Why are we again at 10.5p bid?

It doesn't add up...

Good Results + Strong buying pre results + Christmas online buying soon = Price drop

Then again some companies that have debt for equity hanging in the balance, poor results and bankruptcy around the corner and they go up!

Why sell now at a loss?

Wont that be a kick in the teeth when we see 13.5p 14p again!

Best of luck all.

Looks as though there are some "brave" retail buyers coming back in also, judging by the trades today.

The only bad news regarding RTD is this annoying patent hassle - without that I reckon we'd be whizzing up past 20p right now!

overgrowth

The 100000 buy at 13.62 do you think it was a buy or sell?

Also the spread has been very tight the last few days, can we read anything into this?

thanks

parveen - tricky to tell on that one, the price shows as 13.625p to be precise, i.e. smack bang in the middle of the spread. Also, the NMS is 100,000, therefore all trades will be following the market so we won't see any delaying effects.

The last 3 trades went:

Sell 3,000 at 13.5p
? 100,000 at 13.625p
Buy 100,000 at 13.75p

I would stake cash on it being a buy, because the last buyer of 100,000 had to pay 13.75p on the nail - if the penultimate trade had been a sell, then the buyer would have a better deal at the end of the day to match the price of other sells during the day.

Regarding the tight spread, this is generally good news because it means that there is a steady flow of buys and sells filling the MM's books, hence they don't need to mess around with the price too much to encourage more trading - this in turn decreases volatility and makes the share more attractive for buyers when sentiment turns (which it will - soon!).

Cheers

OG

:-/

i'm depressed just like dougie with the share price continually falling

anyone spare some prozac !!

AEX is where its at, dump this baby!

i aint dumping RTD blakester. I bought this as a long term last year and intend to hold for another 2 years

...and you won't regret it scotinvestor (buy low and sell high - perfect time to top up if you ask me).

ACM - 14 Oct'04 - 19:45 - 373 of 389


Anyone remember this from July.

LONDON (AFX) - Shares in Retail Decisions ticked modestly higher amid talk
that directors are considering a Nasdaq listing or buyout if the rating remains
low. Daniel Stewart, joint stockbroker, yesterday reiterated its 'buy' advice in the wake of the company's trading update, citing the shares' 45 pct discount to the sector.
Retail Decisions shares were 3/4 firmer at 17-3/4 pence by 7.45 am.

At 13.5p, I wonder what the directors make of this?

Growth Dabbler - 14 Oct'04 - 21:10 - 382 of 389


GS - when the litigation is resolved that should put RTD back at about 21p.

Good results to follow will nudge the price up to around the 30p mark (Daniel Stewart's target price as I seem to recall).

The only problem is, that by the time we actually know all this for certain, the price will have stormed up before us folks who don't have the luxury of staring at trading screens all day get a look in.

The wisest advice I have ever seen is that the time to buy into a share is when the crowd have had enough (conversely the time to sell is when the crowd can't get enough - but we'll probably have to wait a months months to see this).

Folks who bought in the early twenties during the last surge should virtually all be stopped out by now. The share is too dangerous for shorting because of where it came from (i.e. 3p ish - meaning that there will be long term holders who won't have to take a loss for a long time yet - these guys are unlikely to sell unless there are adverse trading conditions suspected, so any remaining leverage is tiny). Also if anyone has been short and made a profit, they will want to close as soon as there are indications that the price is moving back up again - this in turn will create more buys. This all implies that very soon the share price will have no other place to go but up - the MM's will be itching to sell back all those shares they've bought.

;o\ ho hummmm ...........how I wish xfinger tho.........

The turning point is very close Douggie - hang on in there with xfingers :-)))

Cybersource announced results tonight (which were good - this bodes well for RTD in the US too because the overall sector looks to have turned up the gas a notch) and no mention of litigation (loads of recent sellers were concerned that something may be announced - for some odd reason).

Whether RTD infringe the patent or not, it is clear from statements accompanying the recent 'The Finishing Line' contract (see post 1530) that they have have a superior product which is causing CYBS both loss of business and key personnel. Unfortunately their special ingredient is not itself patented -maybe it wasn't patentable in any case.
It has been suggested elsewhere that the essential feature of the offending patent relates to the customer's IP address.
RTD will presumably not wish to disclose why their system is highly effective at detection of attempted fraud while having a significantly lower false rejection rate. It may be as important for CYBS to discover that as to stop RTD using IP address information!
Could it even be the main objective of the rather late challenge from CYBS?

