Sat, Oct 25, 2014, 8:48 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Rentrak Corporation Message Board

  • recurve333 recurve333 Jun 10, 2005 12:35 AM Flag

    Our company

    Some here are obvious newcomers and do not have as clear an understanding of the potential, the past, and current operations. I am the first to say that I would like to have an explanation of precisely every minor detail of current operations, and competitive info, but that is not possible in the current environment. It appears that we have a few more speed bumps to cross but the finish line is in sight. Certainly less than six months away. While I have tended to have some talent in �reading between the lines� in the past, my ability to read brail isn�t so good. An excellent point to feature is the fact that we will see a financial breakout of business lines in the June 30 quarter. This is/will be bigger (for you nay sayers) than you realize. Bottom line is whether or not you believe/realize the potential of VOD measurement and ad sales, and the other Essential collection suite products. Cuban is smarter than me and I say I am with him; �the potential is huge�.

    Ok, one more thing, I have seen a ton of other companies with less potential, no earnings, little cash, and a huge burn rate. There is clearly more than just promise here.

    R

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • It implied that the cable companies are a current/near-term revenue source for RENT, but they're not, nor will they be. They are just the source of the data'''''scotch

      good point. i guess the odds of the cable companies banding together to start their own tracking company for vod would be slim for now also. not everybody in cable land does vod the same way and comcast appears to view their offering as a competetive advantage that they wont want to share with other cable companies. my concern with vod tracking is can rent be marginalized as the business grows just like they were in video rentals. it would appear they wouldnt be from the cable companies as you point out. that just leaves content companies who are the "studios" in this business model if there is a problem.

      have we heard of any news of rent teaming up with msnvideo or yahoo video? there are ads that need to be verified in that sector as well. i have not seen any news of rent being linked to those two. anybody know if they are in trials with those companies.

    • Actually, after giving it more thought, the first half of my earlier answer to your question about the cable companies was inaccurate. It implied that the cable companies are a current/near-term revenue source for RENT, but they're not, nor will they be. They are just the source of the data. Plus, the cable companies aren't involved in any revenue-sharing deals with programmers. The cable companies buy the programming at a fixed cost and the VOD fees that you and I pay go directly to the cable guys and that's it (I think). So there's no "direct" model to move to from a rev-share model.

      The second half of my answer still stands: it's the advertisers, marketers, programmers, etc. who will pay for RENT's service because it will be the only reliable way of measuring and analyzing actual viewing data and determining which programs are reaching which consumers who they want to sell their product to.

      As for building cash, I've found it's never a bad thing to have on hand and believe Paul is of the same mind. But I think the message from the guidance is cash-flow neutral: positive c/f from PPT will be invested in Essentials, but net effect should be very little movement in cash balance, barring an unforeseen event or transaction.

    • i didnt mean to hit the strong buy key. i dont enough to use that here. sorry.

    • As for cable companies doing the same, I don't know. But even if they do, it would have no effect on the advertisers, programmers, networks, marketers and other future customers who are the real future cash cows for the company and will benefit from access to the information to price and place ads. So it's a moot question. IMHO ''''scotch

      i think thats a fair answer. do you think the company is building a cash position because they have no idea when the ramp will occur and they are afraid of burning cash in the meantime? in other words as one medium dies (going to blockbuster)the other either may not pay as much as the first or slower to ramp to offset the lack of the old revenue from physical delivery of dvd, vhs etc.

    • Decent question. Although keep in mind in the video rental world, it's only the three (now two) national chains that are on the studio direct program. None of the other 6,000 small video rental stores/chains will ever grow to the size necessary to go direct. But by getting their titles from Rentrak, they get the same deal as the majors, as required by the terms of the anti-trust lawsuit that resulted in the revenue-sharing model.

      As for cable companies doing the same, I don't know. But even if they do, it would have no effect on the advertisers, programmers, networks, marketers and other future customers who are the real future cash cows for the company and will benefit from access to the information to price and place ads. So it's a moot question. IMHO

    • reason the relationship changed with the "major customer", aka Movie Gallery, was simply a function of Movie Gallery growing large enough to participate in the same Studio Direct Revenue Sharing programs that the studios have offered to Blockbuster and Hollywood Video for the past 7-8 years. '''scotch

      thanks for your post. so the "flaw" in the rent business plan is that as a customer becomes successful and grows the studios deal directly with the retailer and cut rent out of most of the revenue stream. in return rent is an impartial counter of the sales but at a vastly lower revenue rate.

      what are the odds that the cable companies do this with vod? is there a chance this type of behavior is repeated again when counting clicks on the net. tia

    • Scotchtape:

      well stated

      R

    • No one is pleased with the time table but PR told us Essentials would take time. Cash position ($2.50) per share, ZERO debt, "one of a kind" (no competition), unexpected revenue from PPT. I believe that with the international presence, and another cable company signs on, all of this weeks (weaks) sellers will regret their decision to sell. JMHO.

      • 1 Reply to nubuzzman
      • No one is pleased with the time table but PR told us Essentials would take time. Cash position ($2.50) per share, ZERO debt, "one of a kind" (no competition), unexpected revenue from PPT. I believe that with the international presence, and another cable company signs on, all of this weeks (weaks) sellers will regret their decision to sell. JMHO. ''''''nubuzzman

        so nielsens has no product in the works for this company?

    • Cuban might or might be smarter than you, but that doesn't make him a good stock picker. In fact, his track record is abysmal.

      This stock is a dog.

    • "22 million in cash and no debt"

      "We expect to remain profitable each quarter"

      "We expect to reach 60 percent in the next one to two months."

      Sounds good to me.

 
RENT
77.60+1.74(+2.29%)Oct 24 3:59 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.