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: LoLoLoLita who wrote (1979)	3/5/1998 2:59:00 PM
From: jacek pietrzykowski	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 164684

CHECK THIS OUT!!!! Not long ago i went to amazon.com to try to buy the book "Titanic" and noticed it would take more than 3 weeks for them to ship the book to me. i was frustrated and went to barnesandnoble.com and found that the exact same book could be at my door in 2-3 days for the exact same price. WHATS WITH THIS? AND HOW IS AMZN EXPECTING TO MAKE MONEY LIKE THIS?

To: LoLoLoLita who wrote (1979)	3/5/1998 3:03:00 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

In reality (as if that matters to i-stock bulls), the bill before Congress has nothing to do with sales taxes. That would have absolutely no chance of passing or holding up in court anyway, but the real intent is to keep states from creating new excise or other taxes related to Internet access or usage like the many new taxes, assessments and fees that mysteriously appear on your phone bill with little or no notice or explanation. The bill, if it passes and holds up in court, may be a good thing for consumers by making access or usage marginally cheaper than with new taxes, but it won't benefit Internet merchants in any meaningful direct way. That's my understanding of Clinton's proposal anyway. Bob