Eidos Share Discussion Threads

[the crypt] 18/1/2009 13:15

life of grime - you have proved that you are ignorant and a real amateur............................ lol lol........ yeh yeh -----eat yer browned pants!

[alanrex] 18/1/2009 13:03

im feeling more optimistic about the approach having given it some consideration. if its TW great, cos the price and the probability are in my view positive. anyhthing more than 25p is great for me (my in pprice is about 20p)

i hope the deal is completed and quickly!

all imo dyor

[dealy] 18/1/2009 12:49

I can guarantee you 1000% that the directors of Eidos did not invent a takeover approach just to push the share price up. That would be a criminal offence.

I can even guarantee you that the board already knew

a) what the minimum indicative offer price was
b) were reasonably satisfied with that price i.e. felt that it had a chance of approval
c) checked with the offeror's advisors that sufficient cash resources are already available to complete such a transaction

Without those three box ticks no director or Nomad will sanction an "approach RNS" in these markets.

[life of crime] 18/1/2009 10:49

Rose tinted to some, realistic to others. The Govt is now going to insure all the bad debts of the banks in order to get them lending again. This on top of the £20Bn initiative last week aimed specifically at medium sized businesses makes me believe Eidos will have no problems rolling over their debt.

I think the bid talk will amount to nothing and has only been released by the firm to put a halt to the share slide, which was going too far.

With the funding situation clarified there should be stability in the business and the share price I don't think that's rose tinted because the management still need to raise their game, cut costs and get the upcoming AAA titles like Batman, DX, K&L and Hitman out on time and to a high standard (and avoid the Xmas market like the plague!).

[altube] 18/1/2009 02:07

good point about Tw having to pay 35p

[theband] 17/1/2009 19:35

Have a look at your new glasses, are they rose tinted.

[dealy] 17/1/2009 16:33

Robert Jakobsen doesn't seem to be familiar with the takeover code. An offeror must offer at least as much as the highest price they themselves have paid in the previous 12 months. That's 35p for TW. Hardly a show-stopper. Under virtually any other market conditions I doubt if they could successfully take over Eidos for a price as low as that.

[the crypt] 17/1/2009 15:30

tell Rogers he can fly a docker

[kooba] 17/1/2009 13:53

TimeWarner Could Marry Lara Croft
Lionel Laurent, 01.16.09, 11:58 AM EST
Time Warner Inc.
01/16/2009 4:00PM
It seems to be a marriage made in heaven: media conglomerate Time Warner, with its finger in all sorts of pies from movies to music, and videogame hottie Lara Croft, whose Tomb Raider series has already spawned two big-screen movies. And now that Tomb Raider creator Eidos is officially in play, after confirming it had received a preliminary takeover approach on Thursday, Time Warner could end up as the victorious buyer.

Time Warner already owns a 20.0% stake in Britain's Eidos, which would give it an obvious advantage in takeover talks, and it has the right to acquire an extra 10.0% as part of an agreement with the games maker. Warner first bought into Eidos back in 2006, with a 10.0% stake, as part of a wider deal to license and distribute games based on Time Warner-owned characters like Batman and Bugs Bunny.

"Time Warner is the most likely bidder," said Robert Jakobsen, an analyst with Jyske Bank. He estimated a takeover price of around 20 to 30 pence (30 to 45 cents) per share, a premium of about 50.0% to the current share price.

Shares of Eidos jumped by 31.3%, or 3.75 pence (6 cents), to 15.75 pence ($2.33), during afternoon trading in London Friday. The company would not say who had approached it regarding a possible takeover, while a representative of TimeWarner was not available for comment.

Eidos is vulnerable to a takeover because of its debt levels, which stand at 25 million pounds ($37.0 million), and growing pressure from the consumer downturn on its ability to meet loan agreements. Although videogames are still selling like hotcakes, prices are coming down to lure buyers out of their shell, and Eidos warned earlier this month that it might breach its loan covenants in June of this year.

If the company were to be taken over, it would be a repeat of what happened three years ago. In 2005, Eidos was bought by SCi Entertainment after struggling to meet its loan covenants. The company decided to keep the name "Eidos," only to face circumstances in which it may suffer the same fate as its predecessor.

