Minds + Machines Share Discussion Threads

[sarkasm] 10/9/2017 15:14

London and Capital Asset Management Ltd 112,157,877 16.03%



OFFICES IN MIAMI AND FLORIDA

[sarkasm] 10/9/2017 15:05

if we accept that 62pc is owned by the major shareholders perhaps in reality or more
then i would imagine any takeover bid or merger needs to be super profitable


also whether they need cash and or lock in a decent profit before year end


must take a peek at Odier



Lombard Odier Asset Management 140,344,766 20.05%

[sarkasm] 10/9/2017 14:54

Richard Murphy on tax and political economy
4
Plan B for the Caribbean’s tax havens after Irma

Posted on September 10 2017

Professor Mariana Mazzucato has an article in the Observer this morning in which she notes an argument that she attributes to the Tax Justice Network. As she notes:

The relief efforts needed are larger than they should be due to how these countries have been starved of tax revenue precisely because they have chosen to be tax havens.

In that case she says:

The simpler question is to ask those “elites” who save billions by using tax shelters in the Caribbean, and the Big 4 accounting firms that enable their transactions, to contribute to the relief funds. The more difficult question is how to change the status quo and make sure that these companies actually contribute to the resources they take advantage of, both at home and abroad.

It’s more difficult because it requires admitting that the governments offering tax shelters, which today might be appealing for relief, are also extracting value from the governments of the foreign companies they host. So, for example, the UK taxpayers pay for infrastructure and education in the UK. British-based companies benefit from that. If they then benefit from havens to avoid paying tax to the UK, the tax shelters are, of course, a key part of the problem.

And as she notes:

Clearly, a priority should be for companies, operating in countries offering tax havens in British Overseas Territories and the Commonwealth (or, indeed, elsewhere, such as Switzerland or Monte Carlo), to be more transparent. As argued by the Tax Justice Network, this would mean that countries in the Overseas Territories should “provide free, online and publicly accessible registers of all companies and trusts” located there.

At this point I have to correct Mariana: the argument actually came from me, writing for the Progressive Economics Group. I enjoy working with the Tax Justice Network and am often still linked to them as I was a founder of that organisation, but on this occasion they’re not involved, and I am not sure what their position is because I have not asked, so I apologise if they’re embarrassed by this.

As Mariana goes on to say:

In particular, it argues that this information should include which individuals own more than 10% of the shares in each company registered in the location; the names of the directors and the various locations where the companies have offices. The Network also argues that the cost of UK aid should be matched by revenue from the companies benefiting from the tax shelters and that full annual accounts should be prepared in accordance with a recognisable set of accounting standards. A modest proposal would be for the countries to raise money from the companies by increasing, for example, the charges they make for offshore services, or by charging tax on the companies based in these places.

Her follow up points are what then add real value:

But if the whole point was to avoid tax, would this cause the companies to leave? This gets us to the core of the problem. It is impossible to have real growth, and a reduction in inequality, through policies that are in the end just part of what we might call the “global value extraction business”. ….

Governments need to make critical investments that transform their societies in ways that create capacity, knowledge and long-run growth. This will be expensive, but possible, if arrangements are put in place so that those benefiting from the common resources also plough their profits back into those very resources. This, however, requires moving away from the “us v them” mentality and recognising that the problem rests just as much on the forces causing inequality at home as on the tensions between the rich and poor countries. It’s more than just an argument about who has to pick up the bill for the mess, disaster after disaster.

And that is precisely why this issue does need to be on the agenda, as does Plan B for these places, something I have long been engaged in.

[grupo guitarlumber] 09/9/2017 18:04

missjojo welcome

[missjojo] 09/9/2017 17:57

Thank you Waldron, wish you luck too.

[waldron] 09/9/2017 17:52

missjojo

i see you have been posting for just a little over year

and seemingly very interested in domain name companies

SPECIAL GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR INVESTMENTS BY THE POWER OF 8

[missjojo] 09/9/2017 17:49

Jamesto2 your 15p is thinking too short term, assuming MMX is not bought out, you have bought into a solid company showing great potential. Selling at 15p would not be smart when the prospects are both good and reasonably safe in a digital world as IP is valuable.

[waldron] 09/9/2017 17:46

missjojo
9 Sep '17 - 17:40 - 642 of 642 0 0
Hi Waldron, I have been invested here for a while, understand the company and its prospects. I also think the price is cheap given the fact that .vip alone makes up a big chunk of the market cap by itself and MMX has a wide range of other TLDS. Which simply are not priced into the share price.

