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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Global Market | GMC | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 50.00 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50.00 | 50.00 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 04/4/2013 12:11 by faz147 Anyone still holding here or has this thread been totally abandoned? I read up on GMC before they listed and liked the business model, but was concerned by the valuation and the lack of buyers when they did list. They appear to be taking a large gamble in providing free GMC certification to manufacturers, and it will cost them up to $10,000 over the two years the scheme will run for. They claim to be currently processing 10,000 applications for the scheme from Chinese manufacturers, and their target is 30,000 new manufacturers from 21 new verticals. I am fairly sure that they can attract the 30,000 manufacturers to the sceme, being free and all, but converting those manufacturers to paying service-users is the key and I will wait to see how that develops before I put any money in. I worry that GMC is trying to be the new, better Alibaba before they have fully established themselves as the leading portal for certified manufacturers. Only time will tell how successful they can be, but they are certainly not popular with investors at this time, with the share price down from 130p+ at listing to c.50p now. |
Posted at 22/6/2012 23:24 by attrader Any one has link to prospectus ? Can't seem to find investor relations section on their website... |
Posted at 27/10/2006 18:41 by richgit sabretooth---7.5p ?That makes me a really greedy pig. I have been following this Company for two years,and thought I`d missed the real opportunity for cheap stock,-then I waited and waited and jumped at the opportunity of buying below 5.25p I simply couldnt believe my luck. Quite frankly I didnt do all that waiting whilst knowing that investors had started to get this completeley wrong for anything less than 30p. When these Guys get even more cash to utilise they are going to make the lunatics that sold this Company down to such levels-Vomit !!!! Dont ignore the fact-The so called Market got this wrong and results have proven it,and now the stock is ludicrously cheap- even the average blinkered numbnut should be able to see that. THEY WILL SOON My comments are as an investment,bought and paid for,and not some short term trade. |
Posted at 27/10/2006 09:50 by batman9 Gaming Corporation (GMC) reported a 400% rise in pre-tax profit and realised net cash of £5.2m for the 12 months to 30 September 2006 as the firm confirmed its plans to ditch its online and mobile gaming business.Shares in the London-based firm, which is proposing to change its name to Media Corporation as it restructures to broaden its advertising appeal, soared 20% to trade at 6p by 3.40pm. Management said the name change would reflect that "the group generates its entire operating profit from its portals and advertising businesses". The company added that changes in US regulations would be positive for the valuation of both Casino.co.uk and the company's mobile gaming business since these have no US customers and derive more than 95% of their revenues from the UK market. "It is anticipated the sale proceeds could be significant and would enable the company to accelerate the growth of the media and advertising business further," said chief executive Justin Drummond. Mark Reed, a leisure analyst at Teather & Greenwood, put today's share spike down to investors possibly realising the stock had been massively sold off after the introduction of damaging US gaming laws. "With cash on the balance sheet of £5m, an enterprise value of £10m and pre-tax profit of £2.5m for the year, it's on a pretty cheap multiple," he added. "The other point is it's looking to sell its gaming business and focus on the portals, which historically make all the money and the company has hinted it could be possible to sell its gaming business for the enterprise value of the firm. That's the big hope." As the company does not currently pay tax and has low capital expenditure, Reed also noted most of the £2.5m profit would be converted to cash. He has rated the stock a Buy, but added: "It is a very small stock - even smaller after its market cap was halved in the last six months to £15m - and it is too early to say how much it could realise from the gaming business." Alison Swersky, staff writer, Bloomberg Money |
Posted at 11/10/2006 16:48 by presneill31 The whole idea of of obtaining a YES or NO to a trading update is a simple one.It cuts down rumours and downright lying on BB's by investors who have an alterior motive. I am a shareholder,i have a right to contact the company if i feel it is correct to do so,and i am not after market sensitive information either. The only time Justin has replied to an email was because he reads the BB's and wanted to scotch a rumour regarding an ex directors share sale(there was not one) Investor relations is important for all companies,if you dont want investors getting in contact and taking an interest in their investment,then they should take that company private. Maybe if Justin does get back to me i will keep it to myself. Alan |
Posted at 11/10/2006 16:03 by outsider But how many investors are contacting them, sounds like loads. So does he concentrate on getting his job done or spend all day replying to investors questions?Even if he has someone to help, it still takes up a lot of time, I expect he has been swarmed with emails since the US legisation. It might be better if he replied even if it was just to say he is too busy right now & he might, but I think he's putting GMC important stuff first which at the end of the day should be his priority. I contact companies myself, but generally don't bother them if I know they are likely to be snowed under with queries, just like now. Maybe he's getting a third mobile deal for us, it hardly seems mentioned about the mobile business, just everyone's mind focussed on the US. |
