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: IceShark who wrote (8431)	7/1/1998 11:44:00 PM
From: Gary Korn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

IOM (or more specifically IOMG) was in the under a buck range in mid '94, before it ran to $66, pre split. Dan, Thank you for the information. The IOMG balloon multiplied over 60-fold? And 60 times 40 would be what, 2,400? Maybe I should go long. Gary Korn

To: IceShark who wrote (8431)	7/1/1998 11:54:00 PM
From: llamaphlegm	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

I've been reading this thread for 4 months now and have learned a ton from Gary Korn and Glenn. Thanks. Mark Fowler has usually been the one civil long on this stock and much as I disagree with his attempted justifications for the stock's valuation, I appreciate hearing a rationale argument for the stock, even if I don't buy it. I survived the ktel ride on the way and have been boxed with amzn for the past 60 point run. I have no idea when this will end. Nor do any of the fundamental-folks or the technicals (and your bollinger bands, stochastics, et al, are not crystal balls or else you would not be wasting your time on these threads). I trade on fundamentals and hope that my understanding of the stock in the long run is right and that the market comes to see it as such. I'm not smart enough to prophesize stock movements intrahour, day or month. To those of you longs who are, keep on trucking. I would just like to make a general observation. The level of idiocy, offensiveness, and gloating of the longs on Yahoo and TMF (and has even cropped up here to my chagrin -- after all I paid the fee to avoid the "noise" --) threads for amzn, has approached that of ktel. AMZN, like KTEL, has rocketed up on literally no news (and even on negative news). If the future of the stock is inversely related to the sophistication of most of the longs, AMZN will, like KTEL, at some point and I don't know when, reverse course. At some point, the rationale of, "it's at $125 it will go to $200, why not?" ceases to work. When, again, don't know. It might be when the company starts to announce that it is facing larger than expected labor costs, when the company can not find enough qualified applicants to fill its job vacancies, when inventories start to build, when a major publication profiles books.com or acses.com and shopping agents in general, when there's a massive sector rotation away from "internet" stocks, or when someone understands that if a website renders a company an "internet" company, then GM, Ford and ALCOA are wonderful relative values. Who knows? But something will shift. So, I'll happily chime in on the bearish side and try to keep the discourse as wonderfully civil as it's generally been.