With video search set to be the next big growth area BLNX have the software the likes of Microsoft, Google and NewsCorp would love to have.

In fact BLNX have done deals with most of these, the most recent being the UtargetFox deal which has been reported in the USA but not RNS'd in the UK.

Alexa rankings confirm the continued growth in usage as its viral effect spreads:-

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/blinkx.com

The ITN RNS confirms blnx is the best in the market and is growing fast:-

Leading News Organization ITN Extends Advertising Deal with blinkx Based on Proven Campaign Success




blinkx Selected to Power Advertising across ITN Website and Syndication Partner Sites




SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF. - July 2, 2008 - blinkx, the world's largest and most advanced video search engine, today announced that it has won an extension contract that will augment the scope of its advertising partnership with ITN, one of the world's leading news and multimedia content companies. Under the terms of the new agreement, ITN will use AdHoc, blinkx's patented contextual advertising platform for online TV and video, to serve advertisements on the ITN website and its syndication partner sites, including Bebo.




Through AdHoc, ITN has already been effectively monetizing its premium news content on the blinkx.com network for over six months. During this time, ITN achieved a significantly better return, greater search volume, and higher monetization through blinkx than through other syndication partners.




AdHoc uses blinkx's patented speech-to-text transcription and visual analysis technology to understand video content more thoroughly and effectively than any other service today, and can therefore dynamically place the most pertinent advertising against it. The AdHoc platform offers media companies and advertisers a unique value proposition -- video advertising which combines the emotive power of TV promotion, with the relevance and utility of contextual search advertising.




The confluence of ITN's premium TV content, blinkx's extensive syndication network, and AdHoc's uniquely powerful targeting capabilities was a formula for success. By extending its partnership with blinkx, ITN aims to achieve similar returns by leveraging the AdHoc platform to deliver contextually relevant video advertising on its own website and across its distribution partner sites.




'We're thrilled to be broadening our relationship with ITN,' said Suranga Chandratillake, founder and CEO of blinkx. 'News content is one of the most popular categories of online video and there's clearly a tremendous opportunity for monetization. The success of our partnership with ITN is evidence that the blinkx AdHoc platform is a uniquely powerful solution for online video advertising today.'




'We've been delighted with the results of our partnership with blinkx and are looking forward to implementing the AdHoc technology on our site,' said Nicholas Wheeler, managing director, ITN On. 'blinkx AdHoc has proven that it can achieve significant monetization of our content, effective marketing for advertisers and, most importantly, a useful, non-disruptive experience for our audience.'




As a pioneer in video search technology, blinkx has built a reputation as the most effective way to search new forms of online content such as video. With more than 350 partners and 26 million hours of indexed video and audio content, including favorite TV moments, news clips, short documentaries, music videos, video blogs and more, blinkx uses advanced speech recognition technology to deliver results that are more accurate and reliable than standard metadata-based keyword searches.

Cynic…I like you and have a lot of time for you….but your last post was so badly flawed…I wouldn’t know where to start..in giving advice…

MM’s almost brainwash the punter….you are correct with profit taking…but if you pick a goodun’ they are more than happy to give you 20%...i’m a bookmaker…I know

The reason they play around with a good stock is they don’t want you to hit em’ with 500/600% or more….you never will!!…and you will still punt your fair share of bad boys on your travels….

I’m covered! lol ….don’t take me wrong Cynic.. but all bookmakers would understand your last post...grin.. and offer you a free £100 bet if you opened an account…must go toodle pip…

cynic

What was that load of nonsense from Tabasco above. When you buy a stock you own it. It is not similar to a bet at all as far as MMs are concerned. Their profit was made when you bought the stock and when you sell it. There is no question of anyone hitting them for 600%. Your 600% comes from the market and the people who have been selling at a lower price as it rises. The whole concept of MMs playing around with stock is an illusion. The most they do is possibly move the price up and down to encourage selling and buying to keep the stock liquid. It makes no difference to an MM what price you trade at apart from where that price sits within current spread. You only have to look at the trades to see that the bulk of the trades for BLINX are done as matched bargains as automatic trades. The scope for MMs manipulating the price is therefore somewhat limited.

of course it's not; that is, i concur!
i have yet to meet anyone who went bankrupt by taking prudent profits - or cutting losses before they get out of hand
i tried in vain to teach my younger son the wisdom of that dictum, but he was determined and succeeded in handing back nearly all the very substantial profit he had in hand on BAO

pot and kettle I think cyners...... seem to remember you held on too to BAO

Cynic…let me put this to you…then you decide?..

