Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Rhythmone LSE:RTHM London Ordinary Share GB00B1WBW239 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -0.25p -0.66% 37.50p 37.25p 37.50p 37.75p 37.25p 37.50p 2,862,667.00 16:28:49
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Software & Computer Services 116.0 -65.6 -15.9 - 185.34

Rhythmone (RTHM) Latest News

More Rhythmone News
Rhythmone Takeover Rumours

Rhythmone (RTHM) Share Charts

1 Year Rhythmone Chart

1 Year Rhythmone Chart

1 Month Rhythmone Chart

1 Month Rhythmone Chart

Intraday Rhythmone Chart

Intraday Rhythmone Chart

Rhythmone (RTHM) Discussions and Chat

Rhythmone Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
27/2/201721:27RHYTHMONE - new Name, new Beginning???3,287.00
27/2/201718:41RhythmOne - 2016 a new beginning5,015.00
16/1/201715:58No Rhythm All Blues128.00

Add a New Thread

Rhythmone (RTHM) Most Recent Trades

Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Rhythmone trades in real-time

Rhythmone (RTHM) Top Chat Posts

Rhythmone Daily Update: Rhythmone is listed in the Software & Computer Services sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker RTHM. The last closing price for Rhythmone was 37.75p.
Rhythmone has a 4 week average price of 38.05p and a 12 week average price of 38.16p.
The 1 year high share price is 44.50p while the 1 year low share price is currently 15.50p.
There are currently 494,240,448 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 2,681,341 shares. The market capitalisation of Rhythmone is £185,340,168.
sikhthetech: could it be that the no. of shares issued was simply set to near the 'limit authorised at the agm without the need for further authorisation', so that 1R doesn't need to seek shareholder approval... and that the share price was the current share price From the Perk acquisition announcement... "while RhythmOne shareholders have generally authorised, at its Annual General Meeting held earlier this year, the Directors to issue sufficient number of shares to close the Acquisition."
leluot3: " Those guys are bitter for a reason - over the years I have shown the reasons in obviously will never believe me, so no point in me trying." Whilst you have been making these masterful révélations and delivering your totally unbiased judgement on all and sundry, you forget to mention one tiny but crucial fact - that 'over the years' you have been calling 240p. Are you blind or are you just so pigheaded that you cant read an share price from the share price charts? You have made yourself look a complete idiot. Perhaps for a good readon. You are one!
1gw: STT - I think in the past I've been quite interested in barkboo's posting style haven't I? So no special treatment for you. But like I do with you I felt there was a marked contrast between how he liked to portray himself and what his posts actually suggested. In his case it was because I felt he was quite clearly trading blinkx (as it then was) while professing disdain for traders. I also had an issue with his aggressive behaviour towards some posters and the "logic gaps" in some of his posts (for example whether or not he had ever sold any of his "core" holding). Going back to you, you claim to be interested in just posting newsflow about R1 don't you? And yet your posts frequently seem to make references to the "gang" and their alleged activities on R1 and (bizarrely) GKP. You take an article talking about how a succession of small trades might be used to "manipulate" the share price and then seem to imply that whenever there is a succession of small trades on R1 there must be something underhand going on. You are perhaps in my view currently one of the worst offenders in terms of trying to (unfairly) undermine the credibility of other posters - you do it by suggesting that certain of them (although here you never seem to get very specific - just a general spreading of mud hoping some will stick) are in a "gang" and are somehow acting together if not just multiple ids of the same person. In fact, I only got into this particular conversation with you because you were suggesting that someone must have been using multiple id's to tick up one of loaf's posts. And since I knew for a fact that I had voted it up exactly once and probably in the timeframe that concerned you, I thought I would offer that information and at the same time comment on why I thought loaf's post might reasonably have struck a chord and been voted up. The vast majority of regular posters on these boards are fairly transparent imo (so the issue I had with barkboo and currently have with you doesn't arise). Most appear to be invested, want to see the share price go up and tend to post mainly positive things about the company and positive interpretations of data and events. There are one or two who are openly negative about and hostile to the company, but they don't make any real pretence to be invested (at least with long positions). There are those who appear just to be here for the company and the chance to wind others up. And then there are the slightly odder ones, perhaps, such as Alex, myself and Gowlane, who say they are invested but can't help themselves posting some fairly negative comments and interpretations when the mood takes them. I post like this I think partly because it irritates me to see what I think are false positive interpretations being offered by others, partly in the hope that someone will show me why I am wrong to be negative and partly just to record my thoughts on the investment - I find advfn to be a reasonable filing system if I want to look back and see why I bought or sold at a particular time or what I thought of a certain event. I also find posting to be a useful spur to research.
