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: KLP who wrote (25477)	3/4/2001 3:24:51 PM
From: Bosco	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28311

Hi KLP - I don't know my situation has any relevance. Should someone have greater right if s/he had GNET stock? And those who bought INSP at the top lesser right? The more important point, IMHO, is that we are all in the same boat now, until those who choose to leave that boat [to become a non shareholder or, gulp, a short seller!] You are right that those who paid a lifetime membership may feel cheated if SI goes the way of the do do bird. Still, I really don't know why these have any relevance to my simple questions. Do I think SI is a loss? Well, I am still using it, so it is not a loss to me --- yet. I am a INSP outsider, so, I don't know what INSP is going to do [to SI.] You said When GNET had it, it was a low maintenance income producer. The exact words are here on SI someplace in the PR...and I'm sure someplace I have all the documents that were sent to me. So are you suggesting INSP has ruined SI? Well, I should not 2nd guess you, since you and I seem to talking at each other today [I shall take the blame, since communication is not my strong suit, not that I ve any strong suit to begin with <sg>!] Assuming you are right, so you think GNET would have been unscathed in the midst of dotcom collapse had it stayed independent? Of course, counterfactual is quite meaningless, the question returns to, what do you think INSP can do about it now, if indeed boosting shareholder value is its prime objective. Finally, I have no answer to your [rhetorical?] question So again, I ask the question. Why in October 2000, both companies seemed to be very well positioned and happy with the merger. What happened between middle of October and end of December to make all the things the newly merged company believed (or at least told us they believed)...WRONG? Arun wanted it. RH wanted to sell it. And NJ bought it. HB of ML seemed to think it was a fabulous idea. The rest is history. But this is not what I ve asked. KLP, different people have different ways to deal with the world. If I keep thinking about the past [and my failure, which I have a hefty share <g>] I will go crazy. Instead, my battered portfolio not withstanding, I want to see what I can look forward to. This is my strategy and I certainly cannot impose my worldview upon others. However, sometimes Socratic exchange is a good way to see into our path more clearly. Antagonism has never worked for me. If you and I are not of the same wave length, maybe I should leave you in peace <G> best, Bosco

To: KLP who wrote (25477)	3/5/2001 10:40:03 PM
From: Rational	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28311

As a shareholder of INSP, I would like to share my views here. My DD shows that the ex-GNET management was selling tons of GNET shares long before the merger. INSP, like many good companies, has a policy that insider sales will have to be approved by the company. It is possible that Horowitz had to sell for tax reasons, but INSP could not keep a top insider with no stake and fired him. I have also noticed that Hurowitz and the rest of ex-GNET management team lacked the bandwidth to communicate with the visionary Naveen Jain. Horowitz's qualification is BA (Economics) if I am not mistaken. The only skill he seems to be very good at was how to sell his cheaply acquired GNET scrips while maintaining a hype about the company. He was adept in screwing up GNET stockholders including Paul Allen and, when he tried to do the same thing at INSP, he was booted out. I believe that INSP and GNET are a good technological fit, but the GNET management was useless in this equation. This was discovered by the smarter INSP management between October and December. The other point made here is that past performance usually predicts the future; I hope it does as INSP has doubled its revenue year-over-year. I would like to add, though, that research shows that past stock price performance is not a good predictor of the future stock prices. The company has nearly $2 per share in cash and other investments. It owns 20% of Paul Allen's dream venture Digeo. Paul Allen has been selling tons of MSFT shares, but he has never sold either GNET or INSP shares. I hope he buys some shares in the open market. He has bought CHTR in the open market. I also see many good posts on Yahoo! unlike the whiners here.