# BXP - Bill Express



## It's Snake Pliskin (14 September 2005)

I believe BXP is a stock with a lot of future potential, based on its product and service model. The demise of Telstra will only help this stock with pre-paid mobile phones on the rise. It's main competitor is Australia Post, but there are few branches these days. BXP is popping up everywhere.

Fundamentally it is not bad. 
If they can keep costs down and continue to grow.....

Any opinions out there?


----------



## silent knight (14 September 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

I bought in yesterday. It came to my attention some time ago as I hold some AFL which has a significant ownership interest, and I've been interested in its progress. When it showed up on my scan as having a 10 week rise I was watching it closely. It dropped on Thursday, Friday and yesterday, possibly as AFL announced an intention to take up options. Personally I thought it was a good time to buy in. I am looking for growth and this seems an agressively managed company with a sellable modern product. Only time will tell.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (15 October 2005)

*BXP*

Well, I'm going to do a chicken here and tell everybody what a wonderful stock BXP is. Significant shareholders such as Gerry Harvey have bought. It is good value and it will grow as its business model takes off. Currently it is in expansion mode and the results of this will be realised next year. So until then I'm holding and will accumulate on dips for a while.

I'm interested in opinions, criticisms or anything to add to a discussion on this stock. 
Have a nice evening all.
Snake


----------



## GreatPig (15 October 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

Technically, it appears to me to be currently forming the handle of a cup and handle pattern.

By my estimation, that pattern could give it a potential target of around 35-40 cents.

GP


----------



## TjamesX (16 October 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

I bought into these last week. Part of a general strategy of moving into solid technology stocks that make a profit and are in their growth phase. I like their business model - they have gained a stronghold into a business that seems to have few competitors and high barriers to entry.

Will see where it goes, but its one of only four stocks I hold ATM


----------



## GreatPig (4 November 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

Another diver this morning, down 15% at the moment.

GP


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (4 November 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*



			
				GreatPig said:
			
		

> Another diver this morning, down 15% at the moment.
> 
> GP




A diver with great volume to add.


----------



## Bingo (4 November 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

Some reading for those who missed  it.

The Australian Financial Review Nov 04
Pierpont

Waiting for some fruity accounts


As the Melbourne Cup field flashed past the winning post (or in the case of Franklins Gardens, limped past it), Pierpont found himself thinking about that dashing bookie Mark Read, who retired to Darwin to float International All Sports.

Back in the early days of this century, IAS was in a syndicate of venture-capital partners that invested $9.3 million in a technology group called On Q, which was into e-commerce products and smartcards. The venture capitalists had no sooner injected the money than they were in mortal combat with the founding shareholders, with writs and affidavits flying like confetti.

IAS's share of the investment in On Q was $1.1 million and it wrote off the lot. The venture capitalists - including the Liberman family and the Arthur Andersen spin-off Accenture - were exceedingly upset by three items.

The first was the discovery that the finances of On Q were considerably worse than they thought when they invested. The second was the sudden arrival of Australian Pure Fruits Ltd on the share register without their knowledge or approval. The third was the appointment of Peter McDougall, Australian Pure Fruits' managing director, to the board without their knowledge or approval.

After a great deal of angst and threats of litigation, the parties settled out of court, so Pierpont cannot say whether Mark ever retrieved much of his million dollars.

However, Mark may be amused to learn that four years later, Australian Pure Fruits is seeking to change its name to On Q Ltd at its annual general meeting on November 30. Any reader who happens to be in the Melbourne suburb of Eaglemont on that day might consider dropping in to the meeting because there will be several points of interest.

The first item on the agenda is the tabling of the financial report. This could be an intriguing document because nobody has yet seen it. Indeed, the company's shares have been suspended for the past month because of its failure to produce accounts.

On September 30, the directors of Australian Pure Fruits advised the Australian Stock Exchange that finalisation of its accounts for the year to June would be delayed until October 5. On October 13, it told the ASX the audit was expected to be finalised on October 21. On October 20 it told the ASX that significant work remained to be done to finalise the audit and directors were unable to give a precise date by which accounts would be lodged.

That was still the last heard from Australian Pure Fruits until October31 when it released the agenda for the AGM on November 30. Item one on the agenda is for shareholders to raise questions about the accounts, which none of them has yet seen.

