper profit we see after the fact. NO, because the current share valuation is detached from reality, from a realistic valuation that takes into account forecasts for the next 12 months, from real market changes, the prospects for the media market, and the upcoming and inevitable consolidation in the industry, which makes ITV an indispensable element for European players.

Everyone is the master of their own destiny. Everyone should base their investments on the realities of their portfolio size and financial capabilities. However, greed and excessive portfolio fragmentation, combined with fear, sometimes create a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity in each of our lives. And it's up to us to decide whether this is the right time and whether we will seize it.

And the pre-market fun with Warner Bros. Discovery shares continues. Another 2.65% gain and the $29 mark broken. We're waiting for Netflix to move. I'm curious to see if it decides to break the $30 offer.

Another day,.., another 9 million shares in prearranged trade.. Exactly as I wrote a few days ago. The repackaging of stocks before the end of the year is underway. After all, shareholders investing in passive equity funds can't accidentally make too much money. Any profits from a sudden yet predictable rise in stock prices strangely always end up in the right pockets..... But of course any losses, however, are usually booked by these passive portfolios... And that's one of the reasons why I invest in this market myself.

Patience is a virtue and always brings results in the long term. And this will continue despite the trolls here, who try to convince us investors of the weakness of our investment, the foolishness of accumulating and reinvesting dividends, and the discrediting of the management board's actions. In their eyes, and based on what they tell us, they always make profits, possess unlimited knowledge and access to confidential information, investing millions of pounds in our shares... because, after all, they know best. But in reality...

FILTERS strips them of their tools for manipulation and brings us peace of mind. Let's remember all this and be guided by our own knowledge and common sense. After all, we alone bear the risk of our decisions.

If the current volume is any indication, the scale of the market sell-off and accumulation of ITV shares (of course, excluding clearly prearranged trades and well-informed shorts trying to make a few points thanks to this info) is truly significant. Personally, I don't recall anything like it in the history of this stock. Add to this the practical liquidation of short positions by large players (0.7% is about 27 million shares, likely partially hedging their holdings and and means nothing). So, "something" is definitely coming, it certainly won't negatively impact share valuations and it won't happen in months or years, but soon.

BigEgo

Given the scale of ITV's operations, and especially STUDIO, and considering what's happening in the US media market, the second option seems most likely. This is high possibility given that potentially three or four players are on the horizon, although financially speaking, perhaps two are likely to be the most significant. However, nothing is certain, as politics may become the final decision very complicated.