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 : Internet Capital Group Inc. (ICGE) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (2483)	11/13/2001 7:25:16 PM
From: bob zagorin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4187

skeeter, i think you need to go back to accounting school. the losses were non-cash charges writing down the value of companies purchased with ICGE stock when the stock was much much higher. you know better than to try and skew the facts like that. the quote about thew cos. making progress referred to the core cos. they identified over a year ago. i think you also know that...

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (2483)	11/13/2001 11:29:05 PM
From: Mark Fowler	Respond to of 4187

Do your DD guy!

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (2483)	11/14/2001 10:15:49 AM
From: Richard Bunker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4187

Skeeter, I fear you missed a few days of accounting class. 1. You wrote: >>"All of our companies are making progress toward profitability, even in tough economic times," ICG president and CEO Walter Buckley said. "We're continuing to streamline and to focus on those firms with the best chance for profitability and longterm success," he said. mark, see the contradiction here? the "b" in buckley must stand for "b"ser... ;-) I don't see any contradiction. The core companies are moving towards profitability satisfactorily, and the holding company is streamlining and focusing on the core companies. Walter is in my experience one of the straightest shooters around. The story of a holding company is a bit confusing at times because of its very nature (i.e. are they talking about the holding company, or the partner companies), but it is just wrong to say that he is a BS-er. 2. Then you wrote: 1 >>ICG said it would end the year with $250 million in cash<< + 1 >>For the quarter ended September 30th, ICG reported a net loss including charges of US$235 million, down from $263 million a year ago.<< = 2 >>ICG said it plans to buy back up to $300 million of its outstanding debt over the next several months.<< bser can't even bs his way through a single press release w/o totally screwing up the math. it doesn't add up. "we have $250 million, we're losing hundreds of millions, we're going to buy back "up to" $300 million (read $1s worth!)" begs the question... with what? You have a couple of problems in here: The first is that the losses were a combination of holding company spending (real cash), portfolio company spending that is reflected at the holding company level (cash from the partner companies' bank accounts, not from the ICG accounts), and paper losses (write down of investments etc.). So losses are NOT the same as cash burn. Next, the debt buyback. They said they would buy up to $300 million of debt, for $295 per $1000 of face value. So even if they got all $300 it would have cost them less than $100. However in the end only $120mm was tendered up, so they spent something like $40m to buy it. A very good deal IMHO. The new guidance in fact states that they will end the year with about $215 million -- UP from the number you seem to think was BS. Yours, Rick.