Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Mediasurface Plc LSE:MSR London Ordinary Share GB00B01XYM75 ORD 1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.00p +0.00% 13.00p 0.00p 0.00p - - - 0 06:30:09
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
- - - - 12.82

Mediasurface (MSR) Latest News

Real-Time news about Mediasurface (London Stock Exchange): 0 recent articles
More Mediasurface News
Mediasurface Takeover Rumours

Mediasurface (MSR) Share Charts

1 Year Mediasurface Chart

1 Year Mediasurface Chart

1 Month Mediasurface Chart

1 Month Mediasurface Chart

Intraday Mediasurface Chart

Intraday Mediasurface Chart

Mediasurface (MSR) Discussions and Chat

Mediasurface Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
31/7/200810:08New Entry MediaSurface - Stonking Buy2,619
27/2/200722:11The Manc Stupidity Resource8
21/2/200718:57html practice20
09/2/200711:18Scratching the surface of Mediasurface' success10
16/3/200510:37Mediasurface a risiging star?-

Add a New Thread

Mediasurface (MSR) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Mediasurface trades in real-time

Mediasurface (MSR) Top Chat Posts

moosetication: I don't think so. Base offer is (9p plus 0.0375 of an ALN share) per MSR share that you hold. On top of that is a mix-and-match capability which says you can opt for more ALN shares or more cash pro rata, provided there is no overall change in the cash/share offer (which basically suggests there's little point in asking for more cash, because it would need to be balanced by enough people asking for more ALN shares). Importantly, the value of consideration share offer is essentially variable since it's a fixed proportion of a share and so must vary with ALN's market position. At the time of the offer, ALN's share price was 160p which valued each MSR share at 9p+(0.0375*160p) = 15p. However, at current price (in the middle) that comes down to 13.8p.
get rich quick: looking at ALN share price movement this year they have risen by about 40% since feb, which is when I presume the talk behind taking over Mediasurface started.This was obviously a good deal for ALN by the look of it ( which makes me think that it wasn't such a good deal for MSR ) As the exchange price was set at £1.60 and they have since dropped to £1.37 our future holding is already at a loss so It seems that we are losing on both fronts. This begs the question...should I just sell now and buy ALN at a later date, assuming that I want to that is. Time will tell I suppose. Does anyone else have a view on this deal
donaferentes: with ALN shares fallen from 1.60 before announcement at which deal was valued to 1.48 yesterday, each MSR share is now worth 0.09 cash plus 0.0375 X 1.49 = 0.055875 makes a total of 0.145875 for each MSR share v. 13.75 closing price yesterday. Let's hope ALN holds up in face of this deal (which I have seen questioned by some form ALN's POV) till we have them in our hands to sell (or hold).
donaferentes: Perhaps this is the reason:- Mediasurface PLC 24 April 2008 Mediasurface plc (the "Company" or "Mediasurface") Share price movement The Company notes the recent share price and announces that it has received a preliminary approach, which may or may not lead to an offer for the Company. The approach has been received from a UK company that does not compete directly with Mediasurface and the Directors expect that regardless of the outcome of these discussions, the services that Mediasurface provides to existing and future customers will be unaffected. For further information please contact: Mediasurface plc Lawrence Flynn Chief Executive Officer David Deacon Chief Financial Officer Telephone: 01635 262000 Nominated Adviser and Broker KBC Peel Hunt Ltd Oliver Scott/Nicholas Marren Telephone: 0207 418 8900
garth: New shares being placed at above the current share price. Current Trading and Prospects The Group's first quarter trading of the new financial year, the 3 months ended 31st December 2007, made a modest un-audited EBITDA profit excluding the rationalisation and non-recurring costs for Pepperio of some £0.18 million. As at 31st December 2007 the Group's cash position stood at £0.42 million excluding the term loan of £1.75 million. The Group continues to implement judicious cost reductions including leveraging the full benefits of the Indian R&D centre which together represent cost savings of £2.0 million compared to last financial year. The Directors are confident the Group is now in a position to achieve full year results in line with management expectations.
kanar: From my pov the share price went down after the profit warning that Mr. Flynn blamed on Ms Sharepoint and the fact that customers, according to Flynn, couldn't tell the difference between Ms Sharepoint, a portal technology and Morello a ECM platform. Blaming customers and competitors looks a bit silly, especially since these factors should have been known to Mediasurface.
