SI
SI
discoversearch

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: yard_man who wrote (9013)7/6/1998 1:15:00 PM
From: slipnsip  Respond to of 164684
 
Jul 06, 1998

FOOL PLATE SPECIAL
An Investment Opinion
by Dale Wettlaufer

Amazon Price Right?

Amazon.com (Nasdaq:AMZN - news) leapt $8 to $132 in yet another spectacular morning of trading for the online retailing
pioneer. In less than 30 trading sessions, the stock has surged more than 80 points, tacking on more than $3.75 billion in
market capitalization to a prior market cap that many short-sellers thought was insane to begin with. The company now has a
market cap in excess of $6 billion, which doesn't even count a bunch of options that go "in the money" each quarter and with
each large advance in the company's share price.

The more value-oriented investor probably started looking askance at the market value of Amazon.com more than a couple
ticks ago, wondering if it is past intrinsic value. For our purposes of intrinsic value, there are two definitions: 1) The specific
current price that will yield an investment performance in line with a market average over a future time period, and 2) the net
present value of all the cash that can ever be taken out of the business. If the price of the stock is set so that it qualifies for the
second definition, theoretically, it should meet the first definition. There's no guarantee that those two will always match, though.

Current Amazon.com bears point to the company's losses, wondering how a company could be priced at twice the market cap
of more established competitors like Barnes & Noble (NYSE:BKS - news) and Borders Group (NYSE:BGP - news) . It's
pretty simple, though. Investment in working capital at the established chains is more intensive than at Amazon, which means
that less shareholders' cash will be tied up in slow-turning inventory while vendors such as Simon & Schuster are kind enough
to finance the booksellers' inventory at 45-90 days. Amazon has a competitive advantage because it can turn its working capital
assets more quickly than its competitors. Amazon can also turn its fixed assets more quickly. (An investor has to bring the value
of all these companies' lease obligations onto the asset side of the balance sheet.)

All of this matches what investors want to see -- less capital invested in inventory and receivables and more capital invested in
building the brand name. However, Amazon is being accorded a huge valuation bonus because of its pioneer status. Barnes &
Noble is on the prowl, though, with advertisements that come at you with a pretty effective message. Borders is out there, too,
but it appears that it is still tweaking things before it gets going with marketing its Web store. Amazon is excellent at execution
almost every time a customer orders a book, and now, CDs. That's a crucial part of online retailing. B&N stumbles a little more
often, according to our unscientific research. However, the others can learn how to execute, if they are worth their salt as major
retailers.

That being the case, investors might be overestimating the competitive position of Amazon down the road. To wit, the company
may not be able to earn a super-normal return on invested capital for as many years as investors expect, especially in other
retailing segments where receivables terms aren't set as irrationally and anachronistically as in the publishing industry. Amazon
bulls should probably take stock here and reassess what they expect out of the company. It's a big wide world out there with
lots of opportunities for Amazon to exploit, but at a certain price you can can get far ahead of intrinsic value.



To: yard_man who wrote (9013)7/6/1998 1:23:00 PM
From: JC Reddy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 164684
 
Longs, of course! Why would anyone pay $136 for a share
of a company that has virtually nothing?

Good luck to you all... Play the game, play safe!