Blinkx Share Discussion Threads

[shroder] 27/2/2015 12:08

Can we change the epic code to GBO, feel a sense of Déjà vu coming on, lol

[football] 27/2/2015 11:51

and says he holds blinkx shares!!! i think not


"JonC did write something last night about notifying TW"

[football] 27/2/2015 11:43

First up is blinkx (BLNX), a company where I suspect Professor Ben Edelman is still not on the Christmas card list. What can be seen here on the daily chart is the way that it is still dominated by the massive unfilled gap to the downside made at the beginning of July.

Ordinarily, one would suggest that until this gap is filled, or is met with an equal and opposite signal to the upside, one would stand aside in terms of thinking of buying blinkx. But for aggressive traders there is the opportunity to go long or remain long while above the old July floor at 27p, especially given the way that since the beginning of this year support has generally come in above the now rising 50 day moving average 28p. The initial target on this basis would be the 200 day moving average of 36.55p, while the best case scenario over the next couple of months would be a top of July price channel destination at 50p plus. However, one would stress that a very strictly enforced stop loss would be placed just below 27p.

[barkboo] 27/2/2015 11:38

TW doesn't have to be notified. lol

[1gw] 27/2/2015 11:34

No alex, not as far as I am aware, but I'm not being quoted over on shareprophets am I? I don't have access so can only read as far as the reference to a post on advfn. JonC did write something last night about notifying TW.

[barkboo] 27/2/2015 11:30

Alex - I'm glad you used the word "think" kinda explains how you work!

[alex1621] 27/2/2015 11:20

Barky - I think you do.1gw - have you been offered a free pizza? :-)

[barkboo] 27/2/2015 11:00

Alex - I don't factor in luck! I don't need to.

[barkboo] 27/2/2015 10:56

Topcar - BLNX have been attacked with severe force. With the recent rns in place, [cover] and that unfair advantage man advising - don't be surprised if there is an upside surprise?

[topcar] 27/2/2015 10:50

So closed period ?? So what you saying then Quil ?

The company cannot defend anything for 6 weeks ?? what ?

They are with in Guidance ?

[barkboo] 27/2/2015 10:47

JonC - some on here do ramp, but many more are negative to such a degree, it becomes embarrassing. You have become that embarrassment.

It would be wrong to steal food for a hungry family, likewise it would be wrong to sell all the food and be the cause of that hungry family. Both actions are wrong, but a large moral difference.

You are negative to such an extent - you are being nailed by your own argument! A double wrong is still a double wrong!

We have 20% positive posting and 80% negative. You do the math.

You and loopy are probably 45% of that 80% lol your argument is flawed!

[quilarvium] 27/2/2015 10:46

Jarvis ....... Naked shorts!!!!

[alex1621] 27/2/2015 10:27

You got one thing right Barky ... I would not risk six figures on Blinkx. My minimum has been £30k, maximum £50k. A speculative investment with tight stops applied. Good luck to you if your betting the farm on Blinkx.

[sikhthetech] 27/2/2015 10:26

exactly...
we must be due another sobeit post...

;-)


JonC 27 Feb'15 - 10:18 - 91081 of 91081 0 0

I post because the views of the ramping bulls are totally at odds with the information that is in the public domain.

Simples.

[sikhthetech] 27/2/2015 10:21

exactly....

The blog was over a year ago... blnx bod seem to have a habit of screwing things up...


JonC 27 Feb'15 - 10:18 - 91081 of 91081 0 0

I post because the views of the ramping bulls are totally at odds with the information that is in the public domain.

Simples.

[barkboo] 27/2/2015 10:19

Shroder - most readers with half a brain know the rags on here, and what they are up to - your thread is visited and appreciated by more than you would imagine.

Keep up the good work my friend - not long to go now.

[jonc] 27/2/2015 10:18

I post because the views of the ramping bulls are totally at odds with the information that is in the public domain.

Simples.

[jarvis4] 27/2/2015 10:16

The multiple postings of the doomsters show up on my screen as a serried rank of "filtered".

Given the massive hit which the company's share price has taken over the last year, coupled with the fact that it is still hardly off the bottom, it does rather beg the question as to what is driving the regular posting of the doomsters. If I take a charitable view and assume they are not all imbeciles (I make an exception for leclot) then the question "Why?" needs to be addressed. If the original shorter's undertook their work in the conventional fashion (borrowing shares, selling down, buying back and returning) then, as the public records seem to show, they exited the company months ago. There is currently only a very small percentage short plus, as mentioned, the share price remains on the floor. So, what can the driver be for the continuous negative postings? Shareholders have no interest in talking down a decimated stock. So who would have, and why? Answers on a postcard please.......

[jonc] 27/2/2015 10:15

I for one will always shout down mindless ramping.

I make no apologies for that.

You have lost your balanced approach shroder.

[shroder] 27/2/2015 10:13

Barky (6742) my own personal take on these threads (as with others) is that many posters have lost money on blinkx and are therefore resentful and bitter.

I think this probably constitutes the majority of posts which unfortunately puts off regular posters. Investors are probably outnumbered 20/1 given the repetitious nature of the posting.

The main objective at least for me was the sharing and dissemination of stock/sector related information.

Instead we now in the midst of a battleground which has little if anything to do with blinkx.

[barkboo] 27/2/2015 10:12

Tom - did you edit your last post?

[1gw] 27/2/2015 10:07

The other question this raises is when was the appointment made? Normally, wouldn't you want to run any major accounting issues past the auditors to make sure there wouldn't be any surprises come audit time? In particular I am thinking of the AdKarma acquisition accounting, where blinkx made specific reference to blinkx' accounting policies for revenue and income from operations, and we have seen reference to a much higher revenue number for AdKarma which suggested blinkx' policy on revenue recognition may well have been different from AdKarma's - just the sort of thing you might want to double-check with the auditors isn't it?

Did they really have Deloitte lined up for FY15 at the time of the AdKarma acquisition but then appointed PWC at a later date?

[quilarvium] 27/2/2015 10:05

36p close today it's coming 'Closed period from 4.30pm today!