Internet Business Share Discussion Threads

[nghomi] 11/7/2007 09:07

SteMiS,
Are the EPS forecasts calculated before or after share buybacks?

[stemis] 11/7/2007 07:48

nghomi,

The interims will be released sometime this month.

To undertake a share buyback IBG will need to sort out its holding company reserves which are currently in deficit.

The EPS forecasts are 1.70p [2007] and 2.0p [2008].

Expected cash balance per share is likely (baring any acquisitions) to be at least 3.5p [end 2007] and 5.5p [end 2008].

Assuming IBG hit its 2007 forecast and look on track to make the 2008 forecast, I don't see why we shouldn't see at least mid 20's for the share price on a 12 month timescale. At that point we should have the 2008 interims and the market can look forward to a 2009 forecast of at least 2.5p and 8.0p cash (before share buybacks). Just my opinion obviously.

[shroder] 10/7/2007 22:09

Thanks yump, hadnt gone into that much detail so appreciate the heads up

[nghomi] 10/7/2007 22:05

I am considering to buy back in IBG. I cannot found out when the interims would be published. Could anybody help please?

I think whoever wanted to sell must have done it by now. And provided we don't get another surprising warnings, IBG would start climbing after the interims. I am assuming that they would not mess up with share repurchase as it could improve earnings at a modest rate. Say if IBG buys 10% shares at 18p per share, that would equate to 1.8p per share. I believe they should afford easily without any extra borrowings. So if the earning expectations for 07 and 08 were 1.65p and 1.9p prior to share buyback, we would have earnings of ~1.8p and ~2.1p after share buyback. So even in medium term, IBG could be traded between 18p to 21p. So we could have 30% to 40% upside from here. Can any body see any flaws in this calculation? I would appreicaite your feedback before I buy some shares! :-)
Thanks.

[yump] 10/7/2007 10:46

Shroder

Admuncher itself runs an affiliate program. (They call it 'partnership'), so unlikely they would be supplying a program that hit the affiliate industry.

It blocks specific images, java script banners etc. etc.
It also blocks spyware and adware download and 'bad behaviour' operations on sites you visit - which is actually a positive for affiliate marketing.

The only caution would be a question over what Admuncher itself is installing on your PC.

As far as I can see, its not designed to deface or interfere with site content in any way - there's actually a section in their forum for people to post where site content has been blocked in error.

Blocking some affiliate banner adverts accidentally on the basis of their size is imo not going to affect the industry to any extent. Its all moving towards contextually relevant advertising, not banners. eg. Pricerunner, review sites are all text-based links.

Blocking an affiliate text-link is not so easy. The software would need to feed the link into something to detect affiliate code, which is sometimes several url links away from the link you see on the website and then somehow block the link from the site.

Any program that blocked text links like that would become pretty unpopular very quickly as you wouldn't be able to read site content properly. It would render some of the largest and most useful sites on the net unreadable.

It wouldn't last long imo. Some of those sites provide big retailers with lots of revenue.

[aleman] 10/7/2007 02:40

Beards are trendy again, anyway. Must be some old farts on here.

[oiliphant] 09/7/2007 22:56

Has maz shaved that beard off?

[hirschnathan] 08/7/2007 23:16

ken

look at these forcasts


(18 June 2007)


Affiliate Window is not alone in reporting solid performance this year, forecasting yearly revenues of £20 million by the middle of 2007, as affiliate marketing as a whole continues its strong growth.

"Affiliate marketing has become a 'must have' for any business serious about growing its online revenues," says Kevin Brown, AW chief executive.

[kenatbabken] 08/7/2007 21:42

hirsch

True,But in an interview in 2005 one of the directors forecast revenue,s of at
least £12m for 2006 for AW so they missed their forecast by quite some way.Good
job they were private then!! Did I read a post that they had put themselves up
for sale?

[hirschnathan] 08/7/2007 17:45

ken

Aw, being its not listed, we dont know forecasts, thats the hinderance to ibg

[kenatbabken] 08/7/2007 17:41

This comparison shows AF is outstipping Affiliate Window


AF

.....2006 2005
revenue £10,928,000 £4,263,000 YOY growth 156%

gross margin. 21% 23%

EBITDA £1,615,000 £702,000 YOY growth 130%



AW

.......2006 2005
revenue £9,784,936 £4,554,091 YOY growth 113%

gross marg 12% 12%

EBITDA £1,187,536 £536,939 YOY growth 120%

[bonio10000] 08/7/2007 12:33

Stemis - excellent example of how share buybacks can work and be far better value than dividends

[hirschnathan] 08/7/2007 11:32

Anand

Thanks

So that means we have 60% increase in affiliates yoy, not bad.

