More than that MoneyGram is a loss making entity with a negative equity. This is just an attempt by MoneyGram to pull a Kodak (last ditch attempt to stay afloat by attaching itself to "cypto" currency bandwagon)
It should really be "pull a RIOT" because RIOT Blockchain was 1 of the 1st companies to pull this off.
Struggling medical equipment company. Acquires a "blockchain mining" company for a few mil, stock shoots up overnight like 500% or something, then their CEO dumps all his stocks.
Pulling a Kodak for me would be something else. It would be when a company that boomers love can no longer innovate and just starts licensing it’s image to the highest bidder. We’ve seen this many times with action cams and so on.
> More than that MoneyGram is a loss making entity with a negative equity
Their net income has been positive for each of the last five quarters and their operations and business produced net cash in the first three quarters of 2017 [1].
Their operations throw off substantially more cash than the $30 or so million in interest they pay each year, and their senior notes don't come due until 2020. Moody's and S&P rate them as highly-speculative, non-investment grade companies (B1) [2]. Not great, but not at risk of imminent default either.
It's not a healthy company. But it's not one in the midst of its death throes, either. Given the amount of dumb money chasing anything that smells like Blockchain, it's not particularly dumb to let shareholders sell their shares at a premium to uninformed buyers.
Book equity is a bad sole measure of the health of a business, particularly a financial business.
> Given the amount of dumb money chasing anything that smells like Blockchain, it's not particularly dumb to let shareholders sell their shares at a premium to uninformed buyers.
Are you advocating companies exploiting uninformed investors or just saying that it's the "money-smart dickish move"?
CryTek was on the verge of bankruptcy a year ago when they were unable to pay their employees. The one-time payment from Amazon in exchange for the engine distribution rights is probably running out.
Except moneygram has a huge place in the history of cryptocurrency, where as kodak doesn't even come close. If you purchased bitcoin in 2013 there was a very good chance that you transferred cash using moneygram from a local CVS or Walmart.
Jeez I had a look at their share price. Tripled in 2 days and down 21% the next. It's price movement resembles a typical ponzi token. It is like the bubble thought pathogen has lept from token world to the traditional stock market. Who will be the last fool? Is it 1999?
I don't own ripple, but you don't need a ponzi scheme to see that kind of growth in speculative value. For example, you may have seen the same thing if Uber's valuation was liquid during it's early days.
Of course Uber followed a traditional funding model that restricted access to the top 1% of wealthy Americans. All VC-backed startups do. And many of them follow this curve, it's just not visible to us.
First, I don't know for sure, but one of the reasons why they might show in their balance loss like that, is that they don't want to pay taxes ie. tax evasion strategy.
Otherwise I can't see how else they can have loss while all migrant people are using them to send money home.
Considering the mining power of blockchain resides in China, they should have paid a visit to Bitmain facility to learn more about it. Methinks it is just a spin given by coindesk website.
