Larry,
Here's the direct link:
www4.50megs.com
Also, here's the text....CMGI CEO David Wetherell answered
these questions on January 17, 2000.
Q: Lisa6: I saw the question on server farms - I'm wondering if there are
any plans to move into the Storage Area Network (SAN) arena?
A: CMGI is developing a global content distribution network of data centers leveraging Engage profiles for intelligent caching. Currently, our plans are to optimize this caching with other forms of intelligent caching, beginning with Akamai. This will lead to many new opportunities including numerous applications for storage networks as web hosting gets redefined to incorporate global network resource leveling based on the dynamic needs of the Web.
Q: paulh54: re: FreeAV and WIN2000 OS: I was told today by AV tech support that AV's free access service is not yet ready to run on Windows 2000 (which I am running on now and can confirm it is not compatable). Will FreeAv be ready for the official launch date of Windows 2000 which I am told will be on or about February 1st?
A: We will strive to have 1stUp (the provider of the ALTA and Excite free web access services) working as close to the delivery of WIN2000 as possible. A date has not been announced, but we do not see this causing any significant issues.
Q: AirCooled: Does Free AltaVista plan to eventually offer Free AV access for MAC users?
A: Yes
Q: montycris: Was wondering about the man behind the words.. kids? hobbies? handicap?
A: Though I shy away from mixing my personal life with business, I will share some basics: Married, father of three, who when not on the Web is a 6-handicap golfer who enjoys playing piano (mostly improv blues/jazz), working outdoors, reading (mostly non-fiction, with occasional sci-fi and humorous fiction) and taking long walks in wildlife sanctuaries. Allergic to most forms of pollen and politics, but I'm grateful there are some talented folks who take care of both maladies. Favorite golf book: Missing Links. It's hilarious.
Q: Nothing.But.Net: As an individual who has worked at times in the advertising and broadcast industries (the old bricks and mortar stuff), I am aware of the magnitude of trade and barter revenue and expense that is reported according to generally accepted accounting principles for customers/advertisers who, for the moment, do not have the cash to pay for the requisite services.
May I inquire:
a) To what extent is the practice of non-cash trade and barter used in
"cross-pollinating" the respective P&L's of majority owned CMGI and minority owned @Ventures investments and in your opinion, does it represent a material percent of reported revenues and expense?
b) Do you forsee this percent as increasing or decreasing in the future?
A: Typically, we have very little barter revenue (from 0-5 percent), but some of it is good business, as it can greatly increase the traffic to your site by exposing it to new customers/users you may not otherwise reach. We have no barter revenue between the CMGI companies, as we work hard to integrate them anyway. I do not foresee that we will alter this practice.
Q: CurveRider (long form question broken up into several Q&A's by DW):
Part 1: "ENGA vs. DCLK".
In his article "The Battle for Eyeballs: In the race for new media
advertising hegemony, bet on DoubleClick", published in the January 15, 2000 issue of Barron's, Bill Alpert makes certain statements I'd appreciate your comment on. [For clarity, his comments are in quotes, my questions are in brackets.]
"The Engage Knowledge database has profiles of more than 42 million
consumers, accruing from those consumers' visits to 900 Websites." [Are
these numbers current and accurate? If not, what are the correct numbers?]
A: This is roughly correct as of about 45 days ago, but we recently started collecting the clicks from the over 1700 sites in the Flycast Network. We have set up a new program, whereby sites can automatically add themselves to the Flycast network, and we are getting thousands of smaller sites in the process.
Q: CurveRider: Part 2: "Abacus should enable marketers to target ads more precisely than Engage. Why? Because its database of $3.5 billion purchases, combined with demographics and Internet viewing behavior, is likely to be far more predictive than 'Net gathered information alone. Abacus' 1999 revenues of better than $60 million, says DoubleClick's Epstein, attest to the value of its database." ["Likely to be far more predictive..."?? Isn't this simply Mr. Alpert's opinion? How would you refute this statement?]
A: Certainly, this appears to be Mr. Alperin's opinion. We looked carefully at Abacus before DCLK purchased and decided to pass for several reasons:
First, the Abacus database is offline data that has no application to online targetability unless it can be matched up with the names and addresses of individuals' online data. This is hard to do, because the vast majority of the time, sites do not know the name and address of an individual at their site. In 100% of these cases Engage will be better.