[togglebrush] 17/1/2009 13:07

Recent volume trades (ex ADVFN)

Day____Close___Volume___Note on Volume
Wed 31 15.50___729,001__V High
Fri 01 17.00____28,737__V low

Mon 05 17.50____83,180__V low
Tue 06 17.50___226,093__Low
Wed 07 17.50___142,016__V low
Thu 08 17.25___179,172__Low
Fri 09 12.00_9,030,434__V High___Trading Statement

Mon 12 10.50_1,010,554__V High
Tue 13 _9.00___825,572__V High
Wed 14 _8.95_1,654,190__V High
Thu 15 12.00_1,019,783__V High___ Statement re possible offer
Fri 16 14.75_2,365,473__V High


Daily Trading volume since the rights issue 27th May 2008 stats:-

Maximum 18,567,286 _____1st September
Q3_________673,702
Median_____280,081 _____Middle of a sorted sample
Q1_________144,077
Minimum________630 _____13th November

Previously the Maximum was 52,016,208 on 11th January 2008 at the time of the Board Coup.

An update to the my earlier shareholders post.

e) Jane Cavanagh (ex CEO) was in the past holder of a large tranche (5.5%) and took up the rights issue but then split her holdings (Jane Cavanagh and Finn-Kelcey & Chapman Trustees Ltd ... now 9,634,037) with her family trusts with each below 3%.

[togglebrush] 17/1/2009 12:29

Blockbuster films can take 2 to 3 years to make. They could also and did make bankrupt many of the studios that made them. Most modern films are now made to budget in about 100 days. They don't have the big premier events but fill the needs of a much wider audience. Their film makers don't seem to go spectacularly base over apex and from what I see provide a good steady income.

AAA games take two years or more to make. They require expensive advertising (TV etc) and promotion but have a relatively short life. Casual games take less time to make and fit the niche in a wider audience. They sell for the similar prices to AAA games but even with lower unit sales can turn a good profit.

AAA games are on a long cycle with all the risks that involves. Casual games output a regular monthly selection of new games. Provide a steady income with much less risk. Look at the number of games each month in the header. If one misses the mark then the loss may be acceptable. Another may be a hit, Pony Friends, and provide a much boosted sales income. They may not be glamorous but, as many other video games companies are finding, they are the bread and butter of the growing industry.

Girl's games, children's games, casual games etc can all find a niche. They may not suit the "traditional video gamer" and much derision is paid to them on this BB. But the message may be that "traditional games market" is mature and the "Casual games market" is where the growth is (and it is a safer play).

All the comment is about TRU which has made the headlines. Look at the header all the other games and back catalogue have provided the income over most of the past half year. I hope the split is shown in the forthcoming interims.

[life of crime] 17/1/2009 11:34

Fair enough - if you bought in at anywhere below 20p then 35p is a great short term profit. However, most of the institutions paid a lot more than that and have no incentive to bail out now. That doesn't mean they won't, if they are just sick to death of Eidos, but I think it is unlikely. Nobody likes to sell an asset at a price they know is well below true value.

With the finances sorted, they should have an independent future for 12 months at least and by then they will hopefully have a few hits under their belt. I'm still optimistic that the 2nd half line up this year will perform well and that the disappointment of TRU can be put behind them.

[dealy] 17/1/2009 11:14

loc

good points nevertheless I would bite their hands off if I was offered 35p.

In this market that is plenty.

If TW don't want to take it over and agree with your assessment of the future then they will block a takeover. It depends on how eager the bidder is.

Certainly at 15p these shares are an absolute bargain.

[life of crime] 17/1/2009 10:23

Dealy, you are right to say TW are in prime position and I think they will eventually take them over. However, there is not much incentive to sell at the moment. I agree 35p is a good offer in the current climate but lousy compared to what it is really worth.

If they get the finances sorted out, which should be no problem now the Govt is pumping in billions to secure credit facilities for small firms, then the prospects for Eidos look much brighter. Better for them to ride out this recession, slim down the business further (eg pull out of the casual/mobile market) and wait until 09/10 to sell the company from a position of strength, when hopefully K&L2, DX3 and HM5 have been released. Under that scenario, an offer of £1 would be more realistic.

That would value them at £250M which is what we should be expecting from a firm with so many assets. Remember Travellers Tales sold for £100M and they are just one studio with no owned IP, although they do have the rights to develop the highly successful Lego series. This is a bad time for any company to be sold. Much better value lies down the road for Eidos in 12 to 18 months.

