We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for streaming realtime charts, analysis tools, and prices.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neteller | LSE:NLR | London | Ordinary Share | GB0034264548 | Moved to NEO, was ORD 0.01P |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 49.50 | 0.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| - |
| Last Trade Time | Trade Type | Trade Size | Trade Price | Currency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| - | O | 0 | 49.50 | GBX |
Neteller (NLR) Share Charts1 Year Neteller Chart |
|
1 Month Neteller Chart |
Intraday Neteller Chart |
| Date | Time | Title | Posts |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/9/2012 | 10:49 | Neteller - Will they take Europe by storm as well? | 21,839 |
| 17/9/2007 | 19:25 | @ Ј9 WANKY SAYS SHORT THESE INTO OBLIVION - I AGREE | 122 |
| 05/9/2007 | 11:57 | NETELLER ...US BID IMMINENT ... 25% OF ITS SHARES TRADED FRIDAY | 8 |
| 25/7/2007 | 17:09 | Tradx666 has tried to delete his Neteller thread...what's his game? | 12 |
| 25/7/2007 | 16:34 | Tradx666 has tried to delete his Nettler thread...whats his game? | 8 |
| Trade Time | Trade Price | Trade Size | Trade Value | Trade Type |
|---|
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 20/11/2008 14:28 by dan1man I'm still here. Getting v bored of clicking on ADVFN each day and seeing no new posts!Then again, its a pretty bloody boring share. I still want to know why directors aren't buying! That and the continued depression of the share price leaves me questioning my conviction that its worth a lot more than this. If it really is going nowhere for a long time, I'd be tempted to transfer some money into something like RBS. RBS has taken an abolste battering, but is at least showing signs it may have bottomed out. Thats the type of share that could easily see 50% gains in a very short time. That's something that used to be possible with NLR; now I'm just falling asleep here. YAWN |
Posted at 03/11/2008 13:48 by bobby.ifa My Broker sent me this ealiar and I couldn't resist 10,000 after making a tidy profit on Renesola. It moved the offer a little as well! These are currently priced at thier cash position, let alone the instrinsic value oif the Company. I looks little an oversold victim of the AIM sell off.NETELLER* 31 October 2008 Leisure NLR.L (AIM) Cash = cap NETELLER has reported solid Q3 results (EBITDA growth 33%) and we are upgrading our FY08E estimates (+5%) Investment Case NETELLER has reported Q3 revenue growth of 13.0%, with a corresponding 13% uplift in gross costs. Reduced operating costs led to quarterly EBITDA growth of 33%. NETELLER has also stated that it has net cash (30 September 2008) of $89.4m. This equates to £55m of group net cash (cable 1.64) against a market cap of just £60m. With the group consistently free cash generative and trading on negative EV/EBITDA multiples (-0.2x FY09E), the shares are a clear Buy and we retain our 120p TP. Q3 Update Upside Buy 140% What's Changed 2008E EPS 10.15c vs 9.66c (+5.1%) Rating Unchanged Price Target Unchanged Price 50p Target Price 120p Shares in issue 120m Net debt (cash) $89m/£55m Market Cap £60m Enterp. Value £5m NAV/Share 96.3c Next Event Prelims - March '09 * Daniel Stewart acts as broker and nomad to NETELLER Company description NETELLER operates the world's leading independent online payments business. Download Report James Hollins +44(0)20 7776 6571 james.hollins@daniel Sales Team +44 (0)20 7776 6931 sales@danielstewart. danielstewart.co.uk Subscriber Links: More Daniel Stewart Research | Mailing Preferences Daniel Stewart & Company Plc Becket House, 36 Old Jewry, London EC2R 8DD Tel: +44(0) 20 7776 6550 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7796 4648 www.danielstewart.co |
Posted at 31/10/2008 09:19 by kooba been tracking for a while having a core holding around 70p.added a few today.the shares seem cheap in their own right with transaction market unlikely to be adversely effected by current climate.but they are still a small fish in a big pond.either they beef themselves up with some solid synergistic acquistions [as planned] or they will be taken out [funding easy when the target is stuffed full of cash].what i don't think is priced in at all is if there is a regulatory change in us re online gaming [as posted above].assuming nlr still has the footprint over there could be huge again. |
