LookSmart Ltd. (LOOK)
Loading...
Symbols:
LOOK Forum Topics
- All Comments on LOOK
- General Discussion on LOOK
- Internet No Longer Immune to Economic Slowdown [view article]
- B.Riley's 29 Tech Steals - Barron's [view article]
- Is There Any Money in Second Tier Internet Search Stocks? [view article]
- Why Didn't CNET Just Buy All of LookSmart? [view article]
- LookSmart Trading at Less Than Half its True Value? [view article]
- LookSmart Shareholders Don't Need To Pump S&P Value [view article]
- Mamma and Looksmart: Buy the Rumor, Sell the News [view article]
- Doesn't LookSmart (LOOK) [view article]
- Marchex Mania on Mad Money (MCHX) [view article]
- LookSmart, Look For A Viable Business (LOOK) [view article]
- Stocks Covered by Seeking Alpha on Internet Stocks [view article]
loading ...Recent LOOK Articles
- Internet No Longer Immune to Economic Slowdown
- ValueClick, LookSmart: Trouble in Online Ad Market?
- B.Riley's 29 Tech Steals - Barron's
- Is There Any Money in Second Tier Internet Search Stocks?
- LookSmart News Ignored by Market
- Why Didn't CNET Just Buy All of LookSmart?
- LookSmart Trading at Less Than Half its True Value?
- Sidus Investment Management Takes An 'Active' Role in LookSmart
- Google Challenger Wikia Acquires Grub Web Crawler
-
LookSmart Shareholders Don't Need To Pump S&P Value
on Jan 28, 2007| by
- Full List of Articles »
Trading Center
Hedge Fund Jobs
Job Seekers: Search jobs by category, get job alerts by email or live feed, apply online See full list of jobs »
Employers: See all recruitment options, get applications online or by email Post a job »
Lion
Internet No Longer Immune to Economic Slowdown [view article]
MSFT and YHOO Apparently Agree on $33 per Sharebadgerthelion.blogspot... Reply
Internet No Longer Immune to Economic Slowdown [view article]
Did you listen to the Google conference call at all? They had an economist explain some of the macroeconomic trends they see in their data. Basically they said that advertisers are *not* cutting spending, in fa ct in some industries, like automotive, advertisers are bidding up higher to attract a smaller set of consumers. Indeed consumers are being more cautious with their online spending habits, but Google also said that they expect consumers to do more research online before they buy (making their dollar go further). This in turn should lead to more clicks in the future, like the Wal-Mart effect. ReplyEditors
General Discussion on LOOK
Is this a buy or a sell? ReplyB.Riley's 29 Tech Steals - Barron's [view article]
B. Riley is just pimping its positions. They own chunks of Centillium, Transmeta, ESS tech. In fact, they urged ESST to liquidate. In the Barron's article it says they screened small cap and mid cap companies with 35% or more net cash to market value, but took out ones with too much cash burn or unsustainable biz models. Yet ovti fits the screen criteria, but didn't make itm, just to name one? Come on. OVTI is profitable. B. Riley is just hyping, and Eric Savitz, the Barron's writer, should check his sources for conflict. ReplyChmielewski
Is There Any Money in Second Tier Internet Search Stocks? [view article]
We read your recent post and were surprised that you didn’t feel Local.com delivered relevant search results from your queries. Relevancy is a hallmark of our service and we’ve been recognized as the leader in most relevant local searches by TeleMapics (October 2006 report on Local Search), by WAP Review (May 2007 review of local search engines based on relevancy of results) and more recently by the Orange County Register, which reports Local.com bests Google on a regular basis when it comes to relevant local search results. But we’d appreciate if you could share with us details about what you were searching for and where. Perhaps we can shed some light on why your results varied. Please send email to ctriebwasser@local.com ReplyHudoch
Why Didn't CNET Just Buy All of LookSmart? [view article]
Good article. Two clarifications: 1) The company's most recent balance sheet showed cash/ST investments as 37 million, and assets-for-sale at 4.3 million. That asset for sale just went for 20 million, so the company's actual cash position is about 52 million, making the EV about 8 milllion.2) The company's TTM revs are 54 million, but this includes businesses such as FindArticless. What the real remaining revenues are is anyones guess. Reply
LookSmart Trading at Less Than Half its True Value? [view article]
Well said. I like your overview. I might offer a few other potential suitors but time will tell for this issue in any case.By the way, it's MySpace who is taking over the fourth floor of the LookSmart Building. Reply
dent
LookSmart Shareholders Don't Need To Pump S&P Value [view article]
Whoops!(Part missed!! - Can be 'edited' in, maybe?)
