posted 08-23-1999 12:24 PM         

---

How do analysts value internet stocks? A new study says it's more smoke and mirrors than science. http://www.msnbc.com/news/299626.asp

Should investors pay attention to earnings when evaluating internet companies? http://www.redherring.com/insider/1999/0819/inv-profits.html

posted 08-19-1999 09:00 AM         

---

A frightening development occurred yesterday. The only source of market strength was the internet stocks. Bullish comments by Henry Blodgett were the only thing that kept the group afloat. Blodgett has long been an internet cheerleader, so it is a bit stunning that speculators would latch onto his comments and drive many of these overpriced issues higher. Investors continue to believe in, and attempt to build castles in the air. These will turn out to be castles in the sand. This is just a retracement in a major bear market for these stocks. Everyone knows the internet is going to be a boon for consumers. However, there is absolutely no way anyone can justify the capitalizations the vast majority of these stocks are currently valued at. Todays action suggests internet investors are more deluded than previously feared. The erosion of the castles will likely continue today.

The Stock Market Advantage
http://members.tripod.com/Stocksystm

posted 08-10-1999 06:52 PM         

---

That was a great investorguide weekly article about net stocks and the effect of interest rates. The stockholders shy away because of the better rates they can get on much less risky investments driving down the price.
At the same time the higher rates make profitability that much farther away for these companies. They used Amazon.com as an example but there are many other good examples that would be hurt more by possible rate hikes. I think this should be an interesting fall and then winter with the first major e-commerce holiday season (last year doesn't count) AND with the havoc that Y2K fervor might play on the market, there could be some big winners and losers over the next six months.

Jake

posted 08-09-1999 01:41 PM         

---

Here's a little humor to brighten your day that I read at the industry standard site...
“The template for Netco IPO success is becoming clearer each day. It's a five-step plan: 1) Set up a company to dominate a niche, like selling doggy-poop cleanup supplies at Petdroppings.com; 2) Get big-name backing from the likes of VC kingpin Kleiner Perkins and underwriting from Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley; 3) Have Forrester or Jupiter calculate your niche as being worth $68 billion in 2003; 4) Lose as much money as possible in the shortest time; 5) Calculate your IPO paper wealth. “

In every bit of humor there is some truth...
happyguy

posted 08-05-1999 05:08 PM         

---

This was in an article about Webvan and how it came across so much money.
>>In fact, there is one overriding reason why this warehouse in Oakland is worth $4 billion: The money managers who have invested in Webvan have already made a whole lot of money in other Net companies. And so, like Son at his conference, they give the entire project a halo of invincibility, no matter how preposterous the financial assumptions. Those money managers are two Silicon Valley venture capital firms, Benchmark Capital and Sequoia Capital. >>

Are some of these companies so popular (with high valuations) just because they have the backing of Son, or John Doerr or any other internet or VC guru? Or do these people have enough pull and respect that just getting them is enough to get others to respect the company they are backing, and that in turn is enough to greatly enhance the chances for the company?
Jake

All times are EST (US)