We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blinkx | BLNX | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 20.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20.00 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 25/7/2016 08:48 by barkboo Mr. Lynch connections with R1 could have some impact on any Yankee interest...he has annihilated some big investors over there.If friends and associates would take his name off the certificates - perhaps R1 would come over that little bit more user friendly on various indexes? lol |
Posted at 16/6/2016 15:13 by football Just back and I think like most people that attended it they did come across a lot more polished this year but as one investor said you sound like David Cameron the way you waffle on. The way I see it he was more like Kevin Costner out of the film A Field of Dreams basically he said that we built it i.e. the ad platform and got everything in place and now just waiting like in the film for the people to come and use it.A few points I did pick up on They have scale but still only converting about 1% of it into hard cash which last year that 1% was roughly $10 million this year I've ramped up the scale by 1500% so that 1% equates to $150 million. There is going to be a small cash burn at the moment of about $3 million for updating hardware Share buyback even though lots of investors asked about it and pushed him on it even suggesting putting shared into Treasury or even buying shares with any cash generated in the future was still pretty adamant even though they look into it monthly not the best for the company and present, so does he still think the worst isn't over? Odd that in a roundabout way confirmed that Yume deal didn't happen due to something found when doing due diligence. As for Tosca they do have conversations with them but wouldn't confirm or deny if they've asked for a place on the board but said they looked at the books and also their very smart people and would be investing if they didn't think they wouldn't make a profit. On the whole EU debate said by don't we get out of it and join the USA so I don't think in or out it's going to have any adverse effect 1R. Funniest bit someone asking him why his name was Brian if he is Punjabi? Like him which he replied no one could pronounce his name so having Brian on a CV made it a lot easier getting the job. As for ad blocking with that extra scale that is what they see or get through to them after ad blocking so 1500% rise even with the rise of ad blocking is not to be sniffed at. And one other thing he talked about was they've developed an ad blocking app which allows the consumer to pay and see the site ad free or see the site with one or two well targeted ads, he said they only had it up and running for just over an hour and got 20,000 people signed up to which I cannot understand if you get that kind of response why not get it out into the market. Someone asked about the pattern's we hold and if they were worth selling or licensing and you didn't think there is much in that. As for good old Ben and the blog basically he was paid on commission of our much the hedge funds made and everyone was doing it at the time as there was no industry standards and blinkx was an easy target being in the UK and not bound by US rules or law also most of that stuff that they close down this year was stuff associated with the past. To stocky NASDAQ and non-goer at the moment to get the share price back up and he said there were more inclined to move to the main market over rear rather than the USA. As I said before come out of the AGM leave a downbeat or particularly jumping for joy was just a solid performance by the team saying trust us we have everything in place now and the good times should return. So everything broken English but try watch England comeback after Joe Hart has had another howler and what's going on with sterling is Roy doing his Mrs |
Posted at 15/6/2016 08:01 by bluesbreaker From the piece above. Sounds familiar?"...Some alleged independent analysts were actually paid by the shorts to write slanted negative ratings reports. The reports, which were represented as being independent, were ghost written by the shorts and disseminated to coincide with a short attack.""...The shorts will hire paid bashers who "invade" the message boards of the company. The bashers disguise themselves as legitimate investors and try to persuade or panic small investors into selling into the manipulation." |
Posted at 28/5/2016 20:29 by football The problem with internet advertisingShare 10:30 19 May 2016 The latest casualty in advertising technology has caused a stir in the industry, but this is a problem that has been brewing since its inception. As regulators and ad-blocking takes its toll, what is happening to internet advertising? A hand smashing out of a laptop screen Ad-blocking is one of the biggest challenges faced by the digital sector. The wave of ad-tech companies floated in 2014 is starting to look more than a little accident-prone. At the time, digital marketing was seen as driving earnings ever upwards akin to search engine powerhouse Google. But a growing number of profit warnings later, a new reality is starting to emerge. Alex DeGroote, an analyst at Peel Hunt and fierce critic of the sector, believes many ad-tech companies raised money on the back of profits created in the embryonic digital advertising sector that were simply unsustainable. Immediately following the floats, there were major macro changes to the sector, particularly regarding the regulation of fraud and, of course, the rise of ad-blocking. These were especially devastating for the companies that had initially relied on such a young and loose industry. The wild west of the web “All of them had benefited from the wild west