Oxford Nanopore Technolo... Share Discussion Threads

[hirschnathan] 22/2/2004 23:51

Lastminute seals new white label deal

London, February 16 2004, (netimperative)



by Susie Harwood

Online travel firm lastminute.com has announced a white label deal that will see it provide online hotel bookings for Spain's national airline Iberia.


The company, which did not reveal financial details of the deal, said the service is already live at www.hotelesib.com.

The deal further extends lastminute's reach in Spain, following the repurchase of its Spanish business from joint venture partner Sol Meliá in September 2003. Iberia.com is the largest online travel site in Spain with 125,000 unique users per day and reported EU80m revenue in 2002.

Customers to iberia.com will now be able to directly access lastminute.com's comprehensive database of hotels with relevant offers in each of Iberia's flight destinations around the world.

Lastminute has recently expanded its hotel database through several acquisitions and partnerships, including buying up UK hotel booking agency First Option Hotel Reservations for £12.1m in January and UK hotel consolidator and package holiday reseller Med Hotels for £16.1m in December.

Last week, the company said it would continue its strategy of growth by acquisition over the next few months despite reporting wider net losses for the first quarter.

The company also hopes to sign further white label deals. It announced similar white label partnerships in 2003 with Tesco.com and Egg in the UK, Fnac in France and said it expects to announce others in the future.

However, lastminute is not alone in pushing itself as a third-party technology and services provider; its two biggest UK rivals, Online Travel Corp and ebookers, are also going aggressively after this market.

OTC recently inked a deal to provide online dynamic packaging technology and services to TUI UK's Lunn Poly, while ebookers has extended its business process outsourcing facility in India to enable it to provide technology and services to third-party travel firms.

[jak1] 21/2/2004 17:06

Been looking through the old reports and cant find any mention of Artemis holding before this RNS on Friday, I wonder if they were in the at the fund raising?? 15m shares 8.46% is very good news.
What with GNI and Herald, there does seem to be a lot of interest hear.
Cant wait for the herd to wake up and join us.

[cir] 21/2/2004 09:58

BHAFC,

You might add that Thomas Cook is looking to recruit more than 200 new call centre consultants in the coming months.

[partner] 21/2/2004 09:13

I wish i could have purchased at 15p as well.I was dissapointed when the price fell around christmas on the news.I consoled myself with the thought that at least this was better than some sort of funding crisis and what it would have done to the share price,at least this was done in a controlled manner.I also think its better than borrowing from the banks.This, on reflection was I beleive the best course of action.Despite my initial disappointment we now have a fully funded business,in a growth sector.
Artemis seem to have stood in the market recently purchasing strongly.They now hold 15m shares[8.46%].They still see value at current levels,imagine the saving to them if they could have purchased at 15p.
We have a good stock here subject to world events,but you could say that about lots of stocks.I beleive in business and will continue to hold.
In the words of Forest Gump, thats all i have to say on the matter.

[bhafc] 21/2/2004 08:58

A quick scan through the annual report just received.

"AGM 18 March

Sales through online travel.com since year end +300% to the same period last year.

Current trading indications are very encouraging

Growth across our three sales channels"

[bhafc] 21/2/2004 08:49

All

With Virgin announcing an extra 700 staff being taken on to increase flights to meet demand for the increase in holdidays to the US; this must be helping the travel industry on a wider basis

I for one am really looking forward to the much touted mid march trading update from ONT.

Hope the quick profit takers from the placing have finished. I also not that yesterday after hours the market was informed that Artemis have accumulated 15% of ONT

BHAFC

[cir] 21/2/2004 08:41

pictureframe,

my experience with onlinetravel is diametrically opposed to yours. would you care to tell me which site(s) you brought your custom to in the end?

For me, booking a trip on the lastminute site is a nightmare. And ebookers is a tad worse.

:-)

[zapa] 20/2/2004 20:24

Your shareholding Im sure has a lot of clout........

[this_is_me] 20/2/2004 20:22

When directors ask for authority to allot shares without a rights issue, as they frequently do at AGMs., always vote against - that is what I do.

[a0148009] 20/2/2004 15:46

pictureframe:
If you think these are bad try Lastminute they screwed up three flights last year - one stands out - four of us flying to Malaga but only three tickets
other ticket to Stuttgard and Bonn, will not bore you with the rest - have not used them since.

[pictureframe] 20/2/2004 15:25

wouldnt touch these with a barge pole. tried to book a flight and I have never had so many problems. ended up taking my £1.5K business elsewhere

[a0148009] 20/2/2004 15:18

Saint:-
Thanks for your comments and empathy.The placing represented 45% of the enlarged capital which speaks for itself.I keep banging on about it to ensure that the company are made aware that there are some very unhappy shareholders
and one day when they need our support we may not hear them.

