Lo-Q Share Discussion Threads

[rivaldo] 04/9/2012 09:49

I read the RNS as relating to the entire Asian region, across Sanderson's sphere of operations. The phraseology used would apear to support this given the emphasis on their "office network that spans nine countries across Asia, the Middle East, and Australia Pacific".

[shanklin] 04/9/2012 08:23

One thing the RNS omits to say is to which countries the agreement relates.

[lucky_punter] 04/9/2012 08:20

Virtual queuing specialist Lo-Q (LON:LOQ) has formed an alliance with a top Australian multi-national them park attraction designer and manufacturer that could see it crack the lucrative Asian market.
Lo-Q, which provides queuing solutions for theme parks and water parks, said the partnership with The Sanderson Group will help spearhead the company's charge into what it calls an "exciting and fast growing Asian market place".

[rivaldo] 04/9/2012 08:18

Excellent news - this looks a top-notch partner. We're not just talking about China here, but India, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia etc etc:

"In 1991 Sanderson Group was contracted as a part of the Warner Brothers team to develop the multi award winning 'Warner Brothers Movie World, Hollywood on the Gold Coast Australia'. To this extent Sanderson Group is extremely happy to say we have held the No. 1 position for the past 23 years.

In 2000 Sanderson Group established India's first specialist theme park turnkey solutions company. Expanding our operations into Asia, in 2001 Sanderson Group opened in Macau, then progressively in Hong Kong then China, becoming the first specialist theme park turnkey solutions company to enter mainland China. In 2006 Sanderson Group Expanded into Malaysia, then 2007 Singapore, 2010 Dubai, with our most recent operations established in 2011 Vietnam.

The Sanderson Group is internationally considered a world class leader in delivering prestigious themed tourism developments throughout Asia, Middle East, and Australia Pacific with an unmatchable portfolio of 23 years of innovation in turnkey solutions."

[shanklin] 04/9/2012 07:32

So LOQ will be working with Sanderson Group, Australia:



I hope their "Group Leadership" are as absolutely outstanding at their jobs as they suggest at:



If so, then LOQ should be winning a lot of business in the Asian market over the next year.

Cheers, Martin

[spud] 25/8/2012 09:34

I wonder how the recent Samsung Apple court case outcome will influence LO-Q's ongoing litigation. I believe it's also being heard in the same State.

spud

[davidosh] 20/8/2012 15:58

I rather think a deal in the far East would be quite soon if coming as the peak season there will be more between November and May so any partner would want to be talking business in the quieter period. That said weather conditions are probably not quite as seasonal.

Has anyone used the London Eye booking via smartphone?

The weather conditions must have been great through August so far just about everywhere and this is generally the busiest month so fingers crossed for record attendances at the theme parks and water parks leading to good business for those wanting to stay out of the queues.

[shanklin] 20/8/2012 14:23

rivaldo

Yes, you can't go public slagging off the previous management on something unless you do much better yourselves.

Cheers, Martin

[rivaldo] 20/8/2012 14:17

Shanklin, thx for the heads-up on the Times feature, just read it over lunch.

As well as the points you made, I thought the closing comment that Disney has been unable to produce a similar product "noting the strength of the British company's patents" was extremely important and encouraging.

Interesting to see TB pushing the development of the smartphone system and hoping that they hadn't "missed the boat". I suspect the very fact that this article has suddenly appeared in the broadsheet press means that TB has something up his sleeve. Perhaps the London Eye trial has gone well and is to be rolled out to other attractions or customers?

[felix99] 20/8/2012 13:38

Not a lot - its mainly to do with when you acquire and sell things / issue new shares.

Premium more onerous than a standard listing I think. So smaller transactions get caught more easily as requiring full circulars and shareholder approval (you have to do a lot of expensive circulars which involve accountants , brokers, lawyers and the full City gravy train.).

[effortless cool] 20/8/2012 12:59

supernumeracy - thank you for the link.

[supernumerary] 20/8/2012 12:50

Actually it only applies to Premium Listing companies, but that's a bit beside the point. There are many companies that follow the Code in order to keep their corporate governance up to the highest standard - it can affect their viability as an investment for some funds. I jut think it's important to put the substance before the form, not after it.

[itchycrack] 20/8/2012 12:39

The LOQ story just gets better and better! Just love it!
500p within a year now (IMHO) easily achievable!

[shanklin] 20/8/2012 12:34

FYI, there's quite a 1/3 page piece on LOQ on p36 of today's Times. There's not much of interest to those familiar with LOQ albeit the article does mention that:
- "It has built a heavy hitting team to push it beyond its current status..."
- according to Tom Burnet, "...the company needed to crack the mobile sector - and fast"
- "He (Burnet) is not shy of pointing the finger at the previous management for not driving Lo-Q hard enough"
- "The company is working toward securing a partner in Asia to get its technology into some of the world's fasting growing theme parks"

Hopefully, there is some real news for us in the pipeline which can build off this piece.

[supernumerary] 20/8/2012 12:34

EC - FWIW the Higgs report has been withdrawn and replaced by the FRC Guidance on Board Effectiveness: The latest Code is found here:

In amongst the self-righteous fretting about corporate governance, can I just interject my thanks to John Lillywhite for helping to make me a great deal of money by taking on the non-exec job and sticking with it through fat times and lean. When there are so many NEDs who are just time-servers, filling the assigned slots in the corporate code, it's important to recognise one who put his heart and his pocket-book into the job. Well done John!

[davidosh] 20/8/2012 09:33

EC....yes I certainly agree on the last two points and I think many companies should be rotating non execs far more once they have completed say seven years service as they must become slightly stale and no doubt too cosy within the board IMO.

[bonio10000] 20/8/2012 07:03

Well - looks like the new non-exec shoul dbe able to devote about 30mins a week between all his interests.

[effortless cool] 20/8/2012 06:55

David,

On what do you base that statement?

Lillywhite failed the independence test under the Code at a number of levels - significant (for him) shareholding, ownership of options, length of service. He would/should not have been deemed an independent non-executive director.


(page 35)

[davidosh] 20/8/2012 01:10

You can still be independent even though you own shares in the company so long as the stake is not so large that you can dominate the board or if you are deemed in concert with another shareholder.

[effortless cool] 19/8/2012 21:23

Himself!

He had about half a million quids worth.

[davidosh] 19/8/2012 18:47

Who was the outgoing non exec linked to in shareholding terms?

[effortless cool] 19/8/2012 18:26

It is a potential conflict, although a perfectly manageable one. I guess that the non-exec being replaced had a similar issue.

It seems a strange decision, however, not to take the opportunity to appoint an independent non-exec.