Jump to content

LookingConfident

Member
  • Posts

    1797
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LookingConfident

  1. In reply to: quiktrade_1 on Monday 08/05/06 04:13pm Thanks for reminding me Quik ..... But will it go even lower?? What do you think? No good buying them for .79cps in the morning, if they can get down around the .75cps mark, is it? Or, do you feel they could even go lower that that? Thanks for your "expert" opinion, once again! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC ps; You still holding BQT? A big move there late, I see .... MMmm? Genner must be back from Nigeria with the "news" ??? Another post office possibly? Or, even security for the Nigerian test cricket team's two cricket bats??
  2. In reply to: quiktrade_1 on Monday 08/05/06 07:33am < .. Yet another 52 week low for SOT. > And may even break that recorded "low", again today? This stock is in a "down trend" Quiktrade_1 .... How long will you hang onto it? What does your T/A say?? What has it been saying, since it was up around the $1.52cps level?? I'm most interested in an "entry" point? Cheers !! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  3. LookingConfident

    LOK

    In reply to: filament on Sunday 07/05/06 06:39pm < Looks like a target of $4.50 and a head and shoulders type pattern unfolding.> IS THAT TOMORROW? Is that what you are saying?? I mean, Looksmart (LOOK) closed (very oversold, IMHO) on friday in the US @ $4.52c after coming back up, off of a low of $4.25c, during the day. With the current exchange rate of $1.29525c, and inspite of a declining $US, this gives LOK an approx "value", of $5.85c, for monday. I'm not sure of where you think the sellers are going to come from, to reach your target figure ...... Maybe a "re-calculation" by you, possibly? Cheers !! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  4. LookingConfident

    LOK

    In reply to: LookingConfident on Sunday 07/05/06 12:49pm NWS - And a Rupert Murdoch "Buy-in" ?? And here is a Fox property, with Looksmart "written all over it", already!! http://www.google.com.au/search?client=fir...G=Google+Search Florida Gators Football .... http://www.looksmartmiami.com/p/search?qt=...Marlins&sb=furl (Note the indexing of the Florida.scout.com article, in Looksmart's Vertical, Looksmartcities - Miami) http://florida.scout.com/ http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  5. LookingConfident

    LOK

    NWS - And a Rupert Murdoch "Buy-in" ?? A reply (from me) to another member within a private Google Group board, where Looksmart shareholders get to post their thoughts on the stock, daily ....... We are discussing the market's lack of response to an announced "partnership" with FoxTV Sites, within Looksmart's CC last thursday .... Thanks for your reply Mike ..... < ........and sadly Ross the stock market flicked it off much the same way they did when it was revealed they were working with Viacom and NYT. > Yes, if the stock markets only knew of it, then it may have been a different story, possibly. Ask yourself ..... How many people in both stockmarkets happen to listen to Looksmart's CC (let alone any, actual Looksmart shareholders) and of them, how many of these would know the real significances of this "new" partner for Looksmart, (in Fox TV Sites) .... And that there are 35 of these sites, in all !! Had David Hills posted an announcement that told the market of this "new" partnership, and told the market of a strategy (if there is one) fully involving publisher & media Co's and one surrounding their millions of articles they have, is it possible then, that the market may have then treated Look's Q1 report friday, in a different manner? I think so and I'm sure other group members would feel the same..... In fact, with Viacom and NYT, (again) I'll say .... There was very little fanfare ... NO bold lights or, bold headings ..... Why? ....Because Dave Hills has also reminded us that his mission is to provide long term value for shareholders and that he "couldn't give a fig" about the share price value, in the short term ......If he had the latter "in mind" he would have been pumping away prior to the "reverse split", to try and avoid a need for it .... Or, at least, (on the reverse split), the low share price was then, a reasonable enough excuse, for the need to have one .... What I am saying is, that Looksmart's shareprice value has been "kept" down at these levels for a more important reason. And that this "real" reason (a Murdoch "buy-in") will 'unfold' over the next couple of weeks, I believe .... And I don't think I am talking through my pockets!! The fact remains that a "buy-in" wasn't possible UNLESS a 'reverse split' was enacted!! The reverse split has now made available some 170M shares in Looksmart, (they are permitted 200M on their register) that have (& as a result of the reverse split, now) become available to make strategic purchases (some all script deals, possibly?) or, allow any such "buy-in", to go ahead, & occur. If Looksmart was being prepared for or, there was ever a potential to be sold 'outright' and Rupert Murdoch was an interested buyer, he (naturally), would have made the purchase "lock stock & barrel", long before today, I feel. And you have also said ..... Rupert Murdoch promised the market he would be securing his Search Engine in mid-May. Back to the share price and it's current 'oversold' situation ..... Looksmart as per tradition enjoyed it's "usual" run-up, prior to reporting it's Q1 results. On the friday, a week before this event, LOOK's share price traded as low as $4.85cps ... So, the 'peak' (of $5.26c) or, close of the day on thursday, actually represented a rise in one week, of some .41cps, or, 8.5% ..... 28-Apr-06 4.88 5.01 4.85 4.96 71,100 4.96 Not convincing enough, was the market's response on friday .... Yet, activity in the A/Hrs (following the report on thursday) was "non-existent" with barely a "seller" in sight. (There were only 2 trades for around 1100 shares only, and @ the close, of $5.26cps). So, maybe a strategy was put into place, 'overnight', for friday in the US? Who knows?? http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  6. LookingConfident

