Buy
Sell
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Dillistone Group Plc LSE:DSG London Ordinary Share GB00B13QQB40 ORD 5P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 17.00 15.00 19.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 0.00 08:00:23
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Support Services 8.7 -0.5 -1.3 - 3

Dillistone Share Discussion Threads

Showing 126 to 147 of 300 messages
Chat Pages: 12  11  10  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
30/9/2014
12:37
Im not currently a holder but have been and would again but this deal, as others have commented, looks very expensive and furthermore is also a departure from licenced software developemnt and support which I see as their core competency and into online candidate testing which isnt.
zoolook
30/9/2014
11:49
MG1982 I agree at first glance it does not look cheap but how do you arrive at £3.5m? The announcement says the maximum total consideration is capped at £2.5m.
valhamos
30/9/2014
10:57
Just reading through the aquisition details. To me it seems like they will end up paying a lot more for it over the years. To my calculations it has the potential to cost them £3.5m by 2017. For a company making currently 162k PBT that does look like an expensive deal for us. Any thoughts? Not a holder but interested in doing DD
mg1982
30/9/2014
10:46
The reduced H1 profit was flagged up in the 2013 results outlook comment. I am not really concerned about the foreign currency impact as the proportion of international revenue is a lot less than a few years ago as a result of acquisitions that are more UK focused. The latest acquisition looks interesting and the increase in dividend offers support to the idea of resumed growth in 2015.
valhamos
02/9/2014
00:01
Great news today regarding FileFinder Anywhere. Serious earnings enhancement for an already cheap off the radar stock.
tintin82
07/2/2014
16:18
"so really it's up to the management" Not really. They have to follow the criteria. It appears that MCGN do not because they engage in development when they are not sure of the technical feasibility. As such that is akin to research which is always expensed. I don't think I would be comfortable investing in a software company that was devoting significant amounts to development before technical feasibility had been established. "If they're conservative, they'll use language like MCGN's which says they're not 100% sure it will get the customer sign off until it's fully deployed - which you could say for any piece of software including DSG's." When you talk of customer sign-off you may have put your finger on the difference between MCGN and DSG - as I say I am not familiar with the former. DSG's development does not depend on customer sign-off. It merely needs to demonstrate that it has the technical ability to bring the development to a marketable product (e.g. a new release) and that there is a market for it. It rather sounds from what you say that MCGN's development is rather more bespoke in concept. This is certainly not a case of companies doing what they want to do; the accounting standards are aimed specifically at avoiding that.
valhamos
07/2/2014
15:53
As far as I can see, IAS 38 gives company a lot of leeway as to whether they do or not capitalise software development so really it's up to the management. If they're conservative, they'll use language like MCGN's which says they're not 100% sure it will get the customer sign off until it's fully deployed - which you could say for any piece of software including DSG's. If they're less conservative, they'll capitalise everything (LRM springs to mind). Both can be justified under IAS 38.
wjccghcc
07/2/2014
15:39
WJCCGHCC - Looking at the latest published accounts for the 3 companies that you mention, they all have as part of the accounting policies words such as "Costs incurred on internal development projects relating to new or substantially improved products are recognised as intangible assets from the date upon which all IAS 38 criteria have been satisfied." The issue is not whether development expenditure is expensed or capitalised, but whether or not any such expenditure that meets the criteria for being capitalised. Meeting these criteria depend on demonstrating the technical feasibility and commercial viability of the project. In other words capitalise only if a case can be made that there will be future returns arising from the costs incurred. AVV actually do capitalise some software development expenditure according to note 17 of the latest annual report. MCGN say none of their development costs meet the criteria because "technical feasibility of development has only been satisfied once the product is deployed into a live customer environment". I am not familiar with what MCGN do, but this rather suggests that they have a history of doing development work that proves not to be successful when it goes live. This is different to DSG's product and experience where a new version of the product is programmed every couple of years and the technical feasibility is well established beforehand.
valhamos
07/2/2014
13:54
So how come I have several software companies who expense R&D. IGP, MCGN, AVV for starters. I don't have a view on the rights or wrongs of doing it. My point is that when the capitalisation is significantly bigger than the amortisation as here, it flatters the figures against those companies in the sector who don't do it.
wjccghcc
07/2/2014
13:52
The really interesting analysis on this is when you split the company into the pre/post acquisition of Voyager, and look at the relative EPS for each, taking into account the shares issued for Voyager. That seems to indicate that the growth is coming from the acquisition, rather than the underlying DSG business. They do seem to be messing about with management charges a bit, which makes interpretation difficult, & I would wish them to be more transparent on this issue, so we could appreciate the relative performances of the 2 brands & geographical results.