Second, there is a privacy issue here. Before DCLK goes ahead and matches online data with offline data, they should get the permission of the user, which should include their ability to view just what data is being maintained on them. My guess is that for the few percentage points of the Abacus database that DCLK can match up with online names and addresses, a similarly small percentage of people will give them the permission to do this. Engage cannot violate people's privacy, because its profiles are 100% anonymous, a critical decision we made four and a half years ago, when we first planned out the path of Engage. Again, for everyone that chooses to not have their online data merged with online data, Engage is better 100% of the time.
Third, the Abacus database is mostly North American. Engage is global and captures 100% of the clicks through a website and can target 100% of those individuals, regardless of where they are from. There are many countries in the world, such as Germany, that will not allow direct marketing to an individual by name and address without the express permission of the individual ahead of time. Engage is already being used by most of the largest ad networks in Europe, since it does not invade privacy.
Fourth, Engage profiling can be more targetable than Abacus info, that is, if a site happens to have a match with Abacus. It depends on the application. This is because the Engage clickstream profile tends to be a more recent and comprehensive profile of an individual's interest. With the Abacus database, someone may have become part of the list because of a bird feeder or some other obscure product that they bought for themselves or someone else. Perhaps that Abacus product purchase occured two years ago, and the individual has no more interest in another such product, whereas Engage may have numerous subject areas of interest with varying levels of known recency, frequency and duration of those interests, all numerically tabulated and indexed for extremely useful targetability.
Fifth, each Engage profile is no older than 90 days, whereas the average Abacus profile is 365 days old. Typically, the more recent the direct response in a given interest area, the more responsive the individual is to a direct marketing offer.
Lastly, if a site so desires, matches of Engage profiles can be made with offline data, with the customer's permission, of course, and derive the best of both worlds, and there are other databases besides Abacus for accomplishing this. However, independent tests show that Engage dramatically increases response to targetable and non-targetable web site pages without having to do this.
Q: CurveRider: Part 3: "DoubleClick hopes its Swiss -- like neutrality will gain it the ad business of publishers nervous about showing their click traffic to CMGI, itself a huge Web publisher." [Are you aware of customers or potential customers ever expressing such nervousness? Could you comment on how you might reassure them if they did?]
A: The opposite is true. Sites do not need to contribute to the Engage Knowledge repository of profiles to enjoy the benefits of the profiles. It simply costs a little more if they do not contribute. Most of Engage's customers readily agree to contribute. In fact, we asked the permission of each site in the AdSmart and Flycast Networks (over 2075), and to my knowledge, virtually not one site chose not to have their site contribute to Engage, and many of those sites are publishers. Why would they care? Engage cannot violate their customers' privacy (as could be the case with the DCLK/Abacus approach), and Engage profiling should help them make more money from our ad networks.
Q: CurveRider: Part 4: "DoubleClick's ad-revenue run-rate is double that of rival CMGI, and DoubleClick's gross margins run about 50%, compared to 35% for CMGI's publicly held ad units." [Do these numbers seem right to you?] "Rival CMGI should likewise prosper in the 'Net ad business. However, those results are likely to be obscured by the firm's other Internet operations and its rapid-fire wheeling and dealing. In other words, DoubleClick is the pure play in this business."
(FYI - personally, if given a chance, I would have rewritten it this way:
"CMGI should likewise prosper in the 'Net ad business. However, their
results are likely to be bolstered by the firm's other Internet operations
and its rapid-fire wheeling and dealing. In other words, DoubleClick has all
its eggs in one basket, while CMGI has its many eggs in many baskets -- and hens, roosters, and a hot hen house! ;).
A: I'm not sure about the numbers, but I do know that we are seeing an overall improvement in CPM rates, so margins should improve as well. Furthermore, I suspect that DCLK's highest margin revenue was the keyword targeted inventory of ALTA, which they are losing. As for revenues, if you add Adsmart, Engage, and Flycast revenues together and take 50% of ALTA's revenue away from DCLK, DCLK is nowhere near double our group, and that does not include AdForce. My guess is we are growing faster, as we are adding more sites to our networks than DCLK, and DCLK lost a significant portion of ALTA by virtue of the terms of their contract with ALTA.
As for our own variation on a direct marketing pure play, please stay tuned....phew!! Curve, you trying to where me out?
Q: profit_guy:re: ENGA, can you help me out on this math please?
I came across this excerpt on "technology evaluation.com"..."AudienceNet
itself is expected to grow to about 1000 sites by the end of the year 2000.
