|
|
#11
02-21-2007, 07:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Actually, Party\'s long term prospects are pretty good
I happen to think that Party MAY be a good buy, even today .... but not because of some immenent legslative activity.
Party is VERY well positioned to re-enter the US market or be acquired, once the UIGE Act legislation is no longer a factor ... give it three years, due to the interest of MGM, Harrahs, Venetian, et cetera 
|
|
#12
02-21-2007, 07:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
No US sportsbook ties that I am aware of .... What do you mean ?
No such ties that I am aware of related to the US, sorry.
|
|
#13
02-21-2007, 07:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: These same analysts no doubt correctly forsaw the UIGE as well
In general i trust the moves of the market alot more than i trust analysts. Generally, the market will tell about a companies prospects before any writer could since the financial incentives are high.
However, in this case i tend to agree with Milton. If you read alot of Berge and Nate's posts it definitely seemed like there was a fairly decent chance of an i gaming bill passing, while the markets largely ignored it in October. It probably has to with the fact that largely non americans are trading, investing in these companies. In all honesty from reading stuff on here and other places i dont really think the climate has changed that much if at all. I suppose behind the scenes the banks could be complaining, etc. but im definitely skeptical.
|
|
#14
02-21-2007, 07:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: These same analysts no doubt correctly forsaw the UIGE as well
There could be some truth to this.
US banks are already under a heavy heavy compliance burden. they have to comply with FDIC, OCC, FFIEC, state regulators, privacy regs, etc. etc. etc. And often each of these government agencies has their own examiners/auditors. Banks are likely not very happy about having to comply with yet another reg, this time one that turns them into a de facto law enforcement agency and for what? gambling? Interesting to see what happens next.
|
|
#15
02-21-2007, 07:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Actually, Party\'s long term prospects are pretty good
[ QUOTE ]
I happen to think that Party MAY be a good buy, even today .... but not because of some immenent legslative activity. Party is VERY well positioned to re-enter the US market or be acquired, once the UIGE Act legislation is no longer a factor ... give it three years, due to the interest of MGM, Harrahs, Venetian, et cetera [/ QUOTE ] me too. I think gambling, particularly online poker, stocks are hugely undervalued in general...these are all licenses to print money regardless of what their market is. disclaimer: I don't own party stock but do own some poker site stock although I didn't actually buy it on a stock exchange :P
|
|
#16
02-21-2007, 07:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: These same analysts no doubt correctly forsaw the UIGE as well
[ QUOTE ]
When Frank Fahrenkopf says "not a chance in Hell", are you instead going to believe some across the ocean analysts who likely were caught last time by their inability to read US politics ? [/ QUOTE ] Farhenkopf may have another agenda in all of this. Outside of being a former head of the RNC his daughter is a Counsel to G.W. Bush. The only genuinely optimistic thing one can take from that story is if the reporters actually have a confirmation that banks are already making noise about how onerous compliance will be.
|
|
#17
02-21-2007, 07:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: These same analysts no doubt correctly forsaw the UIGE as well
[ QUOTE ]
wow 11 to 14 percent is a very very large move. interesting. [/ QUOTE ] 11-14% = about four to five pence per share, in this case. Even a one pence move is over 2%. A 10% move in a penny stock is not meaningless, but it's not really significant, in and of itself. A $10 stock gaining $1.40 in one day is a big move, but the actual change in market cap of PartyGaming, in this case, was nothing to speak about. Particularly as the actual likelihood of a London Stock Exchange analyst actually having any meaningful inside information on what the US Government is going to do is somewhere between slim and none. This type of rank speculation goes on in the market all the time. The fact that this time it involved a gaming stock doesn't change that. It's like the XMSR/SIRI merger. This has been rumored, off and on, for a year. Every time the rumors would start, the stocks would take off, and every time they were found to have no basis, the stocks would sink just as fast. I don't mean to say there's no way UIGEA won't be changed -- but there's no evidence at all to indicate that today's trading in PartyGaming is any indication at all of what the US is going to do with UIGEA.
|
|
#18
02-21-2007, 08:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: These same analysts no doubt correctly forsaw the UIGE as well
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] wow 11 to 14 percent is a very very large move. interesting. [/ QUOTE ] 11-14% = about four to five pence per share, in this case. Even a one pence move is over 2%. A 10% move in a penny stock is not meaningless, but it's not really significant, in and of itself. A $10 stock gaining $1.40 in one day is a big move, but the actual change in market cap of PartyGaming, in this case, was nothing to speak about. [/ QUOTE ] just bah
|
|
#19
02-21-2007, 08:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: These same analysts no doubt correctly forsaw the UIGE as well
Party bottomed out at 26, so its price at 41.5 pence is almost 60% over its low.
What I think is more interesting is that there was more volume in January than during the crash, though that was on the downward move. Volume looks pretty anemic and the next several days will be key to see if there is confirmation and added volume on the upside. Personally, I see this as another dead cat bounce due to the low volume.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
