TSE (Tallinn) Market Overviews
Estonian Stock Market Overview06/03/2006-10/03/2006
This week was more active in Estonian Stock Market. The overall turnover reached €12,355,557.72 and there were 714 deals made. However, the OMX Tallinn Index decreased by 2.13% from 660.50 to 646.46. This is due to the fact that 8 out of 9 companies from the Baltic Main List experienced decreases in their stock prices and only one was happy with increase. A bit different situation happened in the Baltic I-list, where two Estonian companies went down and three went up. Nevertheless, the overall tendency was downwards sloping this week The main player was AS Tallink Grupp (TAL1T) consuming €7,452,768.72 i.e. more than a half of the whole turnover and making the greatest number of deals – 205.
The only company from the Baltic Main List which experienced positive change in its share price is the biggest cable-TV operator in Estonia and the second largest broadband internet provider AS Starman (SMN1T). It amounted 0.52% of the share price, therefore can be considered as marginal. The price of the shares was now stable for almost a month and was at the level of about €3.70. This can be a sign that the market found the optimal price for the shares of AS Starman for the current conditions.
The happiest I-list company this week can be concluded to be AS Klementi (KLEAT) – with increase in the price of share by 7.39% from €2.03 to €2.18. Nevertheless, this increase is caused by a relatively low volume of trade. There were only 15 deals made and the turnover was €5,141.85. Perhaps the most influential factor to this increase was the appointment of the new chairman of the management board which seemed to please the investors.
AS Merko Ehitus (MKO1T) is a company of paradoxes – this week its share prices decreased by 5.53% from €16.99 to €16.06. Comparing to the previous week (an increase of 1.74%) this result is bad and it proved the trend for AS Merko Ehitus to be downwards slopping. The results for the year 2005 caused only a short effect and did not attract the investors from tendency to disinvest in this company.
By Ramojus Gineika
