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 : America On-Line (AOL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Vendit™ who wrote (9988)	4/8/1999 1:56:00 PM
From: Calvin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 41369

Vendit, maybe this will help us a bit: MW 13:50 DLJ UPS YAHOO! 2000 REVENUE TO $630 MLN. MW 13:50 DLJ RAISES YAHOO! 1999 REVENUE TO $452 MLN. MW 13:50 [YHOO] DLJ UPS YAHOO! 1999 EPS TO 57 CENTS. MW 13:50 [YHOO] DLJ UPS YAHOO! PRICE TARGET TO $300.

To: Vendit™ who wrote (9988)	4/9/1999 9:18:00 PM
From: Joe E.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 41369

Vendit: Maybe this is old news now, but here goes: "Joe: I was responding to your original statement where you said that somehow the Tribune deal has affected the price of AOL stock. The Tribune sale was a downer for AOL yesterday. My question now to you is how do you figure that by the Tribune selling junk bonds to the public has anything to do with the price movement of AOL yesterday. The Tribune still owns those shares, they simply used them as collateral. Those shares won't reach the market for 30 more years!" Yes but.... if you are mutual fund A you could have bought the Tribune bonds INSTEAD of stock. (I explained why a mutual might want to in one of my notes.) Since the bonds are a good substitute for the stock to a party big enough to figure out how to trade them, then the sale of the bonds is similar to the sale of stock into the market because otherwise the people who bought the bonds would have bought the stock. So, even though the securities are not exactly the same , they are similar enough so that the sale of one affects the demand for the other.