To: aleta who wrote (1144 ) 2/21/1999 3:03:00 PM From: PartyTime Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 2003
From the 2/15/99 Industry Standard article: "....For example, traditional rep firms, such as 2CanMedia and Enhanced Services, along with ad-serving specialists Real Media and NetGravity, are competing with DoubleClick and 24/7 on many fronts, either by creating ad networks of their own or by licensing ad software. The small players are attractive merger candidates that offer proprietary technologies, strong sales forces and, of course, their site networks...." Several critics have written: Why does ESVS need Zulu since it brings nothing to the table? This is in contrast to earlier comments: Why does Zulu need ESVS since it brings nothing to the table? The fact is, both companies have pooled their resources under one plan. In perspective, I think we've seen enough examples of switcheroo criticism where a comment gets made only to fuel the respective criticism of the moment. ZuluGroup.com is indeed a longterm strategy process and it was never meant, as some have suggested, as only an entity of the moment type proposition (i.e., P&D). It's clear, from a review of the 2/15/99 Industry Standard article, Enhanced Services needs Zulu-tek and vice versa. Otherwise, Enhanced would never have been mentioned in the 2/15/99 article, which obviously is referring to Zulu-tek's technology, sales and marketing capacities. Recent moves on the part of the ZULU/ESVS combination--i.e., executive appointments from Disney, CNN/Turner Interactive and Pointcast; the birthing of Group Omni-net.com; announcement of BFL's initial public offering; and respective ecommerce business alliances--have helped to restore credibility to ZuluGroup.com's business plan. But still we've not yet seen independent media reports which clearly link and/or tout the combination's ecommerce and Internet advertising strategies. When this happens, it'll become a welcome day for all Zulu longs. Comments anyone?