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: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (93068)	2/5/2000 11:34:00 AM
From: Bill Harmond	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 164684

Glenn, this post seems downright bitter. The Amazon numbers were great, they show a roadmap to profitability, and they say that they can finance any needed Capex this year in the US internally. Pretty good.

To: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (93068)	2/5/2000 1:30:00 PM
From: H James Morris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Glenn, here is one example of many IPO's that can be very profitable by just going into the open market. You've complained to me about not being able to get pre-ipo shares. OK, but that shouldn't stop you from doing your research. Everyone knew that Fire was going to "Light my fire". Look below. Investors could have bought in the low 50's and got close to a double bagger, in just one day. >FIREPOND INC(FIRE) Bid: 100 3/16 BidSize: 0 Open: 53 1/2 Ask: 100 AskSize: 0 Close: 22 Last: 100 1/4 High: 102 5/16 Div.: 0.00 Change: +78 1/4 Low: 52 Yield: 0.00 A.High: 102.312 P/E: 0.00 Volume: 9284900 A.Low: 52 EPS: 0.00 Market :NASDAQ NM Ps I don't think these IPO's are as risky has most people think.Why? Because the wealth affect allows investors to take more risks.

To: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (93068)	2/5/2000 2:35:00 PM
From: H James Morris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Glenn, here's some research for you to do over the weekend. BTW Varsity.com is the largest on-line book seller to college students in America. Not Amazon.com, believe it or not? >Pricing Date1 Internet Related Name Ticker Lead Underwriter Price Range Issue Size Offering Amt Post Offering Shares Est. Market Value2 Feb7-8 Yes Buy.com Inc BUYX Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Inc $10-12 14.0M $150.0M 129.1M $1.4B Feb7-8 Yes Fastnet Corp FSST ING Baring Furman Selz LLC $10-12 4.0M $50.0M 14.4M $158.3M Feb7-8 Yes Organic Inc OGNC Goldman Sachs & Co $12-14 5.5M $75.0M 78.9M $1.0B Feb7-8 Yes Stratabase.com -TBA- Self-Underwritten $0.5-0.5 800K Units Maximum $400K 6.3M $3.2M Feb8-9 Yes Cypress Communications Inc CYCO Bear Stearns & Co Inc $14-16 10.0M $150.0M 45.9M $687.8M Feb8-9 Yes Delano Technology Corp DTEC Robertson Stephens Inc (FleetBoston Robertson Stephens) $9-11 5.0M $55.0M 28.4M $284.2M Feb8-9 No Jeremy's Microbatch Ice Creams Inc JMIC, JMI First Montauk Securities Corp $5-7 1.2M $8.4M 3.0M $18.0M Feb8-9 Yes Landacorp Inc LCOR Hambrecht & Quist LLC (Chase H&Q) $8-10 3.5M $40.0M 13.3M $119.3M Feb8-9 Yes Lightspan Partnership Inc LSPN CS First Boston Corp $10-12 7.5M $115.0M 43.3M $476.2M Feb8-9 Yes Vicinity Corp VCNT JP Morgan Securities Inc $11-13 5.0M $57.5M 25.7M $308.4M Feb9-10 No Beasley Broadcast Group Inc BBGI CS First Boston Corp $15-18 6.9M $150.0M 24.3M $400.5M Feb9-10 No Fargo Electronics Inc FRGO Prudential Volpe Technology (Volpe Brown Whelan & Co LLC) $14-16 5.0M $92.0M 11.8M $176.5M Feb9-10 No Precis Smart Card Systems Inc PSPS Barron Chase Securities Inc $6-6 1.0M $6.0M 2.2M $13.2M Feb9-10 Yes Vantagemed Corp VMDC Advest Inc $10-12 3.0M $36.0M 8.6M $95.1M Feb9-10 Yes Witness Systems Inc WITS Hambrecht & Quist LLC (Chase H&Q) $12-14 3.8M $60.0M 21.1M $274.0M Feb9-10 Yes Xcare.net Inc XCAR Robertson Stephens Inc (FleetBoston Robertson Stephens) $11-13 5.0M $74.8M 15.4M $184.4M Feb10-11 No Bio Aqua Systems Inc SEA, SEAW Institutional Equity Corp (Redstone Securities Inc) $5.625-5.625 1.2M $6.2M 3.0M $16.8M Feb10-11 Yes Chordiant Software Inc CHOR Robertson Stephens Inc (FleetBoston Robertson Stephens) $8-10 4.5M $51.8M 34.8M $313.4M Feb10-11 No Diversa Corp DVSA Bear Stearns & Co Inc $13-15 6.5M $85.0M 32.3M $452.4M Feb10-11 Yes Flag Telecom Holdings Ltd FTHL, FTL Salomon Smith Barney Inc $20-22 26.4M $667.9M 127.1M $2.7B Feb10-11 Yes Lante Corp LNTE CS First Boston Corp $10-12 3.1M $50.0M 37.6M $413.5M Feb10-11 No Netjewels.com Inc NTJ Security Capital Trading Inc $10-12 2.2M $26.4M 5.5M $60.5M Feb10-11 Yes Pets.com Inc IPET Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Inc $9-11 7.5M $100.0M 26.4M $263.9M Feb10-11 Yes Varsitybooks.com VSTY Robertson Stephens Inc (FleetBoston Robertson Stephens) $12-14 4.1M $57.1M 15.6M $202.9M Feb10-11 Yes Via Net.works Inc VNWI Donaldson Lufkin & Jenrette Inc $15-17 13.3M $200.0M 56.1M $897.1M Feb10-11 Yes Webmethods Inc WEBM Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co $11-13 4.1M $45.0M 31.2M $374.6M Feb7 Wk Yes B2bstores.com Inc BTBC, BTB Gaines Berland Inc $10-10 2.8M $28.0M 6.5M $65.4M Feb7 Wk No Esafetyworld Inc SFTY, SFT Kashner Davidson Securities Corp $7-7 1.0M $7.0M 3.0M $21.0M 1Pricing dates of the form Jul12-13 reflect pricing on Jul 12 for trading on Jul 13. 2Assumes the issue prices in the middle of the pricing range.

