Rhythmone Share Discussion Threads

[barkboo] 03/2/2017 08:56

Footy - you can take me with a pinch of salt.....but without me, things dont taste as good!

[1gw] 03/2/2017 08:55

So using R1 shares to pay for Perk was getting fair value for them are you saying barkboo? You think Perk management accepted that they were worth £2.40? So what was Perk's "real" value?

[barkboo] 03/2/2017 08:55

RF - at least you are an honest crook. Not many of them around these days my friend. lol

[rocket fuel] 03/2/2017 08:52

gosh, these boards have turned awfully hostile. seems to be an outbreak of posters tilting at windmills.

[precinct14] 03/2/2017 08:51

And the unanswered questions are stacking up nose to tail.

[barkboo] 03/2/2017 08:49

Gordon - I have said many times, I dont talk figures on here! I listen to other opinions with interest, and separate those that are for real and those with an agenda.

Listen - in my early days I had more than one set of books [you work it]...that is the nature of the beast. Those with an agenda usually want to set expectations very high, I dont want to give them oxygen.

I have been told we will show real profit, to coin an Alex phrase - in May. Now that should quadruple the share price immediately from this 40p farce. Then if you were to forward look on a mark to market basis...we will be somewhere near the 240p that I have been promised.

Now you can take that as an answer or leave it - I dont really mind?

[1gw] 03/2/2017 08:36

Very good point Alex on value of r1 paper for Perk deal. Barkboo?

[barkboo] 03/2/2017 08:36

JWooley - I have tried to bury the hatchet with you. You did make an attempt to stop Sikhthetech posting on here, i thought that helpful and a noble deed....he even let you down.

He is a fruitcake, and until you disassociate yourself with him - you will struggle to find many that will trust you - your call my friend.

It was probably unfair to bracket you as a trader - but your links with Johnny Boy and the speed at which you respond to any kind of leading question, does give rise to a link between the two of you.

The family are just a bunch of investors that are likable friendly people that share the same interest in this company. Is that a bad thing?

[precinct14] 03/2/2017 08:35

Football, I've asked Barky to answer, not avoid answering, Alex's question. That's not bashing, nor should it be a problem for you. Is it? And I'm not part of any 'gang', either. Really.🙄

[football] 03/2/2017 08:31

precinct14 you use the words "show us" and "answer Alex's" so you must be part of a gang of bashers or at least have one than one ID going by your leaders views STT

[alex1621] 03/2/2017 08:28

Football ... why aren't you asking Barky to share the numbers that show a £2.40 valuation? Do you think that is an accurate valuation based on the current financial results? Do you believe that would be the bid price in an acquisition? If anyone out there believes that R1 is worth £2.40 given current trading why did the Board not use this figure when negotiating the Perk merger? According to Barky, they've given a section of the company away for a fraction of its true value? That's the only conclusion that can be drawn given his insistence that R1 is worth £2.40 per share. But he applauded the merger? The two views are incompatible.

[geheimnis2] 03/2/2017 08:26

Lol

She's been stung.

[football] 03/2/2017 08:16

"Now, show us a scintilla of class" it's odd the bashers are not asking STT the same thing to answer 1gw's question about he wild claims

[jwoolley] 03/2/2017 08:16

It's a clear tactic of virtually all of the so called family precinct14.

I have never traded this stock. I have made some money out of this stock and my current holding is virtually the same but I currently have a lower average price than before, which was previously 19.5p.

So I am neither "stung" by my holding and I certainly don't need the 240p Barkboo needs to break even. Lol.😉

[geheimnis2] 03/2/2017 08:15

Lol apparently hotpants hasn't been stung here....

Course you haven't missy!

Lol...

[alex1621] 03/2/2017 08:13

I didn't say anything of the sort. Don't accuse STT of lying when you do it yourself.Can you provide the quotes where I mention £1 or £2 price discrepancies? Where did those numbers come from? Your imagination. You simply made them up.Did I say that Blinkx was a "special case"? Can you find the quote where I said that? Or did you just make that up as well? As I mentioned companies like Globo, Quindell, Next, etc in previous posts, not to mention the dot com companies, then clearly I don't consider Blinkx to be a special case.There are many examples of irrational exhuberance with shares pricing going higher or lower than is justified by the facts. A few of which I've mentioned.But back to the point. Blinkx was never worth £2.30 based on its numbers. If you think it is now worth £2.40 then tell us all what numbers and projections underpin that valuation?You are full of it.And for the record, I have never lost a penny buying and selling Blinkx. It's been a speculative punt, but one that has made money, not lost it. I remain net positive on all trades and am currently in the money with this existing one.I don't need to lie.

[precinct14] 03/2/2017 08:07

When Barky gets cornered he always returns to his default lash out position, which is that his critics all got stung here. Well, I haven't, for one.

Now, show us a scintilla of class, and either answer Alex's question by giving him 'some numbers on where sales, EBITDA, profit before and after tax need to be to get R1 to a £2.40 valuation', or admit to what everyone here knows- that you haven't got a clue.

[amt] 03/2/2017 07:33

Qusncast at number 10 ranking. It looks like the ranking is based on some kind of average so if it keeps at these levels the ranking could rise further.

[alex1621] 03/2/2017 05:47

The market is not bent, it is generally efficient, but can at times go out of whack as a consequence of extreme optimism (like Blinkx at £2.30) or pessimism (Next at £9 in 2009). Take a look at the dot com boom? A phenomenon that is well documented. Companies with no revenue on multi-million market caps.Read Benjamin Graham ... "voting" machine and "weighing" machine analogy. But back to the original point ... Blinkx was overvalued by the market at £2.30 based on its numbers ... and you are hoping for that to happen again. Just give me some numbers on where sales, EBITDA, profit before and after tax need to be to get R1 to a £2.40 valuation? You have no idea! You're just hoping that the "voting" machine kicks in and it gets there on vapour!

[barkboo] 02/2/2017 23:17

Oh I see Alex - you now think markets play? lol You have always maintained in the past that supply and demand gives the customer a fair deal.

If the price is cheap they buy - if the price is good they sell....."offering a price way beyond its intrinsic value would not have seen the share price rise to 230p, would it?

So either the market was bent - or you are! Almost the same as your deramping theory having no effect on a share price ADVFN built their business on it! lol