SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : America On-Line (AOL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: ANANT who wrote (40680)2/17/2001 7:47:11 PM
From: Jim Lamb  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 41369
 
Newsweek AOL article here.http://www.msnbc.com/news/529455.asp



To: ANANT who wrote (40680)2/19/2001 9:51:18 AM
From: ANANT  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 41369
 
A Yardstick for AOL Time Warner
Business Week: February 26, 2001
The Barker Portfolio

Yes, it will churn out vats of cash, but AOL Time Warner's valuation is high compared with other money-spinners, such as Cisco and Walt Disney

Wouldn't it be terrific to be in a spot where, no matter how anxious your boss, business partners, or investors got about your performance, you couldn't be compared? That's the perch the newly merged AOL Time Warner (AOL) now is claiming for itself. ``You've got a global, large-cap growth stock here, and it's not a media company, and it's not an Internet company,'' CEO Gerald Levin recently told investors via CNBC. ``This is a one-of-a-kind company.''
Can that possibly be true? In one way, yes. AOL Time Warner is alone in having assembled such an assortment of media assets, New and Old, on such a vast scale. Adopting the jargon of Internet investors, Levin calls it ``a big monetization machine,'' which he promises eventually will turn out the sort of financial returns that in a simpler era built such baronies as William Randolph Hearst's San Simeon. But does that also mean investors can't compare AOL Time Warner to alternative investments? No.
To remember why, take a trip past such mumbo jumbo as ``monetization''--the turning of eyeballs into profits--or ``metrics'' and go back to basics. Any company exists to make cash dollars on the cash that the owners invest. Good businesses return goodly amounts of cash, even after spending on capital projects and whatever else is needed to keep operations in trim. That's what such careful investors as Holland Balanced Fund manager Michael Holland call ``free cash flow.'' What interests him above all is finding a company to buy into that has a good ``cash-on-cash'' return. ``It's fungible,'' he says, and to get it, ``I don't care whether I invest in GE vs. AOL Time Warner vs. International Paper.''
As it happened, Holland was CNBC's guest host the morning of Jan. 31, when Levin appeared. He asked Levin to pit his company's prospects against Viacom's (VIA), which he noted Merrill Lynch also recommends. In fact, while targeting a rise in AOL Time Warner, from $47 a share now to $65 in the next year, Merrill sees Viacom surging over twice as far, to $100. Yet citing AOL's strong growth in online advertising and commerce, Levin told Holland: ``There is no comparison.''
Unless, perhaps, you look at that great equalizer, free cash flow and the list of giant-cap stocks AOL Time Warner finds itself among. It's telling Wall Street that it expects free cash flow this year to triple, from $920 million last year (figured as though the two companies were actually merged, which did not happen until this January).
MULTIPLES. That forecast sounded impressive until I also saw in the company's financials that the merged company's free cash flow would have been $2.4 billion in 1999. So the company's truest bottom line actually plunged in 2000, as it spent heavily to hook up digital cable and high-speed modem subscribers. That may pay off handsomely one day. But even if free cash flow does triple this year, it will wind up just 15% higher than in 1999.
Over the next several years, AOL Time Warner expects free cash flow to grow at a 50% annual rate. That would be an astounding accomplishment, bringing free cash flow in, say, four years to about $5 billion. In the past year, by Morningstar's measure, just eight companies spun out as much free cash, the least of them Johnson & Johnson (JNJ). How does J&J compare? Its market capitalization is $135 billion, one-third less than AOL Time Warner's $201 billion, despite having generated last year the cash that AOL Time Warner only hopes to produce in 2004. Can Levin's ``big monetization machine'' meet its production goal? ``We have a history of setting aggressive goals and achieving them,'' Mike Kelly, AOL's chief financial officer and CFO of the new company, told me. Perhaps they will again.
Yet careful investors will compare prices. Just a hair ahead of AOL Time Warner by market value is Cisco Systems (CSCO). You could buy Cisco for 45 times its most recent 12 months' worth of free cash flow. AOL Time Warner? 220 times. Or look at a rival name dismissed by Levin on CNBC, Walt Disney (DIS). The comparison is not flattering. A veritable Mississippi of free cash flow, Disney in its fiscal year ended Sept. 30 generated $1.7 billion. With a $68 billion market cap, it's going for 39 times free cash flow. So call AOL Time Warner incomparable. Just not incomparably cheap.

Questions? Comments? Send an e-mail to barkerportfolio@businessweek.com or fax (321) 728-1711



To: ANANT who wrote (40680)3/8/2001 2:17:12 PM
From: long-gone  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 41369
 
What a wonderful (cough cough)spokesman for the company:

TURNER'S REP IS IN ASHES
Thursday,March 8,2001

By ANDY GELLER

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TED TURNER

Outraged leaders of Christian groups labeled Ted Turner a bigot yesterday after the Mouth from the South called staffers who wore ashes on their foreheads for Ash Wednesday "Jesus freaks."
The CNN honcho, who once proclaimed that Christianity is "for losers," made the insulting remark in the network's Washington newsroom last Wednesday at a staff meeting that preceded a retirement party for anchor Bernard Shaw.

About 300 people were present and three or four staffers had ashes on their foreheads to mark Ash Wednesday.

Sources said Turner stared at one of the staffers and said, "I was looking at this woman and I was trying to figure out what was on her forehead. At first I thought you were in the earthquake" in Seattle that day.

As puzzled staffers furrowed their brows, the cable tycoon unleashed this zinger:

"I realized you're just Jesus freaks. Shouldn't you guys be working for Fox?"

Turner laughed, and there were a few titters in the audience, but most of the 300 people greeted the remarks with stony silence.

"It was just such an ignorant statement to make," said one source.

Turner spokeswoman Ronnie Gunnerson had nothing to say about her boss's latest outburst, first reported by Brit Hume Tuesday night on his "Special Report" program on Fox.

Shaw said he didn't know anything about the incident.

But leaders of Christian groups were quick to attack Turner as a bigot - and to suggest he could benefit from sensitivity training.

William Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Human Rights, noted Turner had previously called pro-life Christians "Bozos," insulted the pope and accused Christianity of being "very intolerant."

"Ted Turner is a recidivist. He's a repeat offender. The man has an anti-Christian bias that runs deep in his bones," Donohue said.

"He may be just as dumb as John Rocker, but, unlike the Atlanta pitcher, he occupies a position of significant influence in our culture. That is why we look to his superiors at AOL Time Warner to denounce Turner for his relentless attacks on Christians. Indeed, they might want to take a page from professional baseball and ship Turner off for some sensitivity training."

"Amazing," agreed Gary Bauer, an activist for the Christian right and former presidential candidate.

"Once again, Ted Turner has demonstrated his ignorance and his hostility to the religious beliefs of millions of Americans. I'm not surprised, given his past history, which has repeatedly displayed evidence of religious bigotry," Bauer said.

"Oh my word," said Jan LaRue, a lawyer for the conservative Family Research Council.

"CNN is getting beaten to death by Fox in the ratings wars. If Turner thinks Christianity is for losers, he is wrong to say that 'Jesus freaks' belong at Fox. It sounds like Christianity is for winners," she said.

"Ted's comments also sound like there might be religious discrimination in employment at CNN. Are 'Jesus freaks' not welcome there?" she added.

Turner commented that Christianity is for losers a decade ago - and quickly apologized for it. But just last August, he accused Christianity of being "very intolerant."

nypostonline.com