I do not share your optimisim about this business model. In a...

I do not share your optimisim about this business model. In a nutshell, MYA sell ATMs to investors making a margin on the hardware. The hardware is then leased to a wholly owned subsidiary which must pay MYA a profit share + the investor 20% on their investment. The problem for the subsidiary is finding locations which will be profitable considering significant price competition from CUS, GRG, iCash, Cashcard etc. The risk for MYA is the same for all ATM ISOs, in that they must find profitable locations in an increasingly price competitive market. IMO this will be harder for MYA than the others in that they are promising returns to their investors which will increase their cost base. Remember, the boon received by CUS shareholders pre direct charging occured because they had a large customer base contracted at pre direct charging prices. The increased revenue from DC directly hit the bottom line. All these new floats are competing in a post DC market, so won't see the same once off impact