    LOK

    QUOTE (quiktrade_1 @ Saturday 06/05/06 07:45am) < Still want to discount my reversal call at $5.75? > LOOK "hit" that 12 month "high", on march 29th through the course of the day and closed (that day), @ $5.44cps 29-Mar-06 5.68 5.75 5.42 5.44 140,800 5.44 Now do me a favour ..... Dig out the post, copy it and paste it onto the board here, where you ever mention a "reversal call", prior to it happening. OK? Now, I don't expect a reply. Why? Because you never made such a call, as you have claimed ... Just as you have also posted ......... < Ross says that: ...... losing Lycos is a good thing > And I am still waiting for you to "dig" that up for me, too ...(look has lost lycos - quiktrade_1) As a matter of fact, I'll make a point of boldly posting here that you cannot find an answer to either of those above requests, for claims you have made ..... But you make them, all the same! It's a bad habit to develop in life, is my experience in living some 61 years of it .....Honesty and truthfulness go together just as birds of a feather do ...... Show me your friends and I'll tell you what you are ....But if you lie down with a dog ......you get fleas!! LOL !! Nice call, Quiktrade_1 http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  7. LookingConfident

    LOK

    QUOTE (quiktrade_1 @ Friday 05/05/06 12:53pm) Hi Quiktrade_1 ...... < Should be a red day for LOOK tomorrow > I'm not sure what you have based this on. Looksmart's Q1 report, perhaps? I suppose, on the surface, it would be a fair "guess" when breezing through the numbers ..... I broke it down to some pretty 'raw' (basic) thoughts. Looksmart have told us that unique visitors to their sites, have grown from 9M up to, a now 12M, (an increase of 33%) and that this figure of visitors have produced $10.5M in revenues. So, Under a (3 months) 'period' mean average, and by applying a rough 'rule of thumb', 10M 'visitors' will give you $10M in revenues/quarter. So, the obvious solution to increase revenues, (we'd agree), is to increase your 'visitors'. Now, within the Looksmart CC today, the CEO (twice) mentioned a ..... "new partner in Rupert Murdoch's FOX TV Stations", is what he said. As yet (& in my previous post I mentioned) it is not known, as to the extend of this remarkable 'deal'. And I say remarkable, but not unexpected. For many months now I have told of a possible NWS "hook-up" and as late as your own post today, you, and many others have laughed at, the very thought of a "Rupert Buy-in". It's all a "step at a time" and today's matter of fact dropping the news of a partnership is typical of the manner CEO Dave Hills has introduced 'other' Top Tier publisher/media Co partners, in The NY Times, Viacom's CBS Local TV Sites and IACI's Ask.com. Dave Hills has often talked of long term shareholder value and isn't "blowing his trumpet" to cause any short term share price 'spikes', so to speak. But, how many 'visitors' (I wonder) does FOX TV's 35 television stations get us up to, in due course? And if my 'hunch' is correct and NWS do happen to 'buy a controlling stake' in Looksmart, well the sky is the limit!! Rather then say, why should they, let me put it to you, why wouldn't they? If you have any though of a possible content consortium being put together, I'd suggest to you that NWS would be silly not to want (to enjoy) a 'lion share' return of revenues generated. I figured that no matter what it would cost for them to get 60% (that's all that would be required) of Looksmart, LOOK's shareprice value, would jump alarmingly, on any such announcement. Why? NWS now have over 75M "unique visitors", per month! So it's now fair so say, upwards of 100M 'users' could potentially be utilising Looksmart search, one way or, the other. (On my above 'rough' equation, that $100M in Q Revs, for Looksmart). So, that 60% buy-in cost, that doubles the Market CAP in the 1st instance, provides "cash" for Looksmart to make a strategic purchase or, two and in reality, whatever they pay to get "in" they (in reality) would immediately "own" 60% of it, anyway!! (Look's new Market CAP). I was asked to comment (a few days back), when a poster advised of an ......... < Interesting article in the NY Times the other day in regards to NWS's battle to commercialize Myspace.com considering it gets the second highest amount of page views in the world and NWS’s general battle to drive good margins from the web. > It was suggested that ........< Making Friends Was Easy. Big Profit Is Tougher - > I had already suggested to Bambi, that ...