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 : Source Media SRCM -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (326)	7/16/1998 2:45:00 PM
From: Pluvia	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3015

STRONG SELL Rec on SRCM, Buyer Beware Greetings, For those of you who do not know me, please let me introduce myself. My speciality is research. Here is an article about research I have done on two other companies I really did not like TLTK and PLSIA: fool.com I have spent the past few days doing a great deal of DD on SRCM. At first I bought into the AOL/MSFT/YAHOO bidding war "Buyout" rumor that has been circulating. I figured what I believed was their internet technology should have great appeal to the rumored Big Boy bidders. SO I went long some warrants and started doing some DD The first red flag I encountered was this: biz.yahoo.com WOW - that is a bunch of selling by some LARGE shareholders. If the technology was valid I thought - why would they be selling? Heck, I figured they would have to be nuts to sell if they believed in the technology and it was as good as the rumors think it is? This alone was enough red flag for me to sell - which I did at a break even. But it got worse... One of the sellers was an officer, and one is the ex CFO Mike Pate. No big deal in most cases right? I called a few people who had been with SRCM, they indicated Pate was a real clean cut, "do the right thing" type of guy. They thought he quit and sold all his stock. They also said he was the "ONLY GUY THEY FELT WAS TRUSTWORTHY WITHIN COMPANY MANAGEMENT". WOW, this was getting interesting. They said him leaving in their opinion was significant, and spoke volumes, as he was the only guy in the company they really trusted. SO I checked out Mike Pate.... Here's what I found from a October 6, 97 SEC filing: edgar-online.com Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (principal financial Michael G. Pate and accounting officer) Sure enough, my ex SRCM guy was right he was the ex CFO. So far this source had given me good info for everything I could confirm... And none of what he gave me was good for a long position... So I did a little more digging... And guess what? SRCM started looking worse and worse.... More to come...

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (326)	7/16/1998 2:53:00 PM
From: Pluvia	Respond to of 3015

STRONG SELL Rec on SRCM, Buyer Beware (2) cont'd The big issue I feel is whether or not the technology works - and are the patents restrictive to the "BIG BOYS" getting into the cable internet market. 1. According to everyone I have spoken to, people familiar with the technology indicate it is aged and has been leapfrogged by better technology. In fact they suggest the technology they use would not satisfy the needs of today's typical internet user... Everone I have spoken with agrees with the "limited use of SRCM's technology with today's internet users" as is described in this post where it says: "2: Limited potential for the virtual modem. Source's product actually has a server at the head-end which is accessing the internet. It then sends addressable video frames to individual set-top boxes. It is not a direct link like a cable modem since your are acutually getting pictures from the server accessing the net. You cannot link a PC to it like @Home. To surf the web, you use a remote to select buttons or can use an on screen keyboard. This is impracticle for typing e-mail, chatting, playing on-line games or sharing files. Its real use is to check e-mail or general surfing. However, for e-mail, most people want it on their PC to keep addresses, type responses or print a hard copy. It is unclear if you once download e-mail to the Source server if you could then later download it to your PC. Compounding their problems is that the set top box makers have also said they may just build in a cable modem into the box." Message 4103214 But there appear to be other significant problems with SRCM also that lead me to believe there is no way a buyout being considered for this company... More to come...

To: Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (326)	7/16/1998 2:57:00 PM
From: Pluvia	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 3015

STRONG SELL Rec on SRCM, Buyer Beware (3) Cont'd Source Media (SRCM) Pilot Project Failed To Provide Internet "Like" Services In Colorado Springs. Pilot is cancelled. Does SRCM even have the capability to provide internet services like the kind we use everyday, or are SRCM's internet services nothing like typical ISP services? You decide. It would appear the Colorado Springs people voted a big no. Here is an article from the Colorado Springs Gazette-Telegraph dated Feb 5. The article describes the pilot program out in Col Springs and how it was canceled because it basically failed. Feel free to contact them yourself. Here is a clip from the article: "Century, the former Cablevision, launched the Interactive Channel on Aug 30, 1996. The partners in the project were Source Media Inc. of Dallas, which created the channel; and The Gazette, which provided it with news and other information. "It never lived up to expectations," Shreffler said. Scheffler said he doubted the $6.95 fee was too expensive. Rather, he speculated viewers wanted the internet like service - something that would allow them to surf sites as they do on the world wide web. Sounds to me like the Source Media internet (?) service was unable to provide real internet like service..... Do you really think MSFT, YAHOO, AOL or any others would buy this aged type service? I don't think so. But I do think the rumors of a buyout fit right up there with this company's history.... What appear to be years and years of rumors and failed promises. I ask - are the "rumors" used to raise money for a company that if it is not bought out will likely go belly up - QUICK? Inquiring minds want to know... Lots more IMO serious questions about this company to come...