antics that existed in digital and online advertising and was almost entirely un-policed, characterised by gross levels of fraud until last year,” explained DeGroote. In September 2015, digital marketing platform AppNexus went through a rigorous overhaul of page impressions to filter its inventory on the back of client complaints. It claimed that a huge slug of reported internet traffic and adverting impressions were suspect. Various dubious techniques were cited, including bot traffic (faked non-human traffic, sometimes churning out thousands of sham impressions per minute), misleading ads or push advertising, where the browser is essentially hijacked by a rogue extension. Read - What is ad-blocking? In an unfortunate coincidence, shortly afterwards Adgorithms (LON:ADGO), which had until the third quarter of last year reported robust profits, further unsettled the market with a sudden loss warning. Adgorithms floated at 133p but is currently priced at 16p. Investors lost 90% of their investment and the £20mln it raised at IPO looks like a lost cause. Tightening regulation is another such issue facing the industry, as CrossRider (LON:CROS) cited yesterday. In what DeGroote called an “unremittingly bleak” statement, CrossRider warned it will see a 25% drop in revenue and underlying profits this year. It blamed an increased and rapid alteration in regulation for the sudden change in its outlook. Publicly, the company has cited tightened regulation to mobile subscriptions as the main hindrance. The warning came just weeks after the company reassured investors it was looking to 2016 with “confidence and excitement.” CrossRider Ironically, the CrossRider’s own web site is blocked by my malware detector. A quick Google search will churn out results pointing to a “CrossRider Virus”, namely malware associated with certain extensions developed on its platform. This is ‘pushed advertising’ through an often unwanted extension that infiltrates the browser. A source close to the company confirmed that there were indeed extensions, developed on the platform before its IPO, associated with “push advertising”. The source said that CrossRider had chosen to cease monetising its extension advertising. The company is working diligently to ensure malware isn’t developed on its platform, we were assured. On the same day, Blinkx (LON:BLNX), the video search platform, reported losses of US$94mln. Blinkx was infamously laid into by Harvard professor Ben Edelman in a blog post in 2014, in which he outlined his concerns over the practices of the company, called “The Darker Side of Blinkx”. Edelman raised serious questions about the group’s business model and revenue reporting. He accused several of Blinkx’s acquisitions of generating revenues by billing clients for inflated traffic and user impressions. The video advertising group has never really recovered from it. The day it was published, Blinkx shares fell by more than 30%. Edelman’s exposé foreshadowed what was to come for many of these ad-tech companies, as an industry in its infancy started to mature. The problem with ad-blocking and regulation runs much deeper than a battle between consumers and advertisers. It runs to the core of the industry itself. But companies using the platforms also need to take a long hard look at where their content is appearing; as the experts have shown, the advertisers are not always innocent victims. But what now? It seems trusted publishers such as Google could step in and regulate it themselves. Analyst Andrew Darley of finnCap believes that the whole sector is such a minefield and only giants like Google will succeed. No doubt they have the capacity to work round ad-blocking software, but it seems it would be in the best interest of publishers to work with the ad-blockers. After all, it’s what the consumer wants. Dedicated “white-lists&# In a note by broker Liberum, analysts estimate that over US$20bn of advertising spending has already been lost to ad blockers. That figure is expected to rise to US$41bn in the next two years. Publishers take action They found that marketers were paying for a third of ads that have zero opportunity of being viewed. Publishers are already starting to take the matter into their own hands. UK media platforms such as Channel 4 and ITV now won’t allow users to view content if they detect the use of an ad blocker, and other publishing outlets, such as the New York Times and the Guardian, are trialling pay-walls and subscription services in place of advertising. But those are difficult waters to traverse, as DeGroote explains: “Publishers generally have two levels of income - subscription and advertising. It is notoriously hard to get users to pay for subscription online, unless you’re the likes of Netflix and Amazon.” Digital is too big to fail, remember. Ad-blocking is no doubt one of the biggest challenges faced by the digital sector. For the publishers of the free content we all take for granted, advertising just isn’t working as it used to anymore. *Blinkx and CrossRider were contacted directly but were unavailable for comment* |
Posted at 18/5/2016 07:34 by lance corporal winstanley ash The results were poor in terms of numbers but fantastic in terms of the product they've created and the operational cost cutting they've achieved. They couldn't have made it any clearer they expect to return to profitability this year. Good chance for any investors who recently discovered this company. Long term investors who bought higher have been given some hope. Good luck all. |
