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: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (38453)	2/6/1999 2:44:00 PM
From: tonyt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164687

Barron's: "Remember Amazon.com's convertible bond offering that investors couldn't get enough of? You know, the one that was upsized from $500 million to $1.25 billion. The same one that traded as high as 105 at its debut the Friday before last. Well, the clamoring stopped last week. The Internet retailer's bonds fell to a low of 89 1/2 before recovering to 93 1/2 by Friday's close. That means that any investor who bought a $1,000 bond at the issue price lost $65 before the deal was even a week old. Amazon's shares, changing hands at 122 when the deal was priced, haven't fared too well either. Friday, they finished at 115 7/8 . "It has been a lousy trade for everyone," groused one bond investor. Critics are pinning much of the blame for the losses on Amazon and on lead underwriter Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, which they call greedy for selling too many securities. The bonds were trading up before the deal was expanded dramatically, but they fell as the market in general -- and 'Net stocks, in particular -- suffered an attack of indigestion. Another problem stemmed from the hedge-fund community. Hedge funds that buy convertible bonds typically sell the stock short to hedge their investment. But the convertibles -- which the hedge funds were long -- fell 11% from their peak, while the common -- which they sold short -- lost only 5%. So the arbitrage likely was the big loser."

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (38453)	2/6/1999 2:50:00 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164687

Michelle <I have always felt that Amzns true competition will come from a publisher> No, it will come from somebody who can PRINT what others have published at the location nearest to the consumer and deliver it without holding it a single day in inventory -- it is called print to order -- and yes, that means Barnes. We are at the dawn of a new fulfillment process and AMZN has one shot, a very long one, of getting it right. Rumors of EGGhead or other buyouts leave me rolling around and laughing on the floor. The real revolution has only just begun. AMZN has a dollar in its pocket -- do they know what to do? Nobody on this thread seems to know (arrogant but true).

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (38453)	2/6/1999 6:02:00 PM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Respond to of 164687

Is this BOL a publisher? I have always felt that Amzns true competition will come from a publisher, and not from a separate retail chain such as B&N. What I dont know is if one publisher can offer enough to make it worthwhile for a consumer to shop there. Apparently there are a lot of labels under certain publishers like Random House, penguin etc - they use penguin for the paperbacks only. One all-encompassing publisher could easily undercut amzn if they were willing to go into the technology biz. Michelle, I am certain this is answered but is case it is not, Bertellmens owns about 4-5 publishing houses and some music houses too. I will post an article about them when I have more time. Glenn