<<Short sellers are different than stock owners... >>
False. We sell high and buy low. We are typically value investors. Most short sellers usually have a long portfolio which is hedged with short positions.
<<there is no theoretical limit on the amount they can lose and the more they lose the more desperate and strident they become over how bad the stock is.>>
Desperate and strident?
<<THEY have figured out something that all the owners and would be owners for some reason can't figure out or wrongly choose to ignore.>>
Exactly. For example...Bre-X, Centennial technologies, Zitel, Pair Gain, Xylan, Informix, etc. etc. Many of these stocks were touted by analysts and momentum investors. It was short sellers who raised red flags about scams and over-valuations. If you don't believe me, check out some of the past discussion on these stocks on SI and Motley Fool.
<<They resort to denigrating the intelligence of all those who like the stock and think it will go up and that turns out to be the rest of the investing public...>>
I have not "denigrated" anyone's intelligence. In fact, I have kept my comments limited to discussing the merits of this stock as an investment. I have received some pot shots from the longs on this thread though.
<<they look at the same information and conclude you are wrong. You are not wrong, you are just looking at something that used to matter but this is a new industry with lots of other things that are terribly more important than the criteria you choose to apply.>>
Gosh. Where have I heard this before?
<<This is a whole new way of doing business!>>
Gosh. Where have I heard this before?
<<The benefits of being able to easily communicate with a tremendous number of people through a single, familiar, economical 'pipe' or way is well known to people who have things and services to sell.>>
Uh huh. Such as newspapers, radio, television, billboards, t-shirts, bumper stickers, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
<< The ability of being able to get your message out to a tremendous number of customers, without having to 'link' with each one of them>>
What?
<<each time is tremendous and YHOO is one of the ones best positioned to profit from it.>>
Profits to date from this "new way of doing business"....0.
<<Yahoo has got some very significant things going for it... they are beyond the critical mass. What they have is NOT easy to duplicate.>>
Well that may be true if you choose to disregard: AOL, Excite, Lycos, Infoseek, all the various business sites that are also selling info and advertising space, etc. etc. etc.
<<Why would any advertiser sign up with any service like Yahoo who could not already deliver the millions of viewers they can? Want to go through the learning curve with them? >>
What?
<< (Yahoo recently announced that they had a billion (!) hits)>>
A billion hits...wow!!! Question #1: how does a hit translate into earnings for Yahoo? Question #2: how do you account for a "real" hit (i.e. a real person viewing a yahoo page and then clicking on an ad) vs. a hit from other forms of internet traffic (such as a ping by a search engine)?
<< Why would anyone, like one of us, sign up with any other content provider who did not give us the range of destinations a smaller competitor offered? There are competitors, and there may be people who come up with better interfaces but there are more than enough new users to spread around.>>
What?
<<The old accounting formulas simply don't necessarily apply.>>
Really? I'm an accountant. Explain the "new" accounting formulas.
<<For example, Yahoo's cost of adding a new customer is practically zero as is the cost of continuing maintenance!>>
Incorrect on both counts. Carefully read the last 10-Q.
<<How does that effect the bottom line when you can get more revenue from advertisers with more Yahoos and your cost of doing additional business is practially zero?>>
I love this theory that makes Yahoo out to be a money prinitng machine with nearly zero overhead. I recommend that you purchase a copy of AdWeek magazine, a book about the advertising business, and some introductory accounting textbooks.
<< What about all the foreign business they have devleloped? They are the most recognized service in Europe.>>
How does this translate into earnings for Yahoo? They love Jerry Lewis in France, but I wouldn't be going long on his talent if you catch my drift.
<<Your view that YHOO is not a billion dollar company is meaningless.>>
As opposed to what? Your view that it is?
<<Experience hurts you when you try to apply them to companies like Yahoo. There are other things that are a lot more meaningful.>>
Thanks for your concern. I'll really try to find more meaning in my life.
<<If a long position goes against you, you should cut your losses and go on.>>
I remeber purchasing Microsoft in 1989 (I've been buying every year since). A friend of mine recommended that I sell all of it during the small bear market before the Gulf War based on your reasoning. Fortunately, I didn't take his advice.
<<Generally you accept of the basic wisdom that your judgement was wrong and you go on to the next case. You waste a lot of time and energy trying to convince people the stock should go up. It is POSSIBLE they know something you don't. Same idea shoould apply to the shorts.>>
What is it exactly you know that I don't? Are you an insider? How is my judgment wrong? By the way, speaking of people who should know something you and I don't; an astonishing number of insiders have recently filed to sell what amounts to a very big chunk of stock compared to both shares outstanding and the float.
<<YHOO is a buy and forget.>>
Music to a short-seller's ears. Do me a favor and buy on margin...would you? |