[saint or sinner?] 20/2/2004 13:46

Don't worry, or take offense; I was trying to be ironic.

I keep nibbling away as at the current level these are a bit of a bargain. I too am disappointed that a large part of the company was effectively given away at a cut down price to the City institutions, so that effectively the only losers are the small shareholders (in the short term anyway). Hold for the long term and the problem should be lessened.

0 ;-D

Saint

[a0148009] 20/2/2004 09:57

Saint or Sinner
Your presumption is incorrect. I have no delusions as to what directors think of shareholders and employees and what goes on in the boardroom - I was pointing out clearly the immediate granting of options at 20p (most directors try to grant options at a favourable time and price) which rather supports my case that 15p was a gift and the placing was poorly managed.Recently at the end of every day the last trades are sizeable sales to market makers with sellers in their pockets to
square their books.

[mikeran] 20/2/2004 09:12

A0148009- I agree with you, we are all as shareholders as well as the company itself now paying the price for this Placing, while a very few are of course laughing. Dont expect the fsa to act they have in my view insufficient know how/experience to tackle many of these type of issues played out all too frequently in the city. Perhaps those who have nominated this company as their 2004 Choice should raise some of these issues as their nomination continues to underperform ( in Price only)against potential and expectations and against recent contract awards, as well as turnover and management organisation of the group resources. Perhaps any shareholder thinking about attending the compnay AGM in March could ask a few of these questions ?
Oh and perhaps i am a little Naive- but the share price overall reflects the value of the company, not only in terms of directors share options but its value on the open market in terms of any bid.Perhaps someone has an interest in selling /Buying it cheap. Its a steal at the moment.

[saint or sinner?] 20/2/2004 09:09

A0148009 - a bit niaive to think Directors run these companies for the benefit of shareholders and employees, and not for the benefit of their own pockets.

0 ;-D

Saint

[a0148009] 20/2/2004 08:51

I did buy at 17p the point is the price was marked down agressively over a period to do the placing. Frankly I couldn't believe how low the shares were placed.At 17p we paid a premium of 13% plus expenses to the placing on heavily discounted price.Institutions were falling over themselves for the placing.
What is wrong with pre-emption rights for issues over say 15% of issued capital.As i pointed out in one of my earlier posts a few days later the directors allotted 1m options to themselves at 20p clearly they thought this was an attractive level and time to participate - so why give them away at 15p.

[bhafc] 20/2/2004 08:22

Spud

Pretty sure that this raft you bought for 17p will actually float unlike some other investments !

:-))

[spud] 20/2/2004 08:14

A0148009

I (and I'm sure many others) managed to buy a raft @ 17p which although above the 15p Placing is still, i feel, a bargain. I suppose what I'm attempting to say is 'couldn't you have done similarly?'

spud

[a0148009] 19/2/2004 21:48

The citywire article dated 18.02.04 reinforces my previous posting that the recent Placing was contained within the "old boys club" with total disregard to the majority of shareholders who have been massively diluted at a derisive price of 15p poorly advised and managed by Altium - 50% profit for those who have already sold and are still selling and holding the price down. "placing includes Mrs Judith Licht (606667 shares) wife of former MAM etc". It is time for the Stock Exchange and the FSA to change the rules on pre-emption rights for AIM listed securities.After all this was not a rescue operation but the need for additional working capital by the company to finance continuous rapid expansion based on an innnovative and efficient business model.If this had been a basket case you can bet your life all shareholders would have been asked to subscribe. Neither is it a secret that the company has had at least one approach.

[spud] 19/2/2004 18:28

Nice posting ferty.

Pretty much sums up my feeling re take out.

spud

[jak1] 19/2/2004 16:09

Carpediem2

Jak1
Surely the share price has been held back by one or more large holders selling, not buying?. If someone was accumulating stock the share price would have been rising not being held back, wouldn't it?

All things being equal that's what you would expect, but alas they are not, and
Market Makers have there own agenda. If they have a big order for a client they will if necessary mark down the price, or even up the price to encourage sellers to get the price they want to fill the order.
Your GNI scenario could be right, but I think it's wrong in my opinion.
Of course, I could be completely wrong as well.

Regards

Jak1....

[ferty] 18/2/2004 22:51

Thats ok i have an interest in these myself.

[johnroger] 18/2/2004 21:42

ferty ..... thanks for posting.