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 : CMGI What is the latest news on this stock? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JScurci who wrote (9209)	6/4/1999 9:01:00 AM
From: Ken	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 19700

Please take these kind of messages to the Yahoo boards. Let's try to keep SI a source of constructive information. Thanks.

To: JScurci who wrote (9209)	6/4/1999 9:17:00 AM
From: stock_bull69	Respond to of 19700

You are pathetic! No further comment necessary.

To: JScurci who wrote (9209)	6/4/1999 12:58:00 PM
From: Peter Greenhill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19700

<How are your rear ends feeling now? It's even sweeter to see you're both long and wrong a losers' stock like CMGI which I am happily very short. What happened guys? Did you just get your charts mixed up, or were you perhaps looking at them upside down! Whooops!!!!> What sort of a post is this? Is this SI or some sort of thread for wayward juveniles. Please moderate your tone a little.

To: JScurci who wrote (9209)	6/4/1999 8:36:00 PM
From: Scarecrow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 19700

Scurvy -- In all of your boogeyman posting, you made one interesting observation: Seen lately the action in recent internet IPO's?? How does this bode for the Mother/Incubator?? That's a very interesting point – albeit a shorter-term consideration. The rest of your thread-rage is pure garbage – the rantings of your inner child that has been left at the dock while the boat has already left. Stop your whining and crying that the world just won't listen to your reasoning and continues to reap fabulous wealth while you don't. valuations, earnings, free-cash flow do matter but are rarely discussed on these threads partly because of the lack thereof, but usually because its participants couldn't figure out the cash-flow generating figures of their investment if their life depended upon it. Ooh! I love it when you talk finance. You see, us rubes here have never even HEARD those terms before. Can you tell us what those, you know, MEAN? We just sorta look at the stock price and charts and go, “WHEEE!” You see, we didn't go to Yale or Univ. of Chicago. Nope, we're nothing more than several thousand hayseeds who don't know nothin ‘bout no ‘vestin.” Let's see, I'm only one guy. But I have an MBA in Finance and I've made about $100K since Sept. on CMGI. Whew, if only I hadn't been a neophyte. If only I was an investing PROFESHHunal, then I could be losing thousands shorting CMGI. Thank GOD you're here to save us from the money we'd make. Cuz, I mean, we don't know what we're DOING! By and large they are individuals (read non-professionals, i.e. amateurs) who have only recently discovered the stock market. -- You are, no doubt familiar with the comparisons of investment houses with the chimpanzee and dart-board methods of stock selection. They become interested only after long run-ups like the kind that started when I got into this business in 1981. Boys and girls I can remember sitting in the trading room at Morgan Stanley We'll assume this was before you were fired… watching the room break out in a din of activity when the volume hit 20 million shares on the NYSE. The Dow back then by the way was about 9,700 points lower than today. That's great. Did you also manually crank your car to start it, too? Your posts betray the underlying reasons for your “thread rage.” You're so pissed off that people who didn't get MBAs or go to Yale are having the AUDACITY to do work that Skippy and Biff and you were “bred” to do. You're old school and you have no idea that the world changed without your consent. Psst. Did you hear? Commissions are actually lower than $250 a trade now? You show a frightening lack of understanding of the implications of technology on the productivity and the economy. But, then, you've got company. People today want these Net stocks for the same reason they want in the market. It has gone up and therefore does it not now follow that what has been going up will continue to go up?? It's as sophisticated an analysis as that, sadly. The problem now is that all these stocks are largely exclusively owned by a core group of neophytes and insiders. The group of neophytes out there will shrink as these stocks go down and potential new newcomers get scared. But in your model, there is no down. How do they go down? After all, they're being bid up and up by neophytes who are attracted to these stocks in a never-ending virtuous cycle of infinite price appreciation. Morgan Stanley, Lazard Freres, and where now? No doubt you change jobs because you're wildly successful at each one? It's the old story. If you're so smart, why aincha rich? (“Oh! But I am!!!!”) Then, why do you even have time or interest in trolling through CMGI? Your callous and casual lumping of CMGI with all Internet stocks betrays the tissue-thin DD you've performed. And why the hell would you valuate CMGI based on operating earnings? Again, it betrays a stunning ignorance of the business model. As a former professional trader it saddens me to know that most of these are those that recently quit their Day jobs in the real world to become "Day-Traders. No doubt you're an ex-pro because of your consummate skill. Jealousy is such an unbecoming trait. By the way go spend a day at the portfolio shops at the Fidelitys, Janus Funds, Invescos, etc. and notice how many of their managers are "kids playing with other peoples money." Apparently those kids are kicking your butt, too. You're just a bitter, downsized ex-broker who can't stand that a younger generation understands the new game and you don't. Congratulations, yov've taken the term "junenile" to new heights. all the spewing of poison and invictive Quick to post the purile but slow to respond with facts Juvenile Invective Puerile I guess you must have skipped all those English classes at Yale, huh? If you are so convinced you are right about the merits of being long CMGI it should not bother you that there is someone like me that disaggrees. The content of your posts bothers me not in the least. But if you're so convinced you're right, why does it bother you that people you don't know using money you don't own/manage have made fortunes on this by not doing it your way? What do you care? If you're so sure you're right, you should be delighted at the coming windfall and be saying NOTHING so as to not alter what you envision as inexorable wealth through shorting CMGI… I now join the rest of the thread in inviting you to take your Ivy attitude and get lost.

To: JScurci who wrote (9209)	6/5/1999 12:39:00 AM
From: James Thompson	Respond to of 19700

Scurci - your post was certainly not that of a mature individual. By the way, how were your short shares doing the last fifteen minutes or so before the market closed today? CMGI is down, and Internet IPOs are doing poorly on the average right now for one or two simple reasons. 1. Net stocks are out of favor with the movers and shakers, and they are knocking them at every turn, and (no doubt) shorting them on the downside and planning to go long at the bottom. 2. Inflation fears that are market-wide. No, the Internet revolution is not over. It is on temporary hold. It will rebound. If I have learned one thing it is the market is cyclical. Net stocks will cycle back into favor, but where the cycles for mainstream companies are measured in months and years, Internet cycles are measured in weeks and months. You should be grateful for CMGI. If it wasn't so volatile you would not be near as successful on the short side. Of course, I am only assuming you are successful.