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: Oeconomicus who wrote (12831)	8/7/1998 6:28:00 PM
From: Tom D	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 164684

<<<I guess the bulls have nothing to say about the 39% increase in Benji's estimate of THIS YEAR'S LOSS>>> AMZN is going to lose huge amounts of money as it wages a war of attrition against its competition. Its 3 to 5 years before the end of the war, IMHO. When viewed from this perspective (which I guess is shared by a lot of bulls?) the short-term losses don't mean a whole lot. As a bull, I am betting that ultimately it will gain enough economies of scale and efficiencies to discourage its competitors. AMZN will need huge resources and powerful allies to successfully wage this battle. It appears to me that they have the resources, or can raise them. Clearly they have the alliances. The harder it is for AMZN, the worse it is for anybody who is serious about competing with them. BTW, from reading this thread this week I thought the stock was supposed to tank today on news of massive insider selling in the window which opened yesterday. Anybody have any explanations about why the long-awaited collapse did not occur? Best Regards, Tom

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (12831)	8/7/1998 9:26:00 PM
From: umbro	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

I say tomato, you say tomahto The following table is from Zack's: Earnings History Jun 1997 Sep 1997 Dec 1997 Mar 1998 Jun 1998 Estimate -0.17 -0.21 -0.22 -0.24 -0.40 Actual -0.14 -0.18 -0.19 -0.20 -0.33 Difference 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.07 % Surprise 17.65% 14.29% 11.36% 16.67% 17.50% [ URL: biz.yahoo.com ] A pretty picture, eh? Another upside surprise? But wait. Zack's is using the pro-forma earnings figure (without adjustments for goodwill and their ammortized debt. Here's what S&P says AMZN earned: Amazon.com Posts 2Q Loss of $0.44 vs. Loss of $0.16 [ biz.yahoo.com ] So, the investor who likes to buy upside EPS surprises sees one here, but in fact AMZN came in below estimates. Or did it? It depends upon whether the analysts use GAAP estimates in their projections, or whether they use AMZN's home-grown pro-forma EPS, which according to AMZN's news release are "presented for informational purposes only". If the company doesn't think those numbers should be used as the definitive measure of their EPS, then why is it okay for analysts at BARS (Benjamin) and DLJ? And of course earnings estimates for the 1998 year will continue to drop, so they'll be easier to beat. Per Zack's here is the progression of EPS consensus estimates for calendar year 1998: 90 60 30 7 Current days ago -1.09 -1.21 -1.12 -1.25 -1.26 According to the recent EPS estimates that -1.26 figure will be moved down to -1.56 or so (probably to adjust for loss due to the recent acquisitions ... though the GAAP are likely to be a lot lower than that.)

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (12831)	8/8/1998 11:33:00 AM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 164684

Glenn, TA? How 'bout the FA? I guess the bulls have nothing to say about the 39% increase in Benji's estimate of THIS YEAR'S LOSS or the 151% increase in 1999 LOSSES. Better post it again: AMZN: BANCBOSTON ROBT decreased estimate for fiscal year ending 12/98 from $-1.12 to $-1.56 on 08/05/98 AMZN: BANCBOSTON ROBT decreased estimate for fiscal year ending 12/99 from $-0.61 to $-1.53 on 08/05/98 So, when is breakeven now? 2010? Strong buy? HA!!! Bob, It seems rediculous that breakeven is moving out from the end of 1999 to now around 2002 a or even later. No reason to believe it will not move out to 2010 as you stated. I would thing it should be clear to most people thar earnings are nowhere in the future. Losses continue to increase and any change of estimates moves losses further into the next century. Glenn