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.

I phoned my broker at 8.15 and was quoted 125 1/2 ,its finished up nearly 129p, after all the negative publicity i decided against it,,huge amount of trading though..

moneyplus

my thoughts fwiw

there may be some short term upside but to me for the longer term the risks far outweigh the potential reward

I am someone who plays poker online regularly and can see why party is a popular site. However, there is large potential downside in the future based on US govt policy as to whether online gambling is legal - currently it is deemed to be illegal but not policed. Party receive 87% of their revenues from US citizens - if this avenue of revenue and profit is lost then the company will be but a shadow of its current self. To me there are two possible ways this can go long term:

1) The US govt crackdown on their citizens gambling on-line - they have already started by putting pressure on the likes of paypal who do not allow money tfrs to gambling sites. They are also rumoured to be starting to put the pressure onto the banks and credit card companies.

2) The US govt decide to legalise online gambling. If this were to happen then the competition to party will increase overnight with several very big players, especially the casinos who would be likely to bring out their own sites. They would have the ability to link the games to real live games in the casino and offer "comps" to the online players like they do the "live" players. If this were to happen then party could well get squeezed out of the market completely. Ultimately the barriers to entry for competitors are low - the value is the brand name and its customers -the software can effectively be bought off the shelf now.

Based on this, party will only be successful while the US govt continue to dither in either enforcing or changing their policy in this area. Until then, they are likely to generate substantial amounts of cash.


My other concern is to why they have floated - the cash was not needed to help grow the business, it is just to enable the founders to take some money out of the business - would they be doing this if they thought the companys prospects were going to get better?

Long term i think this is a share i would be happy to short but am currently on the sidelines until the price has settled down and found a trading range - i wouldnt be surprised to see it rise over the coming weeks but personally dont see it being a ftse100 company in a few years time.

Blimey, the Group Operations Director is called Anurag Dikshit and the Chairman is called Michael Jackson!!! What does that tell you???

Im supprised Bubbles the monkey is not the Finance Director.

Good info Fundy - thanks for posting your thoughts, I had
looked at it but not actually bought, but the factors you
detail above certainly shed light on some potentially dark
corners.
:>)

Thanks Fundy--I don't think I'll stay in too long! cheers Wilbs and Driver.

I don`t understand how we are able to buy shares when the issue date is Thursday? I`m in 2000 @ 133

Dandu

the shares were officially listed and started trading yesterday at 8am

It seems bizarre but one of the biggest companies on the European side of the Atlantic is banned from operating on the American side.

Partygaming, the internet poker company that floated on the London Stock Exchange this week, is believed to have a worth greater than many blue chip companies - but US law-makers are adamant that it breaks the law.

Online gambling is banned in America, so Partygaming which was set up by an American is based in Gibraltar with no assets in the US.

Its prospectus concedes: "In many countries, including the United States, the group's activities are considered to be illegal by the relevant authorities."

But, it adds the crucial clause: "Partygaming and its directors rely on the apparent unwillingness or inability of regulators generally to bring actions against businesses with no physical presence in the country concerned".

In other words, even if Partygaming were illegal, what could the authorities do?

Compulsive pleasure

Not that Americans are exactly shunning the website.

It's estimated that nine out of every 10 of its dollars last year came from the US.

At $600m those revenues are hefty and generated a profit of $350m in 2004.

When the dotcom bubble burst five years ago, not everything was destroyed - online gambling quietly thrived.

And then noisily thrived.

Partygaming was founded by Californian lawyer Ruth Parasol, who is now based in Gibraltar.

She teamed up with an Indian software engineer who designed a programme that would allow thousands of people anywhere in the world to simultaneously take part in internet poker games.

Their timing was impeccable.

Partypoker exploded as a game in 2002, driven partly by television coverage of big money contests with cameras under a glass table so viewers could see the players' cards.

It was a compulsive, vicarious pleasure that hooked multitudes of prospective customers.

Organised crime

Every estimate now predicts that growth will be phenomenal, perhaps from an annual billion dollars spent globally today to 10 times that amount in five years.


American poker players go online regardless of US law

Much will turn on the law in its biggest market, the United States.

The Interstate Wireline Act was passed nearly 50 years ago in an effort to stop organised crime rigging gambling.

Under it, "wire communication" of bets was outlawed on "sporting events or contests".

Legal disagreement

But poker clearly isn't a "sporting event" so is it a "contest" as defined by the law?

American lawyers are divided.

In 2001, a judge in Louisiana ruled that the act "does not prohibit internet gambling on a game of chance", a ruling that was sustained by a higher court.

Other states take a different view.

The Attorney General of New York, Eliot Spitzer, pursued finance houses that allowed their services be used to pay for online gambling - so firms based in New York have now blocked the use of their credit cards for online gambling.

Laughing all the way to the bank

So state law varies while the Justice Department maintains that federal law is unambiguously opposed to on-line gambling.

On top of that, the World Trade Organisation may have something to say about it.

In the past it has ruled that American attempts to criminalise some companies offering online gambling from the Caribbean broke rules of fair trade.

And some American companies based in Las Vegas may now be worried that they cannot get involved in what is a very lucrative expansion of their business from real casinos to virtual ones.

They have assets in the US which the authorities could come after if they break American law, so they are tied to real bricks-and-mortar casinos on terra firma rather than imaginary ones in cyberspace.

Which leaves the owners of Partygaming laughing all the way to the bank - whatever American legislators might think.

also party has a 53% share of the market-mainly American customers--it's rivals have a share no bigger than 6% each. I'm happy to sit and wait with my small holding as I expect their first set of results to sparkle.

ON THE OTHER BOARD,THATS III SOME ONE SAYS THE ACTUAL BUSINESS STARTS TOMORROW.

NO ONE SEEMS TO DISCUSS ABOUT THIS SHARE,IS IT BECAUSE NO ONE IS TRADING THIS OR WATCHING FROM THE SIDE LINES.

ateeq

im watching from the sidelines.

In an earlier post i posted my reasons why in the long term i saw it as too high risk and probably a good short but could see it rising in the short term - happy to sit on the sidelines and let the price settle down before getting involved

How does some one know where the price will settle ,and the amount of interest shown so far in terms of volume dont you think this might turn out to be another google,not in a big way but couple of years time.

Ateeq

the few others i have spoken to on the traders room board agree with me that they think that it is fundamentally a short but then they like me have thought that at several prices along GOOGs upward rise, hence none of us have entered the market. I think there is every chance that the market could chase this up over the coming months, though long term I still believe the US govt effect will have the largest bearing on the long term share price.

In comparison to GOOG i think the two big differences are the possible illegality in the US and the lower barriers of entry to potential competitors

Thanks for the info,its appreciated.The reason i was asking these questions were after reading what others have said on other boards,at the end of the day we make our own decisions,and should accept the decisions we make, good or bad.I am in this but for the short term,lets hope it stays that way,but i am sure profit takers must be lining up at some stage.

Thanks for the info,its appreciated.The reason i was asking these questions were after reading what others have said on other boards,at the end of the day we make our own decisions,and should accept the decisions we make, good or bad.I am in this but for the short term,lets hope it stays that way,but i am sure profit takers must be lining up at some stage.

The funds don't like the risks that come with this share but if it does go into the footsie 100 the trackers are forced to buy-so it may not be wise to short it yet a while.

as a new investor i was to say the least a little alarmed to see the rapid drop of party gaining thi afternoon. has anyone got any ideas why this should happen?

thanks

sorry,i was so alarmed i forgot how to spell