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.

Non-Tech : Littlefield Corporation (LTFD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SE who wrote (7359)	2/15/1998 8:23:00 PM
From: JakeSki	Respond to of 10368

The question is, do you want a small percentage of a big number (bingo halls) or a large percentage of a small number (VGM's). The VGM market could turn out to be 100% of a zero-million dollar market. -- George

To: SE who wrote (7359)	2/15/1998 8:23:00 PM
From: Anton Anderson	Respond to of 10368

Scott and everyone, I don't contribute very often, but read all of it--and learn a lot. On my way to Anderson, SC I stopped at Blacksburg (I think) for gas.There was a sign on the poker machines "Closed on Sunday" I inquired and was told that was a state blue law. I said I had heard there was some trouble with the machines and was told "The damn Governor is trying to close them down. Where the hell does he think the tax money is coming from. I sure ain't gonna pay no more taxes." I have a feeling there are many more people who think this way. Whether they can influence the legislature, I don't know. I asked them who would profit if they closed the machines down, and they thought for a while. Finally one of the clerks said, "I guess them Indians on the reservation will end up with more money." That, of course, has been my thought for some time. I just am too skeptical to believe that all this effort is being expended out of pure altruism. Anton

To: SE who wrote (7359)	2/15/1998 8:30:00 PM
From: Alan Cole	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10368

Scott - I agree, and it's clear that the focus of the company is bingo going forward. Corky Logue told me that several weeks ago, based on bingo halls' providing dependable solid earnings, and VGM is sufficiently chancy so as to appear less attractive. The current press release was also reasonably clear on that. No reason why a company that's business includes gambling needs to gamble. I won't be able to be on the conference call either, but an important question (maybe the single most important question) would be intended rate and method of growth. Will growth be through acquisition of other companies, or solitary halls? To what extent are they interested in geographic expansion? I would imagine that they may prefer not to do that now, with an effort to consolidate a single area, so as to create economies of scale, a strong local reputation, highly skilled managers that cover several halls, etc. To what extent have they thought that out? It's a good way to dissect out their own management skills. My sense is that John Orton is skilled at financial matters, I'm not certain as to the company's skills at business management (not to say that they're not skilled, I just don't have the information). They will not talk about specific planned acquisitions during the conference call, but they should be quite clear on their intended general approach - if they are not clear, if asked, I would be concerned that things are not properly thought out. As I said, I probably can't be there, but if anyone feels the same way, maybe we could throw a few things around before the conference call. Alan

To: SE who wrote (7359)	2/16/1998 4:20:00 AM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10368

Scott, one of the posts you refer to was probably mine. It was a quick, offhand reply to someone else's query, not based on the thorough research you have done on BNGO. I was thinking more in terms of the market's short-term perception of BNGO. Much of the runup last year came in anticipation of big VGM numbers. A switch back to a mostly bingo strategy probably will be a solid revenue producer in the long term. I just don't think it will be glamorous enough for BNGO to work through the tremendous amount of overhead very quickly - all those shares bought between $5 and $9 which will now slow BNGO's rise in 1998. BNGO was on my short list to research over the weekend. I decided to wait until after the conference call and see how the market reacted before buying in again. Instead I will probably buy SYNT on Tuesday; it has a high PE compared to earnings, but similar companies have been getting astronomical PE's because the Street sees a big future for their business. Not so with BNGO at the moment. In the short term, the price investors will pay for BNGO matters most. If you are playing longer term and BNGO management settles down, it should be a good investment for you.