> Thank you for your thoughtful reply.

> >But to say that this company ( stock ) has NO intrinsic value is both
> >vague and misleading.

> Perhaps it is a matter of opinion.  Looking at the financials where
> their costs are >100x their revenues, I don't know how they are going
> to pull it off.  The video development business is expensive -- at
> least GOFH's is, based on their quarterly expenses to date.  And site
> ads alone generate only a fraction of a cent per page view.  Site ad
> based revenue may work for google with billions of page views and
> inexpensive, algorithm-generated content, but is a poor business model
> for a higher-cost business.  There is no other visible revenue for
> GOFH, and it doesn't seem to me that even a dramatic increase in ad
> revenue will come close to making their expenses.  Nor do they seem to
> be very successful in attracting the kind of user-generated content
> that metacafe.com and other video sites have.

> I have studied GOFH and its data available and model carefully for
> some months.  I finally got out when I realized, as I said, that there
> is no bottom to the stock price because -- IMO -- the stock has no
> intrinsic worth. Yes, their content has *some* worth, but the worth is
> *less* than the cost to produce -- at least that is certainly the
> direction that the data points.  The liabilities outweigh the
> assets.

> How long will GOFH last?  It is not a good acquisition target, so it
> will probably last as long as people are willing to pour new money
> into the firm by private or public financing.  Someday people will
> realize that GOFH is, so to speak, a bottomless pit that will likely
> always eat more revenue than it produces, and will stop funding it
> through public or private investment.  Then the firm will go belly-up
> or will be forced into bankruptcy, or be acquired by some third party
> (that will restructure drastically) for pennies on the dollar.

> Yet short of daydreaming that GOFH is the next YouTube -- daydreams
> that are untenable for reasons I have previously discussed -- I see no
> way that GOFH will succeed financially.  There are good, NASDAQ-listed
> firms that get beat up well on Wall Street for minor revenue
> shortfalls or failing to meet expectations.  GOFH is orders of
> magnitude away from them...not even in the same ballpark.

> Perhaps I am wrong.  Maybe they have aces up their sleeve that I
> haven't seen.  I hope for their sake, and that of their stockholders,
> that they will do well.  It is again a speculative stock -- one with
> terrible fundamentals (How many multiples of 100 is the PE?)  and a
> bad business model.  Caveat emptor.

> On another note, Rat/ Chicago....what do you think, is there a market
> for a MFI program
> like WallStrip that gives a voice to the people behind the companies
> on the smaller exchanges?
> While at the same time providing much needed information to the
> investors that follow them?

> brooke.lo...@earthlink.net wrote:

> > On another note, Rat/ Chicago....what do you think, is there a market
> > for a MFI program
> > like WallStrip that gives a voice to the people behind the companies
> > on the smaller exchanges?
> > While at the same time providing much needed information to the
> > investors that follow them?

> > GOFH seems to have found a floor (range) in the last several days of
> > trading. And done so
> > in the face of steep broader market corrections. Next couple of weeks
> > should be very revealing
> > in terms of support levels.

> brooke:  I'm no expert with technical analysis, but such approaches
> with this stock are irrelevent from my perspective.  When there is no
> news, volume dries up and you really cannot draw any conclusions.  If
> the volume on the day is not at least 500,000 shares, ignore what you
> see.

> It can just as easy trade at $0.35 or $1.40.  All that matters is
> whether the next large actor in this market is a buyer or seller.

> If you really want to get some serious insight, have a conversation
> with representatives of the market maker.

> Also, this stock is serially uncorrelated with the broad stock
> market.  At this stage, what you should focus on are the credit and
> fixed income markets, and the ability for private equity firms to
> maintain their sources of capital.

> I know that most people reading this are lamenting that GOFH had to go
> to Lazard and give up the store in June.  Well, given what we have
> seen in the last six weeks, GOFH actually timed that one to
> perfection.  If they knew they were busted, then it was wise that they
> went to the well in June.  If they tried the same thing now, they
> would have been locked out or else the terms would be ten times
> worse.  They just side-stepped catastrophe.  The real question at this
> stage.......how much of these notes will be "put" back to the firm,
> converted to shares, and dumped.  If this happens en-masse, then that
> would be another drag on the stock price.

> > GOFH seems to have found a floor (range) in the last several days of
> > trading. And done so
> > in the face of steep broader market corrections. Next couple of weeks
> > should be very revealing
> > in terms of support levels.

> brooke:  I'm no expert with technical analysis, but such approaches
> with this stock are irrelevent from my perspective.  When there is no
> news, volume dries up and you really cannot draw any conclusions.  If
> the volume on the day is not at least 500,000 shares, ignore what you
> see.

> It can just as easy trade at $0.35 or $1.40.  All that matters is
> whether the next large actor in this market is a buyer or seller.

> If you really want to get some serious insight, have a conversation
> with representatives of the market maker.

> Also, this stock is serially uncorrelated with the broad stock
> market.  At this stage, what you should focus on are the credit and
> fixed income markets, and the ability for private equity firms to
> maintain their sources of capital.

> I know that most people reading this are lamenting that GOFH had to go
> to Lazard and give up the store in June.  Well, given what we have
> seen in the last six weeks, GOFH actually timed that one to
> perfection.  If they knew they were busted, then it was wise that they
> went to the well in June.  If they tried the same thing now, they
> would have been locked out or else the terms would be ten times
> worse.  They just side-stepped catastrophe.  The real question at this
> stage.......how much of these notes will be "put" back to the firm,
> converted to shares, and dumped.  If this happens en-masse, then that
> would be another drag on the stock price.

> www.digitalmusicnews.com/stories/073007gofish

> It was also reported on Techcrunch yesterday.

> Clearly not good news for GOFH.

> > GOFH seems to have found a floor (range) in the last several days of
> > trading. And done so
> > in the face of steep broader market corrections. Next couple of weeks
> > should be very revealing
> > in terms of support levels.

> brooke:  I'm no expert with technical analysis, but such approaches
> with this stock are irrelevent from my perspective.  When there is no
> news, volume dries up and you really cannot draw any conclusions.  If
> the volume on the day is not at least 500,000 shares, ignore what you
> see.

> It can just as easy trade at $0.35 or $1.40.  All that matters is
> whether the next large actor in this market is a buyer or seller.

> Just because I said it COULD trade at $0.35 doesn't mean it SHOULD :(