Posted at 19/8/2006 20:02 by presneill31 Sent email to Justin,if i get a reply i will post of course.Hi Justin I realise that you do not usually reply to investor emails,including mine,but i hope you read them all the same and this is just a view from a long term investor on my take on the current sentiment from an investors point of view.This is most certainly not a complaint regarding the company performance thus far.(although i'm down 40% !! ) It does seem clear that the market has lost "some" faith with GC at present,and certainly a little more than many other companies in the sector,and as ever it is for the directors and the company performance to change that negative sentiment.You may well say "what more can we do",director share buying helps and you were quick to act on the last major fall,but lack of news on the mobile deals with Orange and vodafone leave to much room for negative feeling. According to Alexa and metricsmarket,gambli There is i believe a trading update soon and hopefully you will take the opportunity to reassure the shareholders that all is well and give some real "flesh on the bones" as to where GC are at present and your vision for the future. As i know you follow the bulletin boards you are no doubt aware of "genuine" shareholder feeling rather than the day traders and short termers that do not add any value or care what a PLC does as long as they make a profit Hope you can find the time to answer. Yours sincerely Alan Presneill |
Posted at 02/8/2006 09:39 by batman9 From another board interesting post.I think the key to understanding the market makers is to consider that they are only traders, just like us, buying and selling shares to make a profit. They want to buy at the bottom and sell at the top. The difference between them and us is that they take a very short term view - they like to keep a 'flat' book overall (holding no shares) to minimise risk. They also have influence over the price movements, as they set the prices. They have two ways of making money - the first is through the spread, the second is through price movements. They can make money from the spread even with a flat price, by moving from the bid to the offer and back, buying and selling and profiting from the difference between the two. This doesn't really affect us, unless the spread is very wide in which case it's hard to profit. It's when they make money from the share price movements that we should be interested, because the market maker's interests are the opposite of ours. For them to profit by buying cheap and sell expensive, we have to sell at the bottom and buy at the top. This is achieved in a few ways: - If a share has been low for a period of time, people have sold out and moved on and the MMs have a holding, they will want to get rid of it. The share price will start rising for no apparent reason, causing people to speculate and buy into the rise. The price may then stabilise when the MMs have cleared their stock, or they may continue the game by dropping the price to encourage selling, and repeat. - The MMs may go short on the stock. To do this they may raise or lower the price to encourage buying (on some stocks, people will buy in when it looks 'cheap', on others people will see a rise as precluding 'good news and will buy). The price will then fall, leaving you with a choice of holding for an unknown length of time to get your money back, or selling at a loss. If the share price suddenly rises on good news, with a lot of people buying in, you can assume that the MMs will have previously held a flat book and unless they had prior warning of news and accumulated a decent number of shares through a 'treeshake' (suddenly dropping the price, then raising it again to frighten investors into selling) they will have gone short on the stock. They then have a large paper loss - they have sold shares they do not have and must buy back at some point to balance their books, and have sold them at an average price lower than the current price. Many investors will try to sell at the top, helping to balance the MMs books, but leaving them with a large loss. This is the main reason that stocks 'retrace' after a rise - the MMs will drive down the price as far and for as long as possible, to sap the moral of investors, and hopefully to encourage them to sell at the bottom. It's worth noting that when they do this, sometimes the buying still outweighs the selling. I believe they allow this in the hope that given enough time, the buying will dry up and people will lose confidence and start selling. If the share price suddenly falls on bad news, the MMs will try to limit selling as much as they can, and will drop the price as fast as they can. This is so that when they do absorb all the sells they will accumulate shares at the lowest price possible, and hopefully sell them back into the market on any bounce or future rises. |
Posted at 20/7/2006 17:59 by keithfagan Today's Headlines 20th July 2006 BetonSports deny deal BetonSports representatives have denied reports that it had reached a deal with US prosecutors over charges against chief executive David Carruthers and the company. Shares in the sector rose sharply after reports of a deal broke then dipped, causing BetonSports to issue a statement denying anyone acting on behalf of the company were in negotiations with the US Department of Justice. Carruthers in court David Carruthers' defence lawyer Tim Evans told the BBC he was "hopeful" of securing bail at a hearing scheduled for the end of the week. The US Department of Justice has stated that it will oppose any appeal on the grounds that Carruthers is a 'flight risk'. US issue stark warning Executives from the online betting industry were strongly reconsidering visiting the US after the country's Department of Justice issued a stark warning to operators. Sports betting companies are now looking at the possibility that this might be the first in a number of prosecutions related after a DoJ statement read: "Maybe some people weren't paying attention. Online gambling is a violation of US law." WTO panel to investigate US online restrictions The World Trade Organisation has set up a panel to investigate US restrictions on Internet gambling and whether they comply with international trade rules. Antigua and Barbuda requested the panel after claiming that since the WTO's original ruling that the US had been busy passing legislation 'directly and unequivocally contrary to the ruling'. UK operators calm investors Gaming software company Playtech has assured investors that it does not provide sports betting software and is not an online gaming operator, explaining that it provides 'licensed software to operators in online casino, poker and bingo markets'. Ukbetting's board also attempted to assuage investor fears by reiterating that the company doesn't take bets from the US market. |
