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.

Politics : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Byron who wrote (11839)	8/17/2001 2:02:47 PM
From: sea_urchin	Respond to of 80990

Guree, a kick, you say. Didn't make much difference. You can see AU is largely an African dog. He likes to sleep all the time. Barely moves when he is called. And is ready to go on strike at a moment's notice. Of course, if you blame him for being lazy he'll tell you that's the way the whites brought him up. And he might even bite you!

To: Tom Byron who wrote (11839)	8/17/2001 2:12:06 PM
From: Ahda	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 80990

FRIDAY AUGUST 17 2001 Tech boom 'no help to US' FROM CHRIS AYRES thetimes.co.uk THE great technology boom has not contributed a cent to the US economy since the autumn of 1995, an influential report claimed yesterday. The report by Multex.com, the US investment research firm, argues that combined losses of more than $148.3 billion (£103.8 billion) among US technology companies during the past year have more than wiped out the collective profits of the past five years. Multex.com examined the profit-and-loss accounts of 4,200 technology companies listed on the Nasdaq stock exchange since September 1995. It did not count so-called “extraordinary items”, or one-off charges, that can result in huge losses, but it did count restructuring costs and write-offs associated with acquiring assets at the height of the technology boom. Although many Nasdaq-listed companies have reported huge profits in recent years, these have been wiped out by catastrophic losses at a handful of high-tech companies. Intel’s $37 billion of profits during the period, for example, are dwarfed by JDS Uniphase’s $52 billion of losses. Multex.com argues that the losses make it impossible to analyse the price of shares on the Nasdaq in relation to the profits that underpin them. This calculation, known as price/earnings analysis, is one of the most tried-and-tested ways for investors to work out whether or not a share purchase represents good value. However, Nasdaq’s supporters point out that companies listed on the exchange generated $1.5 trillion of revenues in the past year alone, representing a huge contribution to the US economy. Some economists question the importance of asset write-offs, responsible for most of the losses in the report, arguing that they represent accounting entries, not real monetary losses. The Nasdaq Composite Index stood at about 1,043 in September 1995, and rose to 5,048.62 in March 2000. It rose 11.40 points to 1,930.29 yesterday. Ironcially our losses appear to be the greatest in the communication field and communication is the base of all man kind.