This one hit the markets running today. Despite negative publicity it was well supported so I jumped in for a small holding--anyone else joining in?? I am hoping for a good run up before the shorters get going.

Ouch! I don't think Roger Blitz, the Leisure Industries correspondent to the F.T. is going to take kindly to that comment. :o)
And surely unsubstantiated rumour is what fuels the M & A gravy train!!!

Grub Street serves it up .... the lemmings tuck in

Journists play a game of use and be used. The questions is why the insider wants us Joe punters know of this piece of news, anonymously, and why now.

IMHO, is it more likely 888 rejected the approach because it does not want to play second-fiddle or junior to PRTY who once had a commanding lead in market capitalisation and number of players. It is now a even playing field. PRTY has only one strength left - cash. PRTY probably wants to get a bargain or two, but hey, why should anyone sell at a bargain basement price to a company still sitting on lots of cash?

All IMHO, NAG, DYOR ...

888 to be bought by Labrokes.. 145p asking price a share...SBT.PRTY TO ROCKET TO MORO

I think PRTY should continue with its business and look for opportunities to buy clients ONLY if the price is right. Ladbrookes is a well-known co with similar interests (albiet in hard sites), so buying 888 is probably a sensible move.

Does anyone know the price Ladbrookes is paying for 888's (Customers+Cash, )?
- That might help to establish a rough figure for PRTY -
I agree with axdpc, ( 888 wouldn't like PRTY merger.) However, to say PRTY has only cash is over-simplification - They still have customers, still have cash rolling-in and they are on Ch5 TV most (late)nights. I think they have a reasonably decent business, even without the thick-jam that was US punters.

Anyone know what the situation is with the UK Gov....or was that posturing so the US magnate can run the M-Dome?
(Er, I thought the Dome was paid-for from our Lottery Funds - so how could our Government sell it?....must be me!)

I'll say it again ...... why would anyone think PRTY was worth anything like 1.2 billion?

Money and power know no loyality. Poker punters can switch at a click.

Dome is worse than a scandle. Physically, dome is probably a good site for a casino.


What's PRTY's shares in issue?

4,000 million .... so now you know from where i got market cap of 1.2 billion .... cannot be worth anything like that

cynic, I see your point. Assume cash of 200M = 5p per share. The rest is ???
Annual profit without US?
Hhhmmm, fair price of 10p??

pretty much my point, though i am not nearly brave enough to go short without a lot more thought (i am incpabale of research and analysis as many here will tell you)

It is also neither difficult nor expensive to set up an online operation from scratch ...

For gambling operation with hard assets, it might be more advantageous to set up a
customised online operation leveraging existing assets. Punters will switch quick enough when the advertisements start.

axdpc

It is also neither difficult nor expensive to set up an online operation from scratch


you say that but betfair has recently decided to go it alone and launch an independent poker site. To do so they actually bought pokerchamps (a small barely used site) and relaunched it as betfair poker. they have made a complete balls up of it and succeeded in losing a large amount of their previously loyal customer base due to poor software with a lot of problems and lack of reliability. They had an online Q&A session regarding the problems tonight - however they had to cancel it as all their staff were working on trying to get the site back up from its afternoon crash lol

Fundamentalist,

Explanations ...

From scratch I meant a bespoke system, not one bought, with warts, bugs, incorrect and incomplete documentations, from another company.

Not expensive because, IMHO, a system can be built for a few million GBP (less than 10M). An online poker system has fewer issues and costs concerning inventory, perishables, warehouses, logistics ... 10M is well within the financial means of companies like Ladbroke.

Not difficult because some part of the system can be built from components readily available, free or for a modest fee.

The single most important factor, also the most difficult, for success or failure is in obtaining and retaining conscientious, competent, honest and dedicated staff.

axdpc

fully understand what you were saying - my post was a bit tongue in cheek as to how easily companies do get it wrong and also how easy it is for a poker site to completely alienate its customer base (which ultimately is is most of its value)

as someone who plays a lot of online poker i have a fair understanding of the business and have hence been very bearish on PRTY since the day it floated

Fundamentalist, hope you didn't get caught in the fall ...
I don't play poker but I am always interested to know more of the poker business :-)

axdpc

afraid to say i closed a short a few days before the big drop, have made a few quid from them on the way down but was a bit frustrating to miss the big fall, got misfooted by the US timing (i expected the outcome but thought it had missed the session :-( )

if anything you want to know re the poker business feel free to ask, either on here or via money am mail

Is this co (PRTY) the same we see on TV Ch5 with PartyPoker logos and a rather large dealing table?
(on late, several evenings)
I't just not quite clear if they are one and the same co...and what will they get out of it, can you say?

hangon

yes one and the same, basically party poker is the poker website name and they sponsor the show on the basis of hoping viewers will sign up to play via there website

If you look on diff sky channels, you will see 888.com, ultimatepoker, poker heaven and many others sponsoring poker tv shows

Thanks fundamentalist, I don't take SKY, useful info though.
++Today I see a PRTY- exec. has exercised his options, so there's hope for the rest of us?
Tessa Jowell made a speech about gambling recently; has that faded away or may we see some Government action with European-wide legislation, perhaps?
Background:
I can understand US Gov wanting to protect its citizens, but I fail to understand there was anything underhand with PRTY (and Others), it was about as risky as playing poker anywhere . . . . . . . . . anyone?

Hangon

nothing to do with protecting its citizens imo more to do with stopping the outflow of US money to non US companies and being left to deal with any problem gamblers left

if they were that concerned then surely they'd have closed Vegas and stopped betting on Us horse racing (oh no i forogt, the US get a large tax take from those)

land of the free my arse

As for the UK the converse is true, as a lot of the companies are UK based and pay tax over here so they arent going to try and put a stop to it, but are likely to attempt to regulate it more.

As far as im concerned the one big problem with gambling (especially online) is the allowance of funding accounts via credit cards. This should be banned imo and people should have to have the cash to fund their accounts. This one step would remove a lot of the problems (and the high profile cases where people run up huge credit cards debts gambling)