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 : BroadVision (BVSN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: King David who wrote (863)	11/14/1998 11:48:00 AM
From: john g	Respond to of 3773

While it's impossible for me to disagree with your opinion, I will say that this deal was made by people that believe in the futures and abilities of both companies. Could we get along without them or they us- well of course? Will we get along better because of the relationship (and I have seen a demo of the finished product) I say yes? Until you have seen the finished product, I wouldn't be too quick to condemn. We are a company that is struggling to get a market share and we need the help and expertise of others to get there. Just like the Royal deal didn't make sense to me- the next time someone came to the table- State Farm- they had to pay a bigger price to sit at the table. SONE

To: King David who wrote (863)	11/15/1998 3:29:00 PM
From: Robert Pope	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3773

> The swap essentially makes SONE returns dependent on BVSN returns. < A $3mil investment in a $300+mil company is less than 1% stake. I don't feel that can be interpreted as "dependent on BVSN returns". I can see a 30% or 50% stake as possibly dependant on returns but less than 1%, I don't think so. How can you feel S1 is a "consolidation company" like CMGI or Berkshire? MSFT, INTC and many others continually invest in other complimentary companies which are strategic advantages. Its an increasing way of doing business in the ever-changing IT world of business. I feel the cross equity investment was more of a token gesture to indicate the seriousness of the joint product development and marketing effort. I've heard both Pehong and Chip speak, and I feel they know more about what benefits the companies than any of us do. I'm thrilled S1 has partnered with with an e-commerce leader and that BVSN has recognized S1 as the most effective and efficient financial services Web application provider. I also want to challenge the poster who says one-to-one e-commerce solutions are easy to build. Easy according to who? What's your technical background to support that? If it was so easy, why is BVSN's main competitor, OMKT bleeding red ink? Why isn't MSFT involved? Why did CSCO and American choose BVSN instead of developing their own solution? Why does BVSN exist if it was so easy? Just a little curious about the evidence to support your statement. s'N.