Posted at 19/7/2006 09:26 by bengo Here are parts of a report I received in March 06 on GMC that may be of interest to fellow holders.Let's start with the regulatory issue. There's no getting round one basic fact: internet gambling in the US is probably illegal. (There's an argument that online casino games are legal, but online sports betting is certainly illegal.) On 17th March 2006 a new initiative was kicked off in the House of Representives with the aim of banning the use of credit cards, cheques and electronic fund transfers for online gambling. As the US is the world's biggest market then not surprisingly alarm bells sounded with institutional investors. However introducing this type of legislation has already been tried before and not passed by the Senate. Furthermore the initiative runs contrary to both the UK's new Gambling Bill, which, rather than outlawing the industry, will licence and regulate it in 2007. It also runs contrary to the World Trade Organisation's interim ruling in 2004, which found that the US government's efforts to curb internet gambling went against the WTO's stance on free trade. In my view, although there is a risk, the chances of these US reforms being implemented are remote. More likely I can see the developed world eventually adopting the UK's lead and deciding to regulate, rather than prohibit online gambling. Regardless of the substantial taxes that this could generate for governments, it makes sense to bring the industry onshore for two reasons. First to help protect vulnerable parties, and second to bring the laws in line with their land based counter-parts. As I mentioned above, online gambling is probably illegal in the US. However, in management's own words "Gaming Corp has a lower regulatory risk compared to many of our competitors as we do not target US customers with our own casino operation. Our gaming portal business falls outside the contentious US regulatory framework as it is essentially a media and advertising business." On the flip side a loosening of US legislation could potentially weaken gambling.com's scarcity value, but this is very unlikely in the near term. Secondly, other gambling portals could eat into Gaming Corp's strong niche position. Again this is a concern, but the barriers to entry, such as uniqueness of domain name, brand strength, liquidity, marketing capability and affiliate networks, are surprisingly strong and provide protection from copycat sites. Finally being a small business, management could find itself over-stretched in pursuing numerous lucrative opportunities in this dynamic market. However I don't believe investors should be too concerned about this. In the unlikely event management did not deliver (and I have every confidence that they will, given their excellent track record), then someone else would probably pounce and hoover-up their highly desirable assets. With the competitive landscape set to further intensify, the strategic value of GMC's assets will become more important. In my opinion a takeover of Gaming Corp is a distinct possibility within the next 2 years. Areas of concern The roller-coaster performance of share prices in the online gambling sector. Online gambling is clearly not for the faint hearted. From a City perspective, these stocks have been more up and down than the England rugby team in this year's 6 Nations championships. Normally I would steer well clear of these roller-coaster stocks. However it's partly because of this perceived "higher risk" that fund managers have hit their ejector buttons. And in my opinion they have gone too far, and over-sold the sector. Even so, I don't expect this volatility to change over-night. So please be prepared! If you do decide to follow my recommendation, then be braced for a white-knuckle, but ultimately (I hope) lucrative ride. The slowing growth rates and reduced profits in the industry. The total online gambling industry (including sports betting) was worth about $10bn in 2005 (Source : Smith Barney). But this only represents less than 5% of the $238bn total legal gambling market (Source: GBGC). On the back of higher broadband internet access and increased marketing, GBGC forecasts that online casino/poker will grow on average by 20% per annum over the next 3 years. OK, so if top-line growth is not a major issue, what about profits? As competition intensifies, obviously online operators will have to spend more on acquiring new customers ("customer acquisition costs", or CACs in the jargon) - and this will put margins under pressure. In fact this is already happening. Heavyweights such as PartyGaming and 888 Holdings achieved underlying operating profit margins of 50%+ and 20%+ respectively in 2005. These are incredibly high, and leave them with plenty of fire-power to invest more in acquiring new customers going forward. So will competition hot up? I believe so. As sign-on and retention bonuses become more expensive, player churn will increase, thereby reducing profitability. Outright advertising bans in the US from the likes of Google, Yahoo and AOL have further compounded the problem faced by large online operators, and led to a dearth of quality internet locations on which to acquire new players. The report goes on to put GMC forward as a company which will benefit from this fiercer environment, is attractively valued and possess a strong position in the crucial area of customer acquisition and : Has the number 1 listing on Google and MSN for the search term "gambling". Is also a search engine itself. In fact Gambling.com is the world's number 1 search engine for casino, poker and sportsbetting, and is known within the industry as the "Google of Gambling". Casino.co.uk is one of the UK's top 10 gambling websites, and serves all the major online casino and poker advertisers. Along with growing advertising revenues, Gambling.com is also benefiting from offering its excellent search technology to other 3rd party online gambling portals. These portals benefit by being able to provide search facilities to their customers. Both parties split the cost per click advertising revenues. It's a win-win situation. As you're aware Gaming Corp (GMC) owns some of the most valuable internet real estate for the fast growing online gambling market. Casino.co.uk is the UK's largest online casino portal and receives approx 3m visitors per month, 98% of which are UK customers. In my mind GMC will continue to benefit from the shift from traditional to online advertising. Price Target by Dec 2007 20p |
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
