Snakk

[Swiftideas]

If you say to someone that they should pay $30m odd for an ... ad making and placement company when TVs were introduced, and advertising revenues exploded, men in white coats with vans would be knocking on the door.

Yet those exact companies who place TV ads are now multi-billion dollar stocks: WPP = $28B, OMC = $19B, PUB = $18B, IPG = $7.3B

Wish someone would knock on your door.

[Copper]

In simpler terms please?

Oops sorry no Canadian dialect.....I was told there was a placement of Snakk at ten cents.My guess was it could be placement to Aussie big bright and beautiful knowledgeable and professional investors or could be Dragon or the other mob unloading a good parcel.I didn't ask the simple question of which.Hope that helps. Good source in my opinion...cheers..Don't want to mislead anybody...

[Balance]

No they haven't depressed the SP as the others have and made a blatant point about it in a release last year. Point is that two major early shareholders are now out/nearly out with one more to go (contrary to what Balance says, Handley is not going to sell all his shares!). This, along with Handleys placements, will most likely be the cornerstone shares for an ASX listing. By taking an initial stake, interested parties should be upping their shareholdings over the next few months, adding liquidity.

First you were fed the line he was donating (more) shares to charity but when the disclosure came out, it showed he took the opportunity to unload shares, and will unload more in future.

It is the thin end of the wedge.

You need to get the full picture, Moose because you are being fed half the story all the time.

[Balance]

Yet those exact companies who place TV ads are now multi-billion dollar stocks: WPP = $28B, OMC = $19B, PUB = $18B, IPG = $7.3B

Wish someone would knock on your door.

They are the ad agencies, slowideas.

The ones who give the likes of Snakk the small bit jobs.

Savvy?

[jonu]

Since SNK doesnt own their platform they wont scale as well as the others they mention. Service based businesses are usually profitable but they never scale easily.

Unless I misread the info they are a mobile add agency service which pays for outsourced technology to deliver their product.

Another thing I find interesting is that they dont revenue share the campaigns hence they need to keep pulling in advertising deals and clipping the ticket.

Excellent points Schrodinger. They have no guaranteed return business by the sound of it. Worrying to me (and I've expressed this before) is the fact that increased revenue brought with it increased losses. On the business model described here I wouldn't have thought that to be the case, unless they are having to spend a fortune continually trying to clinch their next job.

My experience of the AD industry is that they are very much into "contras" which you can show through the books as revenue but aren't going to add to the bottom line. I wonder if that is what is occurring here?

[jonu]

They've been pretty upfront about "doing a Xero" (ie increased losses for a landgrab). I am comfortable with that as long as growth continues on its current upwards trajectory and the macro environment stays positive to allow for more funding.

Trouble is Moosie, it's not a land grab. The extra spending doesn't secure a fixed asset, just the next job! If it secured a long term contract I would agee, but it clearly doesn't

[Balance]

Surely successful campaigns mean repeat customers though? Who says Snakk can't diversify into other scaleable areas such as m-payments like MBE as well?

After reading Mr Handleys book he mentioned the key to being the best in a new sector is being ahead of the curve in order to make the rules by being the first in place. Hopefully we see some new innovations for all that R&D spend in order to be the best (and maybe only) company to go to in the sector...

Xero and landgrab now changing form - so full of Moose ****.

[jonu]

Surely successful campaigns mean repeat customers though? Who says Snakk can't diversify into other scaleable areas such as m-payments like MBE as well?

After reading Mr Handleys book he mentioned the key to being the best in a new sector is being ahead of the curve in order to make the rules by being the first in place. Hopefully we see some new innovations for all that R&D spend in order to be the best (and maybe only) company to go to in the sector...

You don't necessarily get to make the "rules" by being in something first, but those following get to see the pitfalls to avoid, so I find that a flawed concept. Are you sure you are quoting him right Moosie?

[couta1]

We shall see in a few months how things will pan out and surely those of us with skin in the game have more to worry about than those that don't but the reverse seems to be the case judging by the intensity of the comments on here

[Schrodinger]

Trouble is Moosie, it's not a land grab. The extra spending doesn't secure a fixed asset, just the next job! If it secured a long term contract I would agee, but it clearly doesn't

Ding ding.

This isn't a scaleable platform. They need add teams for each campaign more adds means more team, unless they can automate the campaigns (Wildfire). It's not like a Xero, Microsoft or SalesForce which can produce unlimited versions for virtually no cost.

Moosie for peace of mind I suggest you study TradeMe, Google, Microsoft, Xero etc and understand what we mean. I am a big fan of the TradeMe model it's almost perfect considering it's only in one market.

In saying that they can still be profitable but they aren't going to dominate.