|So 72p and I, for one, will be glad to exit this share.
It hurts to compare with the bidder: if I had sold 3 years ago and put the proceeds into the bidder's shares they would now be worth 12 times what I am being offered for the shares I held on to. Humph.|
|This could turn around on the back of the profits announcement.
Strange that there is so little interest.|
madness of crowds
|Deserted since June 06. Anyone left?
Today has shown just how illiquid this one is. Somebody wanted to sell 15,000 shares and had to take just 35p for them, following which the price has moved to 50/51 from 55/60. Hmmm.|
Funny old life isn't it!
Near enough doubled my money on these about 3 years ago, still got a small holding, luckily the previous gains vastly outweigh todays losses.
Still an interesting little Co. Very niche and very well backed by Gartland Whalley & Barker, good solid Yorkshire business folk!!
Am I saying this is yet another buying opportunity?? :-)|
|truly mysterious company.. not much interest by retail punters.. i rember buying this ages ago... but very little movement.. tempted to get back in|
|Looks like all is revealed in today's announcement.
Any experts out there who could suggest WHY someone who already has such a large holding would be interested in just a little bit more?|
|SPT yesterday of 10,000
Does anyone know who may be interested in stake-building?
Dont worry about them being 'oop North',... the GWB (Gartland Whalley & Barker) head office in Halifax is a very prestigious and beautiful listed building complex, with more £££'s worth of 'metal' in the car park than you probably find 'Dahn Sarf'!! :-)
From my visits they seem to have more experience and provenance than many a 'London' Company!|
|Pachiammos - great info, thanks. Don't you think it's a bit scary though?
I think what you're saying is:
They sold an unattractive company, Lead. (Why did they buy it in the first place?)
They aren't managing another one very well (Broadnet)
How many other companies are there in the group? 3 or 4 maybe?
How are each of them doing? Are any of them interesting?
Also - I'm surprised they can afford to have an Ops Director overhead with those numbers! Hang on, aren't they up north somewhere ? Assuming he's located at their head office, I guess he's on a £40k or so salary package.
Which makes me think - why are they up north? Marketing services clients are pretty much all in and around London.
Next time you're chatting to Mr. Towre, could you please ask him about their corporate overheads then compare to CELLO, CRESTON, MSQ ... others?|
|I have spoken with Stephen Towne, the Operations Director, and he has explained how the 2004 figures add up. I calculated from the 2003 Annual Report that the operating profit on market research was £1.20m, and he implied that this was correct. So it was approx £1.57m in 2004. Towne explained that the two reasons for the sharp difference between that growth and overall profits growth were (1) the sale of the Lead Agency, which made op. profit of almost £100k in 03 and "virtually nothing" in 04 before it was sold; and (2) a fall in margins at Broadnet - probably considerable. He gave no precise figures but indicated it was a very high margin business in 03 and significantly less so, but "not a loss" in '04. The total corporate operating profit 9now and prospectively) is the sum of the market research and broadnet divisions, minus corporate overheads - which are "sizeable for a small company but nothing out of the ordinary".
Entj, I think we can now see that the growth was plenty in '04 and up with the sector, though it didn't get through as such to the pretax line because of the Lead Agency (a one-off drag, and good riddance) and Broadnet (still profitable but 03 was a bumper year there).
Am therefore optimistic for the future here, especially with the rating being so undemanding (7.3 times pretax profits per share before goodwill). But this is definitely NOT a "value" investment: (a) the interest is covered only 3.9 times by operating profit and was actually up slightly y/y in '04. OK while the good times last but not much protection in a recession. (b) net current liabilities exceed the sum of current assets and tangible assets. (c) large item for creditors due in more than 1 year. Strictly therefore a speculative holding IMO because of the debts, and despite the undemanding p/e.|
|This is the sort of thing I mean.
In my experience, Mr. Sorrell is never wrong!
"So, how does EQI performance stack up against the sector?" is the questions the analysts will presumably ask...
