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 : Tokyo Joe's Cafe / Societe Anonyme/No Pennies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TsioKawe who wrote (54008)	2/10/1999 4:11:00 AM
From: TokyoMex	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 119973

>Goldman Conference: Lycos CEO Stays Cool > >By George Mannes >Staff Reporter > > >Attempting to clear up any confusion about his merger with USA Networks >(USAI:Nasdaq), Lycos (LCOS:Nasdaq) CEO Robert Davis gave a quick >presentation at the Goldman Sachs Technology Investment Symposium. > >Davis stressed that the new company has as good a chance as anyone to >become "the dominant e-commerce vendor in the world in a very short time." >The stock market gave the deal a thumbs down, sending Lycos shares tumbling >33, or 26%, to 94 1/4. > >In his presentation, Davis spent a lot of time talking about those assets. >In particular, Home Shopping Network, a company that is present in 70% of >cable households, has 2,000 telemarketers and is capable of shipping >200,000 items a day. To survive in a world of low margin or even no margin >or negative margin e-commerce, the ability to operate on such a large scale >is crucial, Davis said. > >Davis also talked about synergies, for example, printing a company's Web >address on some of the 70 million tickets that TicketMaster (TMCS:Nasdaq) >sells annually, or having HSN telemarketers pitch a company's products to >customers already on the phone buying something else. > >He admitted he'd had a tough time explaining the deal to investors, as >evidenced by Lycos' big drop today. From the dialogue in the >question-and-answer session following Davis' presentation, it was indeed >clear that people had a hard time following the transaction, which is >expected to close in four to six months. > >Partly to blame for the confusion were the stock warrants to be granted to >Lycos shareholders that could increase their holdings under a certain set >of circumstances following the deal; people also came up with different >numbers for the proper value of USA Networks' market cap. But he recalled >that Lycos's share price has dipped each time the company has announced an >acquisition of late. In other words, today's big drop wasn't a new >experience for him. "Today's challenge is that it takes time to tell the >story," Davis said. > >Edison Chu, vice president of New York-based Digital Century, said that he >thought TicketMaster and Home Shopping Network were impressive operations >for an online company to gain. "It would be very difficult for another >company to emulate," he said. "Those were assets that were really >unmatched." (Digital Technology does not have any holdings in the companies >involved in this deal, he said.) > >But, Chu said, the challenge for USA/Lycos would be to integrate all the >different brands. "I see potential problems of them bringing the assets all >together," he said, estimating it would take more than a year after the >deal closes. "My sense is, it's going to take a lot of time," he said. >_____________________________________________________________________________ >Wrong! The Net Trap > >By James J. Cramer > >Which company will be the first to say "Hey, we have no Net here! We're NOT >the dot in .com. We have no Web work!" Soon Broadcom (BRCM:Nasdaq) will rue >the day it put a .com on its name. And Webster Financial of Connecticut >will have to change its name to Torrington Savings or something. > >Yeah, we are in the backpedaling stage, big time. Even as people at the >Goldman Sachs Technology conference were joking about how anything .com was >working better than enterprise software, personal computers or semi >equipment, the die had been cast. The mania had been crushed and the >margined players were biting the dust. Nastola is the word. > >Network Solutions' (NSOL:Nasdaq) broken secondary spoke tomes (a broken >secondary is one that doesn't hold the print price where the deal was >sold). But it was the Lycos (LCOS:Nasdaq) betrayal that cut the heart out >of the move. Short of Excite (XCIT:Nasdaq) merging with the Hula Hoop >company, there couldn't be a worse combination. Wonder if Barry Diller had >some TheStreet.com Internet Sector index puts on when he pulled this one >off? Could he be that brilliant? > >So why is tech being pulled down too? First, we are stuck with the guilt by >association problems. Sun Microsystems (SUNW:Nasdaq) worked hard to be a >Net company, so of course it will go down 7 when the Net unwinds. IBM >(IBM:NYSE) so linked itself with the Web that it now has the double whammy >of being a Net hybrid with bad earnings! Eeesh. Dell (DELL:Nasdaq) and >Cisco (CSCO:Nasdaq) have done their best to link their fortunes to the Net, >too. > >So we have to unwind that. And it will be unwound. More pain ahead. Again >purists are probably saying "Well, heck, why not short Cisco?" Go ahead. I >am not that much of a nihilist. I am comfortable buying Cisco down. Not >aggressively. But it is on the buy side of my blotter, not the sell side. > >For those who cannot take pain from the long side, this will be a trying >period. To me it is a necessary period. The bulls need valuations to be >more in whack instead of out of whack. The bulls need a market broader than >just the Janus 20. The bulls need the Net froth taken out to make this >market safe. And more important, the bulls need to have fewer bulls! > >That's the process we are undergoing now. > >The market is going from being severe overvalued to being overvalued. We >have seen it happen hundreds of times in the last 20 years. It will happen >hundreds of times more. > >It's why I am glad I have some cash and why I expect I will need it. > >See you on "Squawk." > >****** >