2jamdog
07/2/2014
13:50
I Agree with Valhamos here - there will be NO software companies on the LSE which expense all software development - it simply doesn't comply with IFRS. As for DSG, the depreciation & Amortisation charge in 2012 was £553k, of which £238k was software development, £227k acquisition intangibles, and £88k depreciation of other fixed assets. See notes 12 & 13 to the accounts.
jimmcl
07/2/2014
13:01
WJCCGHCC- The figures are not flattered at all. It is important in terms of accuracy and relevance of the accounts that companies DO capitalise software development, so that current investment, whose returns are in subsequent periods, is not expensed immediately but charged (via amortisation) in line with the benefits of that investment. Hence why this treatment is mandated by the accounting standards that listed companies have to comply with. See post 83 onwards for an earlier discussion of this point.
valhamos
07/2/2014
12:15
The figures are flattered a bit by them capitalising software development - 803k last year. They don't separate out depreciation/amortisation so it's hard to tell how much they're amortising but given the total is 553k split between depreciation, amortisation of acquisition goodwill and amortisation of capitalised costs, I'd guess they amortise maybe 200k of it. So the PBT figure is flattered by 600k vs those software companies who expense all software development. Doesn't look like - takes that into account when doing the sector comparison.
wjccghcc
07/2/2014
09:22
This maybe of interest, Paul Scott's assessment, in his daily blog.... 'This is a small software group, serving the niche for software specifically targeting head hunter employment agencies. I had a pleasant lunch with the Directors last year, who made a good impression as the type of people I like to back - i.e. straightforward people who are just getting on with the job of growing the business. Niche software businesses are intrinsically attractive as investments, since they usually provide mission-critical software, and have a very good stream of recurring revenues, as Dillistone does. Also in this internet age, it's fairly easy to rummage through Google to find third party evidence of whether a software product is any good. Decent software should leave a pretty clear trail on the internet, from user groups discussing it, reviews, etc. If there is virtually no evidence of software even existing on the internet, then you need to question why. Even though it's small, Dillistone software (which operates under several different brands) is highly regarded by its users, based on the discussions which I've monitored online via a user group. Decent software will also usually feed through into decent financial figures. That is the case here, with a positive trading update for the year ended 31 Dec 2013 issued this morning. Various detail is given, but the key sentence is this; ... for the year ended 31 December 2013 it expects its performance to be in line with market expectations. Turning to valuation, the XXXX graphics show good value, with a modest PER, and a very good dividend yield. Particularly of note are the high scoring green bars in the Quality section, with a strong operating profit margin, and strong return on equity and capital. The downside factors are more short term considerations - that the share is illiquid, and has a rather wide bid/offer spread. I don''t think this share will be a multibagger any time soon, but it does look like a nice quality small business, on a modest valuation. Growth should continue through bolt on acquisitions (it's quite a fragmented space), and smaller competitors are being squeezed through software increasingly moving onto the Cloud. This is expensive to set up, but Dillistone have the resources to do it, whereas smaller rivals may not - thus also providing reasonably priced takeover targets, as well as limiting competition. So this one gets a thumbs up from me at the current price of 105p. As always, that's just my personal opinion, so please form your own view, based on your own research. WH Ireland has issued a positive comment this morning, upping their price target to 130p, which looks sensible to me. So there could be a fairly low risk 20% gain to be had here possibly?''
jakedog2
07/2/2014
09:19
Been on my watchlist for a while now. Bought in after todays postive update.
jakedog2
21/1/2014
12:42
LISTEN: Dillistone Group (DSG) - Launch of Portuguese version of FileFinder Click the link below http://www.brrmedia.co.uk/event/119928/?popup=true
sammy_smith
08/1/2014
15:56
Good update on today's announcement http://www.brrmedia.co.uk/event/119683/jason-starr-group-chief-executive
tentrader
07/1/2014
15:45
Nice rise today!
fargonorthdakota
02/1/2014
14:02
2v1 2000 to 1000.
gazza12
02/1/2014
08:49
A mini sell off after a director sells. Please can somebody let me how level 2 looks this morning.
lennonsalive
22/11/2013
08:05
and again :-)
cheshire man
21/11/2013
15:19
Nice move up :-)
cheshire man
Chat Pages: 12  11  10  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
DSG
Dillistone
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20200811 17:41:14