posted 02-10-2000 12:49 AM         

---

dude, It might be that AOL is counting anyone who uses Instant Messenger or its website as a user, and the author of the statement just took it out of context. I am pretty sure there are at least as many IM and AOL.com website users as there are plain old AOL access users. Maybe they meant 54% or people who are online have at one time used some AOL product. That I'd believe.

Another thing... to turn the discussion international. The London Observer reported that AOL is in talks to buy out partner Bertelsmann's 50% stake in AOL Europe.
Time Warner, is a competitor of German media giant Bertelsmann.

posted 02-08-2000 11:40 AM         

---

dude, my feeling is that the 40% is WAY too high. First, we need to figure out how many people own a computer. And of that bunch, how many people can afford a connection to the Internet. Then, do we count someone who's been on just once at a library, and do we require owning an actual account? Once all schools are wired, then the number will start to shoot up, especially if we include everyone who CAN access the Internet.

I would guess that 1 out of 10 is pretty accurate for right now.

posted 02-08-2000 09:54 AM         

---

to answer simplastic's question:
"I'm still a little leary about investing in internet companies, even one as prominent as AOL"
First i'd say to read the previous few weeks of discussion on this board and decide if you think AOL IS an internet company.
I've never used the site you are talking about, but the previous posts on this board include some good articles (and discussion as I said)

Also, I read this in an article but i think the # is a little high.
"54% of americans access the internet through AOL"
Does anyone know what the number is or how to find out?

posted 02-07-2000 11:41 AM         

---

simplastic posted this in another board. We have moved it here:

I'm new to the world of internet investing. I have some blue chip stocks in a rather small portfolio which I'm hoping to expand upon. I'd like to gather some opinions regarding the future of AOL stock. I'm still a little leary about investing in internet companies, even one as prominent as AOL. I have found one link to another investment site which offered several articles about the aol merger and their opinoin of it's fate, and I was wondering if anyone can give me feedback about the quality of this site. I've included the link for this site below, and if anyone has the time to check it out I would GREATLY appreciate input from experienced on-line traders.
Thank you much!
http://www.multexinvestor.com/tickersearch.asp?ticker=AOL

posted 01-21-2000 06:53 PM         

---

In an attempt to move its online service beyond the PC, AOL is set to launch interactive TV this summer.

Also, AOL Latin America filed for an IPO, seeking to raise $575 million.

posted 01-19-2000 12:59 PM         

---

To James Cramer I ask: The amazing growth that is already built into AOL's stock price has got to come some time doesn't it?
Growth builds upon growth and if you don't grow a lot now your growth later will take longer to catch up to where you could have been. That's the thing I see most wrong with how much AOL paid for Time Warner.

Here's another issue that not many people are bringing up... conflict of interest
"Good journalism is bad business and bad journalism is, regrettably,
at times good business." - University of Illinois communications
professor Robert McChesney, about the possible effects of the AOL-Time Warner merger

posted 01-18-2000 03:59 PM         

---

Sorry for the long quote, but it is an excerpt from James Cramer that I read today, who attempts to refute the "slowing growth" argument. What do you think about what he says?

"I don't care about growth rates or arbitrage pressure. I don't have time to assess those negatives. They get in the way of good longs all of the time. They are the stuff that always blinds you from seeing the concept, from buying the winning concept. They are the stuff that will make these now naysaying analysts go from hold to buy for the next two years, each time taking the combination higher. Sure, a fast growth rate and a slow growth rate equal a less-than-fast growth rate. But how much does dominance cost these days? Two hundred billion? Four hundred billion? How many mergers make Disney look tiny and silly and left behind? How many mergers make you think that GE is now just another player, or that CBS could be left back again?...AOL can now say, 'We don't care. We have the best music and entertainment anyway. We have The Sopranos and we have Isaacson. We have that Man of the Year stuff and we have Nocera and Huey and Pearlstine and Parsons and the best business journalism and the round-the-world news thing. We own it all. And they aren't going anywhere 'cause they don't mind making some money, either.' So, analysts and bears and backwoods folk, make AOL cheaper for me. Take it down, reduce it to some price that allows us to get longer. Makes no matter to me. When people speak of core positions in our business, they speak in unison of GE and Microsoft and maybe a Wal-Mart or American Express. Soon they will speak of AOL. But not yet, please. Let me get my full position in. We want to make money from it, too."

All times are EST (US)