yump: There seems to be a general hunt and interest in low p/e stocks at the moment, although whether that is a growth stock strategy or not is open to debate. They always have me in a puzzle because imo stocks on p/e's of 10 and under are probably recovery stocks, because there is something in their past which has given them that low p/e. Whether its debt levels, hiccups in growth, placings or just a mundane business. Always ask myself - if someone gave me a pot of money to start that business, would I bother ? - from the point of view of whether its an attractive business or not. If the answer is no or don't know, then certainly won't do it the other way around and part with my money to fund them. There is always the hope of a sudden gain with those stocks I think, if they surprise on the upside. However, the other problem is that if they've dropped off from a spike because of a hiccup, then there's a lot of previous investors to interrupt any smooth share price movement upwards. However, for true growth stocks I think its worth paying anything up to a p/e of 15ish on current year, as long as there's at least 25% growth forecast for the next year. If they've grown in the last few years and the share price chart reflects that, then you are still paying cheaply for the growth imo. Some might say a higher rating gives more chance of a fall, but one of the original Slater points about good growth companies is that everything fits together - they are good growth companies because they are good businesses, with good management, good planning, good investor information etc. etc. That's why there aren't many of them imo. Have high hopes for MSR - ticks all the boxes and no hype.
bloodhound: Slowly chuffin slowly! If there was a race between a Sloth, a Galapagos Tortoise and the MSR share price, I'm not sure who'd win.........BH :-((
badabing: A total damp squib of day here then.......makes you wonder why companies employ brokers and city PR companies for all the good it does them......of course ahd the results been perceived as poor or contained a profits warning then we all know what would have happened what's next for the MSR share price? Will the MMs drop it now to "make a market" as they say seeing as these results have obviously failed to make any impression whatsoever today.....when will I learn the lesson of not buying in to these small caps and waiting for months hoping that results will one day push the price up...clearly it's only new contract news or bids that work......doh!!!
badabing: Is this any use to anyone? How to Value a company The most common way to value a company is to use its earnings. Earnings, also called net income or net profit, is the money that is left over after a company pays all of its bills. To allow for apples-to-apples comparisons, most people who look at earnings measure them according to earnings per share (EPS). You arrive at the earnings per share by simply dividing the dollar amount of the earnings a company reports by the number of shares it currently has outstanding. Thus, if XYZ Corp. has one million shares outstanding and has earned one million dollars in the past 12 months, it has a trailing EPS of $1.00. (The reason it is called a trailing EPS is because it looks at the last four quarters reported -- the quarters that trail behind the most recent quarter reported. $1,000,000 -------------- = $1.00 in earnings per share (EPS) 1,000,000 shares The earnings per share alone means absolutely nothing, though. To look at a company's earnings relative to its price, most investors employ the price/earnings (P/E) ratio. The P/E ratio takes the stock price and divides it by the last four quarters' worth of earnings. For instance, if, in our example above, XYZ Corp. was currently trading at $15 a share, it would have a P/E of 15. $15 share price ---------------------------= 15 P/E $1.00 in trailing EPS Is the P/E the Holy Grail? There is a large population of individual investors who stop their entire analysis of a company after they figure out the trailing P/E ratio. With no regard to any other form of valuation, this group of unFoolish investors blindly plunge ahead armed with this one ratio, purposefully ignoring the vagaries of equity analysis. Popularized by Ben Graham (who used a number of other techniques as well as low P/E to isolate value), the P/E has been oversimplified by those who only look at this number. Such investors look for "low P/E" stocks. These are companies that have a very low price relative to their trailing earnings. Also called a "multiple", the P/E is most often used in comparison with the current rate of growth in earnings per share. The Foolish assumption is that for a growth company, in a fairly valued situation the price/earnings ratio is about equal to the rate of EPS growth. In our example of XYZ Corp., for instance, we find out that XYZ Corp. grew its earnings per share at a 13% over the past year, suggesting that at a P/E of 15 the company is pretty fairly valued. Fools believe that P/E only makes sense for growth companies relative to the earnings growth. If a company has lost money in the past year or has suffered a decrease in earnings per share over the past twelve months, the P/E becomes less useful than other valuation methods we will talk about later in this series. In the end, P/E has to be viewed in the context of growth and cannot be simply isolated without taking on some significant potential for error. Are Low P/E Stocks Really a Bargain? With the advent of computerized screening of stock databases, low P/E stocks that have been mispriced have become more and more rare. When Ben Graham formulated many of his principles for investing, one had to search manually through pages of stock tables in order to ferret out companies that had extremely low P/Es. Today, all you have to do is punch a few buttons on an online database and you have a list as long as your arm. This screening has added efficiency to the market. When you see a low P/E stock these days, more often than not it deserves to have a low P/E because of its questionable future prospects. As intelligent investors value companies based on future prospects and not past performance, stocks with low P/Es often have dark clouds