Its a bit weird, RM met with both Meltwater and ISD management? Meltwater (who is by the way a foreign entity) management would have then given them honest feedback on the position of ISD, and its value proposition?? Bizarre.
"So, the half year result introduced some issues that should resolve themselves over time, being the 6-month contract timing difference and Meltwater’s tactical exploitation of that timing. However, we also have some lasting issues, being the recognition that copyright holders have significant power to influence ISD’s economics, and the potential that Meltwater may see further discounting as an attractive path to gain market share in future. ISD has a dominant (and very valuable) share in the domestic market, and vulnerability to price competition presents real downside risk."
The copyright lobby and its influence over ISD, and the fact that Meltwater is a less costly alternative to ISD are not new problems, and were possibly introduced to the analyst in the half year results, but have been issues for ISD for many years.
The thing that was confirmed by the half year results was the quality (of lack of thereof) of ISD management. This has not been addressed by those at Montgomery's - which is why I think ThereAbouts is totally correct (or ThereAbouts)
