Warners staffer dumps stock

Hypebot suggests that those who know most about Warner Music Group aren't seeing stock as an investment:

But according to respected investment trade publication Barron's, insiders are "hearing a different tune" and last week unloaded $3 million in stock.

Barron's points specifically to Vice Chairman of Strategy and Operations Michael Fleisher who on June 2nd sold 400,000 shares for $3 million, an average of $7.41 a share. Fleisher, who joined the company as CFO in 2005 still owns 766,207 shares.

Now, it could just be that Fleisher needed some ready cash. We're all a little short right now, aren't we? It doesn't have to mean any sort of inside knowledge of the way the wind is blowing.

Thanks for the shares, but Bono wants his money

Back when LiveNation signed up U2, part of the deal was a large chunk of LiveNation stock being transferred to the Dutch band. Presumably LiveNation hoped that this would give Bono and his chums a sharper interest in performing well - if they do well, the company does well; if the company does well, they will do well. A virtuous circle.

Unfortunately, U2 have decided they'll rather have the cash, and have flogged off their shares. Even more unpleasantly for LiveNation, the company had promised to guarantee the stock would be worth at USD25million - a guarantee which might have been wise when the deal was struck, but which is looking a little sick now that the markets have got troubles.

Indeed, the stock has plummeted so far that LiveNation are going to have to find USD19million for U2.

It's not entirely clear that it makes sense to suddenly pitch up to your employer and demand - in straightened times - that they find millions and millions of dollars from somewhere; it might be thought of as a little self-defeating to give financial problems to the company to whom you look for investment in your career. Perhaps U2 really, badly need the money. Or maybe they were just afraid that the stock value of LiveNation could have wiped out the company before they got a chance to cash it in. Could it be that U2 know what a stinker the next U2 album will be?

Napster finds buyer. No, really

The long search for a buyer for Napster - or "search for a mark", as I understand it's known - has reached an end, with US electrical chain Best Buy shoveling about USD125million for the ex-con music download site which has struggled to make a go of it since going straight.

Business analysts are using words like "intriguing":

Morgan Keegan & Co. analyst Tavis McCourt called the offer a "potentially intriguing acquisition."

See? What that basically translates as is "I can't think of a single reason why they would throw their money away on this, but just in case they have a plan, I'm not going to point and laugh in public".

The stock market knew how to react, though: Napster's share price shot up, like someone had suddenly found a place where you could sell five dollar bills for a tenner; Best Buy's sank.

[Thanks to Michael M]

MIDEM 2008: Qtrax: follow the money

Why would a company announce its super-duper new service when it knew that it didn't have any licenses for the service? Hypebot wonders if it was all about the share price for QTrax:

Another explanation may be stock manipulation. Qtrax is controlled by Brilliant Tech Corp (BLLN) who's penny stock has languished at 5 cents for more than a year. But on Monday rafter the announcement the price almost doubled to 9 cents before falling back to a 4.5 cents after revelations from the label.s And now speculators willing to gamble that Qtrax will complete the deals have raised the stock to 5.5 cents.

What's even more interesting is that the price [dynamic page, so won't be relevant by the end of the week] appears to have hit 9 cents at the end of trading on Friday - before the announcement - despite there being very few trades of BLLN shares; there was, however, a lot of activity in the market on the Monday.

[Thanks to Michael M for the link]
[Part of MIDEM 2008]

Shrinking floorspace sends Warners through the floor

Troubled times for stockholders of Warner Music Group: Market expert Rich Greenfield has rubbished their shares for the second time in a week. He now reckons they're worth five dollars a piece; the markets are working hard to make his prediction come true.

His main reason for the gloom - besides, obviously, looking at the artists they're working with - is rumours that US chains are looking to cut back the shelf room they give to CDs, possibly by as much as 30%, in order to use the space for something a little more profitable. Like customer washrooms or something.

Warners: The Northern Rock of the music industry

Hypebot reports on the woes facing Warner Music Group. With its plan A - merger with EMI - off the table, the label is suffering from a lack of investor confidence. Its shares are down to a shade under ten bucks; back in autumn of 2006 they were over $25. The smart money, it seems, thinks that Bronfman doesn't really have a plan B.

EMI shares dropping like especially heavy flightless birds

We're not sure you can blame it entirely on Robbie Williams' planned swing album looking dubious now, but EMI have issued a fresh profit warning - the second this year. This time, they're saying the six-to-ten percent slump in profits they warned about in January? It might be closer to 15%.

Norah Jones' album didn't do the trick, then, boys?

EMI shares had started a bounce back after falling as low as 201p, but are still nearly 14 per cent down on the day's trading.

If you see one of their executives at the Brits tonight, do the decent thing and don't expect them to buy their own drinks, eh?