looming in the months ahead. This is not to say that you cannot still find some great low P/E stocks that for some reason the market has simple overlooked -- you still can and it happens all the time. Rather, you need to confirm the value in these companies by applying some other valuation techniques. The PEG and YPEG The most common Foolish applications of the P/E are the P/E and growth ratio (PEG) and the year-ahead P/E and growth ratio (YPEG). Rather than reinvent the wheel, as there is a wonderful series of articles already written on these very subjects in Fooldom, I will simply direct your attention to them and talk about them very briefly. The PEG simply takes the annualized rate of growth out to the furthest estimate and compares this with the current stock price. Since it is future growth that makes a company valuable to both an acquirer and a shareholder seeking either dividends or free cash flow to fund stock buybacks, this makes some degree of intuitive sense. Only looking at the trailing P/E is kind of like driving while looking out the rearview mirror. If a company is expected to grow at 10% a year over the next two years and has a P/E of 10, it will have a PEG of 1.0. P/E of 10 ---------------------- = 1.0 PEG 10% EPS growth A PEG of 1.0 suggests that a company is fairly valued. If the company in the above example only had a P/E of five but was expected to grow at 10% a year, it would have a PEG of 0.5 -- implying that it is selling for one half (50%) of its fair value. If the company had a P/E of 20 and expected growth of 10% a year, it would have a PEG of 2.0, worth double what it should be according to the assumption that the P/E should equal the EPS rate of growth. While the PEG is most often used for growth companies, the YPEG is best suited for valuing larger, more-established ones. The YPEG uses the same assumptions as the PEG but looks at different numbers. As most earnings estimate services provide estimated 5-year growth rates, these are simply taken as an indication of the fair multiple for a company's stock going forward. Thus, if the current P/E is 10 but analysts expect the company to grow at 20% over the next five years, the YPEG is equal to 0.5 and the stock looks cheap according to this metric. As always, one must view the PEG and YPEG in the context of other measures of value and not consider them as magic money machines. Multiples Although the PEG and YPEG are helpful, they both operate on the assumption that the P/E should equal the EPS rate of growth. Unfortunately, in the real world, this is not always the case. Thus, many simply look at estimated earnings and estimate what fair multiple someone might pay for the stock. For example, if XYZ Corp. has historically traded at about 10 times earnings and is currently down to 7 times earnings because it missed estimates one quarter, it would be reasonable to buy the stock with the expectation that it will return to its historic 10 times multiple if the missed quarter was only a short-term anomaly. When you project fair multiples for a company based on forward earnings estimates, you start to make a heck of a lot of assumptions about what is going to happen in the future. Although one can do enough research to make the risk of being wrong as marginal as possible, it will always still exist. Should one of your assumptions turn out to be incorrect, the stock will probably not go where you expect it to go. That said, most of the other investors and companies out there are using this same approach, making their own assumptions as well, so, in the worst-case scenario, at least you won't be alone. A modification to the multiple approach is to determine the relationship between the company's P/E and the average P/E of the S&P 500. If XYZ Corp. has historically traded at 150% of the S&P 500 and the S&P is currently at 10, many investors believe that XYZ Corp. should eventually hit a fair P/E of 15, assuming that nothing changes. This historical relationship requires some sophisticated databases and spreadsheets to figure out and is not widely used by individual investors, although many professional money managers often use this approach. Revenues-Based Valuations Valuation: The Price/Sales Ratio Every time a company sells a customer something, it is generating revenues. Revenues are the sales generated by a company for peddling goods or services. Whether or not a company has made money in the last year, there are always revenues. Even companies that may be temporarily losing money, have earnings depressed due to short-term circumstances (like product development or higher taxes), or are relatively new in a high-growth industry are often valued off of their revenues and not their earnings. Revenue-based valuations are achieved using the price/sales ratio, often simply abbreviated PSR. The price/sales ratio takes the current market capitalization of a company and divides it by the last 12 months trailing revenues. The market capitalization is the current market value of a company, arrived at by multiplying the current share price times the shares outstanding. This is the current price at which the market is valuing the company. For instance, if our example company XYZ Corp. has ten million shares outstanding, priced at $10 a share, then the market capitalization is $100 million. Some investors are even more conservative and add the current long-term debt of the company to the total current market value of its stock to get the market capitalization. The logic here is that if you were to acquire the company, you would acquire its debt as