[shroder] 07/7/2007 15:52

richardbonny - 7 Jul'07 - 12:21 - 2680 of 2682

Good post, I am sure we have all been there


I still think a curve ball may hit the advertising industry in the shape of content blockers, I am not saying it will but something to keep an eye on;

[aleman] 07/7/2007 15:32

Thanks, andnmand.

[andnmand] 07/7/2007 13:16

My invoice for commissions on affiliate future has been updated for the end of June. The following is the increase in my invoice number month by month. Perhaps the other affiliates on here can confirm whether their invoice numbers have increased by exactly the same amount or just roughly the same amount, I thought that they raised invoices in affiliate ID order but only for affiliates who earned some commission (even if it wasn't enough for a payout) but it is a couple of years since I had a month without any commission. Date Increase in Invoice No.   30/06/2007 93665 31/05/2007 91558 30/04/2007 89224 31/03/2007 86404 28/02/2007 84182 31/01/2007 81814 31/12/2006 80062 30/11/2006 76698 31/10/2006 68459 30/09/2006 65667 31/08/2006 61558 31/07/2006 59445 30/06/2006 57358 31/05/2006 55665 30/04/2006 54586 31/03/2006 45138 28/02/2006 45881 31/01/2006 45891 31/12/2005 35514 30/11/2005 33479 31/10/2005 31663 30/09/2005 18944  

[richardbonny] 07/7/2007 12:21

Well I've learned an important lesson from this debacle. Which is to sell immediately any AIM company which announces a 'strategic review'. Its simply not worth the risk. What it invariably means in practice is 'er we can see trouble on the horizon but we have absolutely no idea what we are going to do about it'. Why wait till the trouble arrives?

In the case of IBG the trouble is that they cannot sustain growth rates without further investment. Well thats hardly a surprise but its a good enough reason for the shares to be crucified in a market which requires endless unbroken growth. Growth = p/e ratio of 20, no growth = p/e ratio of 10. So the shares halve in value. All too easy to see in retrospect.

[12345th] 07/7/2007 12:03

Excellent point OBR. HOW MUCH DID THEY OFFER MAZ, and how much would they offer based on today's price?

[old boy returns] 07/7/2007 00:03

Stemis - you really should (if you have the time and inclination) offer yourself to IBG as a non-exec director. I reckon you would bring a lot to the party.

BTW - is there any reason why Maz cannot give an indication of the level of indicative offers received which the board decided not to recommend?

I presume (maybe wrongly) that they were at a premium to the then share price (just under 30p) and in not going for them the board have halved the share price I wonder how they feel about those offers now that they will need to more than double the market cap before thye are back where they could have been?

[muffinhead] 06/7/2007 20:21

Page views and "old" email address Ken!

[stemis] 06/7/2007 15:58

ta/A

I don't disagree with the points being made about buybacks but it does rather depend on the end game. For companies with 'indefinite' lives, buybacks do increase EPS, but if the market perception of the buyback is negative, the resulting reduction in P/E will offset the impact on the share price, so it can be self defeating.

However what Maz said about offers for the company was:

We stated in the announcement that there were indicative offer for the business, but not at levels that the board could/would recommend to shareholders. Clearly, we've then spent time analysing the reasons for this and believe that the reasons for this are a combination of size (too small) and lack of strategic value at this stage to justify signifcant premiums.

This is precisely what we're trying to address, but in a measured way.....

.....Therefore, we're adopting a measured approach whereby we're increasing the levels of investment in the business itself in order to build strategic value (geographical scale, broader income streams etc).

My reading of this is that their strategy is ultimately to make themselves more attractive to a trade buyer and thus get an offer they feel they could recommend to shareholders.

Under these circumstances, share buy backs do make sense.

Suppose IBG could be sold for 50p in 2 years time - a value of £38.6M (77,190,800 x 50p) reflecting the value of the business plus its cash. If IBG could buyback 25% of its shares at 20p, then its cash (and value) on sale would be £3.9M less but the average value per share would be 60p. The more shares they buyback at a lower price the higher that becomes.

It was a strategy carried out to its ultimate by EWD, who bought back over 90% of their shares over a few years from under 30p a share all the way until they were taken over at £3.23 a share.

[aleman] 06/7/2007 14:27

That is a good article, analyst, showing how the line between success and failure in buybacks isn't all that great. At its best, Maz could take available cash and borrow £5m, I would imagine, based on forecast cashflows. What would a £6m to £7m buy-back program do to a market cap of £11m? My experience of buy-backs is a disappointing one, but I might be prepared to reconsider here if it is done positively and taking on debt that shows strong confidence in future cashflows.