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 : InfoSpace (INSP): Where GNET went! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Puck who wrote (22779)	12/13/2000 5:14:58 PM
From: The O	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28311

Arun was just on CNBC. He did a good job. Did anyone see it. What was the issue about INSP not earning any money unless people hit our sites from wireless. Am I missing something? I thought we provided the sites for wireless, or at least a bundle of sites for our provider partners. He also stated that despite being ML downgraded yesterday by ML everything was on target, that employee stock options were being reisued, that the four segments of the infospace buisness was doing well (wireline, wireless, merhant, and boadband being very very new) that customers were using the INSP services earnings to be 66,000,000, 4.9 million pro forma. Arun made comment about the NTT Docomo deal with ATT being an opportunity rather than additional competition. O

To: Puck who wrote (22779)	12/13/2000 6:31:49 PM
From: Bob Kim	Respond to of 28311

Puck, The ML analyst covering INSP isn't new. She's been one of Blodget's junior analysts for some time and has probably been doing the bulk of the work on it since this summer. In fact she is even mentioned in the Wash Post article. You really shouldn't sympathize with analysts because of the the Washington Post article. I think most of Merrill's competitor's were glad one of their analysts wasn't stupid enough to publicly admit to so many questionable activities. It was interesting that in Merrill's official comment to the SEC re: FD, Merrill argued there was no need for it because Merrill Lynch disseminated information to all parties at the same time. The article clearly suggests otherwise.