Marketing spend to show biggest increase since 2000
Sorrell: 2005 will see further improvements
Jennifer Whitehead, Brand Republic 08:30 18-01-2005
LONDON - Marketing spend is set for its biggest rise since 2000 according to the latest Bellwether Report, released today by the IPA.
The figures show that moret han half of the marketing budgets reported for 2005 so far have been set higher than actual spend last year.
The Institute of Practioners in Advertising reports that this figure is the highest since the first quarter of 2000, with companies citing improved business confidence and an upturn in economic growth as the major reasons, along with new product launches.
At the same time, the report said that across-the-board growth for the last quarter of 2004 was also strong, at 6.3%.
Sir Martin Sorrell, chief executive of the WPP Group, said that the findings of the report, which is compiled by NTC Research, matched those of his company's own research.
"The IPA Bellwether Report confirms our view. The recovery that we have seen in the second half of 2004 in the UK (and Western Europe) continues, driven especially by growth in non-traditional marketing services areas, such as direct, internet and interactive," he said.
However, he disagreed with the findings of the report that spending on traditional media had, on average, fallen during the last quarter of 2004, with the Bellwether Report showing a 4.5% decline on average.
"The one divergence would be that media advertising was not as weak as the IPA Bellwether Report suggests. We too, at WPP, believe that 2005 will see further improvements, although relative growth may not be as strong as the quadrennial 2004 over 2003," Sprrell said.
The Bellwether Report sees traditional media having the highest growth rate over 2005, followed by direct marketing.|
|Pachiammos, thanks for this thoughtful input. I've just spotted it - back from hols - and have a few follow up thoughts.
I agree with your point about it being risky (small). I have been considering WPP instead, though I was originally looking for a smaller company.
You mention that you're impressed with them and the management seems good. I'd appreciate some more on that. I've scoured the available online info and none of the management seem to have experience in the sector. They seem to be numbers blokes. Cello, by comparison does have some industry experience at exec board level. Please feel free to put me right on that one.
Again, I agree with your point on Mar-Oct and fledglings but they're operating in a sector which has seen superb growth recently so the fledgling comparison is a bit overgenerous!
I've just gone back again and looked at the basics whilst writing this and I think the main issue here is illiquidity. There are simply too few shares on public issue. Effectively, the company isn't really publicly traded at all. I had my fingers burnt with a similar small company a few years back (different industry). The so-called public listing was just a reflection of the greed of the major shareholders.
I'd need to hear some really interesting ideas from EQ on how they plan to stand out from other strong players and take at least fair shares from the sector growth that's in progress. Must admit, in the absence of any signs of that, I'm tending toward Cello.|
|Which one should I put £25k into?
|Which one should I put £25k into?
|Just noticed unionhall's comment on profitability. I guess he's right. Have they suggested any strategy for improving profitbility? (I have another holding in the same sector and am considering switching.)|
|Just been looking at the chart characeristics. Difficult to be confident due to the low volumes but: down below 100 or up to 155 ????|
|Check out OMG (www.omg3d.com / www.vicon.com)
With world class products, new markets opening up and cash available for further acquisitions, we expect OMG's turnover to increase dramatically in the next twelve months. Our fair value price targets for OMG are:
July 2005 : 52p (market cap. £28 million) + 116% on current level
July 2006 : 91p (market cap. £49 million) + 279% on current level
Current Price : 24p (market cap. £13 million)
Siggraph event starting Monday 9th August will generate significant sales for new MX system|
|Good old Bobby - buying again yesterday - now what does he know ?|
The accounts were ok vs the price I paid for the shares.
If profitability lags behind others of their type I look forward to it catching up and a corresponding rise in share price.|
|EQI, it isnt worth to mention this one|
|Really? In what way were the accounts okay ?
How about doing some benchmarking against other marketing services companies ?
Shouldn't the profitability be somewhere around 3 or 4 times what it is ?
Let's hope the potential acquisitions he mentioned have some IP or a business model which allows more appropriate profit levels.
|yep - just me and good old Bob - the ultimate risktakers......
The accounts were ok though....|
|Unionhall - I guess your real name must be Bob Bond then ?
Noone else seems to be buying ....