We estimate that the sites in this network will be serving 25 billion ad
impressions each month by that time. While there are no estimates for the
percentage of impressions that will be served through AudienceNet, a simple calculation is instructive. If 1 percent of those 25 billion ads go through AudienceNet at an average CMP of $50 (i.e., five cents per impression) Engage would gross $12.5 million per month. Since a large percentage of their inventory payments would go back to other CMGI companies, and since their largest website is CMGI's AltaVista, the net result would be that Engage does very well, and CMGI, in technical terms, makes out like a bandit."
link
Are these extrapolations accurate? Also, I was not able to attend the recent ENGA/CMGI shareholders' meeting, but some one quoted you as saying something to the effect that "ENGA will literally have to envelope all of the CMGI properties"...can you share any insight?
A: Your CPM assumptions may be a bit high, and it is not accurate that a large percentage of the revenue goes back to CMGI companies. It depends on who the customer is. Sometimes, it will be a CMGI, such as ALTA, MyWay, iCast, etc., but most ENGA customers are not CMGI companies. Nonetheless, we anticipate that within 5-10 years the majority of the $200B of advertising being spent in the US will be spent on interactive advertising, since TV, radio, and network appliances will increase the amount of time that Americans spend viewing online media will increase dramatically from the present 9%.
As for my comment at ENGA's shareholder meeting, I only joked about ENGA getting big enough to buy its parent.
Q: rmarcusb: The recent annual report brought HotLinks to my attention, and I think it's a great service. HotLinks.com provides a link
(<http://www.redherring.com/cod/121699.html)> to a recent article that
suggested added value by incorporating a service like HotLinks into a portal like AltaVista. I concur. What's your opinion?
A: IMHO, HotLinks is a great product/service that is of benefit to many. ALTA is one of the many.
Q: Infidel re: Engage: If possible, could you explain the strategy behind
IPO'ing Engage and keeping it as a separate and independent company from the Advertising entity (AdSmart/AdForce/Flycast/AdTech) instead of combining it with the Advertising entity to create a company similar to Doubleclick?
A: We are working on ways to better leverage and integrate our direct marketing business units and hope to share those plans shortly.
Q: mcmom: I wonder what CMGIs strategy is for dominating the interactive
television based internet market. Recently uncovered a company that seems to be headed in a similar direction as ENGAGE in that they collect demographic data on users. The company is IATV or hyper TV as the product is called.This seems to be the next area of growth.
A: Engage's technology applies to all interactive environments, which includes the Web, TV, radio, and network appliances of all kinds. Engage's approach should be the most useful in these new arenas, as it is accumulating the largest set of anonymous profiles.
Q: saveslivesbyday:re:Internet Radio: My question is regarding the rapid development of Internet radio and CMGI's plans to enter the "audio advertisement" space. Also, could Engage capture the "listening preferences" in a way that would enable advertisers to target
listeners based on their interests?
A: A click is a click, and as long as the subject area of the click is useful to targeting, ENGA can monetize it. This applies to radio stations and listening preferences, as many advertisers today target just that.
Q: BIGBUCKS! Do you or does anybody know when legislation will decide if the type of tracking ENGA does on the net will pass and continue to be allowed? Will this be a prolonged dragged out affair? Or is this answer coming soon? Or am I missing something?
A: Given that Engage provides anonymous profiling and targeting, and given that it satisfies governments where direct marketing laws are more stringent than the US, such as Germany, we do not foresee this being an issue. The same may not be the case for others in the field that do not provide for anonymity of profiling. To my knowledge, Engage is the only scalable anonymous profiling technology today. It certainly has the most profiles.
Q: Caleb: re: image compression tech: What is the importance of
image compression technology in this era of the Internet and Internet
appliances? Would you say it's extremely important, very important or just
plain old important? :-)
A: It's extremely important, as we are a long time away from unlimited bandwidth.
Q: qiuboy: What is CMGi's China strategy? Will CMGi team up with some Chinese internet companies(other than the Shanghai venture) to penetrate the huge potential China B2B market? I think the biggest barrier for Chinese enterprises to use internet as a business tool is the language. One of my friend and I are planning to establish a internet B2B company to serve small Chinese companies for their international trading. Is CMGi also planning to cash in this area?