[alanrex] 17/1/2009 10:01

if tchenquiz is still involve, will he want cash asap??

[dealy] 17/1/2009 10:01

Another dirt cheap company (Colt Telecom) just got upgraded due to the value of its tax assets (tax losses carried forward as I pointed out here with Eidos). From today's FT:

Among the mid-caps, Colt Telecom jumped 9.6 per cent to 83p after Morgan Stanley flagged up that an acquirer could exploit tax losses worth about 60p per share.

"To us, this implies that, if the outlook were to deteriorate further, the company and its shareholders would have an option to realise value above the potential bear case," said Morgan Stanley, which upgraded Colt to "overweight".

[dealy] 17/1/2009 09:37

Time Warner will call the shots here:

a) they have a virtual blocking stake - not quite complete blocking stake but pretty close, making it impossible for a buyer to make an offer mandatory unless TW agree

b) they have a distribution agreement for the US which gives them great leverage in negotiations

c) as a trade investor they will be concerned about who gets to own Eidos if it isn't them

They recently removed their representative from the board. They are in the best position to force through a takeover although they will most likely have to pay 35p.

[theband] 17/1/2009 07:40

You been up all night toggle ?

[togglebrush] 17/1/2009 07:13

This is an update of my earlier shareholders notes:-

a) From the Annual Report

On 26 September 2008 the Company had been notified of the following interests in the ordinary share capital of the Company:
________________________________Number___ %
Time Warner Entertainment Ltd 37,518,080 14.23
Thorson Investments Ltd*_____ 25,335,804 9.61
Deutsche Bank AG_____________ 23,841,568 9.05
Cazenove Capital Management___12,515,783 4.75
ING Bank NV___________________11,454,648 4.35
Legal & General Investment____10,089,628 3.83
Pioneer Investments____________9,148,355 3.47

The directors who held office at 30 June 2008 had the following
interests in the shares of the Company:
___________30 June 2008 30 June 2007
_________________Number Number
Tim Ryan________ 81,488 43,141
Nigel Wayne______21,110 11,176
Don Johnston____ 41,555 22,000

Modified since

b) October 08 Icelandic Banks collapse. Mr Tchenguiz (Thorson Investments) retains 13 million and 5% of the company. 45 million of his shares held in CFD's are overhanging the market. Some of these found homes with:-
14 Oct 08 Cazenove Capital Management Limited was 12,515,783 now 15,515,783
16 Oct Time Warner Entertainment Ltd was 37,518,080 now 42,518,080
Other RNS's were I assumed holders of shares of banks holding the backing of these CFDs. Share price at this time was around 20p. This accounts for roughly 7 million shares. A balance of 35 million or more shares cause a overhang in the market

c) November 08
4 Nov 08 Deutche Bank was 9,270,054 now 13,675,027 5.18%
16 Nov Cazenove Capital Management Limited was 15,590,783 now 12,062,783 4.58%

d) December 08
15 Dec Time Warner Entertainment Ltd was 42,518,080 now 52,518,080 19.92%

e) Jane Cavanagh (ex CEO) was in the past holder of a large tranche (5.5%) and took up the rights issue but then split her holdings (Jane Cavanagh and Finn-Kelcey & Chapman Trustees Ltd ... now 9,634,037) with her family trusts with each below 3%.

f) On 15th December Time Warner estimated cost of shares

__________Price__Shares_______Cost_________Note

Original__5.02___8,860,897____£44,481,703__Known
Rights____0.35__23,571,427_____£8,249,999__Known
Oct-08____0.30__10,085,756_____£3,025,727__Guess Price
Dec-08____0.20__10,000,000_____£2,000,000__Guess Price

Current Holding_52,518,080____£57,757,429

Estimated Average cost of shares is £1.10p

g) There was a potential overhang of some 25 million shares in the market before the last 10 days activities.

h) Phil Rogers, current CEO, bought 60,000 22 Sept 08 when share price was about 31.0p

i) There are 263,586,730 shares in issue.

E&OE

[lionheart79] 16/1/2009 23:03

and i take it you're a paragon of virtue then theband? thats why you're on here trying to make a buck from a share just like the rest of us. maybe i have you wrong and you're donating all your profits to Amnesty International.

self-righteous idiot.

[lionheart79] 16/1/2009 20:41

and whats so funny about Barclays getting trashed Crypt? moron.