Gvc Share Discussion Threads

[trentendboy] 20/1/2017 11:54

Interesting post supermike - you seem very well informed.

So in conclusion, GVC have lost out on potential future profits and could have handled it better but on balance not a major loss?

Of course it does show that GVC are ruthless in the pursuit of profits.

Longer term impact?

[velod] 20/1/2017 11:38

Long term and shorter term average volume both approx 1.5m per day. This site and a few others showing that today's volume currently at 1.9m. One site I regularly use only showing current volume of 1.5m - whatever, an average day's volume has been exceeded before mid day!

. . . Each price tick appears wide ranging in bulls and bears volume although with a slight leaning to bearishness. However, neither support nor resistance levels in either direction in sight yet, so it's anyone's which way this mega volume day is going to end the week at for the SP, although as said, a slight trending lean to bearishness so far today.

. . . EDIT -
. . . Intraday micro-managing (lol) I can see a lot of strong support at 619.5p and similar strong resistance at 620.5p - what a battle of huge volume producing little ground gained and little ground lost.

. . . Is the question of the day: "What the hell's going on?"

[festario] 20/1/2017 10:21

Massive quantities Mylands

[mylands] 20/1/2017 10:09

Another day of big volumes, all trading around the 619/620p mark.

[festario] 19/1/2017 21:48

.... some of those who bought heavily in the mid 750's might also be forced to sell, as a 15-20% fall may well trigger their risk profile in terms of loss parameters.

[festario] 19/1/2017 20:51

VeloD, as you well know, many institutions bought into this share at around 400p right up to 760p.These monolithic investment vehicles are governed by rules, in order to optimise returns for their investors, pension scheme holders etc.Therefore, much of this retrace may well be down to forced selling of many millions of shares which have reached their 'target'

[velod] 19/1/2017 20:29

Thanks LBO, for that in-depth link to that latest Edison analyst's report on GVC. Did I say in-depth? A thesis would be more accurate! No stone is left unturned. They count the veritable discarded toe nail clippings of GVC lest they reveal even more analysis. For long term holders it makes for glorious reading, although your head may fall off before you reach the end of it - it's that long and that deep in it's analysis. Impressive! You won't get all that in Investor's Chronicle.

. . . So from every significant detail examined, to every less important detail examined, I hurriedly scanned for their take on the past 5 months consistent retrace that is causing so much angst for GVC investors both new and longer term alike. Was it over valued? Attacked by shorters? Profit taking? Industry wide regulatory fears? Something in the accounts hitherto undiscovered? I expected similar in depth analysis applied to reason/s for this 20%+ retrace which has yet to show a terminal halt to it's relentless retrace. Wouldn't you?

. . . What I got was just this (and I paste it in full; all eight words of it) . . . - Quote: " However, it ran into profit taking in Q416".

. . . That was it. 8 words. Done. Move on. Pages and pages - and yet even more pages of the analysis BUT just 8 words summed up their opinion of this apparantly still not finished retrace.

. . . Did I miss a fuller explanation of the retrace elsewhere in the report anywhere? Only further brilliantly analysied metrics outlined in the report that advocate further sunny uplands to come.

. . . You'll go a long way to find a more in depth analysis of every nook and cranny of the business but not to meet with only a dismissive wave of the hand, 8 word sentence, of mere 'profit-taking' for this 5 month long retrace, which makes for one strange landscape.

. . . But there you are. Profit taking only, nothing to concern anyone. Convinced?

[diviincomesearch] 19/1/2017 20:05

I never really like Edison stuff, as it's paid for by the client I believe. (Happy to be told otherwise). Nevertheless some interesting info and background in there. Cheers LBO

[loganair] 19/1/2017 16:42

Gaming industry veteran Norbert Teufelberger looks to have got the new year off to a good start with two GVC (GVC) share sales totalling £8.4m - albeit carried out by a related party.

Mr Teufelberger, who has worked in the gaming industry since 1989, is on GVC's board as a non-executive director following the purchase of his company by Bwin Party in 2016. He had led Bwin since 2001.

Stock market announcements show thar one 800,000 share sale and another 500,000 share sale, both at 644.5p, by a "person closely associated" with Mr Teufelberger were made on 5 January 2017. After both transactions, which represent nearly half of the owner's stake, more than 1.4m shares are still held. Shortly after the GVC deal completed, Mr Teufelberger sold 460,000 shares at 490p, netting himself more than £2.2m.

[ltinvestor] 19/1/2017 16:29

Richard Cooper nominated for FD of the year in the 2017 Stockmarket Awards.Ps my company terminated its contracts with Fred Done 13 years ago!!