If there is a take over then great if there is a merger then great. If the company just continues to perform as it is then great. With costs now covered by renewals and new registrations adding to the bottom line this is only going one way.


missjojo

thanks

good luck

i hope you thereby bring some sane and factual informative posts to this thread

really tired of opinions that are ramping or deramping this company and management

[missjojo] 09/9/2017 17:40

Hi Waldron, I have been invested here for a while, understand the company and its prospects. I also think the price is cheap given the fact that .vip alone makes up a big chunk of the market cap by itself and MMX has a wide range of other TLDS. Which simply are not priced into the share price.

If there is a take over then great if there is a merger then great. If the company just continues to perform as it is then great. With costs now covered by renewals and new registrations adding to the bottom line this is only going one way.

[waldron] 09/9/2017 17:31

jamesto2
9 Sep '17 - 17:27 - 639 of 640 0 0
Waldron even the takeover prospects have failed to boost share price lol .. Same old MMX
missjojo
9 Sep '17 - 17:27 - 640 of 640 0 0
Cheap as Chips at this price - I intend to add some bright and early Monday!


CHUCKLE

NO NOT THE SAME

THE ONLY THING THATS THE SAME IS SILLY POSTS

SSDD

TALKING CHIPS IS THAT FOR LUNCH OR LATE NITE SUPPER

[missjojo] 09/9/2017 17:27

Cheap as Chips at this price - I intend to add some bright and early Monday!

[waldron] 09/9/2017 17:22

jamesto2
9 Sep '17 - 17:19 - 637 of 637 0 0
Seems Boston has caused a cloud over the share price .. All the hope of big numbers and it's only sold 176 domain names


DOUBT THAT THE TRUE IMPACT WILL BE KNOWN UNTIL SOMETIME IN OCTOBER

EARLY DAYS YET

[grupo guitarlumber] 09/9/2017 11:50

Lombard Odier Asset Management 140,344,766 20.05%

London and Capital Asset Management Ltd 112,157,877 16.03%

Hargreave Hale Limited 64,014,389 9.16%

Oryx International Growth Fund Limited 52,550,000 6.94%

Hony Capital 50,107,692 7.17%


WHAT WOULD THEY SWAY AND SAY ABOUT IT ALL

I WONDER WENDY

[grupo guitarlumber] 09/9/2017 11:48

The Company’s issued share capital consists of 699,857,562 Ordinary Shares of no par value. No Ordinary Shares are held in treasury. The total number of voting rights in the Company is 699,857,562. The percentage of Ordinary Shares not in public hands is 37.05% per cent. The Company has been notified, in accordance with the Disclosure and Transparency Rules, of the following directors’ holdings and shareholdings amounting to 3% or more of the issued capital with voting rights:


Holder Amount Percent


Lombard Odier Asset Management 140,344,766 20.05%

London and Capital Asset Management Ltd 112,157,877 16.03%

Hargreave Hale Limited 64,014,389 9.16%

Oryx International Growth Fund Limited 52,550,000 6.94%

Hony Capital 50,107,692 7.17%


Guy Elliott * † 20,250,000 2.89%


Michael Salazar * 1,975,050 0.28%

Caspar von Veltheim ‡ 916,613 0.13%

Toby Hall * 500,000 0.07%

* Director † Includes the interest of the Elliott Family Irrevocable Trust ‡ Director of a subsidiary

There are no restrictions on the transfer of the Company’s AIM securities. Please see details of the Company’s key advisors. Last updated 12th July 2017.

[suneday] 09/9/2017 10:23

"The sector remains highly fragmented and the review will explore how strategic options might accelerate shareholder value, in particular whether and how MMX can participate in a broader  industry consolidation. The outcome of the strategic review may therefore include, but not be limited to, an acquisition by, or sale / merger of the Company."
"The strategic review is progressing well with discussions ongoing with a number of interested parties from Asia, North America and Europe. A further update on progress will be provided when the Company announces its results for the six months ended 30th June 2017 towards the end of September"

The emphasis is on taking a part in a broad consolidation in a fragmented market ( with several other similarly placed parties) to mutual advantage. There are a number of possible outcomes for this company ( as indicated in the RNS ) and the others, with each looking to benefit.

It is an ongoing review and discussion to assess how best to, possibly/probably jointly, proceed.