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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : TSIG.com TIGI (formerly TSIG) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ditchdigger who wrote (13752)	1/1/1999 5:37:00 PM
From: Chuck Rubin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 44908

That's right, IMO, this is all the legalese the Company must state as contingincies to what COULD happen....not necessarily what WILL transpire....I think we should get a statment from the Company itself clarified as to its "plan(s) of action," it should come straight from them, Not from you stating the standard stuff that each Company has to state anyway. Chuckr

To: Ditchdigger who wrote (13752)	1/1/1999 6:27:00 PM
From: JWC	Respond to of 44908

Ditch, You have said all this before. So why are you sticking around this thread and keep posting the same stuff? Jeff

To: Ditchdigger who wrote (13752)	1/2/1999 2:11:00 AM
From: slaffe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 44908

YOUR LOGIC IS FLAWED I will agree that your logic is 100% on the money if you were applying this logic to a traditional company in a traditional sector with a traditional business model. However tsig is definitely not a traditional company, not in a traditional sector nor does it have a traditional business model. I believe it was Peter Lynch who a few weeks ago asked a group of students how to evaluate a internet stock. He immediately responded that anybody who answered flunks the class. Mary Meeker "The queen of the net" Barron's 12/21/97, on valuing internet stocks. "So here we are trying to value companies without any historical valuation rules/tools. Our tools? How big is the market, how high's the market share, who's No. 1?" I am not going to bore you or anybody else that might read this by giving the argument/rebuttal that higher share prices will off set any potential dilution. Which it will, however that has been hashed over many times here. Instead let's think about this. The internet is in it's infancy, with five million users in 1995, 80 million today and expected to have 150 million by this time next year. I'm not sure if these figures are for the US or worldwide, perhaps somebody could clarify that for me. I submit to you that out of the 80 million current internet users, half or more of those do not use the internet anywhere near has frequently as you or I. Case in point is my brother who has a old (?) 486, pays his $20 bucks every month to aol and calls it a waste of money because he hasn't logged on once in the last three weeks. Out of the remaining half, half of those I suspect are hesitant to use the internet for shopping privileges. They are in fear of the unknown and don't wish to give out credit card information. Fact, internet sales are dwarfed by brick and mortar sales. While I envision that to be reversed, I don't believe it will happen anytime in the near future. Many people, right here in the USA have little or no knowledge of the internet, let alone in the international regions. If we were to apply traditional valuations to the internet sector do you believe that amzn would be worthy of it's current market cap of almost 17 billion dollars? With analysts projections of a 12 month price target of $50 to $400. Let's look at our competition. ..............................amzn........cdnw.......ntki......ktel last 4q;'s revenues.. 423.2m.......43.4m......32.3.....79.2 o/s......................52.7m.......17.7m......14.2m.....8.3m last 4q's loss .........1.76.........2.41......8.02.....0.83 current price ........321.25........18.00......13.06...10.5 #of employees ...........614.........111........267....189 market cap.............16.9b........318.6m.....185m.....87.1m Do you believe that any of the above companies deserve their market cap? Notice that the losses on all four of the above mentioned companies are widening. Imo, that is because these companies are trying a mix of traditional business models in a non traditional sector. They are so busy concentrating on establishing their "footprint" that they are forgetting one very basic premise of business. And that is that the object is to make a profit. They are spending massive amounts of money on very expensive internet advertising as well as traditional advertising. And to whom are they advertising to? That small percentage of avid internet users. Now let's look at tsig. I strongly suggest you review the transcript of the conference call of 8/5/98. It is available on poisontasters site. geocities.com. It was that cc that confirmed my bullishness of tsig, for in this cc he confirmed the path that tsig was about to take with the guerilla marketing tactics. Since then tsig has laid the foundation to become a major internet e tailer. tsig has turned around, instead of widening losses, we are seeing decreasing losses, from .11 in the 2q 98 to .02 in the 3q 98. True revenues were virtually non existent, going from 1.005m in 2q 98 to .445m in 3q 98. That is because tsig has transformed it's business from being primarily a teleservices company with a internet division to a internet company with a teleservices division which I might add that the vast majority of our competitors do not have. It is true that the last 10-q, filed 11/13/98 does not look good, however compared to previous 10-qs it shows substantial improvement. Can you say that about our competitors? It seems to me like the more they sell, the more they loss. That's backwards. It is beyond me how amzn can have sales of 423mil and lose money. Now if we take just one of the recently announced deals, the babe ruth deal. We see that anticipated revenues from that deal alone is 50mil! Most of that coming in 1q 99. That alone will catapult us above ktel, cdnw and ntki. Never mind any revenues coming from Phil Esipsoto sponsorship, or the national music foundation, or any upcoming deals yet to be announced. (Dixie, got anything up your sleeve? Personally, I think Dixie has to wear very long sleeved shirts.) Let's suppose that the br deal only creates 25 mil in revenue, half, out of that 25mil, how much will tsig have to pay for advertising? Answer, virtually nil. I suppose we will have to spring for an airline ticket for RG and Dixie to glad hand some of the babe ruth vip's, and that is just about it. That deal alone should catapult tsig to profitability in 1q 99. Two years before amzn is projected to turn a profit. Never mind the fact that once tsig has obtained a customer, we virtually own that customers repeat business. The fact that tsig is currently ramping up to have over 300 employess, more than ntki,ktel or cdnw. (I wonder why that is) I am disappointed that the investment community has not waken up to the potential of tsig yet. It was I who projected a high price in 98 of 3.25. All of the groundwork has been laid (notice I use the past tense here) and when a moneymaking pr hit, I was sure that we would see a spike up. I was wrong, instead we have this pathetically low price of .43. A while back a poster posed the question of a stock buy back. He said that the only reason why a company would buy it's own stock was to 1) have enough on hand to satisfy employee options. 2) The company could think of no better place to invest it's money than within. You have mentioned in your post the dreaded reverse split. What would tsig benefit from a reverse split? To get nasdaq listing? Are we in a hurry to get nasdaq listing? I'm not. It will come with time. I submit that your vision of a reverse split is totally without vision or foundation. Perhaps put out merely to scare off potential new investors and strike fear in old investors. I see the exact opposite as being a much more distinct possibility. In fact REW has a visit planned to tsig in mid january. He has asked for us to submit to him questions to be asked to RG at that time. At that time if tsig is trading at it's pathetically low price and only a fraction of the babe ruth revenues have come in, I would like REW to ask RG about the possibility of a stock buyback. Where do you think that the price of tsig might be if in late jan. a pr is released citing a stock buyback and in mid feb we get the 4q98 10-q showing increased improvement? In short ditchdigger, whether you sold out your momentum play at .51 or .54, imho it is irrelevant. You sold way to soon. Steven J Lafferty