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 : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom D who wrote (1528)	2/11/1998 12:06:00 PM
From: Don Westermeyer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

Tom, Barnes and Noble said something to the effect that they would not allow their online business to adversely affect overall profitability Nice speech by BKS, but if AMZN is successful, BKS hurts just as bad as it will be taken out of their sales. Even if they don't want to plow into advertising, they may mark their books down another 5% and they wouldn't loose a lot of (if any) money. You could be right and BKS and all will snooze until it is too late, but if the people in charge there want to keep their jobs they will have to act sometime.

To: Tom D who wrote (1528)	2/11/1998 12:16:00 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Respond to of 164684

So, I don't think the P/E will be a meaningful yardstick for a couple more years. So, when will earnings matter? They are expected to lose $1.28/shr this year and might break even in 1999. Let's assume they make twice as much in 2000 as they lose this year. Give 'em $2.50 (before you dilute it with options, secondary offerings ...) and ignore the fact that BKS didn't even make that much on $2.7 billion of sales the last 12 months. You are paying 26 times a dream number for the year 2000. Apply a reasonable margin assumption, and your 3 year forward PE goes back over 50. But then, it's not a meaningful yardstick. Why not 50 times 2010 earnings? Bob