well, effectively paying that much more. This avoids comparing PSRs between two companies where one has taken out enormous debt that it has used to boast sales and one that has lower sales but has not added any nasty debt either. Market Capitalization = (Shares Outstanding * Current Share Price) + Current Long-term Debt The next step in calculating the PSR is to add up the revenues from the last four quarters and divide this number into the market capitalization. Say XYZ Corp. had $200 million in sales over the last four quarters and currently has no long-term debt. The PSR would be: (10,000,000 shares * $10/share) + $0 debt PSR = ----------------------------------------- = 0.5 $200 million revenues The PSR is a measurement that companies often consider when making an acquisition. If you have ever heard of a deal being done based on a certain "multiple of sales," you have seen the PSR in use. As this is a perfectly legitimate way for a company to value an acquisition, many simply expropriate it for the stock market and use it to value a company as an ongoing concern. Uses of the PSR As with the PEG and the YPEG, the lower the PSR, the better. Ken Fisher, who is most famous for using the PSR to value stocks, looks for companies with PSRs below 1.0 in order to find value stocks that the market might currently be overlooking. This is the most common application of the PSR and is actually a pretty good indicator of value, according to the work that James O'Shaughnessey has done with S&P's CompuStat database. The PSR is also a valuable tool to use when a company has not made money in the last year. Unless the corporation is going out of business, the PSR can tell you whether or not the concern's sales are being valued at a discount to its peers. If XYZ Corp. lost money in the past year, but has a PSR of 0.50 when many companies in the same industry have PSRs of 2.0 or higher, you can assume that, if it can turn itself around and start making money again, it will have a substantial upside as it increases that PSR to be more in line with its peers. There are some years during recessions, for example, when none of the auto companies make money. Does this mean they are all worthless and there is no way to compare them? Nope, not at all. You just need to use the PSR instead of the P/E to measure how much you are paying for a dollar of sales instead of a dollar of earnings. Another common use of the PSR is to compare companies in the same line of business with each other, using the PSR in conjunction with the P/E in order to confirm value. If a company has a low P/E but a high PSR, it can warn an investor that there are potentially some one-time gains in the last four quarters that are pumping up earnings per share. Finally, new companies in hot industries are often priced based on multiples of revenues and not multiples of earnings. Cash Flow-Based Valuations Cash-Flow (EBITDA) & Non-Cash Charges Despite the fact that most individual investors are completely ignorant of cash flow, it is probably the most common measurement for valuing public and private companies used by investment bankers. Cash flow is literally the cash that flows through a company during the course of a quarter or the year after taking out all fixed expenses. Cash flow is normally defined as earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA). (Cash flow in this context should not be confused with Free Cash Flow, which is an important metric to Rule Maker investors.) Why look at earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization? Interest income and expense, as well as taxes, are all tossed aside because cash flow is designed to focus on the operating business and not secondary costs or profits. Taxes especially depend on the vagaries of the laws in a given year and actually can cause dramatic fluctuations in earnings power. For instance, CYBEROPTICS enjoyed a 15% tax rate in 1996, but in 1997 that rate will more than double. This situation overstates CyberOptics' current earnings and understates its forward earnings, masking the company's real operating situation. Thus, a canny analyst would use the growth rate of earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) instead of net income in order to evaluate the company's growth. EBIT is also adjusted for any one-time charges or benefits. As for depreciation and amortization, these are called non-cash charges, as the company is not actually spending any money on them. Rather, depreciation is an accounting convention for tax purposes that allows companies to get a break on capital expenditures as plant and equipment ages and becomes less useful. Amortization normally comes in when a company acquires another company at a premium to its shareholder's equity -- a number that it account for on its balance sheet as goodwill and is forced to amortize over a set period of time, according to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). When looking at a company's operating cash flow, it makes sense to toss aside accounting conventions that might mask cash strength. When and How to Use Cash Flow Cash flow is most commonly used to value industries that involve tremendous up-front capital expenditures and companies that have large amortization burdens. Cable TV companies like TIME-WARNER and TELECOMMUNICATIONS INC. have reported negative earnings for years due to the huge capital expense of building their cable networks, even though their cash flow has actually grown. This is because huge depreciation and amortization charges have masked their ability to generate cash. Sophisticated buyers