A: Pacific Century Cyberworks is our primary partner for China and all other countries in Asia. More on this relationship will be forthcoming soon. In Japan, we also have a significant strategic relationship with Sumitomo. In addition, we are working with the Shainghai Information Investment group, a venture firm owned by the Chinese government, to build a large consumer portal. All of these relationships and initiatives will be complemented by @Ventures Asia. We anticipate this to be comprised of a few limited partners, which we are looking to announce soon.
Q: djames: Front page of the Investors Business Daily (January 3,2000) headline "Is China ready to bully Taiwan?" (Missile buildup seen as threat to Island Security..) CMGI's recent foray into the ASIA markets implies more risk then just market movements. Given that China (And Russia) have broken EVERY major trade pack with the US since the '70's (They must have studied the US agreements with the indigenous peoples of the Americas) Given the possibility of technology (An open Internet in China) possibly changing how the people of the biggest nation on earth view and interact with the world, How does CMGI feel about its involvement with such a volatile political, social and moral issue? The involvement with China seems to have the possibility of doing a lot better good then just
increasing the bottom line of CMGI. Can you comment on this? (Without
writing a book)
A: I view China far differently. They are now a member of the World Trade Organization, and they have not broken "every major trade pack", as you state. Quite the opposite. The country is making dramatic progress on all fronts, as is evidenced by the fact that the average per capita income in the metropolitan areas of China is between $7,000-$10,000 US/year, much higher than most realize.
The Chinese are extremely entrepreneurial. Hong Kong is the greatest example of free market capitalism in the world today, and in many regards, greater China is taking its lead from Hong Kong. For example, today thousands of independent franchisees sell, service and install satellite dishes and install cable and fiber head ends allowing TV signals to reach tens of millions of households in China (and over 135mm hhlds across 60 countries in Asia). This has been going on for nearly 9 years, and the founder of this endeavor, Richard Li, is the chairman of Pacific Century Cyberworks (PCCW), our primary partner in China. PCCW's task is to convert many of these households to be high bandwidth interactive. We anticipate that many of CMGI's products and services will be deployed in achieving this endeavor.
As for the benefits of the Internet on China, it is of great benefit to all peoples of the world, regardless of geographic origin or economic circumstance. Through the community features of the Web, it helps break down barriers caused by misunderstandings. I see little else but good that can come from it for China and other nations as they embrace it more.
Q: redelman: Question about CMGI's buttons on CPQ keyboards. When does it start? Which CMGI companies will be on those buttons?
A: Altavista derives millions of page views today from Compaq's integration and bundling. We expect this to embrace other products and services in the CMGI family over the next few months. Likely candidates include iCAST and MyWay, among others.
Q: manfmnantucket: CMGI operational structure: The topic of how CMGI is organized is interesting to me, as I think it's a new kind of company. An operational incubator, so to speak. The only thing I can compare it to organizationally is DEC in the early 80's, which had matrix management for what were essentially 7 different operating companies. The market growth was such that the inefficiencies of this mgmt structure were necessary for speed to market. CMGI's incubator structure, though, would seem to avoid the problem DEC later faced - that of integrating the sub-companies into one. Still, there is much to be gained from synergy between the startups. I have noticed the various sites all being AKAM-ized and integrated into the kieratsu. So my question (finally) regards what sort of management structure you have in place to make it efficient for startups to integrate with the other startups' technology. As CMGI grows, Metcalf kicks in - the Nth startup needs to learn and integrate with N-1 other companies/technologies. I would think the ideal solution would be to have a roving engineering SWAT team to help each startup so that the learning curve happens once instead of N*N-1 times. I recall your saying that CMGI options functioned as a motivator, which is good, but can you elaborate on what operational structures you are putting in place (or thinking of) to help this turbo-kieratsu?
A: We meet regularly (ranging from weekly to semi-annually) as a group between the companies at the CEO, CTO, VP Marketing & Sales, and VP Business Development levels. This includes CMGI's subs and @Ventures investments. There is an active ongoing exchange of info, leads, issues, technologies and what works and doesn't work. What may be good for one company may not work optimally for another, so having the separate business units helps.
As we add more companies and investments to the mix, the leverage of the group increases for eachother and in the marketplace. More partners approach us, and more overall growth occurs. It is a highly successful model that is not without its management challenges, but we are finding many ways to improve upon it. Importantly, it is not limited to any one segment of the web, such as B2B. Many of the most important B2B partners in the world, such as PCCW, will begin as B2C partners, and quickly become B2B. I think our more comprehensive, diversified set of companies has it obvious advantages in these and other areas.
