Glenn,
Thanks for the Barron's article! Did the writer fail to note that Bill Gates was a dropout also? <g>
The difference between CMGI, ICGE, SFE vs. CDO -- is that CDOV has been profitable for 12 out of 13 years with their equity holdings. CDOV has holdings which are well diversified, and are in dynamic markets/industries. Holdings like Ciena, Corvis, Nortel are worth a little bit more than companies like Mother Nature (CMGI). If my memory serves me correctly from SEC filings, CDO has had net writeoffs of only about 3% -- of its VC investments. This number is a bit misleading, however, due to the increased emphasis upon the VC component in recent years.
When an individual really understands a company, the mistakes that a writer makes are obvious. A lay investor, who doesn't truly know CDO, will take the writer at his word. That is a mistake. The inherent value, and soon to be explicit value in CDOV's holdings, is obvious -- simply by reading the SEC filings.
I'm excited to see Transmeta come out too. Check out every one of CDOV's holdings, and you will note only the top VC stablemates.
CDO will be valued accordingly, when the number of shares in companies like Nortel are calculated.
Thanks again for the article. Thanks for the CDOV thread.
advalorem |
