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: Techie who wrote (24851)	11/7/1998 12:03:00 AM
From: Bill Harmond	Respond to of 164684

>>But you are right in the sense that AMZN will be another Netscape :) What an ugly thought, and no I don't sense that. I still don't see the big catastrophe here. Firstly it is plainly anti-competitive by design. The question is whether it hits the trip wire. The move is clearly designed to disadvantage Amazon, and it does, but it hits the entire retail industry, and that's a problem for the deal. In the meantime, this shocker didn't cause the stock to fail. Volume wasn't exceptional today; it was higher two other days this week. There was no rush to sell like the break in E*Trade caused by the Ameritrade news. Amazon is still riding above my short term averages, and until it breaks decisively I'm staying with it.

To: Techie who wrote (24851)	11/7/1998 12:29:00 AM
From: Randy Ellingson	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 164684

But you are right in the sense that AMZN will be another Netscape :) Serious or not, I don't think the Netscape comparison really works. I do see the remarkably high valuation similarity, but I do not see any competition standing in the way of Amazon's momentum in building their business. Net names which do a good job for the internet public (e.g., Yahoo, Amazon, and AOL) don't suddenly lose their audience. Amazon does do a good job with their site, and whether or not I can convince anyone else, I think their internet-only strategy makes them a more obvious and trusted choice for many netfolks. In a sense, they're well on their way to building their future, even before they've begun. People are hearing about them in the news every day, seeing their friends and colleagues use their service, and going to the names they think of first. FWIW, I find myself buying more (books, CD's, videos, as gifts or for myself) because of the ease of use of the internet. I suppose I could have become a customer of someone else, but isn't it more likely for people to go to the 'net name? Randy

To: Techie who wrote (24851)	11/7/1998 12:30:00 AM
From: Philip Logos	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

Techie, you're making too much sense. Cut that out, now. You're ruining that fantasy the bulls and TMF so vehemently cherish. Just when we were thinking that all news was good for Amazon, you tell us that 10 billion in sales equals two dollars per share annually and a pe of 60. Let me post your paragraph here: Even if they sell 10B, with a net profit margin of 1% (coming from Perkins), that amounts to ~$2 based on 48M shares. Which gives them a P/E of ~60 on that forward figure. Now you tell me when they'll get to 10B annual sales and what would their growth rate be by that time. This is my only problem with AMZN. A forward PE of 60, projected out to the year 2005? Not a problem for people in denial of this kind of bad news: Walmart lawsuit, Bertelsmann team-up, Ingram purchase, insider selling. Phil