Posted at 29/10/2008 10:04 by dan1man Yeah that was Ron Martin buying 50,000 shares at a cost of £25k. His salary + bonus last year was in excess of £1m (how the fk he justified that when the company posted a loss of $185m is beyond me) His total shareholing is now 110,000, worth about £55k or about 5% of his annual remuneration. He is not going to give a sh*t about the performace of the share price with a sharholding that small. the only other director who owns shares is Dale Johnson with a paltry 9000.For me this is a major cause of concern and its something I wish I'd looked a lot closer at a long time ago. |
Posted at 14/10/2008 14:59 by 25cent Yep the baby got thrown out with the dishwater, i notice that the Arron Banks CFD long bet on NLR was doubled last week to 2 million shares also.If anyone does not know Arron Banks , he and his partner John Gannon are famous for buying undervalued stocks and then taking them out. Add this with Director buys and the constant good news RNS the 40p per share cash in the bank and you have a surely a recipe for a good punt on these shares? I did not even look at the monitor Friday, i really wish i had seen that Director buy, oh well such is life. This is Arron Banks & John Gannon's company. Not only also isle of man company like NLR but read the first sentence. "Brightside Group plc is one of the fastest growing insurance broking and financial services businesses in the UK." Very interesting why he has bought into NLR? When you add the jigsaw together it looks like NLR is on the verge of being taken out imho. powwow ref your question. A Sellbot is a computer generated share trade that splits up a large sell order into small share amounts until the full order is clear. NLR has been under the pressure of sell bots for as long as i can recall as US holders moved out (or so we are told). Once the overhang is cleared i honestly think that this will move over the 80p resistance general market permitting obviously. |
Posted at 10/10/2008 11:32 by pandide Everyone has probably seen this report. Here it is just in case:NETELLER - BUY Price: 51p Target price: 120p Code: NLR.L Analyst: James Hollins Exceptional value; proposed name change NETELLER has announced a proposal to change its name to NEOVIA Financial Plc. The group has expanded its product offering over the past two years and is now a fully integrated global payments business, encompassing the original NETELLER e-wallet operations, as well as the payment gateway, NETBANX, and the payment cards business, Net+. The group correctly feels that the offer of a complete and integrated offering to merchants and consumers alike cannot be marketed appropriately under the group NETELLER moniker, associated with just the e-wallet, and is therefore seeking approval for a change of name to NEOVIA Financial (translated as 'New Way'). The name change is subject to shareholder approval, with an EGM to be held on 11 November 2008 and a proposed change in mid November, including a move to a new ticker, NEO.L. The name change underpins the significant efforts and technological advances made by the group over the past two years, from a gaming e-wallet to an integrated payments business, as well providing a fresh group re-brand ahead of expected new product roll-outs and geographic expansion over the next 12 months. NETELLER has a market leading e-wallet, but also has a strong, well-invested and fast growing payment gateway business in NETBANX, with the most recent card products, Net+, allowing consumers to utilise both physical and virtual cards to transact online and at >30m Mastercard POS/ATMs. As detailed in our research note of 3 September 2008 ('Stampeding ahead', TP 120p, Buy) where we upgraded forecasts and target price, the group has the brands, client relationships and product functionality to deliver strong volume growth, cash generation and exceptional merchant and customer growth. All these factors underpin our bullish stance and projected earnings growth in FY09E of c.16% (11.18c vs 9.66c FY08E). Furthermore, the group's equity value is currently covered 85% by group net cash ($93m/£52m net cash vs mkt cap £61m). This equates to an implied valuation on the ex-cash NETELLER business (enterprise value) of just £9m. Assuming only minimal free cash generation growth (we forecast FCF of $10.7m/£5.9m in FY09E), the shares are woefully undervalued. Our EV/EBITDA analysis points to a multiple of 0.4x FY09E and a negative 0.1x FY10E. This implies the group will either fail to generate a meaningful uplift in group EBITDA over the next two years, or that it will dwindle away its cash resources with no resulting uplift in group returns. We view both scenarios as highly unlikely. With 135% upside to our unchanged 120p price target, we retain our strong Buy recommendation. |
Posted at 07/10/2008 10:05 by pandide Does anyone know and understand whether NLR is exposed to the global financial turmoil. How will NLR be affected? |