Posted at 26/4/2016 09:58 by sikhthetech Barky,who are these 'lots of blnx investors' that you claim I persuaded to sell and now regret it...smooth talker... BARKBOO - 15 Jan 2016 - 08:23:36 - 903 of 1021 Good morning all - when I recently warned you that sikhthetech was a dangerous player and he had sold most or all his stock in October, he was a very unhappy bunny. lol <...> He persuaded a lot of BLNX investors to sell which many now regret after yesterdays news....he is still at it there, also claiming that he might now buy some more himself. <...> |
Posted at 19/4/2016 09:56 by sikhthetech Barky and his smooth talking trying to sway others.."He persuaded a lot of BLNX investors to sell which many now regret after yesterdays news" really!!!... where are all these Blnx investors that apparently were persuaded to sell after the Jan TU and many now regret doing so it.... The share price is lower than when you posted, is it not? desperation or what... divide and rule... rinse and spin... Totally Health - 2014 onwards - TLY BARKBOO - 15 Jan 2016 - 08:23:36 - 903 of 1008 Good morning all - when I recently warned you that sikhthetech was a dangerous player and he had sold most or all his stock in October, he was a very unhappy bunny. lol Trust me - he is a health hazard, along with many other names on these threads. I reposted evidence that he was now writing with a different slant in his posts, whilst spreading fear in his own inimitable way. He has past history with a number of stocks and has lied to you on here when declaring his buys. I have the posts that he does not want you to see - he had ADVFN wipe them last time. He persuaded a lot of BLNX investors to sell which many now regret after yesterdays news....he is still at it there, also claiming that he might now buy some more himself. Believe what you wish my friends - but just keep an eye on the manner with which he cajoles and manoeuvres your view! Just a warning, nothing more - I hope this stock does really well for all you real investors. I am your friend! |
Posted at 05/4/2016 19:39 by sikhthetech Barky,Is that the same SAR when the share price reached around 1p and started to fall, you warned the good 'honest investors' suggesting sell but now that the share price has gone back up, you now claim that you still hold... that's convenient... lol BARKBOO 5 Apr'16 - 19:11 - 106015 of 106018 1 1 <...> but take a look at SAR - my accounts stayed static. Hope that makes your evening? lol BARKBOO - 24 Mar 2016 - 14:57:01 - 105853 of 106019 John John - i gave SAR to investors that have made a lot of money. When it ticked up around a penny, I warned the good honest investors.. your crowd would now get involved and they have! We called it spot-on as usual! |
Posted at 05/4/2016 08:09 by luafc Rhetorical question for the Airhead Sisters, CUCKOO and GormlessToo:If blnx has just reported $10-11m adjusted EBITDA loss, what was the real loss? The question is rhetorical because the patrol posters know nothing about this company. All investors are kept in the dark, which is why these threads have become junkyards of fluff. Oh, we made profitability in Q3... On what measure? The blinksy school of adjusted profits-u-like? CUCKOO, you should take more care in jumping to conclusions on no evidence about investors or posters. It shows that you believe what you wish to believe - without any regard to knowledge or facts. It confims this is how you operate with blnx. |
Posted at 11/12/2015 16:39 by barkboo A few months old - but you will get the gist:Illegal Naked Short Selling Appears to Lie at the Heart of an Extensive Stock Manipulation Scheme by LARRY SMITH, 2015 • Investment Consequences of Naked Shorting "Only a motivated enforcement agency with subpoena power and an accompanying powerful enforcement infrastructure can prove that naked shorting is at the heart of an extensive stock manipulation scheme. However, I believe that the observational evidence is overwhelming that naked shorting practices are widely used to manipulate the stock prices of emerging biotechnology companies as well as many other small and large companies. Unfortunately, naked shorting is an investment variable that investors must understand if they are going to make investments in the emerging biotechnology space in particular and the equity markets in general. Investors may decide that they just won’t invest in companies that are most subject to naked shorting, but this would eliminate many small emerging growth stocks with exciting potential. For those like me who are attracted by potentially breakthrough technologies, you will inevitably get caught up in a manipulation that leads to a suddenly plunging stock price of a company in which you are invested. Invariably the scheme starts with and is perpetuated by a flurry of blogs, tweets and message board comments which proclaim that the technology is worthless; management is a band of liars and thieves; and people with a positive view on the Company are being paid by the Company. Then come the lawsuits against the Company and management by the usual group of class action law firms. Each year this scenario is played out hundreds of times. This carefully scripted and long used manipulation scheme by short selling hedge funds is all meant to shake and then break investors’ confidence. The result is usually a painful, steady, day by day erosion of the stock price due to naked shorting practices. Stocks can be cut in half by naked shorting on the basis of little or no change in fundamentals. If you are going to invest in this area, you must decide when this occurs whether you believe strongly in the Company and can ride out the storm or want to cut and run. However, sometimes it happens so rapidly that the latter is not an option. On the positive side, these manipulations can often lead to some excellent investment opportunities if the fundamentals remain intact, investor confidence returns and the shorts are forced to cover." Does that ring bells my little campanologists. lol |
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