I could write a book on this topic, but I do not have the time right now, as we have all these companies, and I have all these other questions. ;)
Q: jstrom: Would you consider allowing CMGI shareholders to fund
the new @Ventures B2B fund (and other @Ventures Funds as well) before
placing the balance with Investment Bankers for public sale? [your core CMGI shareholders would relish this opportunity to participate in new Venture Funds and it would save CMGI money as well]
A: No, it is not efficient, even though we realize it has broad appeal. People will just have to settle for CMGI shares as a vehicle to participate.
Q: swd999: Just wondering if you think DSL or Cable will be the winner for high speed access in the future.
A: Both DSL and cable will service many customers in the near to medium term. Different forms of wireless may win over the longer term.
Q: JrKeller: When do you anticipate iCAST will be up and running? Its debut has been delayed, hasn't it? How come?
A: We anticipate the iCAST delivery to be within the next few weeks. They are on the home stretch. We chose to wait, because it wasn't ready with enough of the features we wanted to see for prime time. Since first impressions are lasting ones, it's important we do it right the first time. That being said, there is much more that will continue to roll out in the months and years to follow the initial launch. Though the team is exhausted, they are charged, as well, by the sense of mission of launching something special. That's always the hope in any massive development project.
Q: gitmonee
In regards to ICast: I want to know if CMGI has any friends left in the
old-line media world. It seems that CMGI has burned bridges because of:
1: USA Networks argument
2: Braun and the other old media executive left ICast
3: ICast is moving into 1st place in internet broadcasting, but I am sure
NBC and others are not pleased to see 'their' spot occupied. I want to know
if CMGI needs the help/acceptance/support of the old world media companies?
If not do we plan to go it alone? I don't want ICast to be an outcast,
shunned by the traditional players. It makes me think of that Soap Opera
star (Susan Lucci) who was nominated Emmy about 20 times but never got the
award because the 'traditional establishment' never accepted her- only the
fans accepted her. I think she later got it, though. Any comments?
A: We have many friends in the media industry, some because of some of the reasons you listed above. I do not see what we are doing to be competitive with anything I'm aware of coming out of NBC. In many ways, iCAST's goals reinvent much of traditional entertainment and media, leveraging new media is some new ways. We suspect there will be many in traditional media that will see value is working with us, rather than against us.
Q: djames: CMGI depends on using its own stock for buying new companies. In the advent of a prolonged downturn in the market does CMGI have a significant war chest or "other" strategy to rely on that will last through ANY drought?
A: As our companies go public, they can always use their own equity and cash. In a downturn, presumably the equity of others goes down as well, so CMGI equity may still be a relevant, relatively valuable currency. Furthermore, we have over $8.5B of cash and marketable securities on this date. It is our expectation that this amount will grow significantly, as others within the CMGI family go public, markets willing.
Q: p40warhawk: My question has to do with anti-virus software/solutions. Does Cmgi have any interest in the production of----or alliance with----this part of the industry? Do you see it as a permanent and growing part of internet life?
A: We have no fundamental plans in this area, but it will continue to play an important role going forward.
Q: Jonas :Why not BOMP all CMGI holdings? One thing I liked about the internet is, that it allowed the collective wisdom of people to be harnessed, esp. customers. So far, none of the sites run by CMGI really has a very good, internet enabled suggestion box. People do submit suggestions, but they are never seen nor commented upon, like on this BOMP board, which discourages further suggestions. The question is, why not BOMP them all? Not you, necessarily, but some type of ombudsman holding court, on how the design, usability, etc. of all CMGI holdings/products might be improved.
A: Good idea. The companies that do the best are the ones that listen the hardest to their customers and act smartly on it. We do this, but clearly, we could do a better job of letting others know it.
Q: Caleb: Are any of CMGi's holdings/subsidiaries involved in the unified messaging arena? If not, are there any plans to enter it? (e.g. AltaVista?)
A: We have been watching this space for years, and yes, we have companies involved. We are doing a great deal with email through a small acquisition we did called Nascent, and with instant messaging through Tribal Voice (recently ranked number one in the category by PC Magazine) and Activerse. We will not deliver a unified messaging solution ourselves. Rather it is likely we will work with emerging standards.
Q: Dannyboy: What is your view on how taxes will be applied to the internet? (or current taxes collected.) I can't believe that the states and cities will just let all those sales tax dollars slip through their fingers...Not to mention foreign countries.
