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 : Gemstar Intl (GMST) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rel4490 who wrote (3567)	8/9/2000 7:42:57 PM
From: LLLefty	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6516

Audacious may be too mild to describe Yuen-Murdoch. The Thoroughbred Times today reported that TVG--remember that maligned racing channel of TVGIA and now a money-leaking prodigal child of GMST?--is seeking to become the single world-wide, 24-hour video and interactive betting provider. Highlights from the piece (which I'm unable to copy and paste): --TVG met a few weeks ago with racing officials of eight nations and, according to British racing board chairman Peter Savill, it was decided that TVG is in the best position "because of its strong corporate structure" and contracts with major American tracks. --TVG will host a follow-up meeting next month with racing officals from America, Britain, France and Australia. (No mention of which were the other "nations;" had been hoping super-wagering Hong Kong had been one.) Savill said "It was agreed that TVG were the best people with whom to pursue this." --Times quoted TVG CEO Mark Wilson as saying that TVG is the only racing provider with the platform to distribute racing around the world and around the clock. He said that's always been TVG's goal. If everyone signed on, Wilson said, it could up and running in a year or less. --There is competition for any contract that might ensue. Britain's Arena Leisure, with possible backing from Churchill Downs and (congenital spoiler-horseman) Frank Stronach, has made a 10-year proposal which Savill said is far weaker than that of TVG. -0- My own comments: While it's big and bold and one can fantasize about the Golden Goose, I wouldn't put much faith in CEO Wilson's comment that the platform could be up and running in a year, if ever profitably. TVG is available on Dish nationally but is limited to accepting wagers from only four states and little headway is being made toward expanding the list of states or, for that matter, of major tracks. Stronach won't allow TVG wagering on his tracks--namely Gulfstream and Santa Anita. On the other hand, it might be easier to deal with Britain, France and Australia, which don't suffer from our selective anti-gambling ethic (lotteries, keno, slot machines, casinos, river boats--all okay here) but, still, it would be a monumental task to muddle though the internatonal legal and taxation issues. Domestically, Capitol Hill has yet to pass the Kyl bill which would ban all internet wagering wit the exception of horse racing. In any event, I would think that if TVG does indeed begin to show signs of life domestically, GMST would spin it off as an IPO. But that's some time off; revenue and the number of subscribers remains anemic, even with my periodic $5 dutiful wager on a well-bred but painfully slow Thoroughbred which lives a kingly life at my expense.

To: rel4490 who wrote (3567)	8/10/2000 10:40:07 AM
From: Stu R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6516

"Horror Story": Title of article about Gemstar and E-books in 8/21 issue of Forbes. Nice picture of Rocketbook and Henry. "Gemstar also must overcome a potent foe: Microsoft. The two companies are pushing rival -and incompatible -standards." Article concludes that there will be no tornado without an industry standard. Generally a negative slant on E-books, but does include favorable quotes from Henry. Sorry, no link to Article. rel4490, My impression from this article... thestandard.com is that Microsoft and Gemstar are supporting the same standard (OEB) and are both competing with Adobe's PDF. Could someone shed light on this seemingly important conflict? Thanks, Stu