"So there are obviously many hopes they'll get back to some sort of profitability soon, but they are probably going to have to rely on the cult stock followers from here rather than the turnaround investors." .... He says. (Whatever that IS suppose to mean?)
:)
RB Reply
dent
LookSmart Shareholders Don't Need To Pump S&P Value [view article]
Looksmart - "How Smart Is LookSmart"?How Smart Is LookSmart?
Or, rather, how smart is the writer of a blog, 24/7 Wall St one could be justified in asking?
Jon C. Ogg describes himself as the following:
About Me
Jon Ogg has been a News Analyst for nearly 10 years and also has experience as a broker, portfolio manager & investment advisor. He has been sourced for articles in CBS Marketwatch, E*Trade, TradeTheNews, FlyOnTheWall, Pristine, Evolution Trading, Knova Trading, Hammerstone, CNet.com, Seeking Alpha, Google Finance & other sites. Prior to 24/7 Wall St. LLC he formed News Contrast and was the founder of a service for active traders called TradeTheNews (he sold in 2003), and built up a news desk that was merged up into E*Trade. He worked in Copenhagen, Denmark as a portfolio manager for European clients trading US equities and ran the event-driven trading team there. He has been a financial advisor & advised start-up and emerging stage companies, and started his career as a licensed broker selling fixed income to some of the largest investment managers in the US. He received a B.B.A. in Finance from the University of Houston (1992). Mr. Ogg does not hold any positions in any stocks he writes about. Email: jonogg@gmail.com
And the same Jon C. Ogg signed off on his thoughts (on his blog today) with what I believe to be, one of the poorest prepared assaults on a Co, I have come across for some time now. Jon, (as was pointed out by "tiomike_ca" in the private Looksmart Google Group today) has even (possibly) "made mention" of the group in his blog. Don't miss it! (link below)
.... He says. (Whatever that IS suppose to mean?)
... Unless he means the over 64% share "ownership" by the Insto's, possibly?
www.247wallst.com/2007...
:)
RB
Just ....."How much can a koala bear"? Reply
dent
LookSmart Shareholders Don't Need To Pump S&P Value [view article]
And a further "update" for those who may be interested in the theme of this thread. Cheers!Looksmart has an approx 22,942,387 shares on it's register. Shares that have been issued fully, as of friday. I know of (includes myself) at least, another 200,000 shares (here and in the US) that can be considered as "tightly held". (I personally know of, again including myself, an approx 75,000 of that above estimated total, that are held here over here on the ASX)
The following is my reply to a post on one of the boards over in OZ:
Looksmart LOK - Insto's 14,349,745 - Major Holders 7,441,139 - Total issued = 22.94M
www.nasdaq.com/asp/Hol...;selected=LOOK&...
The continually growing total of shares being added daily to the already monstrous Institutional holdings, really needs no further 'drum beating' on this thread ........ surely?
LOOK/LOK
LookSmart, Ltd. NASDAQ-GM
Ownership Summary Description
INSTITUTIONAL
Total Number of Holders 43
% of Shares Outstanding 62.55%
Total Shares Held 14,349,745
Total Value of Holdings $70,313,751
Net Activity 2,117,458
Top 5 Holders Shares Held
SIDUS INVESTMEN... 2,269,492
S SQUARED TECHN... 2,172,140
PRICE T ROWE AS... 1,266,000
BARCLAYS GLOBAL... 1,115,915
CROSSLINK CAPIT... 1,025,912
INSIDER TRADES
Last 3 Mo. Last 12 Mo.
Number of Insider Trades 4 10
Number of Buys 4 10
Number of Sells 0 0
Net Activity +3,043 ......... +24,143
Last 5 Trades Shares Traded - finance.yahoo.com/q/mh...
BERRY YOLANDA L... 500
GIAMALIS STACEY 262
SCHOEN MICHAEL 281
WRIGHT TIMOTHY 2,000
So they (Insto's) now own some $70,313,751 (14,349,745 shares) and Major Holders own (source, Yahoo) 7,441,139 shares or, a current value (@ the overnight close of $4.86cps) of $36,164,183. And Insiders have bought over 24,000 shares in the past 12 months with NO sells.
Hellooooo ???
(And thinking of LOOK/LOK with it's Q4 Report on 15th of Feb. - Whatever happens next thurs/friday is completely out of our hands. What would anyone reckon those Insto's will be thinking of doing?)
______________________...
Any comments on the above, are most welcomed. TIA
CHEERS!