Item four is to change its name to On Q. Australian Pure Fruits is flogging its fruit and vegetable juice business and specialising On Q's electronic banking.

Australian Pure Fruits describes On Q as the cornerstone of the technology now licensed by the company to its 42 per cent-owned spin-off Bill Express Ltd.

Asking Pierpont to explain electronic banking is like asking Paris Hilton to lecture on chastity, but your correspondent will try anyway.

Bill Express offers several varieties of electronic banking but let's take the simple example of a young geek who wants to top up his prepaid Optus mobile phone. He can walk into a newsagency that is equipped with a Bill Express terminal and hand over $30.

After a bit of technical wizardry that Pierpont will never fathom, the mobile is suddenly able to make another $30 worth of calls. On the money side, Optus pockets something like $29 and the other dollar is split between the newsagency and Bill Express. Bill Express then kicks back a licensing fee to Australian Pure Fruits.

So far, so good, but there are several points about the financial intercourse between Australian Pure Fruits and Bill Express that Pierpont doesn't understand.

To begin with, the Bill Express prospectus said the staff for its day-to-day operations would be provided by Technology Business Systems Pty Ltd (TBS) at cost plus 7.5 per cent. The only jarring note about this relationship is that the Victorian Commissioner of State Revenue applied to that state's Supreme Court on October 5 for TBS to be wound up.

Bill Express's chief finance officer, Marc Lichtenstein, assures Pierpont that the matter has been settled, but Pierpont would be more comfortable knowing his staff was working for a contractor that didn't get into such a situation in the first place.

It's a small point (and all over now, anyway), but Bill Express never told the ASX about this potential difficulty - mainly because TBS hadn't told Bill Express.

Which just shows that electronics companies aren't necessarily perfect communicators.

Another point is that Pierpont cannot reconcile the previous accounts of Bill Express. In its prospectus of October 2004, Bill Express showed its unaudited accounts for June 30, 2004. Those accounts showed no debt to the parent company.

However, the Bill Express accounts for June 2005 show that at June 30, 2004, nearly $12million was owing to Australian Pure Fruits.

OK, the prospectus accounts for 2004 were unaudited but that's a very big rabbit to pull out of the hat a year later. The 2005 cash-flow statement of Bill Express shows it repaid the debt to Australian Pure Fruits during the year. However, those accounts give no indication of how or why this debt arose.

Not only has Bill Express repaid a $12 million debt to Australian Pure Fruits which was not revealed in the prospectus, it has lent Australian Pure Fruits a further $1.6 million during 2004-05 plus $6 million to On Q Technologies. That's more than Pierpont would lend to a company that is in dispute with its auditors.

Marc explained to Pierpont that these were amounts owing for research and development done by Bill Express for Australian Pure Fruits.

There must be a two-way traffic in technology between Bill Express and Australian Pure Fruits, because note 22(d) to the Bill Express accounts shows that Bill Express sold On Q Technologies Pty Ltd to Australian Pure Fruits during 2004-05 for $100,000, which was only $3000 more than the value of its assets. So On Q Technologies doesn't sound as though it was very valuable. Which is strange, because On Q Technologies is the company that licenses the On Q technology to Bill Express.

Note 28 to the Bill Express accounts shows that Bill Express owed Australian Pure Fruits $587,455 in royalties for the use of On Q Technology last financial year. In other words, a company it sold to Australian Pure Fruits for a mere $100,000 is now gouging it for $587,000 a year.

Marc explained that On Q Technology had been a shell when it was sold to Australian Pure Fruits, but Australian Pure Fruits had then injected technology into it upon which Bill Express was now paying a royalty.

So there are two bits of technology. Australian Pure Fruits owns one bit, which it is charging Bill Express $587,000 a year for (probably more in a full year), and Bill Express owns another, which it has charged Australian Pure Fruits and On Q $7.6 million for but hadn't been paid by June 30.

Which is a pity, because Bill Express could have done with the money. Bill Express raised the not inconsiderable sum of $40 million during and after its float last year.

The cash-flow statement shows operating cash flow was $19.4million negative in 2004-05, while investments soaked up another $19.3 million.

