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 : OnSale Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: StaggerLee who wrote (1454)	7/29/1998 9:22:00 AM
From: Norm Demers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4903

RTQ 26 3/8 * 26 3/8 no gap up or down yet. Looks good for the longs today so far.

To: StaggerLee who wrote (1454)	7/29/1998 9:37:00 AM
From: j_b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4903

I have been fascinated watching your posts over the prior year regarding ONSL and their business plan. No offense, but who died and made you an expert on their plans? You harp (correctly, I might add) on their need to double revenues without increasing expenses, just to break even, but make no comment on the possibility or liklihood of that actually happening. You comment on the margin rate, with no consideration of any action management might be taking to increase margins. You don't discuss what has caused the rapid increase in expenses, and whether such growth will continue in the future - could management actually be considering reducing some spending, thereby accelerating the break-even period? What is ONSL spending so much money on, and is it money well spent? Will more employees and equipment be needed to handle the growth? Will software innovation require continued massive expenditures for programmers and equipment? These are all issues that would be dealt with in that mysterious business plan you have ridiculed. What are the answers? Without them, there is no basis for discussing the viability of the ONSL model. They were profitable at one time, and they could be again, depending on the answers to these (and I'm sure many other) questions. Let's see more analysis - we all need both positive and negative viewpoints to be knowledgeable investors.