I missed this when it came out, but Bluehorseshoe hit the nail on the head. http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...37D-428D-BBC8-5AC983464774}&sid=1149266&symb=
Patrick is scheduled to be on Donny Deutsch Thursday night. I would suggest you tune in. I'm dying to know what he'll do. The action you're seeing in Congress and the Senate you can directly attribute to him. Aguirre was just a gift from the sky. When you have the Chairman of Judiciary telling SEC branch chiefs their testimony did not match their written statements... that's perjury, and nothing pisses off Senators more than arrogance. Trust me when I tell you. This fight is coming out in the open, and it is history.
flytiger, i am just trying to confirm your comment; "Patrick is scheduled to be on Donny Deutsch Thursday night. I would suggest you tune in." where did you read this? can you provide a link? thanks in advance.
Nope. He told me. But CNBC hates him, so it is possible they could pull him. This back and forth has been going on for a month.
byrne is STILL nuts. according to auctionbytes, "Those changes - launched with little advance notice - made sellers so hopping mad, it led CEO Patrick Byrne to publicly chastise some of them on the discussion boards and to ban a few indefinitely." changes = looking into classifieds. http://www.auctionbytes.com/cab/abn/y07/m01/i02/s01
Well, the interview was today, but it's not on tonight. I'll try to get word when it's on and let you know. I have a feeling it's good. I don't get how people watch this crap. Tonight it's Howie Mandel and game show stuff.
http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/48leg/1r/bills/hb2389p.htm this is Patrick Bryne. Arizona has TASR, and Patrick employs 58% of the NAVAHO tribe. This bill is well thought out, researched, and it will fly. Now, I think, you can start looking for more like this. I think you'll see the Aguirre thing come forth, some Criminal stuff. Go to the thread I started on "Stocks" called RegSHO. There is a hedge fund world article, and a vodia group article you will find interesting. All of the sudden, the SEC is looking at market maker exemptions. Wonder why?
Byrne's appearance, taped "live to tape" (I hope, CNBC has bagged him before) is scheduled for tomorrow nite's Donny Deutsch at 10 pm on CNBC. That's Wednesday Jan 17. It was taped last Thursday.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/sto...4AAD-9FD7-94C167D5F5C7}&siteid=yhoo&dist=yhoo http://retail.seekingalpha.com/article/24957 ___________________________ From the Seeking Alpha Estimate: Dec 2005: # transactions = 1,394,434 Oct 2006: # transactions = 632,303 Nov 2006: # transactions = 1,256,345 Dec 2006: # transactions = 1,836,440 Tot Q4/06: # transactions = 3,725,088 Q4 of 2005 created revenue = $317,980,000. Returns are "in" this number. We know from the Q3/2006 customer data slides (slide #7) that the average order size ('AOS') was about $103/transaction in Q4/2005. Therefore ~ by dividing we get the Q4 2005 # of transactions (net of returns) = 3,087,185. From above, the Dec 2005: # of transactions was recorded ast 1,394,434. So, the difference must be the number of transactions done in Oct/Nov of 2005. Calculated as 3,087,185 - 1,394,434 = 1,692,751 From above, we know that the total transactions in Oct/Nov of 2006 = 632,303 + 1,256,345 = 1,888,648. So, the YOY growth in the # of transactions for the periods Oct/Nov of 2005 vs. Oct/Nov of 2006 = 11.6% YOY growth This seems to mesh with what Patrick suggested. A very slow start (11.6% YOY growth) that kicked into high gear (32% YOY growth for Dec) in the middle of November. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Looking then at the whole of Q4 and comparing the growth in transactions YOY from 2005 to 2006 we get the following; total q4/06 transactions estimated = 3,725,088 total q4/05 transactions estimated = 3,087,185 Based on this YOY growth would be 20.66%. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now the question is what if any growth should we assume occured in the average order size. Factors: Further discounting of inventory, increases due to gift finder, inflation etc... Page 21 of the Q3/2006 transcript ~ Jason suggests that they had $10M - $20M of inventory that they want to sell and never buy again. So, if you take the high end of $20M and say that is sells for 20% less than it would have just to get rid of it, then that is still only a $4M hit to revenue. On the other hand if the gift finder was able to double AOS's then we only need about 20,000 transactions to have been funnelled through here to offset this discounting which is peanuts (1/2 of 1% of the number of transactions done in Q4). So, if we do a bit of a sensitivity test using the YOY growth in transactions above and a varying estimate for AOS; If AOS falls -5% then the growth should be 20.66% - 5% = 15.66% If AOS is flat - then the growth should be = 20.66% If AOS is up 5% then the growth should be 25.66% This gives us a range of 15.66% to about 25.66%. That seems to be on par with all the industry data that I have read which suggests that online retail grew on average 26% YOY. I would submit that 20.66% - 25.66% seems more likely. I hope this q delivers a swift uppercut to those not playing by the rules. <IV