Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Empire Online LSE:EOL London Ordinary Share VGG3037J1021 ORD NPV
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.00p - - - - - - - - -
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
56.5 23.9 9.3 0.0 0.00

Empire Online (EOL) Latest News

Real-Time news about Empire (London Stock Exchange): 0 recent articles
More Empire Online News
Empire Online Takeover Rumours

Empire Online (EOL) Share Charts

1 Year Empire Online Chart

1 Year Empire Online Chart

1 Month Empire Online Chart

1 Month Empire Online Chart

Intraday Empire Online Chart

Intraday Empire Online Chart

Empire Online (EOL) Discussions and Chat

Empire Online Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
31/3/200713:02Empire Online - the online gaming empire3,431.00
16/11/200611:00EMPIRE STRIKES BUST!10.00
18/7/200615:06Empire Online on a decline!9.00
15/11/200513:52Only woth 14p on fundamentals3.00

Add a New Thread

Empire Online (EOL) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Empire Online trades in real-time

Empire Online (EOL) Top Chat Posts

DateSubject
14/2/2007
18:51
lbo: Do they still have the 65,951,297 PartyGaming Shares or have they been sold? If they have not been selling then they are making a profit on their first investment! The share price of PRTY has risen and at 34p would value the stake at £22.4m and the shares were valued based upon an average price of 29.32p for Partygaming or £19m. The buyingback of shares makes sense IMHO. 48p in cash which you can buy for 44p http://business.guardian.co.uk/marketforces/story/0,,2006980,00.html Online gaming group PartyGaming climbed 0.75p to 30.75p after Dresdner Kleinwort repeated its price target of 50p and its buy recommendation.
04/1/2007
21:57
25cent: Well lets put it like this Lanir could buy a run down one grove olive farm in Israel for $298 million that his mate owns with voting control over the Empire dosh! Looking at the almost all-time low on the share price and the unlimited amount of shares on offer at 42p its not hard to say that most people are not overfull of confidence of shareholder value enhancement? Another possible nightmare for EOL holders is the new AIM rules on cash shells, EOL could be de-listed if it does not spend its cash!
29/12/2006
18:20
richardsj: This open letter has been sent to Mr Lanir, their brokers Numis, their PR company and the FT. I believe it puts the case succintly and I intend to 'sound out' a number of institutions in the new year re the requisitioning of an EGM - Dear Mr Lanir As a private investor in Empire Online holding a substantial number of shares, I am both shocked and disgruntled at your disregard for the rights of minority shareholders. Your announcement of 29 Dec 2006, selling the remaining gaming related assets and the preceding statement of 28 Dec 2006, whereby you stated that you intend to 'invest opportunistically' across the market cap spectrum in both public and private companies, without any consultation to other minority shareholders is outrageous in the extreme. I am sure I speak for many 'Secondary market' investors, both institutional and private alike, who believed they were investing in an Online Gaming enterprise and that to overnight change the company's remit (being a complete volte-face I would add from your recent statements) without dialogue is somewhat unpalatable. Particularly so given that we are now holding effectively a dollar denominated bank account and, a minority stake in PartyGaming. Empire Online's 'listing' is in London and not New York or Tel Aviv, consequently the vast majority of minority shareholders are likely to be sterling denominated. You are in turns forcing UK investors to hold the precariously placed US dollar (by way of the company's dollar cash deposits) and, in eerie echoes of the 'investment companies' of the late 1920's boom years on Wall St – by default also forcing us to invest in a very opaque manner in, as yet undisclosed companies over which we have no desire to invest – we could of course purchase innumerable investment trusts and subscribe to Private Equity funds in our personal capacity. The events of early October and the effective outlawing of Online Gaming in the US was distressing enough for shareholders, without being forced to now endure your intended actions for the company. Given that the shares of Empire Online languish at an all time low and some 75% below the flotation price of 175p, I believe it is an affront to investors in the UK to allow them to face two stark choices, namely to either sell their shares for 80% of their cash value (43p versus the current cash value of approx 51p at present FX rates and PartyGaming's share price) or, be forced into blindly investing in those areas you see fit and at your discretion! Can you answer me the following questions too - what will the prospective Board of Directors comprise of following the asset sale, as an 'investing company' obviously doesn't require a 'padded' and expensive Board? Why have you not explored avenues to return capital to those shareholders who wish to redeem their stock at the cash value and not the present 'discounted' market price.? I sincerely believe Mr Lanir that this is the wrong way to 'court' the City of London on a medium term basis and is both