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: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (120716)	3/17/2001 10:50:40 PM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Respond to of 164684

Amazon may really have some accounting problems to deal with above and beyond the already hazy view we see: "Juggling the Books at Amazon.com? By Mark Veverka We think folks have taken their eyes off of the ball when it comes to the Amazon.com story. Forget about insider trading allegations, rumors of a Wal-Mart partnership, board members trying to quash analyst research and the scent of burning cash for a moment. While most of that is relevant -- save the sensational insider trading allegations -- a lot of analysts and pundits are missing the point. Amazon is less of a proxy for consumer retailing on the Internet than it is a case of a hyper-growth company altering its business plan on the fly and failing to come clean with its investors about lack of performance. How many times does the company need to engage in varying degrees of deception before the Securities and Exchange Commission determines that Amazon has crossed the line? The company has confirmed recently that the SEC's informal inquiry remains open, but the commission itself does not comment on whether it is, or is not, conducting an investigation. Nonetheless, we suggest that regulators take a close look at the latest example of dubious financial reporting to surface at the e-tailer. Amazon may have made its 1999 online performance appear better than it was by including Old Economy revenues in its measurements. In its December 1999 online revenue per-customer figures, Amazon included sales from two catalog businesses acquired late 1999. That adjustment made it look like revenue-per-customer-a key metric for the core online business -- rose more than it actually did, hedge fund sources say......continued with a lot of good information interactive.wsj.com This is from Barrons and I hope everyone subscribes to Barrons. Article title: "The accounting at Amazon.com continues to march to a peculiar drummer. Does anyone care? "

To: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (120716)	3/18/2001 7:18:39 PM
From: 16yearcycle	Respond to of 164684

"Regarding these support levels. I think your method for evaluating the sp500 is reasonable. And for the Dow, probably a P/E of 15 can hold. But the nasdaq cannot be treated as one entity." Yeah, I tend to agree. I would also factor the long term dow/nasdaq ratio of 5/1 to 5.4 to 1 at bottoms into the mix. I'd also look at the nas 100 pe at 20 being about as low as it has ever been and that would suggest a price of about 1350 on the nasdaq itself. That would infer the dow drops to 7500 or so. Basically, what we are looking at is repeating the 10/8/98 bottom of 1400, 7400 and 950 respectively in the 3 major averages. That drop brought the dow to within a hair of the price it was at the time of Greenie's 12/96 "exuberance" speech. And all those averages would be undervalued by at least 20% according to the fed's formula. Long term ta trend lines also suggest 1500 on the nasdaq. So, since there is no reason to stay above 1500, lets do this tommorow and get it over with.