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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr.Gogo who wrote (40379)	12/3/2010 12:39:53 PM
From: rllee	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78752

NFLX - One of my concerns about NFLX having to pay for content to compete with Hulu & others was just announced: Netflix puts money on the table for Hollywood studios' shows Netflix (Nasdaq: NFLX) is all-in in its efforts to attract subscribers to its Watch Instantly streaming service. Reports say the movie rental service is in negotiations with Hollywood studios to pay up to $100,000 an episode for "fresh" TV shows to spice up its streaming media service with TV shows days or even hours after they've been broadcast on TV, reports say. If Netflix can get studio buy-in--and there's no guarantee of that, even with the good price it's offering--it would become more competitive with Hulu and a more serious threat to cable. The move would also be somewhat financially remarkable for the service which is attracting viewers by deeply undercutting cable subscription rates. "It's just not going to happen at $7.99," Olaf Olafsson, a Time Warner vice president said during a New York conference. Web companies like Netflix and Hulu must up the ante (which is what Netflix is doing) before Time Warner is willing to sign on. "We encourage all of that stuff, as long as people pay for the content," Olafsson said. "That's why we're not on Hulu."

To: Mr.Gogo who wrote (40379)	12/11/2010 8:32:35 AM
From: Madharry	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78752

i will join others in cautioning you that shorting can be particularly treacherous especially if you do not have deep pocket. to recount my experience which many here have heard in the past. in 2000 i bought an ipo called icge at 15 or so. with a couple of months it reached 80 and i was convinced it was massively overvalued and sold my entire position and thought about possibly buying puts on it down the road. six months later it hit a high of $320 or so. when it dropped back to $240 i thought about buying puts but for the amount of money i wanted to risk it would have had to drop 50% more for me to make money so i didnt do it. eventually the stock dropped well below $1! another problem are facing shorts is the greater fool theory. the classic example of that being time warner's foolish purchase of aol, which probably destroyed many smart shorts. The moral is shorts can be great but you have to have staying power and be willing to suffer a better than 100% losing position before you may be proved right. I agree that nflx is way over priced but i also believe it could be acquired by a greater fool as well. Most of us cant stomach that. Last year i was short both gm and aig both of which i covered profitably, gm way too soon.