To: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (93068)	2/5/2000 10:47:00 PM
From: H James Morris	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Glenn, what the hell did you do? You might have initiated an investigation of Amzn by the SEC!! BTW I thought this might interest you. >First books, then stocks. And now, diamonds may be the new, new thing to sell over the Internet. Good news for consumers, but it could mean a squeeze on profit margins for traditional jewelers. Thanks to the booming economy, U.S. diamond sales are soaring, gaining an estimated 11% or better last year to roughly $25 billion, good for half the world's market share. That follows a nifty 9% rise in 1998. Vendors are giddy as this year's demand appears to be just as promising, and retail diamond prices have been firm. But the 'Net is casting a shadow on this sparkling outlook. Diamonds are probably one of the last things people associate with e-tailing, but that has begun to change. Far from being too expensive, too individual or too difficult to buy sight unseen, diamond sales over the Internet are surging, with a virtual explosion of sites in just the past six months dedicated to selling diamond jewelry. And the reason is simple: Prices that are anywhere from 20%-50% cheaper, carat for carat, on equivalent grades. Most of the sites are small and private, so little hard data exist currently. Yet Bluenile.com, which, for example, began taking Internet orders last June, saw sales jump 233% to $10 million in the fourth quarter from the third quarter's $3 million. Other sites are seeing similar triple-digit growth rates. Once rare on the Internet, sales of $50,000-$70,000 diamonds now are not uncommon. Third-party data also tend to confirm the huge growth. The Gemological Institute of America, one of two big U.S. diamond-rating agencies, saw requests for the number of grading reports rise by 42% last year, far higher than the 25% growth seen in the two previous years. Grading reports are typically issued with each diamond sold. Dan Morehead, president of DiamondTrade.com in Dallas, says traditional bricks-and-mortar diamond pricing will come down inevitably as the sites and their popularity proliferate. Matched for quality, grade and color, diamonds generally cost roughly 30%-40% less over the Internet, he asserts. Over the long run, such a differential "is going to pressure margins for the typical retailer," he predicts. Rob Bates, editor of industry publication New York Diamonds, adds it's common now for people to take price lists from Websites to a traditional retailer and say, "Match this!" " While 'Net diamond sales now are relatively puny, their steep growth rate suggests their impact on prices might come long before total sales become significant. Paralleling what's happened in other businesses, a recent survey by trade magazine Jewelers Circular Keystone found the Internet threat topped a list of vendor concerns. And in the past year, top-flight managers from well-known traditional jewelers have migrated to the Web companies, just as in less-glitzy retail areas. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key Commodity Indexes CRB Group Indexes 2/04 1/28 Yr. Ago CRB Futures 213.24 210.72 190.90 Industrials 200.59 203.53 182.40 Grain/Oils 169.81 172.96 170.40 Livestock 253.91 248.88 219.30 Energy 245.78 240.25 132.30 Precious Metals 271.50 253.95 245.00

To: Glenn D. Rudolph who wrote (93068)	2/5/2000 11:21:00 PM
From: Sam Citron	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Glenn, RE: Zero Cash Collars as per WSJ 2/2/00 It is clear from the article that a zero cash collar is simply the sale of an out of the money covered call, with the proceeds used to purchase an out of the money put, so no net premium is either paid or received. One offsets the other. In this case, when the stock was about 25, Volpe limited his downside risk to 22.37 in exchange for limiting his upside potential to 30.07. That's the easy part. It is the "prepaid variable forward" that is incomprehensible from the author's description. Ruth Simon explains: "His broker gave him $2.162 million, or $21.62 per share, against 100,000 Kemet shares. When the agreement expires next August, Mr. Volpe will pay the broker a sum based on Kemet's closing price and a price range set when the contract was established. If that hedge expires with Kemet trading at $51.1875, Mr. Volpe will have to hand over to his broker roughly $4.75 million-equivalent to nearly $2.6 million in interest on what he received from his broker just a year earlier. Mr. Volpe's true cost will be lower, however, because he earned a profit investing the money he was advanced." She earlier tells us that this hedge was also done when the stock was in the mid 20s. It sounds to me like Mr. Volpe's broker got a very good deal indeed or Ruth got her math wrong. How does this sound to you? Lend me your stock, which is currently worth $25. I pay you $21.62. If your stock goes up to $51.1875, you pay me back $47.5. I can only imagine what you have to pay me if the stock does not do quite so well. Bizarro! If anyone gets it, please explain. Sam