Posted at 19/9/2008 15:34 by 25cent Must say its very very disappointing to be up 15% and then end up down on a day like today?56p on the bid after getting as high as 63.75p on the bid, in real terms all in all a dire performance after the 13p three day fall. Yet again runs into strong selling, who the hell is selling this consistently with 65% of the share price in cash a vastly profitable operation and new contracts/ deals growing all the time? |
Posted at 11/9/2008 07:20 by whatgoesupcomesdown UnlikelyBrightside Group plc, through its subsidiaries, provides finance rehabilitation solutions to the United Kingdom consumer credit market. It offers its clients a range of financial rehabilitation solutions, including free advice through its free-to-phone debt counseling center, home visitors to assist with the completion of debt information packs, mortgage and loan broking, debt management, corporate recovery and formal insolvency services. The Company operates in four segments differentiated by service lines: Insolvency Services, Mortgages and Loans Broking. Some of the Company's subsidiaries include Brightside Holdings Limited, David & Co Consultants Limited, Brightside Personal Finance Limited, Brightside Mortgages Limited, PB Recovery Limited and Campbell & McDonald Limited. In June 2008, a reverse takeover transaction was completed between Aust Holdings Limited and Brightside Group plc. On March 18, 2008, the Company disposed of the trade of PB Recovery Limited. Employees 103 as of 31/12/07 Dividend Information Dividend Yield - Dividend per Share 0.00 Market Capitalisation Market CAP (GBP) 79.99 m Shares Outstanding 326.47 m Float 65.30 m Valuation Ratios Price/Sales 84.19 Price/Book - Price/Cashflow - Profitability Ratios (%) Gross Margin - Operating Margin -429.89 Net Profit Margin -429.89 Financial Strength Quick Ratio 0.04 Current Ratio 0.04 LT Debt/Equity - Total Debt Equity - Per Share Data Earnings -20 p Sales 05 p Book Value -45 p Cash Flow -19 p Cash - Management Effectiveness Return on Equity - Return on Assets -149.84 Return on Investments - Income Statement 31/12/07 GBP(m) 31/12/06 GBP(m) 31/12/05 GBP(m) Total Revenue 0.95 0.45 0.59 Net Income Before Taxes -4.08 -2.81 -0.47 Net Income -5.31 -3.94 -0.47 Diluted Normalized EPS -0.20 -0.14 -0.02 Cash Flow Statement 31/12/07 GBP(m) 31/12/06 GBP(m) 31/12/05 GBP(m) Cash From Operating Activities -4.74 -4.44 -0.79 Cash From Investing Activities -0.13 -0.29 -0.69 Cash From Financing Activities 4.98 4.88 1.67 Net Change in Cash 0.11 0.15 0.18 Consensus Broker Estimates Forward PE Target Price Long Term Growth Rate Broker Estimates Consensus High Low Number of Estimates Sales Profit EPS DPS Significant Developments Brightside Group PLC Announces Completion Of Acquisition Of Aust Holdings Limited And Injury QED Limited; Completion Of Placing Brightside Group PLC announced that it has completed the acquisition of the entire issued share capital of Aust Holdings Limited and the entire issued share capital of Injury QED Limited. Terms of the transaction were not disclosed. The Company also announced that it has completed the placing of 55,789,474 new ordinary shares, raising gross proceeds of £10.6 million. The shares were admitted to trading on AIM on June 30, 2008. BRT Realty Trust Announces Resignation Of Finance Director Brightside Group PLC announced that Paul White has ceased to be a Finance Director of the Company as of March 20, 2008, Paul Chase Gardener the current Chairman will be performing the role of Finance Director. |
Posted at 21/7/2008 16:46 by 25cent Yep great news this is recent interview with him. He is famous for buying undervalued assets.Q: It appears you have a particular approach to corporate governance, seeking out opportunities to acquire and exercise voting rights where there are 'undervalued assets' - how did you arrive at this strategy, and what does it entail? Our strategy is to buy undervalued assets wherever they are in emerging markets - it's increasingly less the case that we exercise voting rights. When we started our company, the obvious target was closed-end funds selling at discounts - public companies whose assets were fundamentally undervalued. We would use our voice as a shareholder to reconstruct those companies, for ourselves principally but also, by ramification, to the benefit of other shareholders. While this is a strategy we are most heavily identified with, it is not the overriding feature of our business - in most cases our investments are passive. Q: As corporate governance issues and proxy voting become hotter topics, do