Cupid Share Discussion Threads

[j777j] 29/7/2013 09:07

The part missed by the shorters is that Cupid are actually now ahead of the curve.They have spent the last 6 months restructuring and reorganising the business.
They have followed all the recommendations from the independent audit,as well as from the legal advisors.
Furthermore,this is not a Cupid specific issue,moreover and industry wide one.
Like any new industry there will inevitably be regulation,but that is not necessarily a bad thing if it means Cupid will be able to compete on equal terms with the seedier side of the industry.
What is not in doubt,is the size,growth and popularity of the online dating industry.

Cupid are in an excellent position,both strategically and financially to take advantage of the inevitable changes and opportunities that lie ahead.

[brownie69] 29/7/2013 09:03

I think the best buying opportunity will be tomorrow. Clearly the BBC are lining up a hatchet job on the industry for tonights Panorama programme. MM's will mark the stock down in the morning and that's when I will buy more.

[j777j] 29/7/2013 08:55

The business is now effectively selling for free.

Turnover will will between £35 and £40 million this year on the continued operations,they have significant cash in the bank,no debts and will make a profit.

They will receive £725,000 cash each and every month for the next 40 months.

The niche businesses such as uniform dating are where the growth is.Canoodle,Womensweb and Yolo are all about to go live.



Just sitting with my finger on the buy button once the shorting mafia have pushed it down on zero volume.

[lennonsalive] 29/7/2013 08:50

Just a quick google and you can see the unhappy punters on different sites. The main two are

1) Repeating billing after cancellation, they keep charging and punters are unable to get a response

2) Fake profiles

two examples here

[coldfish 2] 29/7/2013 08:43

Next on
Tainted Love: Secrets of the Dating Game
Panorama exposes the tricks of the UK's online dating industry.

BBC One
Today
20:30
BBC One

[coldfish 2] 29/7/2013 08:41

never realised bill dobbie from the Goodies is in charge

used to love the goodies

[bomfin] 29/7/2013 08:35

Never mind the shorting gang!

If! (note use of this word) they havn't been doing things properly they will leave themselves open to attack from every dissatisfied punter who's ever had a bad date! lol

[robotface] 29/7/2013 08:33

The shares in treasury will depreciate, no?

[bubble pricker] 29/7/2013 08:24

J777J 28 Jul'13 - 06:34 - 3332 of 3345 0 0

Current market cap £49 million
Last reported £10 million cash
£9 million of shares held in treasury
£5 million cash down payment for sale of casual
£29 million cash,being balance due over 40 months.

----------------------------

The £29 deferred payments will not be forthcoming.

[lennonsalive] 29/7/2013 08:15

Now dipping below all moving averages on the chart, this may go down to 50p, beyond that 38p.

[j777j] 28/7/2013 21:04

Anytime I can buy a company for free,I am backing up my trucks in preparation.

[lennonsalive] 28/7/2013 19:12

Wonder if the MMs will mark this one down, before or after the programme?

[j777j] 28/7/2013 16:45

If you want real news about fraud and corruption involving the largest Uk companies,read this.......


A private investigator at the centre of a row over a secret list of blue-chip companies that hired corrupt private detectives has claimed they are being protected by the police.

Graham Freeman, one of four private detectives jailed last year for stealing confidential information on behalf of big business clients, says publication of the names of the companies would rock the City and lead to high-profile prosecutions.

He claims the police and the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) are also reluctant to release the details because it would expose their own failure to investigate serious fraud allegations over years.

Last year's case prompted SOCA secretly to compile a list of 102 names of well-known financial institutions, law firms and insurance companies all linked to the corrupt investigators.

Freeman is the first of the four detectives to break his silence about SOCA's controversial list and the extent of the alleged conspiracy.

His revelations will add to concerns that while Lord Justice Leveson has dealt with some newspapers' use of criminal private detectives, nothing has been done to tackle the much greater use of them in the City.

Freeman told The Mail on Sunday last night that City clients sometimes turned to private investigators because the police failed to investigate claims of property and investment fraud.

Freeman, who lives in Spain and now works on maritime security, was jailed for six months last year for conspiring to defraud by 'blagging' – or stealing – personal information through phone calls to banks and companies.

The investigation was led by SOCA and codenamed Millipede because its 'legs' connected so many financial institutions, firms and high- profile figures to the work of corrupt private investigators (PIs).


But before the trial started, SOCA and the Crown Prosecution Service took the decision not to let the names of the PI clients become public knowledge. None of the clients' names was read out in court as would have been customary.

Instead, SOCA, often described as Britain's version of the FBI, secretly compiled a list of many of the country's best-known financial institutions, law firms and insurance companies linked to the four PIs convicted in the case.


It is this list that was finally surrendered to Parliament by SOCA last week, but only on the strict condition that it was kept under lock and key and not shown to the public.

SOCA claimed names could not be released because of human rights concerns or the risk of harm to the companies' commercial interests. MPs now want to know which companies on the list behaved illegally.



Freeman, who was released from Wandsworth Prison in London after just eight weeks, warns that the SOCA list is a 'Pandora's Box' which, once opened, will bring about a criminal investigation that will end in the jailing of dozens of bankers, lawyers and boardroom executives.

He says any of the PI clients that requested the information could be charged with the same conspiracy for which he and the three other detectives were jailed.

He said: 'If they were to name our clients, on the evidence we were charged on, our clients would be open to the same conspiracy [charges].'