[shayadfn] 19/1/2017 15:22

I'm buying in small amounts 500 at a time

[festario] 19/1/2017 15:00

The seller is still amongst us, dropping lots of 10k and 5k amounts. Smaller than before, maybe he's nearly done?

[festario] 19/1/2017 11:17

GVC and BetFred are no way compatible, I'd forget about that.

[brownie69] 19/1/2017 11:05

RNS's have to be issued if the news has a material impact on the company. Thus we can only assume that its not material, despite Kenny correctly trying to sell the deal strongly at the time the deal was announced.

Must admit my first thoughts were could it be corporate activity that would conflict with Betfred's position. But i guess we have to wait to find out.

However as per one suggestion it would not be Betfred buying GVC, They don't have the balance sheet (IMO) to do it and no way GVC holders would take shares in a privately held company. Plus cant see GVC wanting to buy a betting shop heavy business, makes no sense.

[investmentguru] 19/1/2017 10:33

I suspect that the deal was hoped to be significant in terms of eventual revenues but this didn't materialise due to one reason or another. Were any revenues even booked as a result of the deal? As such, it shouldn't have any actual impact on revenues going forward.

[velod] 19/1/2017 10:22

Don't have any reason to differ from your view of the platform deal cancellation Cheshire, and I don't think Ballychan is arguing the opposite either but raising a point of ethics in transparency, clarity and moreover one of accountability.

. . . Rechecked and the final sentence of the final para in the May 23rd RNS last year does indeed state:
"Kenneth Alexander, Chief Executive of GVC, said: " ....This is a significant deal for GVC ....."

. . . . . So B/Chan's point is well made. I was unaware of that sentence until it was highlighted. But I'm loathe to support a demand for a negative RNS potentially affecting my investment. Could it be with years and years of nothing but success that KA finds it difficult to admit to a failure/bad decision/unfortunate circumstance etc., that at the end of the day really isn't significant?

. . . Only thing is; he said it was - at the time. Perhaps he was just wrapped up in the success of the moment? If only he had not said it was significant but purely and simply said he was "pleased to announce" and left it at that, without the add-on.

If he did do an RNS I'm sure he could use the same skill to turn it into a benefit: "in light of the current conditions" etc., etc.,

[cheshiremoggie] 19/1/2017 09:46

Lol.

I had a disagreement with someone at the time of the Betfred original announcement. They said the deal was financially significant.

My take on the deal was that it wasn't financially significant but it WAS significant/important in that it opened a new line of business for GVC. The Betfred deal would open the gates to several/many other deals which WOULD have a material impact on the overall business.

That line of business has now been closed for now. Its not really surprising given the huge task of completing the integration - adding an extra layer of complexity/resource drain was never going to be easy to pull off.

All in all, imho, that news has good and bad implications - overall pretty neutral for me.

CM.

[grahamburn] 19/1/2017 09:38

But the RNS announcing the deal said it was important. At the time, of course.

[nurdin] 19/1/2017 09:31

They dont see a need to issue an RNS on the closure of the Betfred deal as it is not financially material.

[ballychan] 19/1/2017 09:26

I emailed investor relations asking if the 'significant deal' that now no longer exists will be RNS'd. No response yet.They appear to be very quick at churning out more Edison notes. It seems like they pay Edison to produce a note everytime the share price is low.

[trentendboy] 18/1/2017 23:06

I think the bedfred issue may well be related to cooperate action.If for example GVC were to William Hills in a RTO it would make sense to pull the plug on betfred.Interesting times

[velod] 18/1/2017 20:13

Quite a range today from an intraday low of 599p up to 624.5p ending in a day resulting in a 2.8% gain over the previous day.

. . . As a FTSE250 company a rise on one single day of 2.8% is significant. Not noise. Not a typical market day but significant. Usually accompanied by a positive RNS or a widely read leading analyst buy or upgrade report. Nothing. Thought volume was modest early on but left it for the day. The huge rise appears to have occurred in the final hour/30 minutes and checking volume it finished up 27%+ on the average but nowhere near some notable highs in recent weeks.

. . . So what gives? Could it be another huge institute buy like Standard Life back in the run up to Christmas week? I'm rather taken with previous posts ruminating on possible shorters closing. With the late in the day rise it might only be one of them rather than the start of the turn but this is the third failed attempt to break 600p and keep it there. Really positive signs tonight. However if this continues to rise only to revisit 600p in the future then rightly or wrongly I'll consider it games being played, because I'm pretty certain of the likely negative outcome if it keeps repeating its visits to 600p vicinity. That has to stop.

I have high hopes for February, very high hopes - but will have to wait and see as not out of the woods yet but quite a remarkable day today. 2.8% is significant in my book but as the saying goes "we've been here before".