short-termist, immoral and likely very damaging to your personal reputation and prospects of doing business here again. A fair and appropriate course of action is to offer those shareholders who wish to exit the company and allocate their cash at their own direction, a 'tender' offer purchasing the shares back at the underlying cash value. In this scenario, those investors who wish to remain with you can remain so and those who wish for a graceful and realistic exit have the choice. I would add that in the event that this course of action is not taken that I intend to requisition an EGM in order to propose the compulsory 'tender' offer for those shareholders wishing to redeem their £10 of shares for £10 and not £8 – which is the totally unnecessary choice facing us at the moment due to the present market 'discount'. I await your comments and would add that this is an 'open letter' to the FT too. Yours sincerely
10/10/2006
17:47
dosullivan: Betting bosses are big winners Tamsin Brown, Daily Mail 10 October 2006 While fund managers and investors are nursing heavy financial losses from the plummeting value of shares in the internet gambling industry, some bosses have bagged pots of money from generous share packages. PARTY TIME: Richard Segal was granted 56m share options when PartyGaming listed. He left a few months later OTHER STORIESGoogle buys YouTube for £880m Market report: Tuesday close Grainger is a hot property Two more UK firms quit US online gaming New Airbus chief warns of job cuts FTSE LATEST6072.7041.80 THE EDITOR'S PICKSTips: Reclaim bank charges Tips: The best music download sites Tips: Lists of the best credit cards Tips: How to spot a windfall Fuel bills: Can you save? The bonanza will stun those who have looked on in astonishment, as £3.5bn has been knocked off the sector in the days after America signalled its plans to ban online poker, roulette and sports betting. The victims aren't just the speculators who staked their cash on the success of the sector - but the City funds who have lost much more. These are the people managing the savings of millions of ordinary men and women with private pensions. Any day now President Bush is expected to sign a bill that could wipe yet more off the already waning value of the industry. But while the bosses of these firms may say that they feel your pain, the collapse of online gambling isn't exactly hitting them in the wallet. Take Sportingbet. Its annual report reveals departing chief executive Nigel Payne owns 1.5m share options, with a guaranteed share price of £2.15 - nearly triple Monday's 73¾p close (up 3¾p) and worth £3.3m. Meanwhile, finance director Andrew McIver, who takes over from Payne later this month, has 500,000 share options on the same basis. Both would have to exercise the options between January and December next year and Sportingbet has set aside £5.1m in case they do. A spokesman said the board was reviewing the set-up but declined to comment further. The millions netted by PartyGaming's four founders have been well publicised - but its management, past and present, have also done rather well. The poker giant granted former boss Richard Segal and finance director Martin Weigold a total of 56m share options when the company listed. A large chunk of these options has dived in value, but Segal and Weigold are unlikely to complain because they didn't pay for them in the first place. PartyGaming said the award was to 'attract them to the company prior to the offer to incentivise and reward them for successfully floating the company'. Unfortunately it didn't persuade Segal to stay - he left less than a year after the company's debut on the stock market. He forfeited millions of share options in doing so but had already made £10.7m at the float and was able to keep 7.5m share options, worth £2.93m at Monday's close of 39p (down 2½p). Weigold made £4.26m in PartyGaming's listing and was handed 12.3m worth of share options, vesting at quarterly intervals over four years. Segal's successor, Mitch Garber, was granted 27m share options on joining - including 7m, currently worth £2.73m - that will vest in his first year of employment. The remaining 20m are exercisable over the next four years, depending on the share's performance. PartyGaming declined to comment, but a source close to the company pointed out that the share options were given by the founders and so came at no cost to incoming shareholders at the company's float. Small comfort for investors looking at a 350pc drop in the share price since its 176p August 2005 high. John Anderson, the boss over at 888, has followed Segal's lead and decided to cash in his chips. He didn't do quite as well as his mates at PartyGaming - but he did all right. He received options on 1% of the company at float and sold 1.7m shares at the time, making £3m. He also has an option on another 1.6m shares, vesting over the next three years. Chief operating officer Gigi Levy, who takes over from Anderson at the end of the year, was given 1.35m shares, currently worth £1.4m, and 1.1m share options. PartyGaming and 888 now appear to be far more frugal with their free shares. But many investors will probably feel it's too little, too late. STEINBERG WALKS OUT ON EMPIRE Lord Steinberg is quitting his role as chairman of internet gambling group Empire Online. A source close to the Tory Party donor insisted his decision to step down was unrelated to the fall-out from the US ban currently rocking the industry and follows his plans to retire from the same role at Stanley Leisure after its takeover by Malaysian conglomerate Genting. He will be replaced at Empire by senior independent non-executive director Richard Rosenberg at the end of this month
