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 : Bid.com International (BIDS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Pink who wrote (23142)	4/20/1999 4:12:00 PM
From: SirVinny	Respond to of 37507

Mr Pink, No one here really cares about your rating. Should we ever feel a strong need to indulge ourselves in stupidity, we shall join you on your thread. Good Investing SirVinny

To: Mr. Pink who wrote (23142)	4/20/1999 4:17:00 PM
From: RG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 37507

Mr. Pink, It's so nice to see you and other Canadians rally behind one of your own. This certainly does not send a very good message to the U.S. What a shame you could at least give one of your own a pat on the back or some sort of recognition for the hard work and effort put into this company. As I said, not a good example to set for any companies, especially Internet companies coming out of Canada.

To: Mr. Pink who wrote (23142)	4/20/1999 4:18:00 PM
From: WhatsUpWithThat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 37507

>Revenues are overstated. Actual revenues should be only >the fee on the auction item, but bid recognizes the total >sale amount Who bills for and collects the entire sale? BIDS, no? Who ships the items? BIDS again? How is this different from other companies that report full sales $$ as revenue, rather than the gross margin (sale less cost of the item)? In the final analysis, BIDS' revenue treatment meets GAAP and exchange requirements, so I'd say the point is moot. WUWT

To: Mr. Pink who wrote (23142)	4/20/1999 4:18:00 PM
From: GoNorth	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 37507

Mr. Pink, looking at it your way I get (1998 numbers) $20M sales X's 3.6% GM equals $720,000. >>Revenues are overstated. Actual revenues should be only the fee on the auction item, but bid recognizes the total sale amount....Looked at this way sales would be more like 2.5mm....

To: Mr. Pink who wrote (23142)	4/20/1999 4:20:00 PM
From: David in Ontario	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 37507

Pink - $5-6 suggested fair value from a Canadian fund manager. Saw him recently on Pat Bolland's Saturday afternoon investment show a couple of weekends back. The shows are archived and available via video to the computer - if you're interested in seeing this piece. NASDAQ listings are not a guarantee of a higher share price - there are many stocks on that exchange that trade below $5. Real earnings are what is needed here. Furthermore, they really need to show how they are different from EBAY etc. to the wider US investment community - where it is still a largely unknown stock. Yes - I did see the piece on CNBC this morning before the open: business-to-business, European (Irish base) business etc. Still a ways to go. Looks like the trend is down for a while as the NAZ anticipation is now behind the stock. david

To: Mr. Pink who wrote (23142)	4/20/1999 4:24:00 PM
From: NTT	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 37507

>>>Mr. Pink reiterates his rating t3/f and announces target price of $3.00 per share.<<< I initiate coverage on Mr. Pink with a t4/f rating. That's right -- Quadruple turd with rotting maggots. Face it, you're just pissed that you were proven wrong on BII's potential and that you got rebuffed on the phone when you called BII's IR dept. Nobody holds you to being right on every call. I suggest you grow up and just admit that you were wrong.

To: Mr. Pink who wrote (23142)	4/20/1999 5:10:00 PM
From: Gul	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 37507

Before making such comments as to the revenue being overstated, you should review how similar company report their revenue. Even thought we are have free of speak, your comments like this tends to give less respect to an individual like yourself. We are all investors and we are not playing games like many people who make wild statements. I would conclude that people like yourself really don't what you are talking about.

To: Mr. Pink who wrote (23142)	4/20/1999 6:03:00 PM
From: F. Evans	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 37507

MR. PINK......NO CREDIBILITY!!! Didn't he call this stock a dog at the $6.00 range??? Didn't we see $30.00?? Listen all...I'll be back later but just one thing I'd like to say for now...we made it to the Nasdaq and we all knew that with that, the volatility would be massive. Institutional traders got this thing today and profits were locked in early in the day as a spill over from yesterday...others were looking at value in the Nasdaq's old boys like Amazon etc...but we will come back. We are making headlines on CBS Marketwatch as having a ton of "bidders" People take notice....all those trashing the stock now were exactly the ones who have been missing in action the past three months? Why now? Is it trendy to bash this stock now because it had a brutal day? It's had many of these days since November. There is no difference in the fundamentals of this company from two months ago till now....in fact, they've gotten better in my opinion. I'll be back later but I'll leave you with this.....Don't trust anyone coming out of the woodwork now telling you "I told you so" Because all negative predictions were made when we were at $6.00....a little too late to be credible in my opinion. Also...to those who doubted we would ever make Nasdaq.....we got the last laugh...It takes guts of steel to play these stocks....stick it out instead of guessing which way the market will turn...it will turn around. Frank