you expect better opportunities to target other financial institutions, or simply to encounter stronger defences? Just as we have now become a public company, anyone who puts themselves into the public domain should expect scrutiny. In the case of closed-end funds or, for example, of Hambros Bank, we have done nothing other than to exercise our rights as a shareholder. So, although some might describe our activities as 'ungentlemanly' or even 'sharp', whatever we do is within the framework in which the shares of those companies were sold in the first place. In the same way, now that we have gone public, if people wanted to shake us up because we'd done a poor job, we would have to accept it. Q: You discipline management through the markets, by carefully targeted and timed buying, selling, and value-based activism. Do you think that this is the best mechanism for encouraging good governance? The best way to start the ball rolling is to talk to the management directly. Unfortunately, in most cases, the reason the company is under-performing is that management is inadequate and therefore unreceptive to the sort of proposals we might make. We are then forced to take action through the constitution of the company and try, though external methods, to restructure it. Looking first at closed-end funds, the arguments are straightforward - their assets are easy to identify and value, and they typically sell at a big discount. The validity of the closed-end fund is no longer there because the market is now liquid, but the managers have no incentive to close the gap between share price and net asset value because they are paid on the value of the underlying assets not the market cap. of the fund. They have almost an annuity stream of income, at the expense of the shareholders. We have done fourteen reconstructions in five years, every one successful, from our point of view on behalf of our investors and for the other shareholders who were otherwise stuck indefinitely at a substantial discount. In the case of Hambros, the arguments are similar. We are not trying to 'raid' Hambros, nor the closed-end funds - simply to restore a balance between share price and NAV. Q: How do you answer the charge that your methods of shareholder activism are often "self-serving" rather than furthering the cause of all the minority shareholders? We are in business for ourselves and for our clients, and to that extent we are self-serving. We don't present ourselves as crusading knights, and it is not our objective to go out and help other minority shareholders, though they tend to get carried along. It is indeed a form of naked capitalism, but I don't think our own shareholders and fund holders would be pleased if we operated as a charity for the benefit of minority shareholders around the world! Q: Looking at corporate governance more generally, from your perspective, what are the principles at the heart of 'the corporate governance debate?' In my view, the responsibility of a company is exclusively and absolutely to the shareholders - it does not have responsibility to its employees, management or customers other than to further the interests of the owners of the capital. That's a very Anglo-Saxon view of corporate governance, but it's the view that I hold. To that extent, a company should not be run for the maintenance of a lifestyle for management and employees, it should be run exclusively for profit. I don't think that companies should, without reference to shareholders, make any political or charitable donations, give substantial options or other remuneration packages to senior personnel, nor make serious changes in the nature of their business. The thread running through it all is ultimate accountability to the shareholders, and not to some kind of body corporate for communal benefit. Q: Why do you think so many institutional investors either do not vote at all, or have policies of always voting with existing management? I can't understand a policy of always voting with management - it is rigid and must by default be incorrect in certain cases. For instance, when management is clearly flawed - such institutions are withdrawing from a fundamental right they can exercise not only on their own behalf, but on behalf of their shareholders, or people who are saving with them - they are representatives as opposed to owners of the capital that they are voting for. As for not bothering to vote, I suspect that this has a lot to do with the voting mechanisms. Institutions don't have time to get the proxy forms, review and assimilate the information, and it's all too hard to vote. It may be lethargy, or simply that pressure of