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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bearded One who wrote (92893)	2/3/2000 11:23:00 AM
From: Mannie	Respond to of 164684

One step at a time. The acquisition costs run up the losses obviously, they will begin to taper back on those soon also.

To: Bearded One who wrote (92893)	2/3/2000 12:24:00 PM
From: Wizard	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Bearded One, you have to give them credit for the value of their platform. Company after company is paying AMZN to get at their valuable customer information. Even if Amazon only makes small margins on selling products, they can make good overall pretax margins just by monetizing the platform. That is exactly why AOL is so valuable. AOL makes low margins on subscription revenues but the value is enormous because of the AOL brand for co-branded merchandising. This is fundamentally what the new economy is about. Besides, all those net losses and +$38mm in positive cash flow for the quarter.

To: Bearded One who wrote (92893)	2/3/2000 1:13:00 PM
From: Greater Fool	Respond to of 164684

>>accounting tricks A couple of things: - Did they specify whether it was operating profit from bookselling, or net profit? I could easily see operating profits. - You don't even have to use accounting "tricks" to fudge the profit by line of business. For example, Jeffy boy could easily say that all the marketing costs were for getting customers to the new businesses, not bookselling. That would make it easy.

To: Bearded One who wrote (92893)	2/3/2000 1:29:00 PM
From: Greater Fool	Respond to of 164684

From ZDnet story, pardon if it has already been posted: "Specifically, the company has been recording its share of losses in equity partners as non-operating expenses. We would argue, however, that these are not necessarily passive investments - because many of the investments were done to acquire revenue streams, they have actually become an integral part of Amazon's operations, and we believe they should be considered by investors when evaluating the company," Farley [an analyst] said.

To: Bearded One who wrote (92893)	2/3/2000 1:37:00 PM
From: spal	Respond to of 164684

Bearded One; Your analysis is interesting. I was under the impression that the books were profitable on an operational basis only, not a bottom line basis. If this is true that we are talking about operational profits then your analysis is somewhat skewed, since the losses for all of the other products will then not be as deep.