Bill Express is still liquid, but only because it has borrowed $21million from its bankers.

Marc explained that the tightness was caused by the telcos. "If you owe a telco a million dollars, they're fairly relaxed," he said. "But if you owe them $10 million, they tighten their credit." This could be described as a problem that comes with success, because Bill Express has expanded its electronic banking business significantly in 2004-05.

Just in case readers are wondering, the 2005 Bill Express accounts were given a clean bill of health by the auditors, Pitcher Partners. Pitcher Partners are also the auditors that have been giving Australian Pure Fruits such a hard time for the past month. Given that Bill Express and Australian Pure Fruits have much the same electronic banking interests, Pierpont can only presume Pitcher Partners spotted a few rotten apples in the fruit and vegetable business.

Meanwhile, Mark Read must be wondering what happened to On Q Technology. He and his partners invested $9.3 million in the group five years ago but by the time the Bill Express prospectus came around, it was worth only $100,000. That's an even worse performance than Franklins Gardens.


----------



## Bingo (4 November 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

Further to my post of what Pierpont had to say this morning. This is what pushed the share price down of course, and it might not be entirely right.

I find it worrying to invest in companies if I have a doubt on the ethics of management. This article raises issues in my mind anyway.


----------



## samsterchan (22 November 2005)

*BXP - Bill Express will sky rocket !!*

Excellent buy at 23 to 24 cents. Huge volume yesterday!! Share price has gone down over the past week - it has been performing very strongly over the past few months, trading close to 30 cents for some time.

This is an excellent entry point - Bill Express is doing extremely well in rolling out its new products. Take a look at the attached links.

http://imagesignal.comsec.com.au/asxdata/20051110/pdf/00566121.pdf

http://imagesignal.comsec.com.au/asxdata/20051026/pdf/00560758.pdf

http://www.itnews.com.au/newsstory.aspx?CIaNID=20978&s=bill+express


The only way is up from here - as disclosed in the AGM report, the following additional products will be released to market very shortly :

BoPo prepaid Visa card
Mobile EFT PDA device

Other attractive notes :

1. 99.7% of the Australian population now live in postcodes that have a BXP terminal
2. BXP is poised to rolout a prepaid Visa card, branded the Bo Po card
3. BXP is in discussions with 1 group that has 700000 active cards in the Australian marketplace, to get them to adopt the Bo Po card
4. Rock in to any major newsagent and you will see BXP signs prominently displayed
5. Check your council rates - most major councils have already signed up with BXP.


----------



## etrader1 (20 December 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

Hi

Any forumers currently holding BXP shares? What are your thoughts on the current sp? Looks to me like an excellent opportunity for entry with sp between 0.21 - 0.22. There was a price-sensitive announcement made today about getting a new contract but the market's response seems not very positive. 

Thanks heaps. 

Cheers!


----------



## Bingo (21 December 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

I held some months ago but have sold out. See my earlier post of 4 November I still feel that you need to be careful with stock.


----------



## TjamesX (21 December 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

Sold out at my purchase price a month or so ago. In general I like the company, but I think there are issues with its ownership structure. Australian Pure Fruits seem to control the company, as well as license software to it...... ?


----------



## samsterchan (30 December 2005)

*BXP - Bill Express...comments anyone*

Hi

I still believe very srongly in this company's unlimited potential.

Refer to my earlier post in early November as to my reasons for its attractive potential.

The s.p. has been hovering around 21 to 22 cents, but the trend analysis shows it on the way up. I reckon that another market sensitive announcement early in Jan 05 will shoot it up to the high 28 to low 30s.

From there on, it's blue sky territory. This stock is held in huge quantities by Gerry Harvey.

Now is a great time to go in.


----------



## Stan 101 (30 December 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

Sam, with all due respect to Gerry Harvey, I haven't seen his Harvey Norman share price doing anything much in terms of capital growth in the last 3 years. Also, the dividend is nothing to write home about. His expansion is faultering. Just because he has a chunk of BXP doesn't make it a bonus. But I do realise that you have other markers to back your thoughts. Good luck with it.

I sold yesterday at 22.5c after buying in at 20.5c in late nov..


