| |
Gofish Corporation |
Your correct! I have nothing invested in the GOFH. But I'm using this
crazy and radical approach: I thought I might take a thorough look at
this
company BEFORE I invested my money.
I started paying attention to them in February of this year. First, I
did my
homework on the business vertical. That was not too difficult, as
online
video is growing by leaps and bounds. Then, it was on to flow of ad
dollars
toward this growing medium. Was it real? And, more importantly, was
it
sustainable? Again, the evidence was overwhelming. So then comes the
harder question to answer. Who benefits? Of course there are some
obvious
answers here: Google's YouTube, Revver, News Corp's MySpace, etc. But
I
didn't see the opportunity to turn $25,000 into $250,000 over 24 to 36
months
with those choices. You could certainly make money...but you can also
do
that with a nice conservative mutual fund.
After literally months of patience and due diligence on the company,
the space, the
advertisers, the content producers, I picked an entry valuation. I did
not want to
get into GOFH while it was valued at more than $15,000,000. No
exceptions.
All the while, I would watch the message boards, anemic as they were,
and marvel at
the indignation of some ( not all of course ) of the stock's
purchasers. Much of what I read
can't be repeated here, because of the language that was used. But to
my everlasting
shock...the vast majority of those on the boards, never talked about
anything on which a
shrewd investor, would hang his/ her hat. Furthermore, no one was
asking tough questions.
They were simply damning the precipitous drop is the stock. My view
is: Why did you not
know this was bound to happen? Answer. Because some people were
following the herd on
GOFH. I think people like you and Chicago are the exception here. But
even the two of
you, who I respect because of your reasonable, well thought out
points, seem to have taken
measure of this company, out of context.
Here is what I've discovered so far. GOFH is not managing their stock.
They are rightly focused
on managing a company. And to do that, you need to have an operational
framework. How can I
manage a business, without knowing implementing order. That takes
time. But if investors had
taken the time to look into the professional experiences/ expertise,
of the people GOFH was
bringing on board, you would have discovered, a guy well regarded for
financial acumen.
Mr. Verjee is not there to be a long-term president, he is there to
instill financial discipline.
The effects of which, were not going to begin to be felt until the 3rd
and 4th quarter of this year.
They've brought on people ( at least 2 that I know of ) from Yahoo who
really understand the medium.
And one of them was responsible for the front page of Yahoo. Aaron
Cohen, of Bolt, is as an unassailable
executive, and really understands the advertising business. And is
well known within it.
I am not here to convince anyone that I am right and they are wrong.
What I do hope to do is contribute
to a robust and informative discussion group. I will learn things
here. In fact, I already have.
But to say that this company ( stock ) has NO intrinsic value is both
vague and misleading. That seems
too visceral, too personal. We ( your readers ) can't learn from you
if its too emotive. Your loss might color
your personal opinion. But your personal opinion should never color
your loss.
My invocation of MySpace was not for matters of comparing the two
companies. But rather, to illustrate
how widely perceptions and value can differ, when looking at the same
set of facts. It isn't your doubt about
GOFH that concern me, but instead, your certainty of that doubt.
I think the reason I will make money off of GOFH, is because the only
thing that I certain of...
is that I don't know everything. And so I'll just keep asking
questions.
> >Not only do you use your personal loss on the stock as a barometer of its
> >value
> No. How about the fact that the stock has gone continually downhill
> since February/March, with days with up to 50% losses -- and almost no
> up days?
> I kept thinking that the stock has hit bottom, and then it would only
> reach new lows. Then I realized that, for a speculative stock like
> this, there is NO bottom, as the stock has NO intrinsic value.
> It is perhaps easy for you to be optimistic on the boards when one has
> nothing invested in a company.
> >you seem to fail to recognize content as an actual asset ( and a very valuable one at that).
> When they are able to turn content into revenue, it will be an asset.
> Until then, it is a liability. It consumes resources but has not come
> close to paying for itself with revenue.
> >Myspace thought they were only a $580 Million company. Rupert knew better. Let that be a lesson to us all.
> How many dot-com busts have there been for every MySpace or YouTube?
> I have detailed in previous posts how GOFH is different in many ways
> from MySpace or YouTube. It is not family-oriented but is rather
> crude and adult oriented, and is thus a very poor acquisition target
> for any firm. The content quality is also poor. GOFH is not the next
> YouTube.
> >What should really excite everyone is this, Bolt and ostensibly
> >GoFish, are behind the new company, WikiYou. Which I believe, has the
> >potential to be worth more than both companies combined, and then
> >some.
> A call for documentation. I see NO evidence that gofish stock conveys
> any interest in WikiYou. Wiki You is indeed a venture initiated by
> the Bolt founder, but it does not appear to constitute part of GOFH's
> acquisition.
> Keep in mind - GOFH is a speculative stock. Visions of potential are
> far removed from performance and financial results. Of every hundred
> seemingly promising startup companies, few do well.
> My concern is emphatically not just stock price. It is that, after my
> comprehensive evaluation of the data, I believe that GOFH is simply
> not a good company. Their revenue model, in my opinion, is wholly
> inadequate to meet their expenses. I see little indication that GOFH
> will make it, and many to the contrary. Perhaps the stock will turn
> around -- but it is unlikely that this will happen in a time frame
> that is relevant. I can scarcely justify buying remote speculative
> hypothetical stock like GOFH clinging to a distant hope of "making it
> big," when there are so many other stocks of better companies that are
> producing very well for me.