Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Softbank Group Corp -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: manohar kanuri who wrote (2711)	12/14/1999 7:37:00 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6020

Hello Manohar Kanuri, I thank you for this fundamental piece of information, as I had not been monitoring same for a while ... "Yahoo!, for example, does not suffer from the fact that its shares trade at 612 times net income, 95 times book value and 194 times revenues." I am thunderstruck at how inexpensive Yahoo is! It is intuitively obviuos to the most casual of passing observers that Yahoo price is dirt cheap in comparison to Tenneco, if Yahoo were to get into B2B, G2B, and continue its relentless globalized growth in B2C and get into C2C, along with buying everything in sight with its gloriously valued paper ala the early days of Qwest, etc. And we have not even contemplated the possibilities of what might happen if Yahoo were to, say, buy Softbank itself. Well, why not? Imagine the possibilities! However, it is equally obvious that Yahoo's business can not reasonable grow without hiccups, and also, Yahoo's share price can not grow if/when the market tanks due to any number of reasons, including the formidable dark hand of "reverting to the mean" for performance. I am down to my last 100 shares of Yahoo and I will keep it as a subscription price for the annual report, and wait with ever more patience.

To: manohar kanuri who wrote (2711)	12/15/1999 8:00:00 AM
From: Seeker of Truth	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6020

Grant's estimate that intellectual assets are too highly valued relative to tangible assets has to be opposed lest people sell their valuable nontangible assets too cheaply on one of the usual dips in the market. Tangible assets don't multiply like intangible assets. A lump of gold doesn't even multiply at all. I well remember an esteemed analyst comparing GM and IBM. The latter had few patents, only a good sales organization and a good service(repair) organization and a strong interest in and knowledge about data processing. The time was 1956. The analyst laughed at the price of IBM and said that from the way too high valuation, idiots were expecting IBM to be worth more than GM. GM was chock full of tangible assets and deficient in intellectual assets. IBM proved to be a beautiful investment, going up about sixty times. GM has languished. I say, people, please don't sell intellectual assets such as Softbank in order to buy tangible assets. Of course everybody has to choose their favorite intellectual assets. I'll take the human brain any time. Never has the productivity of the human brain been so obvious, helped as it is now with thinking hardware. And software gets more and more valuable in comparison with hardware. By the way, the Tenneco company with no particular growth prospects has to double in price or a little more, in order to be fairly valued. BUT that's it. There is no more. Suppose you need the money for Softbank,QCOM,NTAP,YHOO,SEBL which imho will grow and grow and grow. You'd have to reluctantly decline the bargain in the shock absorber company. We can't put the same dollar in two places.