Hi Stoploss
We should know pretty soon but judging by the growth of the Client list as per the [www.estaronline.com] web-site we must be as Percy would say - "well positioned" :p
Printable View
Hi Stoploss
We should know pretty soon but judging by the growth of the Client list as per the [www.estaronline.com] web-site we must be as Percy would say - "well positioned" :p
Interesting to see the Briscoes news release on Friday for their 1st Q Sales to 28th April 2013. Extract from Rod Duke's report:
"and our on-line business continues to show pleasing growth both as a sales channel and also as a display window for our bricks and mortar stores".
This must be good for www.estaronline.com which is the on-line provider for the Briscoe group.
Hi Stoploss
Yes, good to see and very interesting. At 10c EstarOnline capitalises at only $8m. This is a profitable, divi paying tech co, growing fast out of tax paid earnings, but only worth $8m! It is an unlisted public company. What would it be worth if it was listed?
Compare it to say the listed SNAKK, which is unproven but capitalises at $30m.
Cheers
Makes you wonder what a reverse listing into some dodgy shell company could do for its price.
The only problem is it doesn't have (unrealistic) global growth plans, just sensible growth using its own money. And no rock star founder.
Hi CJ
I do not think that a reverse listing would be required in this case to list as there is a good shareholder spread already. It is probably only the cost of listing and general compliance requirements and costs which is stopping them. There is no debt and unless they needed to go to shareholders to raise capital for an acquision or to speed up expansion it is not high on the list of things to do.
As a shareholder, I would like them to list as I like my investments to be readily tradeable on a regulated market. I think it will happen at some stage especially now that the Company has such a good established business.
Cheers
A reverse listing saves all the prospectus and IPO costs which is a big benefit. The downside is you take on all the baggage of the previous shelf company.
The issue for them is they are an $8m company. Is it worth the additional cost to be listed?
To me this is a big failing of the NZAX. Unlisted goes part way there. I wonder if the NZX needs a 'sophisticated investor' exchange that does away with alot of the regulationes/costs etc as it would be great for tech companies. Something like secondmarket in the US.
[QUOTE=CJ;405416]
The issue for them is they are an $8m company. Is it worth the additional cost to be listed?
Is it an $8m company or a $30m company trading at $8m? :p
Shareholder update just posted .
http://www.estaronline.com/images/as...r%20Update.pdf