UK 09:34 Friday, 6 November 2026
Breaking news and expert analysis on fast-moving AIM and LSE listed shares
Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from ShareProphets). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
Following Ben Edelman’s presentation at the UK Investor Show at the weekend, ShareSoc Deputy Chairman Roger Lawson has published a blog entitled ‘Impressions of a self-publicist, and Blinkx’. I’d concur with Doc Holiday that it is the quality of the work rather than whether the writer is perceived to be someone ‘of modesty’ or not that is of relevance.
Already a member? Sign in
• All premium articles
• Tom Winnifrith’s Bearcast
• Access to all the entire nearly 13 year archive
• ShareProphets Daily Newsletter
Cancel any time
This area of the ShareProphets.com site is for independent financial commentary. These blogs are provided by independent authors via a common carrier platform and do not represent the opinions of ShareProphets.com. ShareProphets.com does not monitor, approve, endorse or exert editorial control over these articles and does not therefore accept responsibility for or make any warranties in connection with or recommend that you or any third party rely on such information. The information available at ShareProphets.com is for your general information and use and is not intended to address your particular requirements. In particular, the information does not constitute any form of advice or recommendation by ShareProphets.com and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any investment decisions.
Comments
King bob
I read the article by Roger Lawson, you will have to show me what is libellous. He disagrees with the way Ben presented and thought he may be biased. I will not be investing in Blinx as they don’t fit my remit and the points he raised seem valid. But people are entitled to their own (non libellous)opinions.
Tom Winnifrith
King Bob
He accused me of making a defamatory remark about Blinkx’s lawyers. That is libellous since I didn’t make a defamatory remark. I accused them of being “bully boys”. I have seen the letter they sent me and it was a bullying letter with overt threats. Mt Lawson has not seen that letter so was in no position to judge whether my remark was true (thus not defamatory ) or not.
As it happens Blinkx’s lawyers have not said my remark was defamatory, the only person who has is Mr Lawson.
As to Mr Lawson’s views on Edelman he is entitled to say what he wishes. I disagree with him but i defend his right to an opinion, just think he is rather silly to have made that defamatory comment about my remark.
I cannot say that I plan to do anything about it, just that it makes him look a trifle silly. Which is a pity as generally he is a sound sort of fellow.
Best wishes
Tom
David Atherton
I listened to Ben, and it’s simple. They “are” Zango, and their business model is built on deception. Nobody wants their software, it is IMHO malware, and quite frankly, what they are doing will lead ultimately to a shutdown. So value=nil.