----------



## etrader1 (30 December 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

Hi samsterchan,

Thanks for your post. I have gone in last week at 0.21. BXP has a great potential to deliver outstanding value for investors and the current sp weakness is a very good opportunity to come in. I believe the ownership question is not an issue given the way the company is being managed and expanding its business. 

Cheers!


----------



## laurie (30 December 2005)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

How it is going to make in-roads on *Bpay* beats me!!

cheers laurie


----------



## samsterchan (10 January 2006)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

Hi all

I reckon BXP is on it's way up. It has been holding around 22.5 firm. The past week has seen it hold steady at 23. Hopefully it is on an upward trend from now on.

I am hoping to sell at 30.

Does anyone have some views?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (10 January 2006)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*



			
				samsterchan said:
			
		

> Hi all
> 
> I reckon BXP is on it's way up. It has been holding around 22.5 firm. The past week has seen it hold steady at 23. Hopefully it is on an upward trend from now on.
> 
> ...




Why are you going to sell at 30? 

I sold out in November.


----------



## Caliente (10 January 2006)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*



			
				laurie said:
			
		

> How it is going to make in-roads on *Bpay* beats me!!




truth laurie... truth...


----------



## slimtrader (10 January 2006)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*

Hi Samsterchan,

This stock has been under lots of pressure ever since a very negative article appeared in the FinReview. The article related to governance and disclosure issues...

You'll have to decide how this negative sentiment (on balance) compare against any positive fundamentals you may have for this business.

I think a run in the short term will be difficult


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (27 January 2006)

*Re: BXP Bill Express*



			
				samsterchan said:
			
		

> Hi all
> 
> I reckon BXP is on it's way up. It has been holding around 22.5 firm. The past week has seen it hold steady at 23. Hopefully it is on an upward trend from now on.
> 
> ...




What`s your T/A on this stock now?


----------



## ghotib (27 January 2006)

My TA half cent is that there's support at 21c and no trend upwards, but my TA isn't even worth half a cent so ignore that.

What prompted me to post is that I've had a look at their website and it's a shocker from both user and investor point of view. I realise that the website is not a core part of the business, so maybe that's no big deal. OTOH, their business does depend on providing user-friendly software, and the website reeks of developers playing with cool toys and a lack of even rudimentary usability analysis or testing. That makes me suspicious of the company's development culture. Even if they contracted out the website, I'd expect a good software company to demand something that works much better than this before it went live. 

Have you tried to use any of their services? What's your experience?

Cheers,

Ghoti


----------



## YELNATS (11 July 2006)

My enduring concern about BXP is that their major competitor and near monopolist, Australia Post, which receives the backing of the Federal Government (being 100% govt owned), won't tolerate a sustained loss of bill paying market share to such an upstart. There has been precursors to BXP before and they have been outcompeted by Aussie Post.

My other concern is that BXP is using newsagents for their cash collections, who don't have adequate security protection for the extra levels of cash collected, nor for their staff and nor for their customers in the event of armed robberies, which occur all too often nowadays.

Regards, YN.


----------



## Sultan of Swing (13 September 2006)

A disappointing result or am I reading it all wrong??  What have I missed?

http://imagesignal.comsec.com.au/asxdata/20060913/pdf/00646139.pdf

http://imagesignal.comsec.com.au/asxdata/20060913/pdf/00646140.pdf 

I've been holding a fair chunk of these for about 12 months hoping we'd get some better news here.

How does a company incease it's revenue by 63.5% but make 3.8% less profit?

Any thoughts anyone?


----------



## Vainglorious (13 September 2006)

Sultan of Swing said:
			
		

> How does a company incease it's revenue by 63.5% but make 3.8% less profit?
> 
> Any thoughts anyone?




Mind dump below .....

BXP loosing money on PODtv which is unlikely to improve because AFAIK there is not a single profitable digital signage company anywhere on the planet.

bopo card is a joke.  If it was a profitable business model the banks would have issued a card to every existing customer.  I know Suncorp Metway already issues VISA sponsored debit cards, so the concept of a flexible debit card is not new.  If the concept does become profitable BXP will get blown out of the water by banks issuing a VISA debit card to every customer.  Why would someone see virtue in aiming for customers too poor to have a credit card?

While BXP's existing bill paying business has some merit it is hardly a threat to Australia Post.  Notice that Telstra is not on BXP's billers list.

