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: levy who wrote (25975)	5/25/2001 10:32:23 AM
From: AugustWest	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 28311

FWIW.... (COMTEX) B: JAGfn Rumors B: JAGfn Rumors May 25, 2001 (JAGfn.com via COMTEX) -- Infospace Inc.(INSP)$4.58. Rumor that (VOD) will acquire the company in a stock transaction, price unknown. Both companies were unavailable for comment. Copyright 2001 JAGfn.com All Rights Reserved -0- * end of story *

To: levy who wrote (25975)	5/25/2001 6:13:37 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28311

...And one more thing...PS...Wonder if Matt Shea is still at INSP? Who wants to make a bet? And I wonder how many INSP employees worked 40 hours a week, or were actually classified management, with actual management responsibilities. When Mr. Jain works 80-90 hours/per week, as he has said on many occasions including this week at the annual meeting....one must also wonder how many other employees are expected to work anything like that, or never be promoted in INSP. Further wonder why Tammy Halstead, and for that matter, any of the INSP management, would continue saying negative things about GNET (see my post #25981).... After all, INSP is the company that went after GNET in the first place. How do the employees of INSP (BOTH companies combined) feel about this continued "slur".... As a shareholder of INSP, I AM concerned about this....INSP needs to retain the best employees..... There is one thing certain....Even thought it is not PC...All people in their off-hours talk about Religion, Sex, Politics, and their Job.....That's why it behooves ALL employers to handle their employees by The Golden Rule. Fairly. At least IMO.

To: levy who wrote (25975)	6/15/2001 8:10:58 PM
From: Roger Sherman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 28311

Two potentially HUGE iTV revenue streams... Geesh...this first article I hadn't even considered in my wildest dreams (how embarrassing that it was written on my birthday, and I had completely missed it). ;) allnetdevices.com And then there's this Reuters article, which was published in yesterday's New York Times: June 14, 2001 Shopping Shows More Early Promise on iTV Than Ads By REUTERS Filed at 2:19 p.m. ET NEW YORK (Reuters) - Prospects for revenues from shopping look more bullish than those from advertising on interactive TV, Internet research firm Jupiter Media Metrix said in a report released Thursday. Interactive TV, which aims to marry the best features of the Internet and television, has garnered a good deal of buzz in recent years but has yet to gain widespread acceptance and contribute to the coffers of the variety of companies that have invested in the new technology. Similarly, interactive TV has been characterized by some industry executives as bearing huge promise for advertising. Jupiter now expects interactive TV to reach 8 percent of U.S. households by the end of 2001 and 42 percent by 2005 -- a year sooner than its previous forecast. However, analyst David Card said it will take a year longer for interactive TV to generate the type of revenues Jupiter had forecasted. ``The lower-end stuff got deployed earlier than we thought, but given the hesitancy of the market and the ad industry, we think people will experiment more frugally for a while,'' he said. Advertising won't account for more revenues than shopping until 2005, due in part to current U.S. economic conditions, Internet advertising's seeming ineffectiveness, and the lack of a common national iTV technology platform, Card added. In its report, Jupiter said shopping on interactive TV will account for 44 percent of total TV-based shopping in the United States by 2005 while advertising on interactive TV will account for only 7 percent of total U.S. television advertising.total $4.3 billion and advertising to garner $4.5 billion, fragmented across networks, carriers, and third-party response networks. Revenue from shopping on interactive television will largely be driven by a shift among existing TV shopping networks' channels. Jupiter expects that $5.5 billion in revenues from shopping channels and infomercials will shift from the phone to the television. Shopping on interactive TV will take three forms. Viewers will use a remote instead of the phone to buy items featured in infomercials or shopping channels. Viewers will also tune in to Web-like catalogs or stores that carriers and their partner merchants will provide and also interact with offers integrated into commercials and programs to capitalize on impulse buying. As competition heats up, Jupiter expects carriers to offer for free many of the current fee-based services such as program guides and digital video recorder functions that allow viewers to pause live television