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: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (107448)	8/23/2000 5:11:23 PM
From: Bob Kim	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

otherwise somebody else will do it and take their business Wal-Mart already has been taking business away from TOY, web or not.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (107448)	8/23/2000 5:49:06 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

lizzie, i remember the analysts saying 1999 was profitable in 1996 - 1997. they bumped it to 2000 after it became apparent they were wrong. now it is, what, 2003? i don't think folks that bout this dawg at $100 expected these kinds of results. >>toys r us can still trot along w/o too much trouble then it is a win / win for toys r us. << you forget the "if" at the beginning. how do you disagree with a question? you take it out of context. i don't know enough about the deal to comment on the details - so i didn't. toys r us might be super dumb. a web store makes sense for many companies. my guess is toys r us benefits from marginal web sales (good, but not a billion manna falling from heaven) and their downside is limited to their investment. >>Amzn failed because it ramped too quickly<< shoot, that was #1 on the business plan. get big quickly and squash everyone else. amzn has an idea what needs to be charged in order make a profit. RAISE PRICES. is this rocket science? they don't. why? i know. >>That doesn't mean its going away.<< i never said it was going away. i said it is a cut throat competitive industry that ought to send chills down a shark's spine. many companies are going bust weekly. many web sites are dedicated to fallen net companies - companies that no longer exist. i expect amzn to be a marginally profitable company (less than $100 million) eventually. the debt may end up crushing them, but they probably survive in one form or another.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (107448)	8/23/2000 6:07:14 PM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Respond to of 164684

first nobody that I can recall said amazon would be profitable in 1999, I don't recall 2000 either, shall we all pat ourselves on the back for that? Liz, This thread is loaded with projections of profit in 1999 an huge profits in the year 2000 going back to 1997 and 98 posts. Then there was the distribution built out so profitability was moved to a later date. That was the excuse given anyhow. The other excuse was the "land grab." Those profitable projectiosn are really here but I am not going to take the time to locate them. The fact is toy knows they HAVE to get a web presence and fast, otherwise somebody else will do it and take their business. They have failed to execute their stategy themselves in the past... they have no choice but to partner with amzn. Liz, Dual channel is a winner. That is now proven. Toys R Us needs that and Amazon can handle that for them now. Toys are very condusive to on-line selling. I do predict this long contract will be short lived.