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.

SI - Site Forums : Silicon Investor - Welcome New SI Members! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (21710)	12/1/2004 2:57:14 AM
From: d:oug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32917

"Bob [honored grandfathered & Lifers contracts] simply out of the goodness of his heart." goodness of his heart (versus) a good person It's knowned that Billionair Warren Buffet is a good person, but "goodness of his heart" were not the instruments used when making his business dealings. Unlike that New York City @sshole Trump that uses like a weapon, the Ungoodness of his heart, to accomplish business deals. Anyway, we know IH's Sheriff Matt was part of the decision making on this, and those familiar with IH know Matt has a cold heart of Absolute Zero, that is, if he has one :o) But it is quite clear now that Dave has become an owner, that his true real self is show'n loud & clear to be a hard-nosed meanie tough as dirty nails take no prisioners dried leather hard nosed.

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (21710)	12/1/2004 6:06:04 AM
From: Bill Ulrich	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 32917

The only problem with looking at features strictly from a bandwidth perspective is that it ignores the actual work involved for creating them. There are a lot of features that could benefit the users and the site, that wouldn't impact bandwidth but would use hundreds of hours of design and build time. Perhaps the more miserly members here don't remember what the SI feature set was really like at the actual time of grandfathering and how much it's changed since then. What was that, late 97/early 98? "what is the least arbitrary way to differentiate a standard from a premium service? My answer to that is to determine what features require processing and/or bandwidth requirements above and beyond the norm."

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (21710)	12/1/2004 10:21:24 PM
From: wonk	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 32917

…So, there are two real issues here. The first is whether SI can legally be construed to have closed down. Since money changed hands, as opposed to just different management taking over, I would think the answer would be yes. If so, all prior contracts are void. Case closed. The fact that Bob has decided to honor any contracts at all is simply out of the goodness of his heart. Actually, Jeff, its an interesting legal question. Upthread, Dave indicated that only the assets were purchased. (and yes I’m aware of Dave’s “pre-retirement” profession) Message 20814451 Downthread, Bob said the only “liabilities” he feels he inherited were to provide certain features to grandfathered members. Message 20815881 If as Dave implied it was a straightforward asset-purchase agreement, then one would have to examine how the “customer base” was treated in the sale documents. If, for example, only tangible assets were sold (servers, message database, software code), then Bob would not have any rights to any of the member account information (either grandfathered or paying subscribers.) Since, it appears obvious that the purchase included us as members along with the SI name, I assume the purchase agreement therefore included both quantifiable and non-quantifiable tangible AND intangible assets. (both the physical stuff and the subscribers and the brand etc). IMHO, if the customer base was deemed an asset (and is specified in the purchased agreement) then Bob also purchased all the service obligations associated with that asset. Hence, if my understanding of the legal aspects of asset purchase agreements as well as acquisition accounting is still up to date, the “new” SI is legally obligated to continue to provide that level of service that was implicit in the agreements with grandfathered or paid lifetime members. However, I think Bob’s sense (and Dave’s and yours Jeff, and Bill’s) that he is not obligated to provide new features to conveyed subscribers is absolutely accurate. If, OTOH, it the legal language is vague as to the transfer of the customer base, then one could argue that Infospace still owns that base and still has a legal obligation to provide service. Hence, if Bob “choose” to throw out the old subscribers he would be within his rights to do so, but the subscribers would have a claim against Infospace for the lost value of their grandfathered and paid lifetime subscriptions. Assuming Infospace – when it owned it – kept SI in a separate corporate shell, then it could walk away from that obligation by folding the shell in a Chapter 7. Just for giggles and grins, I really like to see the purchase agreement. :-) ww

To: Jeffrey S. Mitchell who wrote (21710)	12/13/2004 8:05:46 PM
From: Jon Tara	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 32917

"searching through 20 million+ messages is going to put a hit on the system, so that's clearly a premium option." That would be true if searching were done via a linear method. But that's not the way any decent search works. They work by indexing the search terms (words) and doing a binary (or other similar tree-based) search on terms. The time spent is proportional to the number of search terms, not the number of documents. And the time needed to search for terms is much better than linear to the number of search terms. Using a binary search, searching 256 terms requires only 8 probes at most, 65535 terms requires 16 probes, etc. Most implementations would use methods that are even more efficient, though. Of course, it's not quite so simple as this - you can have multiple search terms in the search, and if the terms are being "anded" you have to do a search on each. It's still not the big deal it is (and historically has been) made out to be here on SI. As a grandfathered lifer, I am not complaining. Frankly, I don't spend enough time here any more to care one way or the other. If I were using the site regularly, perhaps this would bother me and/or I would think it useful enough to pay the monthly fee. It seems to me, though, all rather silly. We are talking about a relatively small number of subscribers (aren't we?) who are either grandfathered or life members (and still active), and a relatively low cost to provide the extra services. I liken it to processor chips that have on-chip features intentionally disabled by the manufacturer as a marketing gimmick to allow them to sell the chip at a lower price without canabilizing their own sales. Why unnecessary pi**-off a small number of veteran subscribers, who, because of their longevity, could be one of SI's best free marketing tools?