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 : America On-Line: will it survive ...? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve lipson who wrote (6536)	12/19/1997 2:35:00 PM
From: Tim Kenney	Respond to of 13594

> It is still growing.< Questionable. >It is making money.< Not. They are still overbooking ad revenue. > I did not look at the stock price to conclude the odds of success had improved. Rather, I saw the odds improving and watched as the stock moved up in unison.< Competition is beating down on them more than ever and they still cannot make money. That is at best running in place. >There's nothing perplexing about what happened this year. AOL is not a greater fool stock, a mania or a tulip. It is a classic emerging growth stock that put some of the key pieces in place this year that can produce success down the road. Experienced investors recognized this,< Only inexperienced investors could believe this. >and you'll notice that they haven't panicked and raced for the exits despite some good shakes to the overall market.< Yes, and these "experienced" investors haven't raced from the general market either, but they should. Do you think the general market is a screaming buy too? Actually, this market is more inundated with inexperienced investors than it has ever been before, i.e., the famous dip dip-buyers. The last 5 dips would not have been particularly profitable but they are still buying them. That is what the Japanese did several times as their market was deflating. Japan was inundated with "experienced" investors too who saw that the cost of capital was zero so and the market was a no lose proposition. Heck, they were even right for the first 5-10 years.

To: steve lipson who wrote (6536)	12/19/1997 2:40:00 PM
From: Tim Kenney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13594

To ALL: Just been reading the hype coming out of TALK. Was their fearless leader Boris Karlow born and bred at AOL HQ? He can outpitch Stevie and the Pitchman themselves. He has definitely adopted the AOL business model by the book, the book being "How to make a billion dollars by giving myself stock options and controlling the news flow about my company." If it works for Stevie, it can work for Boris. I wonder if he has to pay royalties to Stevie for expropriating his business model.

To: steve lipson who wrote (6536)	12/19/1997 4:12:00 PM
From: Harry Larson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13594

>>Experienced investors recognized this,and you'll notice that >>they haven't panicked and raced for the exits If you read the tape and the 10 x 200-300 sizes with which it's been peppered lately, and the blocks, and the 13-D filings you'll see that large investors have been peeling off in classic strong-weak (instutitonal to retail) distribution. Fidelity has cut its stake 50%, Paul Zwick at the top performing Seligman Tech has bailed; even super bull Bill Miller who put 3m shares into his Legg-Mason funds has done some selling. 10% just by an AOL S3 shelf reg alone.