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: Jan Garrity Allen who wrote (41369)	2/20/1999 8:32:00 AM
From: Lance	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 164684

I AGREE JAN, AMZN is going to fly again and not fall like many think. The MM's did their job already! They made a killing selling high, now they have made a killing shorting it back down...... Look for a fierce upward movement & soon..... SHORT SQUEEZE!!! Lance

To: Jan Garrity Allen who wrote (41369)	2/20/1999 11:22:00 AM
From: H James Morris	Respond to of 164684

>> I am well above water as I bailed out of yhoo at420 while I was traveling in USA so<< Glad to hear you're above water. It's the right place to be. I was only insinuating that you're under water on the "Thing". Selling Yhoo @ 420, I believe. Was the right "Thing" to do. Congrats.

To: Jan Garrity Allen who wrote (41369)	2/20/1999 11:26:00 AM
From: H James Morris	Respond to of 164684

>>....hey it is a gamble and since Korea is such a bummer<< As a matter of Interest. What was so bad about Korea?

To: Jan Garrity Allen who wrote (41369)	2/20/1999 3:07:00 PM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

7 money: time) increase dramatically as the Web becomes the haven for an increasingly large staple of goods. Again, the greater the number of choices available, the greater the need for an aggregator. Consumers often consider the value bundle as a whole, especially on the Internet where many factors can be weighed at little cost. In a perfect market, buyers would purchase from whichever supplier can offer the best combination of desired attributes (price, service, selection, availability, quality, etc.) The best “deal” may or may not be the least expensive pants, mortgage, book, DVD, car, or beanie baby. At some point in the consumer decision making process, the transaction cost of searching and assessing market offers is greater than the opportunity cost of settling for a less optimal offer. That's fancy wording for: I'll buy the more expensive CD because it's one click away and can be shipped with my book order. Part of the value bundle that Amazon offers to consumers, then, is their ability to cut through the choice thicket and give them what they want without consumers having to search it out. To this we would add the very real (and probable) notion that Amazon's ability to drive “other” revenue (in the form of advertisement, transaction fee sharing with Shop The Web partners, etc.) is just starting to come into view and could provide all the margin (and more) that Amazon could lose if price became the competitive weapon of choice. After all, if free-pc.com and Onsale AtCost are going to make money by amassing eyeballs, ears, and wallets, why can't Amazon do that in spades. Heck, they've already got 6+ million customers and are growing that figure like kudzu. Just like we've been consistently surprised by how successful AOL has been in monetizing their customer base over the years, we tend to believe that Amazon.com will surprise us to the same degree. Content: Disseminate or Populate? In last week's Internet Capitalist, we spoke about the role that Internet content will play in the development of the Internet as a consumer mass medium. The take-away was simple: certain content (what we call commerce-driven content) will start to become highly valuable in 1999, thanks to its ability to provide context to and catalysts for e-commerce. That is, information that drives revenue will increase in value. We used financial content (e.g. TheStreet.com, CBS MarketWatch) as early indicators of this trend. Central to this thesis was our discussion about how content companies handled the never-ending business model debate: should they be subscription fee-based or advertising fee-based or both? Many of the bright folks at content start-ups are noodling on this very issue with some frequency, as they try to pin a terminal value on this Internet donkey's tail. In last week's Internet Capitalist, we put it this way: “If you accept our thesis that financial content will increase its value markedly in 1999, the more relevant long term question for content providers is whether they should they keep or cede control of their content. Would the value of their content be greater if it were widely disseminated? Would scarcity value, generated by limited, exclusive partnership-type arrangements, create greater dollar returns? Those are tough questions, though good ones to be asking, since they strike directly at the heart of determining the long term value of Internet content. After all, the more widely content is syndicated on the Web, the greater page views, visits and advertising revenue to its creator. But the more syndicated his material becomes, the lower the scarcity value of the information and thus the smaller the incentive for users to pay subscription-type fees to view