02/10/2006
08:46
ards: I expect eol to now buy some assets at knock down prices. their april statement suggested as much. I very rarely call the bottom on any stock as the market is so unpredictable, but gambling is not going away and eol are sitting pretty with cash and a stupid share price. looks like a one way bet to me so have just loaded up.
26/9/2006
18:31
oldtown: Dos at last you see sense with this, it pays $100's of dollars per new sign up then after the free roll over 75% of new players evaporate. The churn rate has not been disclosed by Empire but i have heard its appalling as is its $ per what it calls regular cash play punter per day rate. EOL if its not careful in the near future will reach the point when the cash paid out for new sign ups will out way the rake from the games. This is what I have been saying for months and this is what the two warnings are about. I don't think its cheap, I don't think its attractive and I certainly don't think anyone with any common sense does either. The cash in bank may offer some respite in the falling of the share price but with negative sentiment ,profit warnings, falling earnings, expectation of higher player sign up fee's this is going nowhere! Surley any prudent company would hedge its cash fund against a falling $ if it represented 90% of the share value? Many professional investors and hedge fund are short the dollar and if it carries on falling then EOL cash pile and hence share price will be swiftly falling with it. I remain short with a stop at 71p
06/9/2006
16:43
oldtown: So I take it by your foolish response that you acknowledge EOL's troubles are not as you say, specifically AIM related? I'm confused by how you can call my posts (predictions) that i have made since 160p anything other than constructive. They have all been basically spot on in predicting the continued demise in the share price the profits warning the lack of recovery ect ect ect are all clearly documented in the last 4 months post on this very thread. You in return just post some half baked pathetic reason for the collapse in the share price as "just a aim thing" well your 100% wrong its not a aim thing it's a EOL thing as proved yet again today. Sometimes I wonder if some people can really appreciate that you don't have to be long to post an opinion on a thread, or be long to make money on a stock. They get really nasty when the share falls as if it should only go one way? If you take making a poor call badly then don't invest in dodgy Jewish poker stocks listed on AIM evil! I can see it pains you that i have called this right!
01/9/2006
16:29
dosullivan: Is eol just another stock in freefall? Share mags view Friday, September 01, 2006 New highs beat new lows but many Aim stocks are in free fall One of the simplest indicators of stock market health that I follow is the number of shares reaching new highs versus the number reaching new lows. In May this ratio was giving a negative message. After many months in late 2005 and the early part of 2006 when the number of shares reaching new highs exceeded those falling to new lows the pattern changed, new lows exceeded new highs and a period of marked weakness followed for shares generally. The good news is that this pattern has recently flipped again to favour the bulls. On Thursday, for example, even though the FTSE 100 index was down 23.2 points on the day, 72 shares reached new peaks versus 41 reaching new lows. In the US the ratio was even more positive with 279 shares reaching new 12-month peaks versus 76 falling to new lows. Create your own share portfolios and watchlists here Good omens promise share price rises More shares peaking than troughing is a good omen and suggests that we can expect stock markets to perform more strongly in coming months. A better performance would be welcome. In the 1990s the US Dow Jones index rose roughly fivefold; in the 2000s, so far, it has gone nowhere. A significant feature of recent stock market performance has been a better showing by shares in larger companies. I have compared charts of the FTSE 100, FTSE 250 and FTSE Aim indices since the bear market ended in March 2003. In early 2005 the Aim index was the best performer. It had doubled in roughly two years. By contrast the FTSE 250 index was up around 75 per cent and the FTSE 100 was up less than 40 per cent. Dramatic shift in trends Since then the relative trends have changed dramatically. The FTSE Aim index is up around 88 per cent; that means it is lower than it was in early 2005. By contrast the FTSE 250 and FTSE 100 indices, although below their best levels, have continued to make progress. The FTSE 250 is up around 135 per cent and the FTSE 100 is up around 60 per cent. Since the year's peak on 11 May the FTSE 100 has done best with the Aim index well in the rear. If we rebase all three indices at 100 on 11 May the FTSE 100 is now 98, the FTSE 250 is 95 and the Aim index is a struggling 83; that