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: Bill Harmond who wrote (14206)	8/21/1998 1:22:00 AM
From: Jan Crawley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

and the stock is telling the story. Bill, with all due respect, you do not see that the stock price is due to supply(10 million float) and demand(10 million sold + 5 million short) in-balance currently...?? I thought that we are all here cause the vulnerability of the stock price(up/down) and are trying to take advantage of it?

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (14206)	8/21/1998 1:31:00 AM
From: IceShark	Respond to of 164684

Most people prefer branded goods and services and will pay more for them. It's the first law of marketing, and it has been proven over hundreds of years. As far as AOL goes, I think that most people are semi-idiots and AOL is far superior for an idiot to get up and running as opposed to most other ISPs. Ever wonder why AOL posters on usenet get so much grief or just dismissed? And there is a content issue with the chat groups, etc. Also, changing ISPs is more like moving a residence than going to another book store. Ameritech just popped my monthly fee by 2 bucks per month and I will not change because it means deleting and reloading, informing everyone of my new address, blah, blah, blah. Or, are you suggesting AMZN is going to start offering coffee and danish while you browse through these shotgun acquisitions? Starting out a brand new purchase decision is a totally different matter. Consider America Online, the highest-priced ISP. Wrong. Under your theory of market rationalization, AOL's membership should be imploding but it obviously isn't. Until proven otherwise Amazon is the online-retailing category-killer, and as it scales its offerings it will benefit from increasing returns. I think Amazon will amaze you, and the stock is telling the story. Keep telling yourself that, but I really don't want to try to change your mind as you sound like an IOManiac in the height of the bubble. Regards, IS

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (14206)	8/21/1998 1:48:00 AM
From: e. boolean	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

>>Consider America Online, the highest-priced ISP. Under your theory of market rationalization, AOL's membership should be imploding but it obviously isn't. Until proven otherwise Amazon is the online-retailing category-killer, and as it scales its offerings it will benefit from increasing returns. I think Amazon will amaze you, and the stock is telling the story.<< 1. Market rationalization takes time, and there is certainly more inertia keeping people from switching their ISP (and e-mail address), once established, than from switching retailers. 2. Most internet-related companies are still in the "give it away to build revenue" phase of development - the question is whether they can make the transition to turning the healthy profits needed to justify their market caps. I (and many others) will happily use YHOO's free news service and ignore their ads, but when they try to make real money off my "eyeballs" - either through more and pushier ads, invasion of my privacy, or charging a fee - you better believe I won't be back. Look at the AOL and GCTY privacy scandals, for example. These companies are assuming their customers will placidly sit still to be relieved of their fleece: it ain't gonna happen, especially with growing numbers of consumer comparison and watchdog groups. On the internet in particular, the truth will out. 3. The keiretsu is really the perfect explanation of what's going on. For a while, Japan had a keiretsu-dominated economy that seemed could do no wrong - all the middlemen you wanted miraculously prospering by employing each other. (In this case, for example, I believe ZDNet, part owned by Softbank, is a major advertiser on YHOO, also part owned by Softbank.) In Japan, the Nikkei climbing to 30,000 on the kind of blind optimism we're seeing now in the internet sector. The questions now are 1. how high will prices go before the house of cards collapses, not to reach those prices again in our lifetimes, 2. will it take the rest of the stock market down with it, and 3. will anyone end up in jail over this. 4. You have not explained the mechanism of this "amazing" money making ability AMZN will display, nor responded to Glenn's requests for any hint of what you think you see that we do not see (except for the always amusing "they lose money on every sale, but they'll make up for it in volume"). I can only conclude that you do not in fact have confidence in the company's prospects long term, but are just hitching a ride on the elephants and kicking up dust with your purported "fundamental long" posts. OK, I can respect that. e.b.

To: Bill Harmond who wrote (14206)	8/21/1998 11:16:00 AM
From: Rob S.	Respond to of 164684

That is thinking educated in the broadcast media centric consumer age. That's old think born of an old technology. I can here echos from the past: "But with these new-fangled automobiles we will still need buggy whips to scoot the flys away." Why do we need brand names for merchants? To give us confidence in what we buy? Bunk. At best, that's just a temporary advantage because consumers are unfamiliar with the net. But as familiarity grows and as a host of credit card and other gurantee plans, merchant rating systems come into place, and buying services in which feed-back and assurances of service are provided, that will become increasingly irrelevant. "The mechant has the lowest price and is a member of 'Merchant Check Gold' - all my purchases are guranteed through my friendly bank card." OnSale.com, Amazon.con, and other existing merchants had no tract record or assurances when they started and it seems that people haven't had that tough of a time trusting them. Why should that be a factor or large advantage all of a sudden? The internet is inherently far more secure than purchasing something via giving a credit card number to someone you don't know at a mail-order company or just to buy lunch at the local restaurant. Consumers aren't stupid, just ignorant of that fact. Far too much is made of the issue of security. What does a consumer care if the purchase is something generic such as a book or CD? How badly can the merchant screw that up? This stock is held up by over confidence and hype, a lot of which is supported by brokers. It's not a question of "will Amazongonenuts.com come down?" but "When".