of these properties use cash flow as one way of pricing an acquisition, thus it makes sense for investors to use it as well. The most common valuation application of EBITDA, the discounted cash flow, is a rather complicated spreadsheet exercise that defies simple explanation. Economic Value Added (EVA) is another sophisticated modification of cash flow that looks at the cost of capital and the incremental return above that cost as a way of separating businesses that truly generate cash from ones that just eat it up. The most straightforward way for an individual investor to use cash flow is to understand how cash flow multiples work. In a private or public market acquisition, the price-to-cash flow multiple is normally in the 6.0 to 7.0 range. When this multiple reaches the 8.0 to 9.0 range, the acquisition is normally considered to be expensive. Some counsel selling companies when their cash flow multiple extends beyond 10.0. In a leveraged buyout (LBO), the buyer normally tries not to pay more than 5.0 times cash flow because so much of the acquisition is funded by debt. A LBO also looks to pay back all the cash used for the buyout within six years, have an EBITDA of 2.0 or more times the interest payments, and have total debt of only 4.5 to 5.0 times the EBITDA. Investors interested in going to the next level with EBITDA and looking at discounted cash flow or EVA are encouraged to check out the bookstore or the library. Since companies making acquisitions use these methods, it makes sense for investors to familiarize themselves with the logic behind them as this might enable a Foolish investor to spot a bargain before someone else. Equity-Based Valuations What is Equity? Equity is a fancy way of referring to what is actually there. Whether it's tangible things like cash, current assets, working capital and shareholder's equity, or intangible qualities like management or brand name, equity is everything that a company has if it were to suddenly stop selling products and stop making money tomorrow. Traditionally, investors who rely on buying companies with a substantial amount of equity to back up their value are a paranoid lot who are looking to be able to collect something in liquidation. However, as the TV-dominated mass-consumer age has helped intangibles like brand names create powerful moats around a core business, contemporary investors have begun to push the boundaries of equity by emphasizing qualities that have no tangible or concrete value, but are absolutely vital to the company as an ongoing concern. The Balance Sheet: Cash & Working Capital Like to buy a dollar of assets for a dollar in market value? Ben Graham did. He developed one of the premier screens for ferreting out companies with more cash on hand than their current market value. First, Graham would look at a company's cash and equivalents and short-term investments. Dividing this number by the number of shares outstanding gives a quick measure that tells you how much of the current share price consists of just the cash that the company has on hand. Buying a company with a lot of cash can yield a lot of benefits -- cash can fund product development and strategic acquisitions and can pay high-caliber executives. Even a company that might seem to have limited future prospects can offer tremendous promise if it has enough cash on hand. Another measure of value is a company's current working capital relative to its market capitalization. Working capital is what is left after you subtract a company's current liabilities from its current assets. Working capital represents the funds that a company has ready access to for use in conducting its everyday business. If you buy a company for close to its working capital, you have essentially bought a dollar of assets for a dollar of stock price -- not a bad deal, either. Just as cash funds all sorts of good things, so does working capital. Shareholder's Equity & Book Value Shareholder's equity is an accounting convention that includes a company's liquid assets like cash, hard assets like real estate, as well as retained earnings. This is an overall measure of how much liquidation value a company has if all of its assets were sold off -- whether those assets are office buildings, desks, old T-shirts in inventory or replacement vacuum tubes for ENIAC systems. Shareholder equity helps you value a company when you use it to figure out book value. Book value is literally the value of a company that can be found on the accounting ledger. To calculate book value per share, take a company's shareholder's equity and divide it by the current number of shares outstanding. If you then take the stock's current price and divide by the current book value, you have the price-to-book ratio. Book value is a relatively straightforward concept. The closer to book value you can buy something at, the better it is. Book value is actually somewhat skeptically viewed in this day and age, since most companies have latitude in valuing their inventory, as well as inflation or deflation of real estate depending on what tax consequences the company is trying to avoid. However, with financial companies like banks, consumer loan concerns, brokerages and credit card companies, the book value is extremely relevant. For instance, in the banking industry, takeovers are often priced based on book value, with banks or savings & loans being taken over at multiples of between 1.7 to 2.0 times book value. Another use of shareholder's equity is to determine return on equity, or ROE. Return on equity is a measure of how much in earnings a