Posted on iii bb by christh2000

litigation:malicious act of desperation

It's unlikely that we will see any comment of note from either party regarding the litigation as such comments would be prejudicial to the trial. This is particularly true as "willfulness" is being sought by Cybersource, both parties conduct will be under the microscope. Red were first informed, according to them, of the possibility of infringement by the summons received on the 13/8. At this point they will have to have sought a patent opinion by an appropriate patent legal team to give an opinion on whether ebitguard does infringe on cybs patent. In addition they will have started on their defense potentially with a separate legal team although a recent Senate ruling has relaxed the requirement for this I believe. The patent opinion will examine the elements within the patent claims against the features and methods of the ebitguard product. For infringement all elements within the claims must be practised by ebitguard or a clear equivalency to an element must be found. The opinion team must be completely impartial and will have access to all the correspondence etc through the patents filing history. If infringement is found then a possible way round is to change ebitguard so that it does not infringe or seek licensing of the ip from cybersource. If the opinion goes Reds way then on to court. The 2nd team of lawyers will be focusing on a defense strategy of the charges which may comprise
1) It doesn't infringe (helpfull if backed up by the patent opinion)
2) The patent is invalid as there was prior art that contained all the claims.
3) Varies other legal get outs.
In all of this cybs have the moral high ground as they were issued a patent in the fraud prevention class by the patent office. In order to avoid the damaging triple fines of being found guilty of willfullness Red must behave in an appropriate matter in the conduct of their defense and preparation of the legal stuff takes ages. This is why the average costs of going to court are in the region of $2.5m for both parties. Other factors that may be taken into consideration by the judge are the 4 year delay of cybs in taking action , a 6 year delay enables a defense of latches, the closeness of the issuing of the patent (22/2/2000) to ebitguards release and then first commercial order (RNS 20/3/2000) and other such things.

Ebitguard strength lies in part in the number of strategies it brings to bear on the question of whether a transaction is fraudulent or not. If Red were forced to re-engineer ebitguard to avoid the claims contained in the patent then it is likely (given the importance of the Internet Identificatin system in the cybs patent) that this would be in the area of IP address and transaction mapping. Given that many people use dial ups and increasingly mobile computing it is questionable in my mind how much of an important jigsaw piece that is in the ebitguard armoury. A geolocation check is probably sufficient or keeping track of subnets and card velocity. This will have been less true when cyb first filed their patent.

On a final note I wouldn't have thought you could build a commercial fraud detection system based on the details in the cybs patent alone as the rejection rate would be very hard to balance, but there you go.
The comments from Kent Zimmerman, Finish Lines Director of E-commerce, that the previous solution was resulting in too many valid transactions being declined, reflect a key area of ReDs competitive differentiation. ReD has a very strong pedigree in fraud management (16 years) and is
able to offer a more sophisticated solution: maximising customer revenues whilst providing sufficient protection against fraudulent transactions.

Pweeeeeewwwww!!!!!!!

Dogggie

I'm glad you understood all that

Persoanlly i'm still baffled !!!

;o\ me too

thanks slmchow for the info

so what are your conclusions from the info that you have given?

for those of us with the attention span of a gnat

cheers

g

Time to buy again folks, Elliot Wave theory predicts that this is the bottom and on other sites known shorters are showing characteristic signs of getting scared, with the falsely damning statements even more extreme like "2p soon" etc.

Note that after having all small sells virtually every day for the past couple of weeks, that more and more buyers are coming in. The MMs will be lifting the price soon because they've got plenty of shares they want to sell back to eager punters.

Remember, that when the shorters are forced to close because the price is going up - they have to buy back the stock that they've sold, and so the price goes up even higher.

Don't miss out on the low prices if you're thinking of buying!

;o\........wait for it more red

Here is a response from a e-mail i sent to them

Thank you for your email.

I can reiterate ReD's statement in its interim report. The Board of Retail Decisions continues to investigate CyberSource's claim, and believes that the US subsidiary's operations do not infringe any valid claim of the asserted patent. Retail Decisions intends to defend its position vigorously.

As I am sure you can appreciate, the Board is unable to comment further on the claim at this stage but it will continue to update all shareholders as and when it is possible and necessary to do so.

As I am similarly sure you aware, the Board is also unable to comment upon the Group's share price.

Yours sincerely

Jane Martin