The questions about the parent company On Q have already been covered.  

Lets add the weird Islamic financing package they recently arranged.  Why bother?  Didn't the Australian banks want to touch them?

And the final odd thing is the director called Dugal McDougall.


----------



## thejunkcompany (18 September 2006)

I am a holder of BXP am I am debating to sell at a loss or to keep and go for the ride.
I originally bought in because of Harvey Norman being a major holder but am a little concerned with the relationship that the company has with pure fruit Australia and the lack of address the company have had to "that matter".
Still for a company like this to post a profit is rare in its early stage of listed life.


----------



## Sultan of Swing (18 September 2006)

Well, after the thoughts expressed on this thread and also after relooking at my criteria (which I'd strayed from   ) I sold out today at 17 cents. I bought for and average of approx. 27 cents a year or so ago  . (1/2 at 31 cents and 1/2 at 24.5 cents when they started to drop and I _THOUGHT _they'd bottomed.) 

For me, an expensive lesson about catching falling knives and not putting a stop/loss in place.


----------



## Butterfly (22 September 2006)

Why sell at the low? This company is about to turn around in a big way. It is just suffering teething problems.


----------



## Sultan of Swing (22 September 2006)

Butterfly said:
			
		

> Why sell at the low? This company is about to turn around in a big way. It is just suffering teething problems.




Don't tell me that now, I'm already too indecisive.


----------



## vicb (22 September 2006)

Is there any tie up with the Bill express here and the Bill express that operates out of Jamacia?


----------



## Vainglorious (22 September 2006)

If a person wants to put their proverbials on the chopping block by having exposure to BXP then the funky thing to do would be to buy the parent company ONQ.

ONQ owns 43% of BXP with a value at today's close of $29mil

Mkt cap of ONQ is $13mil.  Therefore you can buy $1 worth of BXP for 45c

In fact, you could buy effective control of BXP by buying half ONQ and topping up with 8% of BXP.  Controlling ONQ which itself controls 43% of BXP plus 8% gives 51% control.  Total cost - only $11.5mil to control a $68mil company. (Keeping the numbers simple)

Fire both boards (fire the same people twice).  Sell all technology into BXP.    Dissolve ONQ (which may even return some spare cash)  Sit on now 30% holding of BXP with a market value of $20mil.  Total return of 77%

This would the first stage of my plan to take over the world.  Anyone got a spare million?  I need about 12 of you.


----------



## Sultan of Swing (22 September 2006)

Vainglorious said:
			
		

> This would the first stage of my plan to take over the world.  Anyone got a spare million?  I need about 12 of you.




hmmm, you've got me thinking. I'm a little short in dollars to be able to invest in it, (about $990,000 short, give or take   ) but hey, a little leverage can go a long way.

the world huh.....  :grinsking


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (25 September 2006)

Sultan of Swing said:
			
		

> Well, after the thoughts expressed on this thread and also after relooking at my criteria (which I'd strayed from   ) I sold out today at 17 cents. I bought for and average of approx. 27 cents a year or so ago  . (1/2 at 31 cents and 1/2 at 24.5 cents when they started to drop and I _THOUGHT _they'd bottomed.)
> 
> For me, an expensive lesson about catching falling knives and not putting a stop/loss in place.




Sultan,

You may have been a bit premature with the selling. It has been in a range for a while now 16 to 17 cents. It has rejected 15 cents on higher volume and a high close indicating some bullish bulls and it has finished on the high recently. It will be interesting to see which way it breaks out; up or down.

Snake


----------



## vicb (26 September 2006)

Should be an interesting long term investment, I have had a rough ride on this stock but seems to of hopefully found support around 16c.
We need more positive news from this company, posting a profit is a good start.


----------



## Sultan of Swing (26 September 2006)

Snake Pliskin said:
			
		

> Sultan,
> 
> You may have been a bit premature with the selling. It has been in a range for a while now 16 to 17 cents. It has rejected 15 cents on higher volume and a high close indicating some bullish bulls and it has finished on the high recently. It will be interesting to see which way it breaks out; up or down.
> 
> Snake




Thanks Snake

I'm still keeping an eye on it.