The market makers are just high class Bookmakers…or they think they are….i know my place..

Unlike a Bookmaker that chalks a race up legitimately and works purely off a %....an overround…MM’s possess the tools to rig the race…on the very few instances they choose not to rig the race….they have a bent trainer in their pocket who tells them the winner half way through the race….they act on this…most punters lose!!!

On this understanding…do you think it wise to make several £100 bets each week on what you think are good things…or say one or two £20,000 bets a year or the real banker?….I know what type of punter Bookmakers like..and i know what type of punter you are..

Frankel was unbeaten in all his 14 races….he never looked to be given a race…his prices ranged in those races from 7/4 – 1/20….he beat Dubawi Gold at 1/2fav … that would have been a quick 10K …even the 1/20 against Farhh would have been the easiest grand you would have ever made…

Man Utd. deep into the season at 1/4 was a gimme…I actually bet and lay the same selection on many occasions…. lol

No Cynic….you show me a punter that makes many bets each week..and that vows always to take a profit…and I will show you a loser that walks around kidding himself…Baler…exactly!

Finally….let us say a few words about Haystack….he just about gets everything wrong…posts on many BB’s with various nome de plums…tells a pack of lies on any given subject…and is just about the thickest pensioner ever to pen on these threads…just for the record he posted on every BB…BLNX were only worth 3p….check his last figures on here for factual info…..lol…a bin case of the very highest order!!!

Morning tabby how you keeping ?

BB - but baled out long ago and at an overall profit (i think)

Tabby - i never bet on horses or even buy lottery tickets ..... as for casinos (other than the stock market), i haven't been in one for 30 years or more ..... i know the definition of a poor bookie is one who is down to his last rolls royce

Dil…I am very well and refusing to grow up as usual….congratulations on your Cardiff…I know it means a lot….the passion needed rewarding…

Cynic…ffs.. a bet is a bet…a punt is a punt….horse racing…stock picking…sports betting…and you like the everyday buzz….

Do you call an alcoholic a different name if he/she gets continually smashed on alcopops? Or are you safe because a proper alcoholic takes two bottles of Vdka a day…lol

Tabasco
Yet another post of yours that displays an ignorance of the workings of the stock market. Go and get some investor training.

Haystack …I never need to work again…off to the SOF for two months with the family next week…my investor training passed out many years ago…

I realized the value in this stock at 12p….when it climbed to over £1 your opinion was 3p…hence my interesting lifestyle at a reasonably young age…and you still scratching around as a pensioner scamming people…

no tabby .... if you back a horse or the roll of a die, you either win or you lose ..... stocks and shares are totally different

if you are a day trader, which i am not, then the rules are very different yet again, and as hilary has pointed out, very few have the knowledge, back-up support and, above all, the discipline to make this work consistently profitably ..... however, i certainly know one chap who is very successful indeed as a day trader

OK Cynic.....follow Haystacks....


Just to show some of you guys how honest and trustworthy our old pensioner Haystacks is…here are some of his post on other BB’s over the years…remember he just post this important info to help…he has no other interest…he tells us in the last post…


BLNX


Zipless - 04 Aug 2011 - 23:35:55 - 4238 of 30644
The point either way is that it is probably going down tomorrow big time. The question is how far.
Zipless - 03 Aug 2011 - 09:56:30 - 4143 of 30644
�1 now very close. Once it breaches that it is clear air down to around 80p - check out the chart!

Target 3p.

Zipless - 24 Apr 2013 - 14:31:48 - 29760 of 29764
BLNX is on a P/E ratio of about 90. It is an overinflated bubble. Remember when it collapsed from 150p to 50p in a couple of days.


DDD
Zipless - 02 Aug 2011 - 10:29:09 - 27951 of 29764
Nothing has changed. As DDD only get pennies per unit in royalties, the boost just means the results won't be as terrible as usual.

Target price still 2.75p
Zipless - 05 Aug 2011 - 15:23:57 - 27978 of 29764
Nice fall today so far. Now below support at 26p.
DDD to hit 10 quid - DDD

Zipless - 04 May 2012 - 16:48:06 - 28812 of 29764
DDD - still doomed


Next stop 19p support level on the way to 2.75p
Zipless - 05 Oct 2011 - 16:06:15 - 5500 of 30644
I don't short stocks.

Cheers tabby meant the world to me and every other Cardiff fan who have waited so long.