company generates in four quarters compared to its shareholder's equity. It is measured as a percentage. For instance, if XYZ Corp. made a million dollars in the past year and has a shareholder's equity of ten million, then the ROE is 10%. Some use ROE as a screen to find companies that can generate large profits with little in the way of capital investment. COCA-COLA ,for instance, does not require constant spending to upgrade equipment -- the syrup-making process does not regularly move ahead by technological leaps and bounds. In fact, high ROE companies are so attractive to some investors that they will take the ROE and average it with the expected earnings growth in order to figure out a fair multiple. This is why a pharmaceutical company like MERCK can grow at 10% or so every year but consistently trade at 20 times earnings or more. Intangibles Brand is the most intangible element to a company, but quite possibly the one most important to a company's ability as an ongoing concern. If every single MCDONALD'S restaurant were to suddenly disappear tomorrow, the company could simply go out and get a few loans and be built back up into a world power within a few months. What is it about McDonald's that would allow it to do this? It is McDonald's presence in our collective minds -- the fact that nine out of ten people forced to name a fast food restaurant would name McDonald's without hesitating. The company has a well-known brand and this adds tremendous economic value despite the fact that it cannot be quantified. Some investors are preoccupied by brands, particularly brands emerging in industries that have traditionally been without them. The genius of INTEL and MICROSOFT is that they have built their company names into brands that give them an incredible edge over their competition. A brand is also transferable to other products -- the reason Microsoft can contemplate becoming a power in online banking, for instance, is because it already has incredible brand equity in applications and operating systems. It is as simple as Reese's Peanut Butter cups transferring their brand onto Reese's Pieces, creating a new product that requires minimum advertising to build up. The real trick with brands, though, is that it takes at least competent management to unlock the value. If a brand is forced to suffer through incompetence, such as AMERICAN EXPRESS in the early 1990s or Coca-Cola in the early 1980s, then many can become skeptical about the value of the brand, leading them to doubt whether or not the brand value remains intact. The major buying opportunities for brands ironically comes when people stop believing in them for a few moments, forgetting that brands normally survive even the most difficult of short-term traumas. Intangibles can also sometimes mean that a company's shares can trade at a premium to its growth rate. Thus a company with fat profit margins, a dominant market share, consistent estimate-beating performance or a debt-free balance sheet can trade at a slightly higher multiple than its growth rate would otherwise suggest. Although intangibles are difficult to quantify, it does not mean that they do not have a tremendous power over a company's share price. The only problem with a company that has a lot of intangible assets is that one danger sign can make the premium completely disappear. The Piecemeal Company Finally, a company can sometimes be worth more divided up rather than all in one piece. This can happen because there is a hidden asset that most people are not aware of, like land purchased in the 1980s that has been kept on the books at cost despite dramatic appreciation of the land around it, or simply because a diversified company does not produce any synergies. SEARSDEAN WITTER DISCOVER and ALLSTATE are all worth a heck of a lot more broken apart as separate companies than they ever were when they were all together. Keeping an eye out for a company that can be broken into parts worth more than the whole makes sense, especially in this day and age when so many 1970s conglomerates are crumbling into their component parts Yield-Based Valuations A dividend yield is the percentage of a company's stock price that it pays out as dividends over the course of a year. For example, if a company pays $1.00 in dividends per quarter and it is trading at $100, it has a dividend yield of 4%. Four quarters of $1 is $4, and this divided by $100 is 4%. Yield has a curious effect on a company. Many income-oriented investors start to pour into a company's stock when the yield hits a magical level. The historical performance of the Dow Dividend Approach supports the general conclusion buttressed by Jim O'Shaugnessey's work that shows that a portfolio made up of large capitalization, above-average yielding stocks outperforms the market over time. Some, like Geraldine Weiss, actually invest in stocks based on what yield they should have. Weiss measures the average historical yield and counsels investing in a company's shares when the yield hits the edge of the undervalued band. For instance, if a company has historically yielded 2.5% and is currently paying $4 in dividends, the stock should trade in the $160 range. Anyone interested in learning more about Weiss's yield-oriented valuation approach should check out Dividends Don't Lie. The simplest way to take advantage of stocks that are undervalued based on their yield is to use the Dow Dividen
Mediasurface share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
Gulf Keyst..
FTSE 100
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:43 V: D:20180223 14:52:53