Skip to main content
Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0
i know by definition it does not qualify but no stock comes close to this in the past decade none. i wonder if the rules could change because the internet is changing everything?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<< i know by definition it does not qualify but no stock comes close to this in the past decade none. i wonder if the rules could change because the internet is changing everything? >>


I don't find that CMGI posesses any of the qualities that define a Gorilla. I don't see them as a Godzilla candidate, either, from what I read in The Gorilla Game.


There's no arguing CMGI's success, but aren't they more along the lines of a venture capitalist ("internet incubator") or a mutual fund?


rex
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'm not overly concerned with the fact that a company may or may not exactly meet the Gorilla Game criteria at this instant. What is more important in my way of thinking, is that the basic philosophy of a company is being directed in the Gorilla direction. This one clearly is. I now have 600 shares of CMGI so I must admit to bias on the topic, but the CEO treats the shareholders very well. They initiated a program of directed IPOs which make it possible for 100 share holders to buy into any IPOs they have; unlike SFE, you get a spot in line and can buy as much of the IPO taht you might want (SFE gives 10 shares rights to buy for each 100 sh you own). I have 100 sh each of ENGA, NAVI and SILK though SILK was IPO'd before the directed shares program started. All three have been blowouts! I will always own at least 100 shares of CMGi. It is currently down a bit but with covered calls I have salvaged a significant part of that drop in price. Another thing I do is buy enough shares in any publicly traded stock that CMGI buys to acquire another 100 shares of CMGI--got 189 shares of CMGI via FCST and will acquire another 160+ shares via YESM--the 189 shares cost <$44, the l60 won't come out that well with CMGI having gone down, but the return has been fantastic. David W's goal is to add another 60 companies to their stock pile and they will all be interrelated so that the fit between companies in the stable of stocks will help one another. The cash DW raises by spinning off about 15% and retaining 85% of the lcompany being IPO'd has made CMGI a huge value concern with lots of chances to acquire others with stock and little cash. He was to have gone IPO with one a month about a year ago and evidently found that too ambitious but AltaVista will be IPO'd this quarter land I lreally want that one!. Could be wrong, but it has made me a fortune to date--My Wit Capital account where I buy the IPOs has grown from $7000 to over $40,000 since late June when I started it. I can stand that for a while! My disclaimer is that I will own 800 shares of CMGI at the time that YESM is integrated into CMGI and I plan to own a lot more in the same manner--problem is that most of the companies they buy are not publicly traded, but AOL News will give you all the action of CMGI via email as they do on any stock you choose--another good reason to stay with AOL.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
I'm not overly concerned with the fact that a company may or may not exactly meet the Gorilla Game criteria at this instant. What is more important in my way of thinking, is that the basic philosophy of a company is being directed in the Gorilla direction. This one clearly is. I now have 600 shares of CMGI so I must admit to bias on the topic, but the CEO treats the shareholders very well.

I'm sorry I'm jumping all over posts like this, but I think it is important since the thread is entitled "The Gorilla Game" that we try to make sense of the criteria and theories outlined so well in the book.

What exactly does 'being directed in the gorilla direction' mean? CMGI is an incubator of Godzilla stocks and although I am happy DW treats shareholders well - this isn't a gorilla or in a gorilla game. Although I am pro CMGI (my daughter has had shares for nearly three years), I wouldn't use the misnomer of gorilla. I'm sure if you've read the book you would have no trouble agreeing on that point.

An entire topic of discussion could be opened for the incubators like ICGE, CMGI, SFE and others because I do believe it is worthy of discussion. However, in terms of technology adoption life cycles of enabling technologies - how do incubators fit into the puzzle with their mecurial holdings?

What should we call the incubators? Pregnant Godzillas?

BB


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Ben,

I'm not overly concerned with the fact that a company may or may not exactly meet the Gorilla Game criteria at this instant. What is more important in my way of thinking, is that the basic philosophy of a company is being directed in the Gorilla direction.

I understand your point and think you're using a fine approach. Having said that, I really do believe there is no risk/reward scenario on the planet equivalent to buying an enabling gorilla near the beginning of the tornado. I think the second best scenario is buying an applications Gorilla near the beginning of the tornado.

I realize that risk and reward are subjective, but I do believe that all other investments are a great distance behind those two types of Gorillas when it comes to the risk/reward scenario. The extent to which one varies might increase your potential reward (or might not) but most likely not without increasing at a far greater rate your potential for risk.

Just my opinion.

--Mike Buckley
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<What should we call the incubators? Pregnant Godzillas?>>

Teradactyls?

Sorta the Stork meets Godzilla

Print the post Back To Top