is a huge divergence. Create your own share portfolios and watchlists here Recent Aim performance has been dire If you look at the Aim index in isolation its recent performance has been dire. It is down 17 per cent since the May peak and has staged only a minimal recovery from the July low point. It is probably due to do some catching up but a more detailed look at how many Aim shares are performing presents an unhappy picture. Shares in many companies that have been floated in the last two or three years are in free fall. My suspicion is that something is going badly wrong. In 2003, looking at how Aim had performed in the bear market I came to the conclusion that most Aim shares were rubbish. In the next two years the index did so well that I began to revise my opinion. But now again I am not so sure. Ferocious bear market hid problems Between 2000 and 2003 many Aim shares lost 80 or 90 per cent of their value. It was a disaster but at least they had the excuse of a ferocious bear phase in the overall stock market. But now many Aim shares floated in the last two or three years, against the background of generally favourable market conditions, have still lost between 50 and 80 per cent of their value. It looks to me as though the sponsors are not doing their job and many companies are being floated on valuations that are unjustifiably high. My advice is to be very careful with new Aim flotations. If they don't have a track record of strong and growing profits they may be vulnerable to a big fall in price. Create your own share portfolios and watchlists here Company promoters flog worthless paper to eager punters These dangers are only to be expected. If investors are eager, especially given the tax breaks available on Aim shares, promoters are going to be only to happy to flog them worthless paper in exchange for hard cash. It is the oldest law of economics that supply expands to meet demand. All those risk factors in the small print of company prospectuses are not there for nothing; these shares really are risky. I don't want to leave it on too gloomy a note. There are some excellent companies on Aim with well-thought out and proven business models able to deliver strong growth in sales and profits. I have included a number in the TSW portfolio. Subscribers will notice though, that I rarely recommend shares in companies that are not already profitable. I think such shares should be left to the venture capitalists that specialise in analysing these types of investment. Even they make plenty of mistakes and reserve their biggest bets for strongly cash-generative businesses. For the average investor, trying to gauge whether an idea or unproven concept is going to be successfully commercialised is too hard; it is best not to try.
21/11/2005
11:34
coscos: I thought PRTY were serious about taking over EOL, but by coming back with a ridiculously low bid of 60p from an initial offer of 130p-140p, proves to me that it was all a hoax. PRTY were never serious in the first place and tried to manipulate the EOL share price in order for them to get them only on the cheap. As aN EOL shareholder, I am very happy that EOL had the sense to tell them where to go. It had NOTHING to do with EOL's 'Future prospects' as PRTY put it, and had nothing to do with PRTY's DD. It was an outright CON from the start and with all of this mess out of the way EOL can now concentrate on doing what they do best- signing up customers at a faster rate than anybody else can. PRTY got greedy. And I personally think that they will suffer for it. Good.
17/11/2005
18:57
crazi: Keep in mind the PRTY management where interested in EOL when they were 270p. Then again at 170p when the previous approach didn't go through. If you had offered EOL to PRTY a month ago at 100p they would have grabbed it! PRTY have done an excellent job in manipulating EOL's share price in to the dirt. You have to give them credit for how they have handled things. PRTY's own share price suffered by their strategy as well but they knew it would recover quite quickly which it has been doing (I'm holding them from 69p). Would share holders have accepted a 100p offer when the price was 100p? No way... Would they accept a 100p offer now that it's 66p...? Probably most would and be happy about it too. a) If PRTY make such an offer...up she goes... b) If they make no offer I believe she will climb again on it's own current and forecasted figures which are much higher than current share price .. c) PRTY chance their arm and offer lower than 66p..? share price will dip through panic and then start to recover anyway... I doubt c will happen. a & b are left. Someone has been shorting EOL because of the uncertainty and as normal have been winning the buyer/seller struggle. The quicker news comes the better but I firmly believe the share price will rise no matter if a or b happen. To me the real question is how long will the news take - so the shorting ends - before they try and drag the price down even further. Right now nearly "any" news is good news! It's the unknown that bites... IMHO Crazi...
Empire Online share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
LSE
GKP
Gulf Keyst..
LSE
QPP
Quindell
FTSE
UKX
FTSE 100
LSE
IOF
Iofina
FX
GBPUSD
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:30 V: D:20161208 08:01:54