I am back in this now. Just got very ridiculously low again considering the biz holds half of the MCAP in cash. I get it some of it is probably deferred rent and money raised from discounted selling but really all things considered ... This is low. This is a business with massive scale and an online presence.
I hoping when results come they will prepel this to 2.30 which is my target price.
Here is how I see it going... Which is a bit of fantasy ... But you never know as I did buy in quite late in the day today.
So Triller becomes default social media of choice taking place of tick tock... Once they sort out the things they are receiving feedback on on play.com reviews right... Then Triller become super big and then instead of renewing 7 digital contract they just take them over for mega money.
I suspect yesterdays buying was big money generated from hours of relentless inflows into and then out Supply@me. Temporarily funded a hyper bubble here as investors tried to boost profits further quickly.
I agree with this. Read the reviews of what users really think of Triller in Google play. For me there are a number of features they must add or improve before it can take off.
If Triller improve the user experience this could be a winner in the future. Particularly if the contract is extended. I might invest in this but I think the MCAP is a shade high currently.
I bought into this yesterday on the RNS and quite frankly could not believe it did not go up. Starting up at the point the economy goes into recovery in a sector that does well at this stage of the cycle awesome.
They say they have plenty of cash and if not who cares. The placing was over subscribed and I am happy to subscribe more if need be. They have a good head count (sales ability) and winning contracts. As long as they have a high level growth. This is a good growth stock.
This is the dip I've been waiting for. Very happy to be able to buy in. Not long until some mega vaccine news and I think government will be forced to u turn on quarantine rules given they are very unpopular and completely uninforcable.
I could be wrong but even if I am in the short term this looks like a great long term hold
My concern with this business model is that the risk appears to be with the institutions funding the stock not the shareholder. In most other pawn brokers which is essentially what this is. The Owners take on the risk.
I will want to see more evidence that the a pilot works before investing. I need to see very large institutions ploughing billions in which is what is needed to justify the MCAP. When something is too good to be true is usually is.
Yes there is going to be demand as a result of companies in cash flow trouble due to covid but what longer term?
I am feeling massively gutted. Was locked out of my trading account at 13 p when I tried to buy. Bought at 34 when I managed to unlock it. So Went down to 27 p panicked and then sold. How unlucky. Well done to all those who made a boat load of money. Feeling envious
RE: Please pull this off Sig. Zamboni!14 Aug 2020 20:43
This business model can't work if the central bank rates go up surely. Then institutions would just deposit at banks for 4% rather than take a cut of some stock revenue
RE: Please pull this off Sig. Zamboni!14 Aug 2020 20:41
So basically it is a like a pawn brokers on a massive massive scale. But specifically for manufacturers and traders of stock.
But instead of using the money of shareholders... We give a cut to institutions who fund the purchases. Sounds like the risk is firmly with the institutions not the shareholders... Why the heck would institutions take on so much risk?
RE: Please pull this off Sig. Zamboni!14 Aug 2020 20:21
I can deramp by saying monetising stock is risky business. If the stock or business go bad whilst it is temporarily owned. It gets lumbered with a massive amount of stock it may or may not be able to sell.
Just like loans... This can go bad too. They can do a load of due diligence.... And that can reduce risk.. but can still go bad. I guess the pilot scheme will show the way and they can tweak their model to lower risk.
Have I got that right?
It does seem like a novel idea... If it can be pulled off.