OK, let's look at this morning's RNSs.
Globo (GBO) is a share I've always had nagging doubts about, after reading their Annual Report. It is regularly promoted in the financial press (which rings if not alarm, then at least mild warning bells). They divested their Greek operations in Dec 2012. It's a very lop-sided disposal deal with only E1m received on signing, and the other E10.2m sales proceeds deferred. Hmmm. The first thing I would do when scrutinising Globo's next set of accounts is to write off that E10.2m debtor!The other thing I would look closely at, is their policy of capitalising internal costs into intangible assets. You might find that profit is nowhere near as high as they claim, once you adjust the accounts to a more conservative basis expensing all costs.
However there's no denying that the trading statement this morning sounds very good. EBITDA is expected to be E29m for 2012, up 42%. I'd want to add back the costs they capitalise though, and work out what the profit really is, rather than this inflated EBITDA figure. Their mobile offerings, CitronGO!, GO!Social, and GO!Enterprise have all shown strong sales growth. It does look tempting, but I'm not happy with the accounts, so will pass on it (will probably kick myself when they double or triple from here).
Mission Marketing (TMMG) looks potentially interesting. I think this is a good time to be buying into cheap, cyclical shares, such as PR & Marketing companies - several of which are still on cheap multiples of earnings. They have operational gearing, which means that when the economy improves (as I believe is likely for 2013), then profits rise disproportionately fast when increased turnover is achieved (due to most costs being fixed, so extra turnover drops through to much higher profit).
They put out a nice bouncy RNS this morning, gushing about a new contract win (Harley-Davidson) for their subsidiary "Big", based in Leicester. There are no figures of course, that would just complicate the message! Someone was telling me the other day that they never use advisers based in London, because if you use people based elsewhere in the UK, you get the same service for a much lower price. Worth considering as a general point.