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: Acey who wrote (4868)	5/30/1998 11:40:00 AM
From: hal jordan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

Acey, Thanks for providing a bullish opinion on this stock. A bull's perspective has been sorely missing from this thread. I do believe this stock is tremendously overpriced, therefore I have puts on the stock. That is not to say that AMZN's future destruction is assured. However, present valuations need to correct drastically. Only time will tell whether they survive, and I'm no long term prognosticator. AMZN faces significant competition with low barriers to market entry. Maybe they succeed in three years, maybe they don't. I just know present value has gone too far north in my opinion not to warrant a short/put position. Hal

To: Acey who wrote (4868)	5/30/1998 12:57:00 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

Acey, AMZN may have only started in 1995 and I'm sure no one expected them to make money right away, but get real. This is not some biotech startup that pumps millions into research for years before ever seeing a penny of revenues. It is a retailer and it is not expected to make a dime of profit until the year 2000 (if then). Any retail business that can't turn a profit by the time it is five years old can hardly be said to have a good business model, to be "very well managed" or to be in a "dominant position". The only thing well managed is their PR and the only thing they dominate is the analysts that cover them. JMO, Bob

To: Acey who wrote (4868)	5/31/1998 10:33:00 AM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Respond to of 164684

I'm not trying to be rude. But the ignorance by some people on this board is a little stunning. Acey, This was not a nice statement and does show your lack of seeing both sides of a position. No one on this thread has called an Amazon bull ignorant. You stated you were not trying to be rude; so do the correct move and apologize to the thread. Now let's move on. People think just because the company loses money for a few years, like many startups, that it should be worth next to nothing. Fooey! AMZN has gone from nothing in 1995 to the leading internet retailer in 1998....and internet commerce is just in its infancy. This year, I think most people would agree, AMZN seems poised to hit $450 million in revenue, give or take a few million. Amazon is not losing money for a few years. The conservative projection is at least 1/2 decade. Secondly, there doe not seem to be any renvenue projections for Amazon. I would appreciate you pointing me to such projections. It is my opinion the growth in revenue of Amazon is about over due to additional competition. THis is less than a quarter of AMZN's book sales for this year. Probably more importantly, he claimed that internet selling like this actually increases the entire book market....as in expanding the pie. You are again aking revenue projections. Keep in mind the CEO of Barnes and Noble actually has a revenue projection on the net and they have been on the net for 14 months. Also, many people find books at the Barnes and Noble site and then go to the local bookstore and purchase it rather than waiting days. I also project the net will not expand the book market. It will decrease the book market. People are spending more leasure time on the net rather than reading books. I can back this opinion up with a great deal of factual information if you wish. FInally, there is all the hubbub about valuation. Certainly, AMZN may look expensive here. But in reality, AMZN is trading only around 4 to 5 times 1998 sales....not extremely expensive considering its growing better than 100% a year, is the leader in internet retailing, and is very well managed. We are back to sales not profits. Companies do not survive on sales. I do not know how you score the ability of management. I tend to disagree or there would be a business model with revenue projections and an approximate year to be profitable. I cannot find that. Can you. but AMZN is registering explosive growth, and isn't just a book store...they plan to be a giant retailer, selling books, music, videos, and who know what else. I sure do not know what else. Management does not know or they are not telling. However, Borders has all the above already excluding what else and Barnes and Noble are close. The mose common causes of retail faliures are undercapitalization and a poor business model. Amazon will have a negative book value within three weeks. They have no business model that one can point to nor are they stating. They can continue to operate due to high interest debt but that will have be paid at some point. The ver increasing loses not decreasing is not a good sign of success. I appreciate your opinion on this thread and hope you continue to be involved here. Please do not call us bears ignorant is all I ask. I do not agree with your opinion but would consider you ignorant based on your opinion. Glenn