One Media Ip Share Discussion Threads

[briangeeee] 01/4/2013 14:27

That's part of the reason why when the company lists on AIM that they should be traded on the SETSmm exchange. That way you can place your orders where you like, and the spread will be as tight as those who want buy and sell desire it to be.
Of course the market makers will want it listed on the old SEAQ system because that maximises their cut, and ensures a large take on every trade. They normally use fallacious arguments based on liquidity.
Using the SEAQ exchange means we're little better than being listed on ISDX. SETSqx is an alternative, but the auction order book is less visible to retail investors, although it does function quite well.

[microscope] 01/4/2013 13:57

In the past, Plus marketmakers have - sometimes - discouraged all trading by widening the spread ludicrously when they know a company is on the move to AIM. No reason to think that will (or won't) happen here, but i wouldn't be surprised in the least if it was some nonsense, like 6.5 to 8.5 tomorrow.

I agree with others, i see no problem with 8p+ valuation. We have suffered with being way too low for years. It's not just about current p/e either, cash etc, this has all the hallmarks of a growth stock for years to come.

All imho!

[jamielein] 31/3/2013 13:20

I'd agree; which is probably why they're starting at 8p rather than 6p.

Even at 8p they're not on a demanding PE, and considering the growth and lack of debt, they do seem like a buy.

[meadow2] 31/3/2013 12:22

At the moment, One Media is a company with a fully diluted PE of 9.6, already making good profits, cash rich, paying dividends and has no debt. After floatation on AIM, there will be a further £750,000 in the till to finance future expansion; surely a buy rather than a sell?

[meadow2] 29/3/2013 13:10

I would be surprised if the share price falls much below 8p when introduced on AIM. What we do know is that the investing fraternity feels that a share price of 8p is reasonable. Mind you, as many of you will know, the investing fraternity is not always right! Having said that, based on profits and dividends, I believe 8p to be more than justified. But then, who am I to judge?
However, I have been a holder since April, 2011.

[jamielein] 29/3/2013 09:59

It may well be possible to buy at 6p in the mean time. Do you think they'll start at 8p on AIM? It's possible they only open at 6-7p.

[microscope] 29/3/2013 09:18

Great news! one extra thought, Will be interesting to see if shares can still be picked up around the 6-6.5p range on plus meantime!

Fantastic! hashtag, ThatIsAll! :)

[glasshalfull] 29/3/2013 09:14

Confirmed - couple of mistakes in docs. Corrected next week.

Happy Easter.

Regards,
GHF

[glasshalfull] 28/3/2013 23:21

...or possibly another mistake in the doc!

Noticed it earlier & was going to ping MI an email.

Regards
GHF

[briangeeee] 28/3/2013 23:09

Looks like Roman Poplawsk and Nigel Smethers exchange holdings, or Nigel Smethers purchases 2,600,006 shares from Roman Poplawsk.

[meadow2] 28/3/2013 22:04

I hope that One Media have words with their Nomad. It looks as though the notification date at the end of the document has the wrong year - 2012 - should it be 2013? A correction soon? Hope it doesn't delay things.

[jamielein] 28/3/2013 21:37

I got so excited that I posted it multiple times. This is wha happens when you use an iPhone to post a message!

[jamielein] 28/3/2013 21:36

Didn't expect this to become a reality so soon. Hopefully they'll attract some more interest once they start trading on AIM.

[jamielein] 28/3/2013 21:36

Didn't expect this to become a reality so soon. Hopefully they'll attract some more interest once they start trading on AIM.

[jamielein] 28/3/2013 21:34

Didn't expect this to become a reality so soon. Hopefully they'll attract some more interest once they start trading on AIM.

[jamielein] 28/3/2013 21:33

Didn't expect this to become a reality so soon. Hopefully they'll attract some more interest once they start trading on AIM.

[glasshalfull] 28/3/2013 20:56

All systems go for AIM listing...



* Trading on AIM due to commence 18th April.

* £750k raised with MIs stake reduced to 40%

* Issue price 8p

Well done MI & team. Excellent Easter pressie ;-)

Regards
GHF

[capt bligh] 08/3/2013 14:54

Realistically OMIP is so small that its not going to make much difference, but having the confidence to move to AIM is a good sign... I think its gowth over the last few years will attract a wider ownership...Its going to be interesting to see if their video content is going to turn out to be lucrative.

[briangeeee] 08/3/2013 12:52

So, are you saying you'd like to see OMIP trade on SEAQ, rather that SETSmm or SETSqx? Personally I can't see a good reason for any company to trade on SEAQ.

[microscope] 08/3/2013 12:29

If the company is good enough, it will flourish - even on AIM! plenty multibaggers over the years. using a stick to put all companies in one boat, is, frankly, (finds polite word) pointless.
I think this one is most certainly good enough.

[capt bligh] 08/3/2013 12:27

On the minus side... many smallish companies in SETS and big ones too, are ruthlessly hammered by clever bot systems that chew up good news and suck all momentum unless it is overwhelming. A decent broker given guidelines can usually get inside the spread.

[briangeeee] 08/3/2013 11:33

Paul Scott made a comment this morning about AIM, all of which I pretty much agree with.


"I see that my namesake, Scotty (LON:SCO) is the latest micro cap to announce its intention to de-List from AIM, although it will remain Listed in Austria. It is interesting to read the reasons they give as to why AIM has not worked for them, and these include:

Difficulty in equity fund-raising
Lack of liquidity in the shares
Volatile share price (due to lack of liquidity)
Significant costs to remain listed on AIM
No need for a dual listing given the company's small size.

It seems to me that the first four points in that list are generic problems with AIM, and are caused by the archaic system of having market makers maintaining quotes for a tiny quantity of shares in AIM companies, at a ludicrously wide bid/offer spread. This just deters anyone from buying or selling the shares, unless they are desperate.

Nobody benefits from this system overall. It shuts down the market in smaller company shares, so although the market makers might make a fat profit on the bid/offer spread when someone occasionally trades, most of the time the shares are just dormant with hardly any transactions.

As I keep mentioning, the solution is simple and obvious - the market needs to move from a quote-driven, to an order-driven electronic order book. This SETSmm approach already exists, and works brilliantly for larger company shares. You can either get your broker to buy directly from a market maker, or if you want, you can get your broker to place an order directly on the order book at the price you would like to buy or sell at. Even better is if sophisticated investors can have direct market access (DMA) and place our own orders on the order book, by-passing market makers altogether.

AIM will continue to flounder until the authorities grasp this nettle, and fix things. I'd like to see a highly liquid, electronic market, instead of the stagnant, old-fashioned system we have now, which seems designed to ensure investors are fleeced by a whole load of unnecessary middle-men.

Many small cap shares would come alive if they were moved to the SETSmm order-driven system. Then more companies would list in London, the whole thing would spring into activity. Sure, there would be some vested interests who would need to find some other form of gainful employment, but they are slowly killing the small caps market at the moment, so will end up out of a job eventually anyway. Bold thinking is needed, but there seems little sign of that from the LSE, from what I can gather."