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.

Non-Tech : E*Trade (NYSE:ET) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gil Gilbertson who wrote (4573)	1/30/1999 11:42:00 AM
From: ecommerceman	Respond to of 13953

A huge built-in advantage that ETrade has is the fact that its customers often become its shareholders (according to the Wall Street Journal), so as ETrade's customer growth skyrockets, so will the interest in its growing customer base in EGRP stock. This is why a stock split is very important to ETrade--it keeps the perception to unsophisticated investors that the stock is still "affordable," and is why the stock will likely split again in the near future with even modest growth in stock price. My assumption is that these ETrade customer/EGRP investors are more loyal to the company and the stock than they are to other stocks, and will provide it with a stronger base (less willing to sell, I mean) in the future as their numbers grow in size. One reason, only one reason, why I'm staying long for many years.

To: Gil Gilbertson who wrote (4573)	1/30/1999 11:48:00 AM
From: ecommerceman	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13953

Gil Gilbertson--I agree with you completely that the chances of ETrade getting bought out by a big bank are nil. It ain't gonna happen. If they didn't buy when the stock was at $10, they aren't gonna buy when it's $110! I don't share the depth of your concern about the effect that a bear market would have on ETrade. Clearly, it wouldn't be good, but I don't view it as the calamitous event that you evidentally do (where bids disappear to nearly nothing, as you say they did in 1974). This country is, in important ways, very different than it was 25 years ago, and one of the ways is that stock dispersal among the populace and interest in stocks in general is vastly greater than it was then. It's not that I disagree with the thrust of your point, I think you're overstating the danger a little.