other work makes voting at AGMs not a high priority. Q: Would you agree that this is tantamount to owning something and then not looking after it? If you are a very large institution you have a huge amount of money and you have to diversify among many companies - a few will fall by the wayside but, generally speaking, most companies will actually be run properly for the benefit of their shareholders. Thus by dint of default and diversification, while the charge may be accurate, it can be glossed over by the fact that there are only a few 'bad apples'. Q: In view of your actively voting rights in, say, a fund-busting scenario, do you have a policy of active proxy voting as regards the rest of your holdings? Not necessarily. We obviously look at all the votes that come through, but we are generally passive investors and not looking for a fight, and would usually vote for management or not vote - the latter not through apathy but because we are usually satisfied with the way companies are run. Q: What do you think of the argument that institutional investors have a duty to exercise their voting rights diligently as part of their fiduciary responsibility? Well I disagree with that - nobody has got to vote, but I think that institutions have a duty to review the opportunity to vote on each occasion, but that is different from having to vote. Q: Do you think that institutional investors should concentrate solely on financial added value? Yes. Q: What aspects of good corporate governance do you believe add value? I think greater disclosure, greater transparency, greater communication, greater consultation with shareholders on key issues such as executive compensation and changes in business strategy, and appropriate use of non-executive directors to remove potential conflicts of interest - all those things, racked up, make for good corporate governance. Q: What do you think that stakeholder theory has to say about wider issues of corporate governance and accountability? I don't believe in stakeholder theory. What I do believe is that companies should widen ownership in their own stock among their own employees and managers; that the greater the degree of ownership by employees and managers in the company in which they work, the more likely the company is then to return profits to the whole body of shareholders. Q: Given that the linguistic definition of prudence implies a long-term view, is it possible to pursue purely short-term financial gain and still act as a responsible fiduciary agent? I don't think that being a long-term investor is incompatible with anything I've said - a focus on the company being run for the benefit of shareholders does not imply short-termism. Companies must address issues of re-investment of capital, dividends, share price, etc. not just for today but beyond tomorrow. I am very much in favour of companies reinvesting, provided the expected returns are high. It is up to the shareholders to ensure that companies are not run in a short-term fashion - if they are, they are more likely to be badly run! Q: So is there a conflict of interest between institutions' dual roles and responsibilities as both owner and fiduciary? No, I don't think there should be any conflict at all. Institutions, if they are long term investors (which is what they should be) will take an active & appropriate interest in the businesses in which they are invested, but neither of those things should be in conflict. Q: Is there any other point you would like to make on these issues? I have strident and straightforward views on corporate governance - no doubt in highly developed societies such as the US or the UK, some refinements are necessarily imposed by sheer volume and size, but we don't find that here in Asia. The bottom line is that shareholders own the company, shareholders should get the reward. Q: Do you feel something of a lone crusader on shareholder rights, or are there others doing much the same or, for that matter, do you perhaps see it simply as nothing more than one particular kind of investment opportunity? It is one of several forms of investment opportunity, and no longer the major part of our business, but it is sometimes disappointing to see institutions not supporting measures that will be protective of their clients. They won't take the lead but, increasingly, will back us once we have - hence the reconstruction of all fourteen funds we have been involved with. We are just waiting for Hambros Bank to be reconstructed as well! We don't like giving up, and there's no reason to give up - Hambros remains a fine investment opportunity. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