:)
RB Reply
dent
LookSmart Shareholders Don't Need To Pump S&P Value [view article]
And it's worth noting that the Insto holdings are now holding up, to near on 62% or, 14,207,443 shares (of the 22,943,750 issued), as they continue to accumulate.www.nasdaq.com/asp/Hol...;selected=LOOK&...
Cheers! Reply
Mamma and Looksmart: Buy the Rumor, Sell the News [view article]
Ashkan Karbasfrooshan advises he has sold his MAMA and LOOK too? But I'm not so sure on Looksmart."Mamma and Looksmart: Buy the Rumour, Sell the News"
Hi Ashkan ................... I agree with your timely disposal of your MAMA shares (it's truly amazing what traders can achieve) but I truly do feel that you have 'bailed out' way to early, in regards to your selling of Looksmart. I continue to hold and buy as many as finances permit and see a very bright 2007 and beyond.
That the Co has guided for increased revenues of 26% - 28% (over Q3) for this Q4, is no 'fluke' & demonstrates that the new model is working. FindArticles is growing & now has an estimated 5M 'uniques' monthly, itself. Furl.net continues to increase it's membership (and by a stated 1% each week) & along with the Co's AdCenter has already been taken up by a dozen or, so publishers and media Co's, including Top Tier's of the likes of The NY Times, both the NWS's MyFoxTV and CBS TV Sites, IACI's ask.com plus a 'no fuss' announcement in the Q3 CC, of a growing relationship with the much talked of (12M member), facebook.com.
That's not bad for a Co with some $40m 'cash' and a market Cap (at close of day, Wed. Dec 13th, 2006 - $4.94cps), of just a little over $113M. And everything to date about Looksmart's CEO Dave Hills, has been of the (heads down/bums up) 'no nonsense', 'low key' type/variety.
Your post also makes mention of News Corp gladly accepting a $900M payment from Google, (as you wrote), to use it instead of their buying search in, to solve what may really be the Co's true need. You also noted that you saw the “Powered by Google” logo on NWS's MySpace.com for the first time.
From within a recent Motley Fool advertorial, the mention was made that something described as 'disruptive technology' will play an even larger role over the next 10 years & that 'disruptive innovation' takes root at the low end of the market.
They then quote that:
[ A disruptive innovation is a new product or service or a new business model that doesn't attack the core market by bringing a better product to established users in direct competition with the leaders in an industry, but rather it comes into the low end of the market, either through a business model that can compete at much lower costs, can compete profitably at lower costs, or brings to the market a product or service that is so much more convenient and simple to use & affordable, that a whole new population of people who previously couldn't afford or, didn't have the skill to own and use a product, can now own one.] - And it did make a lot of sense to me, as an investor.
www.fool.com/news/comm...;logvisit=y&np...
And I do feel that the simplicity of the Looksmart business model, the transparency that it offers to both partner sites and advertisers, plus the added bonus of their (marginally) "sharing" of all their (partner's) advertising revenue increases along the way, makes it very much a "buy", rather than a "sell", at this stage of it's continued development. And it has only just begun. (The NY Times alone have predicted a 30% web advertising increase in revenues, with that being some $80M, for 2007).
Many years of quality "free" archived (articles) content belonging to and shared among partner newspaper publishers/media Co sites, (millions of articles that get to be indexed in relevance/popularity by their many collective users), may very well be a "next step" or, a graduation for Looksmart, to play an all-important kind of "fat controller" role. Thus allowing all 'users' from each of their own & partner sites, to then bounce "to & from" each other's sites. (Via Looksmart's 181 Vertical sites?). And seeking research information on their favourite topic of interest or, passion. And an ideal platform then for the "Long Tail" aspect of search (& their unique products or, services offered) & for Looksmart (& partners) to geo-target (such) and 'share' a lot more of that estimated $26.1 Billion for Global Internet advertising, in 2007.
www.ozestock.com.au/bo...;postID=451562&...
Newscorp have over 300 Global Sites. And like other Newspapers & Publishers, (who already have a "shandy" of Tier One Search - GOOG, YHOO, ask.com & MSN) they too may yet choose to 'spread the lode' (sic) on their properties, with an addition of their own search offering, to their many users. This keeps things competitive after-all and any future partner sites can also keep their existing/any organic search they may have, in place.
And whilst Looksmart are said to be "NOT FOR SALE" it wouldn't surprise me at all, if NWS were to take up that once talked of "controlling stake" in the Co. I'm hanging onto my shares, regardless.
Ross Bradley - Shareholder Reply