There are plenty of shareholders who think like me...

In case anyone thinks I'm a wild-eyed lunatic howling alone in the wilderness, I thought I'd reproduce this from www.iii.co.uk, posted by 'eagle51' (NB: I post as 'chickenmadras' on iii). Good to see that others are thinking the same as me. I cannot - and nor can anyone else as far as I can figure it - think of a single good reason why Blinkx management has gone about the Miva 'bid' in the way that they have. From where I'm standing it looks like a totally amateur and cack-handed attempt at a takeover. And if I'm wrong and the Blinkx management team really do know what they're doing who's fault is it that shareholders don't know what's going on? If Blinkx management has been totally appalling at communicating their Miva strategy (assuming they have one), doesn't that vindicate what I've been saying?

-----------

"Chickenmadras could be a person who has posted on this board in the past and has merely created a new identity, norman - this is something which seems to happen a fair bit.

Whilst I do not agree with everything he says, he does make some relevant points about which some shareholders may have genuine concerns - me included. I think SC has made a ham of the MIVA 'non-bid'. He has not at any stage made it formal, choosing instead to give an indication of the price at which he would be prepared to make an offer. Contrast this with the way Autonomy has negotiated 3 much larger deals in the past 2 or 3 years and presented them to the shareholders and the world at large as 'fait accompli', sending out a message of initiative, competence and stunning execution which seems to have been lacking where MIVA is concerned. If something is worth going for it is always best to give it 100% and to fail to get the MIVA directors on board before going public with an indicative offer was always asking for trouble. No-one has come out of the situation with any credit and it should not have been allowed to happen.

A large part of the loss in value of blinkx shares is undoubtedly associated with it being an AIM stock. The index fell 68% last year, but whilst I haven't checked the relevant numbers, my feeling is that blinkx's sp has fallen further than this, which might well have something to do with MIVA and the perceived experience and competence of SC as CEO. He is undoubtedly technically brilliant, but at 28 (or perhaps now 29 he is very young to be at the helm of a listed company - particularly when others around him are mostly young and inexperienced as well. The new finance man blinkx took on does seem to have more experience, which partly addresses what might have been seen as a weakness. I don't know to what extent the non execs have been involved in blinkx's affairs to date - not much would be my guess judging by what has happened.

There is a danger of falling in love with a share and failing to see when things aren't right. blinkx still has a very small share of the market it operates in, regardless of the apparent brilliance of its offering. I have tried using it quite often and the other day (for instance) was looking for the video of John Bird & John Fortune, where George Parr is talking about the sub-prime crisis. I tried a few combinations of words using the blinkx site but came up with nothing I could immediately see was what I was looking for. So I tried Youtube and up it came first entry on the list. This did not fill me with confidence and pride as a shareholder in blinkx. I know it has other innovative products to offer, but we don't yet know how these convert into $ and the company hasn't even given us a clue to date. 

The jury is out as far as I am concerned. It is not sufficient in my view for SC to occasionally appear wherever 'looking confident', whatever this means. I prefer a flow of information that enables me to at least form an opinion on whether the company is doing well and is on course to meet or beat expectations. We haven't had this flow of information, nor has the company's PR been up to much as far as I can tell. Why isn't it screaming out its message from the the hilltops, rather than relying on word of mouth and messages passed on by those who know where to look to find out its present market share?

On balance, I think it might be a good move for a bigger outfit - perhaps Microsoft - to acquire blinkx, but it may not be that easy. I can't recall if there is anything in the agreement for blinkx to use Autonomy software that might scupper a deal. The danger to me is that blinkx disappears into the pack and becomes just another search engine pitching for a small share of a very big market. Hopefully someone more familiar with the industry will tell me this is impossible to happen. I am afraid that hope alone that blinkx does have something different that is of serious practical interest to a large part of the market is not really sufficient for me. When a share price drops this far below its float price and stays there for so long prompts me to ask: "if what it has is so good, and the share price is so low, why hasn't someone bid to buy it"?

On balance, I think I would bite off the hand of anyone that offered 60p a share. There are plenty of other more tangibly undervalued compaies out there at present to invest in and funds are invariably limited. It is a simple question of what offers the best value. 

I remain a holder for the present - no better, sad to say. 

IMO/DYOR"