Gamingking Share Discussion Threads

[hotfinance14] 05/10/2006 20:06

Need some news on this one very soon.

[marine boy] 05/10/2006 17:04

They are no spring chickens and I get the feeling that GGK is run by the old school tie brigade and a bit of an old boys network. I thought the appointment of Douglas Yates in March 2005 as the Non-executive Chairman was going to make a big difference as he was finance Director and Commercial Director of the Rank Group plc for over 15 years but the share price has continued to slide. I can never find the directors' remunerations in their annual reports so I suspect they would rather you didn't know. Their latest excuse for dissapointing H1 figures was warm weather - how pathetic is that. The smoking ban might hit the clubs a bit but I still can't see why a company that has doubled turnover in three years to over £5m is unable to scribble up much more than a £100k in profit.

Go to www.gamingking.co.uk for some info

[minho] 05/10/2006 15:56

Marine BOY thank you for that imformation, what you said about a hostile bid would be just great,how old are these chaps?

[marine boy] 05/10/2006 13:35

I don't think they have any share options or are at all bothered where
the share price goes. A hostile bid would certainly put a rocket
up 'em. I'm sure the 5000 + clubs they operate would be a good outlet for many a betting/ gambling company, perhaps one way an internet operator could have a high-street presence. The one thing they have in their favour is that they do
seem to have a mature approach to their finances but they also seem to lack dynamism and the share has floundered as a result.

[minho] 05/10/2006 13:06

MarineBoy do you know if directors have shares?They might make a good profit this quarter must do some research.

[marine boy] 05/10/2006 12:07

I thought the selling to 0.4p was a bit overdone despite the lacklustre
performance. GGK has doubled it's turnover in the last 12 months, still has a healthy bank balance despite the debt incurred for the purchase of Kelly's Eye and has no interest in internet gambling sites, especially in the USA.
My main concern is how much of the profit goes back into the business and how
much into directors' remuneration.

[marine boy] 02/10/2006 11:29

ARS announcement

The board of GGK has noticed the drop in share-price
over the last twelve months and basically couldn't give
a damn. However, it is aware of the situation regarding
internet gambling sites that operate in the USA and suggests
that investors that can't tell the difference between a duck,
have only themselves to blame.

[cbrown] 27/9/2006 17:34

Directors Pay = £5M?

[marine boy] 27/9/2006 15:54

GGK never fails to dissapoint. They were hardly making a profit anyway. Despite increasing turnover to > £5m they still can't make it work.
BTW, what are the directors paying themselves ?

[hotfinance14] 27/9/2006 15:05

Gamingking PLC
27 September 2006


27 September 2006

Gamingking Plc

Trading Statement

Gamingking announces the following trading statement. The Company announced, in
its annual results in July 2006, that current trading was showing some impact
from the effects of the World Cup and the very warm weather but that the
expectation was that sales performance would improve.

Whilst September sales indicate that the Group will achieve the same sales
revenue as the first half of 2005, sales have not returned to the levels
expected by the board and this reduced activity appears to be consistent with
the retail leisure businesses serving this market sector.

Accordingly the board currently expects that at current sales levels, the
results for the six months to 31 October 2006 will show a loss compared to the
small profit in the first half of 2005. This is due to increased costs in
anticipation of a higher level of sales which have not materialised. The
directors are looking at a number of options to align the cost base with the
current sales levels as well as re-directing resources towards new business
generation.




This information is provided by RNS
The company news service from the London Stock Exchange

[powwow] 27/9/2006 14:28

I said a long time ago this company was apile of cr@p. today proves it. Dont trust the company, they have never produced anything for shareholders.

[minho] 12/9/2006 13:38

WIERD just been marked down hard?

[marine boy] 12/9/2006 13:18

Or a miracle.

[hotfinance14] 12/9/2006 13:12

I need the share price to get to 4p plus.

We need dramatic news.

[powwow] 12/9/2006 12:43

Goldie I agree with the below ..
goldie40 - 12 Apr'06 - 09:05 - 922 of 929

I REPEAT WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING FOR YEARS THIS IS A GOOD COMPANY MAKING A PROFIT GOOD POSPECTS WITH THE NEW GAMING ACT IN 2007 BUT AND THIS IS A BIG BUT HAS BAD DIRECTORS WATKINS HAS TO GO HAS BEEN PAID FAR TO MUCH WITH NO RESULTS A SHAREHOLDER IS ASKING FOR A EGM TO REMOVE HIM AND OTHERS I WILL BE SUPORTING HIM ALONG WITH OTHERS SHAREHOLDERS WITH THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN CHARGE THIS SHARE COULD FLY BUT NOT WITH THIS LOT THEY ARE DEAD WOOD AND ITS TIME FOR THEM TO GO

[minho] 12/9/2006 09:51

I will agree with that allthough the directors seem a bit laxed profit is on going and now the days are drawing in buisness will pick up.

[ursamajorra] 12/9/2006 08:56

This could go back to 2p.

[minho] 11/9/2006 13:57

goldie40 I will support that move. Please post if you have any imfo.

[wiganer] 11/9/2006 13:55

And to me, though I'd like to see the MMs move the offer up, not just the bid...

[ursamajorra] 11/9/2006 13:42

Was that the bottom??

Anyone still holding.Looks grossly undervalued to me.

[retford1] 11/9/2006 12:43

Some excellent posts recently and good assessments. I suppose one positive to come out of the recent fall is how few sells there have been. I guess for a lot of holders there is simply no point in selling at such a low price. I'm averaging at 1.5p so its hurting at the moment, however in the long term (2-3 years) and barring any bad managerial decisions, I am optimistic that I will get a good return on my investment. I like the business model however we do need some news of product development or an aquisition for a significant increase in the share price (I think that I have just stated the obvious).

[cbrown] 08/9/2006 16:29

Looking now............ I should also say that I am just a logical investor and would not call myself an expert.

Had a look at TGM and on the face of it they only have to replicate the 2002, 2003 or 2004 profits to more than justify the current share price.

I have only had a quick look at various info and haven't yet seen why the share price is weak but I'm guessing maybe its because there is some doubt over renewal of some of their bigger Bus and Coach contracts?

However, even if this is the case 50% of NAV looks like a safeish level providing their own asset valuations are realistic and providing that the market place isn't currently overloaded with bus and coach operators. I guess the good thing about TGM, compared to say GGK, is that TGM's assets are tangible.

I would also say that logically the share price could well rise in the short term by 50 to 100% but is very unlikely to super multiply quickly because diversification and expansion I would think is a slow process in this sector because of both the capital expenditure required and the amount of competition.

This is just my of the cuff gut reaction formulated in 30 seconds of thinking time.

Okay, can now see impact of increased fuel costs and some restructuring costs. Perhaps more disposals are the way forward for TGM to make it leaner and fitter and to realise some of the asset value.

This looks very much like yet another stock that has very poor liquidity meaning often that price movements are exaggerated based on small volumes.

I think overall if you can pick up say 15 or 20 of such stocks that have been marked down too much but yet retain sound fundamentals or potential big business expansion this could be a good investment strategy and by holding a diverse portfolio it would be easier to ignore some of the shares dropping more in the short term on the basis that they are a good hold.