In 2011, Freeman, 52, Daniel Summers, 33, Philip Campbell Smith, 54, and former policeman Adam John Spears, 73, pleaded guilty to charges of conspiracy to defraud. Freeman, who received the shortest sentence, says he was working for three major clients at the time – a law firm in the south of England, an international foreign exchange company and a third unidentified company.

His detective agency, Brookmans International, was at the centre of the trade in personal information 'blagged', or stolen, from banks and Government agencies.


Action: MPs are now keen to know which companies have behaved illegally

Freeman and business partner Campbell Smith, a former Army intelligence officer, used Summers, who specialised in 'blagging' private data by calling banks, phone companies and other organisations and impersonating 'targets' or pretending to be an employee to obtain confidential details.

Freeman, who was a co-director of Brookmans and has also provided personal security for celebrities including Mel Gibson, Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman, still refuses to name his clients because he says he doesn't want to go through any more court proceedings.


But he told The Mail on Sunday: 'SOCA doesn't want to give up the Millipede names because if they did, they would be forced to investigate them and charge them for conspiracy to defraud as they did us. On that list are the names of law firms, banks and insurance companies who all used private detectives for all sorts of reasons.'

He said many of the cases he was involved with were driven by a police refusal to act and commit resources to investigate fraud.

'One solicitor who hired me had 35 clients who had lost millions in a property scam. The police didn't want to know, so she resorted to private investigators,' he said.

A SOCA spokesman said that while further investigations were on-going, the information provided to MPs 'does not allege that the individuals and companies named in it .  .R01; . have or even may have committed a criminal offence.'


He added: 'Evidence chosen to be presented to the court is a matter for the CPS.'

[nolens volens] 28/7/2013 12:18

Cawky - allege away. I know how to contact you if I was in the slightest interested. Why don't you know how to contact me. I'm not one of your lemming followers. And in the words of Katherine Tait or was it Katherine Tate: do I look bothered? Now put something useful on this bb that folk want to read rather than this schoolboy prattle saying that you are going to sue everybody on these bbs who says something you don't agree with. And as what you really crave is an audience, you'll receive none further from me today.

[simon cawkwell] 28/7/2013 11:54

nolens volens,

I think your memory is failing you (or it may be that you simply do not understand basic English). However, I asked you for your address so that I could serve papers upon you alleging defamation. It is you who have failed so far to provide the address: dare you?

Simon Cawkwell

[bomfin] 28/7/2013 10:42

There is a difference in motivation and all investigative journalists seem to use some subterfuge. Often it's the only way to blow open corruption. If your motivation was to expose corruption rather than running corruption any court will look on that more favourably. Those making both sound similar are trying to excuse the inexcusable. imho

Also any false profiles created by the journalists were done willingly. I don't know how that compares to Police using dead people's information to create cover for under cover cops to expose criminal activity. Remembering that the relatives were never even informed and won't be!

[daofs] 28/7/2013 08:24

Ask Sally Bercow about online free speech. I suppose the difference is she was worth suing. I doubt anyone long Cupid has much cash left to pay damages

[nolens volens] 28/7/2013 07:49

EdmondJ - Yes but the programme has already been broadcast in Scotland a few days' ago and there have been no ripples across any other strands of the media up here. The programme has been available to those in investment circles for some days now via the i player. The traditional English fortnight holiday period has commenced and there are more English up here at this time of year than Scots. If it is fine weather, then most folk will be sitting outdoors tomorrow on their decking not sitting indoors watching telly.

The guy with the kilt hire shop in the programme - a shop from which I have hired kilts for one of my weddings - had a big advert for his shop free on the bbc. Could he not have spoken to Fiona Walker more discreetly at his home. Scamming is an industry wide issue according to the programme so which alternative sites are you thinking folk are going to turn to.

[daofs] 28/7/2013 07:38

Nolens Volens BBC reporters have been glibly accused of criminality for using subterfuge to expose wrongdoing. Subterfuge in this case is 100% justifiable in the public interest and was completely transparent in their reporting. I do think posters should be careful about throwing around accusations you couldn't hope to defend in a libel court.

[edmondj] 28/7/2013 07:14

Quite an existential crisis though, if this BBC Scotland prog is going out on BBC1 Panorama. It basically says the sites can't be trusted. Since there are so many nowadays, daters might as well go elsewhere.

Although I managed to find a genuine dater when briefly on Cupid maybe 2 years ago, amid the initial teasers, the really frustrating issue was not being able to cancel the recurring subscription on this and a sister site. It needed a lot of messaging to customer service including finally, that I would complain to the plc and send the letter to a newspaper. This was the main reason I didn't get involved again.

[j777j] 28/7/2013 06:34

The remaining businesses are on sale for £5 million.I wonder for how long?

If you count the treasury shares,the remaining businesses are valued at minus £4 million.

So you are buying a fast growing business which should do £35 million to £40 million turnover this year, for effectively nothing.


Current market cap £49 million
Last reported £10 million cash
£9 million of shares held in treasury
£5 million cash down payment for sale of casual
£29 million cash,being balance due over 40 months.


The purchaser will be paying Cupid plc £725,000 cash a month for the next 40 months.


If they don't do an mbo I will eat my hat.



Post KMPG we know the company have put in place the recommendations,so Cupid will likely emerge as the best of breed, further down the road.