1gw: And while I'm here, a couple of follow-ups on your posting over the weekend. 1. Who do I speak for? Well no-one but myself obviously. When I said "what people don't understand" I was making an interpretation of various posts that I have seen - perhaps I should strictly have said "what people don't seem to understand..." although I do know for certain that 1 person (me) is in that position. I would say that the high tick count for that post might suggest that my interpretation was reasonable, wouldn't you? 2. Can you own shares in R1 and still want the share price to fall? You seem to be suggesting that since I have seen evidence that you did at one point own shares then I couldn't reasonably believe that you want the share price to fall. Well to give you just one scenario that I believe is plausible: your posting history seems to me consistent with primarily being driven by wanting revenge on other posters or even the company for past "bad" behaviour. i.e. even though you might own shares and so suffer financially from the share price going down, that might be outweighed in your own mind by schadenfreude - the pleasure you would take in feeling that your "enemies" were suffering more.
1gw: Well I think I'm one of the ones who voted up loaf's post recently (and from memory when it was showing 3 other votes up). Does anyone else want to own up to put stt's mind at rest? What people don't understand stt, is how to square (1) your assertion that you're an investor in R1 and (2) the huge amount of time you appear to devote to posting on the company with (3) your apparent unwillingness to try to engage the company in discussion on some of the points that you raise in order to supply some answers on these boards instead of just questions. The obvious way (but maybe not the only one) to interpret your posting style is that you want to see a fall in the share price for whatever reason. If you came out and stated that you were either short or just posting with a view to driving the share price down, then your posts would make more sense (at least to me). I believe it is the disconnect between what you say your position is (i.e. an investor in R1) and the way you post that causes a lot of the hostility towards you on these boards.
sikhthetech: what happens over the next few days will depend on the Perk & 1R share price... shareholders adjusting their holding depending whether it's cheaper to currently, hold Perk or 1R shares.. Let's see how the Perk share price performs in US..
sikhthetech: absolutely - if BM achieved his promises then the share price would have taken care of itself and BM would have got his options.... However, crucially, the same applies to Perk... They bought 2 companies over the last year and Perk were supposed to be growing strongly... according to Yahoo, the analyst price targets average CD$5.21, against the current CD$2.5.. therefore analysts see Perk target DOUBLE the current share price .. yet Perk have accepted an offer @ CD$2.9, still approx 40% below analyst TP.. Brokers also had Perk down as a strong buy as they were growing strongly... However, Perk executives have sold out prior to their fy results and some 40% below mean broker target price... seems odd... If our broker TP was say 70p, how many would agree to be sold at 40p, especially as like Perk, we're supposedly so close to profit... unless, of course we/Perk are not.... there would be an outcry...
sikhthetech: The Perk acquisition is @ 38.1p or approx $42.5m... If the share price drops will Perk shareholders still vote through the deal... or if the share price rises??? "Pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, the Company shall acquire the Perk Shares for total consideration of approximately US$42.5M inclusive of certain employee options, payable in RhythmOne shares at a price of GBP0.381 per share"
sikhthetech: a year ago, post H1 2016, Tosca increased their holding 3 times within a few days... on 19th Nov, Tosca increased of their holding by ~3.8m...from ~108m to ~111m... followed by another increase by ~4.5m on 23rd to ~116m.. followed by a 3rd increase of ~200k taking holding to ~116.97m On 19th Nov 2015 the share price opened @ 26p On 1st Dec 2015 the share price opened @ 23p during the period ranged from 20p to 26p Maybe the 3m reduction is just them top-slicing and taking some profit off the table??? would be interesting to see if there are any more holding rns
1gw: I see from the notice that Toscafund had increased before the latest decrease: 116.4m shares in annual report 117.5m shares before latest transaction 114.1m shares after latest transaction Now selling 3.4m shares (i.e. about 3% of their holding) doesn't strike me as "dumping" given the size of the holding. So perhaps that suggests it is tactical. Possible reasons could include: 1. A bit of top-slicing - but again, why only 3m shares? 2. Let someone else in who Toscafund thinks might be good longer-term to have as a shareholder (cf what happened on Findel with Sports Direct) - same challenge, why only 3m shares? 3. Stop a threatened price rise which might otherwise have made something else more difficult. 1. is possible, with the "why only 3m?" answered by price dynamics - they sold what they could above a certain price limit. 3. somehow seems more plausible to me. This is the scenario that various posters think is playing out on another holding I have, where they argue the major shareholder is selling into any rises (and buying back on falls) in order to keep the share price steady at a level which they believe will encourage a bid for the company as a first-step to getting an auction going with 2 or more interested parties. These posters argue that if the price rises too fast in anticipation of a recovery or a bid then that would make the bid itself less likely - and they believe that if one company bids then other companies could get drawn in to an auction. Maybe some wishful thinking there, but nice to see that the share price hasn't weakened following the rns.
Rhythmone share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
Gulf Keyst..
FTSE 100
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:41 V: D:20170227 22:45:00