SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : InfoSpace (INSP): Where GNET went!
INSP 136.61-2.4%Dec 5 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Sarkie who wrote (7943)6/22/1999 1:33:00 AM
From: Jeff Dryer  Read Replies (3) of 28311
 
I often wonder if financial journalists know anything about what they are talking about in their columns. I was over at Red Herring a few minutes ago and the concluding paragraph of a feature article by J. Carlo Cannell (president of Cannell Capital Management, an alternative asset adviser) reads as follows:

redherring.com

"Will the Internet revolution commence? Yes. But the estimates of Internet companies' losses -- the hip way to analyze securities these days -- continues to increase. And if you know history, then you know that Go2Net (Nasdaq: GNET), Ameritrade (Nasdaq: AMTD), and the ETrade Group (Nasdaq: EGRP) will not be up more than 12,000 percent a year from now. Has Internet investing become a mania? Indeed."

Comments:

How in the world does Go2Net belong in this concluding paragraph? Go2Net wasn't mentioned earlier in the article. Losses? And how is the 12,000 percent remark relevant? Go2Net is up about 1,000 percent in the last 52 weeks. So what if it's not likely to be up 12,000 percent?

These people write as if they're making a cookie batch and they decide to throw in a few chocolate chips and some nuts. "There, now my article is interesting." But is it useful, or just noise pollution?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext