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 : IMOT, the Yahoo of China?? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DavidMW who wrote (514)	3/15/1999 8:43:00 PM
From: Retired41	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 781

IMOT having no potential doesn't equate with China having no potential. China of course does have potential, but have you been reading the news. America is increasingly at odds with the Chinese government. They have all but banished and/or imprisoned all the entrepreneurs in the south of China (the former enterprise zone on the coast where such things as a profit motive were tolerated), and they are having absolutely incredible problems even feeding their population. Bottom line IMOT is not, nor is it intended to be, a serious company worthy of foreign investment. The facts of their operation speak for themselves. Giving them money puts you at risk. The intelligence of doing so, IMO, really has to be questioned when there is no need for it. The Chinese government has time and again proved that they are not ready to open up and in fact are cracking down again reversing many reforms. Expecting internet acess for their population without first having a revolution is simply dreaming. As a developing country can you seriously expect the internet (which scares the heck out of the communists) to even be on a secondary priorities list. When you are a totalitarian government and you can't even get adequate food, clothing and shelter to the majority of your population the last thing you want to allow is controlled massive communication. Microsoft's investment is not even close to significant. Pennies at best to that company. Compaq opening an on line bookstore wouldn't cost much at all. This is not much of an investment by a company that size. Anything I could write a check for I don't think you can consider a significant investment in a country that size. For both of these companies it's more like going into a store and taking a number. It's also good press. It seems to me that economics dictates that the computer revolution in China be placed on an extremely long time table before it gets close to the U.S., or even western Europe, model. It is really quite basic. People will first buy all the food they need, then clothing and improved shelter. Then items like furniture, indoor plumbing and other sanitation. Then they will seek to get electricity on a more reliable basis, Maybe a few luxury items -- like a sceond bicycle. Later on they might even be able to get a car.. Then they will need to communicate a greater distance as people become more mobile and acquaintances spread out. The next necessity is a phone. Computer is quite far down on the list. As you can see by the dismal results IMOT has been able to post when they say they already control 1/3 of their potential market. There have been some really good articles lately in IVB, WSJ, NYT to name a few on China. Basically all indicate that success is hard to come by and conditions difficult and they are not improving. So yes, I have been reading almost ALL of the major news stories on international business. And China is a problem that can universally be characterized as the prize that seems to confound everyone. All those people - many with educations - but a system so poor, repressive and backward that making money is so very difficult, and getting it out of the country even harder.. If I were to invest in China, or companies doing business in China I would look for distribution companies, infrastructure such as construction materials and engineering, and other such needs of a developing country. Those are the operations that are currently the business base of anyone seeking to do business there. I'd say you gotta give it 20 years or more. IMOT sometime in the next year ought to be the bargain it should be (about .10 or less) and then load up on it and forget it.

To: DavidMW who wrote (514)	3/15/1999 9:34:00 PM
From: Softechie	Respond to of 781

DavidMW, Bill Gates cannot control chinese people like the communist party. The party keeps a very close eye on the internet because it can corrupt the people and lead them to revolution against the party. Only the elites will have the internet connection for the next 10 years. Average people won't have it. I've done research over the weekend and came away not feeling good about it. You can check the posts from the weekend and see.

To: DavidMW who wrote (514)	3/15/1999 11:25:00 PM
From: Elllk	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 781

I am long XNET and IMOT. For what it is worth I will state my point of view basing it on only a few facts (since the alleged facts are few, somewhat hard to dig out, and equally difficult to validate) and on an analogy. There are only two important questions, to my mind (and one of them is basically rhetorical). 1) Does the Chinese govt. license a somewhat exclusive number of internet operatives within China? A sub-issue is how many? If have seen posts referring to 6 companies licensed to operate in China and other posts referring to about 30 companies licensed to operate in China. If XNET and IMOT are among only 30 or so companies licensed to operate in China that is a great position. If XNET and IMOT are among only 6 companies licensed to operate in China that is a phenomenal position. 2) Are the owners, insiders, management, etc., of XNET and IMOT total fools? If they are not fools than they must realize that a license something like the above is almost akin to a license to print money. With such a license they would have to be fools to run some kind of scam, especially at current prices and number of shares. The advantage of such a license, along with the help now coming from the Chinese govt as well as help soon to come from US companies, can, combined with genuine effort and commitment on their part to develop their extremely advantageous positions, result in 100 fold or more money (than in any scam under current conditions) to be made in appreciation of share price and concomitant increase in number of shares (through splits) such as has occurred in US companies in the past 2 years. The analogy is to gestation. It is a reasonable analogy to the rapidity and breadth of internet development in the US in recent years. Who would have believed it 4 years ago? In the gestation analogy we might say the US is well beyond the neural tube period of gestation and well into something like the brain and nervous system developmental stage. In comparison, China is probably not yet at the "neural tube" stage but still in the "primitive streak" stage of development. That, however, means that although the 6 or 30, or whatever, licensed internet companies may, themselves, not have reached a very sophisticated level of development, they, nevertheless, occupy the crucial leverage positions to capture great areas of hegemony as internet develops and expands through China, as it did in the US. It also seems very likely that the Chinese govt will limit foreign companies, for the foreseeable future, to having a presence in China primarily through deals and affiliations with the currently extant Chinese companies (yeilding the licensed Chinese internet companies a further advantage). Will internet develop that rapidly in China? I think, most cetainly. The Chinese govt is taking steps to nurture it and US companies are already lining up to help out with the highest levels of technology in order to bring as many as possible of the 1.2 billion Chinese to accessibility to the internet world. And you don't need anywhere near all of them to develop a very impressive market. The development of internet in the US, including its rapidity and reach, was unprecedented and, for most, quite surprising (as was the phenomenal appreciation and continuing valuation of internet company shares). China will have the additional benefit of outside help (which the US did not have, of course, having been the pioneer in this sphere). That will help balance the fact that China is moving forward from a more primitive starting position. The result will be development of Chinese internet much more rapidly and in greater breadth than is anticipated. I think there is no question that China internet is now the primary candidate for exploding the way US internet has in the past 2-4 years, and, for some of the above reasons, is likely to develop in some respects even faster than the US (because it will have help). Of course, there will be some substantial differences between Chinese and US internet, such as suppression of pornography in Chinese internet use, but the differences are not a great concern to the issue we are dealing with here. A final fillip here. There are two regular points made by the critics of XNET and IMOT which, taken together, amount to a type of oxymoron: 1) One criticism is that they are not reporting companies and are not up to US or SEC standards. However, it probably is the case that most Chinese companies, and even most companies around the rest of the world, do not know and are not used to or practiced in US or SEC standards of reporting and are going to have to learn these standards and put them into effect. Still the criticism is reasonable until these companies show some sign of doing this. On the other hand: 2) IMOT, for instance and especially, has come under criticism for having hired a PR company which is posting exciting news releases about the company and is helping develop the company image as well as a sense of the potential of the Chinese internet future. But why is this latter endeavor not seen as a marvelous demonstration of the ability of Chinese companies and entrepreneurs to take to and develop standard and time proven US practices and ways. Is not the US the leading light in the world with respect to PR? Shouldn't this be taken as a very good sign for IMOT in the US as well as in China? At any rate, fellas (you critical ones, that is), you can't have it both ways with these latter two points.. Larry