And all those predictions were correct.

Your system of prediction is that it is going up because it is going up. You were remarkably quiet when Blinx crashed. I guess you will disappear again when it takes a dive again, which it almost certainly will. This is still an overblown bubble.

Hays - you are perfectly entitled to your view, though i'm sure you don't marry money with mouth ..... for myself, i am more of the camp that thinks this company may well have something going for it, though the market is currently unconvinced

Haysack…..” And all those predictions were correct.” lol

Yes..for you all those predictions were correct….DDD 2.75p BLNX 3p….age has not treated you well?... BLNX has no financial risk.. as the capital structure does not rely on leverage. Reassess your 3p on the facts below….toodle pip

Revenues for the year expected to be approximately $196 million, ahead of the previously upgraded range of $180 to $185 million, an increase of 71% from the year ended 31March, 2012

· Adjusted EBITDA is expected to be approximately $26 million, an increase of over 200% from $12.8 million for the year ended March 31, 2012

· Profit before tax, including one-time costs and amortization of purchased intangibles, is expected to be approximately $15 million, an increase from $1.9 million for the year ended March 31, 2012

· Basic earnings per share is expected to be approximately 4.4 cents, a 400% increase from 1.1 cents, for the year ended March 31, 2012

· Net cash at year-end is expected to be approximately $55 million an increase from $38.4 million for the year ended March 31, 2012

there are facts and there are facts.
fact....... a 200% increase from $12.8 million is $38.4 million
fact........a 400% increase from 1.1 cent is 5.5 cents.
anyone who uses facts to forward and augment their argument really ought
to be sure they get them right. .
additionally how can"expected" be regarded as fact? except that it is a fact that it is "expected "if you see what i mean.
regards
and good luck to all
jkd

jkd - the following extract from Wikipedia's entry on 'Bullshit' describes Tabby's 'facts' and style of posting alarmingly well:-

Distinguished from lying

"Bullshit" does not necessarily have to be a complete fabrication; with only basic knowledge about a topic, bullshit is often used to make the audience believe that one knows far more about the topic by feigning total certainty or making probable predictions. It may also merely be "filler" or nonsense that, by virtue of its style or wording, gives the impression that it actually means something.

In his essay on the subject, William G. Perry called bull[shit] "relevancies, however relevant, without data" and gave a definition of the verb "to bull[shit]" as follows:
To discourse upon the contexts, frames of reference and points of observation which would determine the origin, nature, and meaning of data if one had any. To present evidence of an understanding of form in the hope that the reader may be deceived into supposing a familiarity with content.[7]

The bullshitter generally either knows the statements are likely false, exaggerated, and in other ways misleading or has no interest in their factual accuracy one way or the other. "Talking bullshit" is thus a lesser form of lying, and is likely to elicit a correspondingly weaker emotional response: whereas an obvious liar may be greeted with derision, outrage, or anger, an exponent of bullshit tends to be dismissed with an indifferent sneer.

Harry Frankfurt's concept

In his essay On Bullshit (originally written in 1986, and published as a monograph in 2005), philosopher Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:[8][9]

It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Gerald Cohen, in "Deeper into Bullshit", contrasted the kind of "bullshit" Frankfurt describes with a different sort: nonsense discourse presented as sense. Cohen points out that this sort of bullshit can be produced either accidentally or deliberately. While some writers do deliberately produce bullshit, a person can also aim at sense and produce nonsense by mistake; or a person deceived by a piece of bullshit can repeat it innocently, without intent to deceive others.[10]

Cohen gives the example of Alan Sokal's "Transgressing the Boundaries" as a piece of deliberate bullshit. Sokal's aim in creating it, however, was to point out that the "postmodernist" editors who accepted his paper for publication could not distinguish nonsense from sense, and thereby by implication that their field was "bullshit".


G

Gausie : being an inbred sheepshagger i been trying to get my head round this "bullshit" thing , is this an example ?



"A very lucky and undeserved win for the Taffs against the run of play.

The better team lost.

Contrasted nicely with England's deserved win after their display of the new strategy over Scotland: possessionless defensive excellence. It was a joy to behold the birth of this new paradigm - with new skills such as those now demonstrated by the England team, you no longer need the ball to win matches. Sheer brilliance.

Wales and France - be very afraid. You have nothing in your playbook to undermine
such a strategy."





Think someone posted it last year a few weeks before we won the Grand Slam (again} :-)

How you keeping mate ? :-)