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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (36119)	12/7/2000 2:33:11 PM
From: Bruce Brown	Respond to of 54805

You are right, Frank. We just wanted to throw in a token Godzilla to see how it stacked up to the gorilla and royalty stocks. I will be presenting i2 which is in the transition from client/server architecture to the network application architecture of computing. B2B might be as 'taboo' as Godzillas, but in the software business the transition is well under way. I haven't quite given in to the concept of the 'network is the computer' yet. However, enough evidence is driving me to believe in that more and more as the months progress. I still haven't purchased a copy of Excel for my Mac because I figure if I wait long enough, it will all be on the net. I ever claimed to be the sharpest knife in the drawer <gg>. You're sharp and located in the top drawer. Good thing you have Aunt Nancy and I have Lady Tara to remind us of any dull edges we might display from time to time. <ggg> BB

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (36119)	12/7/2000 2:37:30 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

Frank, but imho it would be more appropriate on the G&K thread if that analysis focused on its significance to Gorilla or King companies. That makes a lot of sense. But only to a point. Bruce mentioned that he likes to focus on the members of the value chain of the G&Ks he invests in. How could anyone logically and effectively refute the efficacy of Bruce's thinking about that? It would be difficult to think of a G&K company that doesn't have Yahoo!, Amazon, eBay or AOL in its value chain. To appreciate how network effects inures to the benefit of a particular member of a G&K's value chain also helps us appreciate the significance (or insignifcance) that might apply to the particular Gorilla or King in question. The reason I got excited about including Yahoo! in the reporting process is because an understanding of that company arrived at using "network metrics" might paint the clearest picture of the topics covered by those metrics. That sort of understanding might make it easier to appreciate how the same metrics are applied to a company such as Siebel (as just one example) that is different from Yahoo! in that it doesn't maintain a network as its core operation. --Mike Buckley

To: Uncle Frank who wrote (36119)	12/7/2000 5:19:46 PM
From: Judith Williams	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

never claimed to the the sharpest knife in the drawer Any sharper and we'd have to run for cover. Project Network originally included YHOO to see if we could identify whether there were substantial differences in its network effects vis-a-vis those exploited by the Gorillas and Kings that will be covered in the other reports. I think it was clear from the YHOO report that it enjoys some network effects by virtue of the eyeballs it attracts, but that its business plan in its current iteration does not cement a value chain in RFM terms. I found this perspective useful. Critical mass with retail customers or users may not be enough to engender network effects in an advertising-based business plan of what is basically a non-tech, consumer-oriented company. The situation is also very different, as DownSouth and Mike Buckley, will no doubt contend, from the ways in which network effects play out in a NTAP, SEBL, or even JDSU. --Judith Williams