Cheers


----------



## vicb (18 October 2006)

Seems to be some positive support behind BXP at the moment.
Anybody have any thoughts on the late support.
You may be right Snake, it may be looking for a bullish run.
Seems to be a few punters having ago at it.


----------



## vicb (19 October 2006)

Interesting read from the age. Could see some signs of life in this stock yet.
Lindsay Fox may have read your post VAINGLORIOUS.

TRUCKING magnate Lindsay Fox has emerged with a substantial shareholding in On Q Group, a company that owns a software system designed to support electronic financial transactions. 
Linfox Share Investment, controlled by Fox Holdings, has purchased 6.2 million shares in the company from Raywood Communications.

The off-market transaction ”” which occurred while the company's shares were suspended from trading while it gets its audited accounts together ”” gave Fox a 9.4 per cent stake in the group.

On Q, which used to be called Australian Pure Fruits, and licenses its technology to Bill Express, has a market capitalisation of just $10 million. The purchase cost Fox $868,000.

While the rationale behind the purchase is not clear, Fox may have bought at a very interesting time. Bill Express, which is part-owned by On Q, has been the subject of recent takeover speculation. The word is industry rival E-Pay Asia is believed to be interested in a stake before launching a takeover offer.

Bill Express shares have soared this week on heavy trading volumes after recently floundering.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (20 October 2006)

vicb said:
			
		

> Seems to be some positive support behind BXP at the moment.
> Anybody have any thoughts on the late support.
> You may be right Snake, it may be looking for a bullish run.
> Seems to be a few punters having ago at it.




Some interesting action for sure here vicb!

Today's action on lower volume appears positive.


----------



## vicb (1 December 2006)

Good movment yesterday. Any thoughts as to why?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (21 February 2007)

After some higher volume yesterday it is up again and the trading volume is up compared to recent trading. I anticipate further rises.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (24 February 2007)

I am still bullish on BXP as I see some sellers getting out without a plunging price. Rejections of $0.19c.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (4 March 2007)

It's Snake Pliskin said:
			
		

> I am still bullish on BXP as I see some sellers getting out without a plunging price. Rejections of $0.19c.




I look like a fool now in hindsight.


----------



## mmmmining (4 March 2007)

I resisted the urge to buy BXP in the first few days after floating because I believed internet banking would kill BXP business model one day. I believe the story is still the same today.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (5 March 2007)

I sold today after hitting my loss level.


----------



## PALERIDER (7 March 2007)

Hmm, 

BXP cashflow is looking healthier at $23 Mill for the half year 07.  Some spent on R & D (very good) and the rest spent on growing the network ( still a good use of spare cash)  If this cashflow level continues for the rest of the year can we expect $46 mill cashflow / full dilution 460M shares = 10 cents cashflow per share?

Accounts payable and receivable are similar meaning it seems there is no juggling figures to artificially boost cashflow.  

Non cash item of depreciation write off is still high due to all the tech equipment BXP owns.  

EBITDA up 65% ( underlying profitability)

Currently earning 10% on equity which is  poor (reflects all extra cash spent on growing the business) but fully expect this company to return at least 15% on equity over next one-two years with high generation of extra cash.

Surely it can snaffle a piece of the $85 Billion pie that goes through Aussie Post?

Current equity is $67.3 mill / 460 mill shares (fully diluted ) x 14 % roe = reasonable 2007 earnings of  $0.02 per share x very conservative 12pe = 24 cents.

Is anybody else looking at this and what are your thoughts?


----------



## YELNATS (7 March 2007)

PALERIDER said:
			
		

> Hmm,
> Surely it can snaffle a piece of the $85 Billion pie that goes through Aussie Post?



Doubtful if they would get more than a small slice. Newsagents are not really set-up to take in and act as custodians for large sums of cash, security-wise and logistically, and its a low commission business for them, compared to say, Lotto.


----------



## PALERIDER (30 March 2007)

Thanks Yelnats,

Never the less BXP has built most of the network which covers all the facets of retailing plus more and I think you should see cashflow go to the bottom line, along with a push in advertising and release of new products.

It seems likely they will be looking to go into transactions on mobile phones in the near future.  I bought in recently for the long term.  

I noticed they have ramped up their website's Investor centre and will be doing roadshows soon.  

