PPH - PushPay (Church/donor software.)

[BlackPeter]

...
Nothing fishy about it imho. ACMR is just one way to measure SAAS companies and it helps in they all use a similar method for calculating it.

So - who gains if they change the metrics to make their growth look better? How does this improve (long-term) shareholder value? How does it help shareholders to have 4 consecutive quarters with measurements every time on a different basis? What is the value of a measurement which is not comparable to anything?

[Bilbo]

So - who gains if they change the metrics to make their growth look better? How does this improve (long-term) shareholder value? How does it help shareholders to have 4 consecutive quarters with measurements every time on a different basis? What is the value of a measurement which is not comparable to anything?

The value of the change is in making their metrics comparable to other companies. But I agree it makes it difficult to compare past periods for PPH, but this is only an issue for the transitional periods. I would contend they are changing to make their growth look more accurate.

[BlackPeter]

... I would contend they are changing to make their growth look more accurate.

How does it make their growth more accurate if they change the calculation base for it 4 times in one year (or didn't you notice the time variance of the new definition?)?

If they really would have wanted to just adapt to some more appropriate metrical standard, than they would have made the change to the new method in one step (not in 4), they would have given this new metrics a different name to help everybody to understand that they are now measuring oranges instead of apples in the fruit salad and they would report for several years on both the old as well as on the new metrics to keep comparability.

[kizame]

Just look at all the tears in the threads of companies who passed their hype peak already ... wouldn't it be nice we could save some people from losing their money?

The first indicators for a coming downturn in hyped up stocks are often when holders start to question any critical voices why they bother to post anything which could hurt the perception of their darling.

I guess let's face it - if you are sure that this company is a goose which will lay golden eggs ... than some cautious voices on this thread are the best thing which can happen to you. Just allows you to buy more of this great stock for cheap.

If you are however not quite sure, than it might be a good idea to reflect on critical comments ... might save your money as well.

In any case ... in which situation would a critical post be bad for you (unless you currently try to sell ... do you?)?

No not trying or thinking of selling,critical posts are not bad for me,in fact as yours are,they might be enlightening,however it's always good to know the critical postee's agenda.
You must admit you are pedantic with your view.

[MikeE]

What's the story guys? Onwards and upwards over the next 3 months or are we waiting until June, the next update?

[Hoop]

What's the story guys? Onwards and upwards over the next 3 months or are we waiting until June, the next update?

MikeE my opinion on this and trying to ignore the hype.............This is an unfortunate too often scenario found in the NZX list of companies which has sucked in too many investors..

Re: Investor Relations:---These loss making companies play on a cyclical formula...We have been promised (installed greed) .... now and for the near future is the waiting game (installed patience and faith) before delivery (installed hope)...when patience dwindles the company suddenly announces a positive update often via newspaper (revitalises faith/patience/hope)...

PPH in its new shape (since last October chart-wise) is a bear in a volatile price trendless pause mode..Trend-less is characteristic of a patient waiting market...PPH being an illiquid stock has a high beta coefficient and is price sensitive to any rumour (revitalising investors emotions)

Logic says the next update will confirm either-way whether PPH is still on track to deliver...but logic can perform poorly in an investing world...PPH being price sensitive any media attention at any time (truth or lies) could affect the price with a sudden up or down movement in a large way (high Beta)...and..that can be a problem for the conservative investor sitting and waiting on the sidelines...With illiquid trading stocks TA disciplines can be unreliable ...so too can forward looking FA..

These types of stocks are spectulatives and using portfolio theory you use only your speculative money allowance (up to 10% of a standard portfolio**)..and dive in using either having faith or taking a punt .......I never rely on faith as faith is a delusional emotion (remember the investor maxim .."Emotion Kills") instead I'm relying on the punt.

** Why only 10% of a portfolio??..Because the odds in real life only 10% spectacularly succeed the other 90% can be portfolio killing duds)

Disc: Hold (just)..still in profit (just)

[Beagle]

MikeE - What Hoop said but I think only 5% of one's portfolio as a total should be allocated to speculative stocks. Speculative stocks in my opinion includes any company not presently making money.
Disc: Still holding, (just) and PPH represents 2.7% of the value of my listed assets.

[Hoop]

MikeE - What Hoop said but I think only 5% of one's portfolio as a total should be allocated to speculative stocks. Speculative stocks in my opinion includes any company not presently making money.
Disc: Still holding, (just) and PPH represents 2.7% of the value of my listed assets.

Sorry Roger I rewrote my post..You may not agree now......Yes I agree 5% is more sensible..depends a lot on the Investor mental make up and the type of portfolio they feel comfortable to hold...e.g heavy weighted no growth/high dividend companies held long term for adverse risk investors...to that of..short/medium term active investors aiming at growth companies / lower dividend and acceptable to some risk and agile enough to jump in or out..

[Beagle]

Sorry Roger I rewrote my post..You may not agree now......Yes I agree 5% is more sensible..depends a lot on the Investor mental make up and the type of portfolio they feel comfortable to hold...e.g heavy weighted no growth/high dividend companies held long term for adverse risk investors...to that of..short/medium term active investors aiming at growth companies / lower dividend and acceptable to some risk and agile enough to jump in or out..

No worries Hoop I still think what you've said makes good common sense. For a SAAS company their runway to potential break-even has been pretty short, sorry to be so dogmatic about it but I can't help myself comparing the length of the runway to Xero's ! XRO was trumpeted as a business champion, Rod Drury receiving business accolades and was almost seen as some sort of new business Messiah when the company had a market cap of $4,000m.
Still not at break even after what, a decade ? In that context if it takes PPH another 3-18 months after the promise of break even to achieve same, is that really so terrible ?
Yes I admit its a bit of a punt for me but a bit of faith mixed in as well

[Hoop]

That's what got me interested ..the promised "short" lead up time to profitability... now operating with some success within the biggest economy in the world (USA)..and...wait for it.. has been labelled as a hyper-growth company .