A: I do not see how governments could adequately regulate taxes on the Internet. IMHO, that's a good thing.
Q: gitmonee: According to this weeks Business Week (BW) article on the Asian internet market, Lycos is late to market and will have trouble catching up to Yahoo. BW says CMGI owns Lycos. While this is only partially true, (I think we own about 16-18%), I want to know how much influence CMGI has over Lycos, especially since rumors say you do not get along at all with the CEO of Lycos (due of course to the USA Networks fiasco). How can CMGI be late to market in China (gasp!)? Due to the overwhelming potential of that market, shouldn't CMGI be devoting 50% of its attention there? I am aware of the deal with Pacific Century, but Yahoo is hooked up with a Chinese Red Chip which may open up more doors for them...
A: We have no influence over Lycos' direction, but we are working with them on a few fronts, while exploring others. It's getting late early for partnering in Asia, and I believe that we have the premier pan-Asian partner in PCCW.
Q: jaman1: Have you given any consideration to lengthening the holding period of CMGI for participation in your babies being release into the wilds? It would seem that this would be a great way to reward those with a longer horizon, as well enhance their chances for participation. It would also seem to be another way, other than the great returns!, of encouraging people to maintain their positions...
A: No, but we will think it over.
Q: RichieH: What is the cutting edge these days for PDA? Wireless is just now coming on-line with the Palm VII and wireless modems for the other manufacturers units. Are any of the CMGI babies doing anything to capture this rapidly expanding market? Is there anything on the horizon (application) that will make these PDA's a MUST HAVE?
A: PDA's and other web appliances will gain an increasing percentage of online viewing time over the next decade, perhaps the majority. MyWay through its relationship with BellSouth and another company to be announced will be unveiling work it has been doing within the next couple of months. This work should reach millions and will be shared by others within the CMGI family.
Q: RichieH: What is the cutting edge these days for PDA? Wireless is just now coming on-line with the Palm VII and wireless modems for the other manufacturers units. Are any of the CMGI babies doing anything to capture this rapidly expanding market? Is there anything on the horizon (application) that will make these PDA's a MUST HAVE?
A: PDA's and other web appliances will gain an increasing percentage of online viewing time over the next decade, perhaps the majority. MyWay through its relationship with BellSouth and another company to be announced will be unveiling work it has been doing within the next couple of months. This work should reach millions and will be shared by others within the CMGI family.
Q: gitmonee: Is 1Clickcharge the same as 1click (isn't this what Alta Vista uses)? Is this a low margin business with explosive growth potential?
A: Not sure what 1Click is, but 1Clickcharge, along the entire market for micropayments, has significant growth potential.
Q: djames: Long Question: When my wireless pda and my Internet cell phone fully merge into a single product that can talk to my car computer my desktop and my household appliances, as well as serf the web and order services on line i.e.: My plane lands in L.A, I open my phone hit a single button log into Alta Vista and with my stylus click on "Search by current location" "as opposed to ("Search by specific address" ) (Did I mention my new phone will also have a GDS chip in it to provide my location anywhere in the world?) Then I click on "Search for Hotel" "Or "search for Restaurant" or "Search for car rental" , I get to choose how far the location is from my current position, for instance I want a car that I can pick up AT THE airport so I thin a 1/16 mile radius of my current
location. Up pop four or five banners for car rentals within my range, I
click on a banner and I can scroll through price size etc. I can then click
on a button that says "Dial current" and my phone calls the rental place. I
then find a local hotel and restaurant and entertainment in the same manner (luckily my phone remembers my past preferences and only shows me banners of what it thinks I will like). Is CMGI ready to compete in this space? How will CMGI compete in this space. It seems to imply an enormous amount of infrastructure (each business will have to update there own information, restaurants may want to display a scaled down menu etc. Individual business may want to pay for inclusion in such a network. It would also need specific targeted advertisement. Do you see your current holdings ENGAGE 1click charge etc. participating in this space and how will they do so?
A: The short answer to your looooonnnngggg question is, yes, we are ready to compete. Today, Vicinity, a company in which we are the largest shareholder can deliver the location assistance you are seeking. We are in the process of integrating MyWay content with pagers, cell phones and other devices. In addition, we should have an advantage when it comes to targeting on these devices, because of Engage. Many of our companies will play a role in this space. How can they not? It's where |