I am predicting some strong action here.  Should be interesting.


----------



## Glenhaven (30 March 2007)

I looked at BXP when they floated, but reached the conclusion that the management team failed on a number of aspects. I don't know if their has been any change, but I would suggest you have a look at them and reach your own conclusion.


----------



## Glenhaven (30 March 2007)

Look back at post 8 on this tread of the article from "The Australian Financial Review Nov 04" by Pierpont, and assure yourself that changes have occurred or it is not true.


----------



## mmmmining (30 March 2007)

Internet is killing BXP's business.


----------



## PALERIDER (30 April 2007)

Thanks Glenhaven and mmmmmmingg,

I have considered all these aspects as I have been researching the payments industry since April 06.

BXP has just released some interesting results

prepaid revenues up 19% pcp
number of bills paid up 88% pcp
number of over the counter bills paid up 143% pcp
number of bills compared to previous month up 39%

Other interesting facts:
Bill payments are higher margin than prepaid 
EBITDA margin increased from 3.25% to 3.7%
No more McDougals on board
Annuallised bill volume should be around $1.5 billion 2007
KPMG as auditors
Opportunity with low ROE and pe ratio.
XIP media is making loss.
BOPO shows very good promise.
Strenthened board with further appointments
Very strategic retail presence
Distribution businesses love high volumes with low margin - eg WOW, CML
Increased advertising and marketing.
Strong cashflow

Yelnats , do you know what margin TTS collects on its system - 3.5%? 

I'll be sticking to my guns.


----------



## Ang (10 May 2007)

I agree it looks strong in the accounting sense, and now if it can break 23 cents she should fly. There has been the resistance and couldn't break that a few months ago. If we have a strong market tomorrow we should see the break let's all hope. Could also be a good dividend coming.
Kind reg 
ang


----------



## PALERIDER (19 September 2007)

BXP looking good.

How does this look to you for June 2008

EBITDA $44M
minus Depreciation & Amortisation $15M
minus interest of $8M
minus tax of $6M
equals Net Profit $15M
Divided by full dilution 459 million shares = EPS 3.2 cents/share
times very conservative pe 12 = 3.2 x 12 = 38 cents

Reasonable share price June 2008 38 cents. (current price 18.5 cents)

Anybody else out there got some thoughts BXP


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (19 September 2007)

PALERIDER said:


> BXP looking good.
> 
> How does this look to you for June 2008
> 
> ...




Thanks for the fundamental view. It is good to see how it works sometimes.
BXP has been up and down like a yo-yo so what is going to drive it?


----------



## PALERIDER (19 September 2007)

Cheers Snake Pliskin,

Drivers for higher for EBITDA June 2008 will most likely come from :


more free cash flow to spend on advertising
less expense for building the network
higher bills processed
increased takeup of the Bopo card targeting specific markets
*much lower depreciation charges next year and the ones following*
increased licensing fees
increased profit in the media division
EBITDA has increased significantly year on year
has the free cash flow now for aquisitions or more organic growth

Basically they have built the network, people are increasingly using it, they have good increasing EBITDA, depreciation & CAPEX should decrease and stabilise, they spend good money on R&D, profits will show up significantly on the bottom line over the following year (in my opinion very likely)

Tis my opinion
Diclosure - I do own BXP


----------



## Ang (19 September 2007)

Looks good i have also a target of 38 cents there was an acsending triangle at one stage and i used the depth of the triangle.

Kind regards
ang01


----------



## YELNATS (29 May 2008)

What has happened to BXP? Has been in a trading halt or suspended since May 1. Notice they have some sort of dispute with Optus.


----------



## vida (8 July 2008)

Its all over with BXP.  The management were obviously just no good although they had a great idea and profitability at one time yet managed to stuff it up.
The company is going into administration and the corporate graveyard. RIP


----------



## YELNATS (12 July 2008)

vida said:


> Its all over with BXP.  The management were obviously just no good although they had a great idea and profitability at one time yet managed to stuff it up.
> The company is going into administration and the corporate graveyard. RIP





Yes, they couldn't compete with the might and power of Australia Post plus the internet for customers paying bills.

I feel most sorry for the small business newsagents who shelled out in good faith and lost heavily on this sorry investment.


----------