(within a Content Consortium) "Most (or,a lot) who frequent these “social†sites, (myspace.com, etc) also study full time. They “can†then get the opportunity to mix some leisure with pleasure and still get to prepare a report (or, an assignment), at the same time, they are "interacting". And that Looksmart have, both the expertise and “tools†to ensure a long lasting success of any “venture†of this type and a Licensed Furl on each publisher/media Co’s individual site, then allows “users†to “save & share†what is relevant to that site’s own (age) “group culture†and at the same time they then get to “share†their ‘finds’, with users on both myspace.com & other newspaper/magazine sites, all over the world". And, I then went on to answer some of the 'general' advantages for a NWS 'involvement', (when he said: < The point is the margin not the method >), as follows: (some of this is repetitive, sorry) My point has been all along, if NWS were to buy "into" Looksmart they would then get it from both "ends". A 60% invested "controlling stake" will see their initial investment amount "double" in value when the market get to hear of it, for starters! But whatever that 60% "cost" them, they effectively now "own" 60% of the 'new' Market Cap that is bestowed on LOOK. So, how much does it "really" cost to make such a move? Think about it???? They then "own" 60% of all future profit generated by their (new) interest, in Looksmart. Their investment also allows Looksmart to make some strategic aquisitions to compliment the overall stratergy (eg; INCX's Local.com for starters) and also gives Looksmart some 'breathing space', to add manpower expertise to their effort. Not only the likes of myspace.com get to initially help generate (a minimum) 78% Adsense revenues from Looksmart's Vertical result's pages, we are now on display to millions of additional users daily, through ALL of (NWS's) publications, (right down to their, well over 100, 'free' local papers here in OZ). All Local newspaper (here) can now have their "own" (and now more meaningful) sites (localised) to 'fit' each publication's specific "local" conditions. Interaction between a local publication and it's own website then "comes alive" all of a sudden and Google is encouraged to "top up" (locally), any web page (Looksmart's) results that haven't already been filled by NWS's own (existing), those print division advertisers who can all be initially levied with a % "top-up" marginal fee, (over their print cost) for an automatic high ranking ('cocked up') appearance in Local search results, conducted within the websites (say max 30km radius, only), of an area's Local paper. All print division advertisors would also pay a minimum (introductory) "click through" fee (of say, .15cpc ?) with a minimum monthly spend, of say, $15.00 per advertiser. Can't they afford that? Of course they can!! And again, with simple & easy "interactions" between the print copy advertisers, (eg: announce randomly, on any given, run of the free "local" paper page, hidden with an article or, an advertisement (?) even, (maybe ?), that there are $50.00 cash prizes "hidden" in/on their Local.com websites. 1st to 'claim', wins the prizes each week!! One payout only, per advertiser. They then gauge the number of cash prize claiments back to them, (the total number of actual phone ins), as to the success of these type promotions!! (They will then report the winner to the paper, that then does a "head & shoulder" photo of all weekly winners, etc, as part of the promo's .... I could go on and on ...... but I won't !! Don't even dare to ask me how "Local" schools all over the world can also become involved (with easy promotions "involving" participation incentive contributions, to a school's annual fund raising targets), by the setting of suitable homework projects or, centered around search results, again with article's content provided within Looksmart's Vertical's!!!! And you are worried about 'skinny' margins? I'll show you a 100% increase on current margins, if you care to have a good LOOK at where it's all going to come from. It's all "fat" contained within NWS's "existing" Ads customers, on a local level. Yes, at the 'coal face'. Their $$$$'s are the same, aren't they??!!! Cheers !! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC Quiktrade_1 .... Does it matter if it is RED or, GREEN tonight, in the real context of time? But I think it will be GREEN. pps: Do I get the L-O-N-G-E-S-T post award???
  8. NWS had a great day today, up 2.3% at the close. This didn't surprise me at all with sentiment with it strongly, of late. A strong performance overnight in the US too .....Large volume. NEWS CORP (NYSE:NWS) Last Trade: 18.73 Trade Time: May 4 Change: Up 0.33 (1.79%) Prev Close: 18.40 Open: 18.40 Day's Range: 18.40 - 18.79 52wk Range: 14.76 - 19.07 Volume: 2,519,900 Avg Vol (3m): 1,684,140 I've mentioned before I don't hold this stock but remain a fan of it's internet stratergy and have been hoping a "speccie" of mine, is included somewhere along the line. My Co reported overnight with signs of a definate "light, at the end of the tunnel"...... What did make me "warm & fuzzy" was the casual announcement within it's CC (following market close) that Looksmart have a new partner, in the FOX TV Stations. Rupert Murdoch's FOX (Newscorp) have a total of 35 stations, consisting of 25 Fox stations, one independent station and nine UPN stations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_Television_Stations_Group It was during Looksmart's CONFERANCE CALL after the close of market yesterday, 05/04/2006, Looksmart's CEO Dave Hills mentioned (twice) of Fox TV Stations becoming a partner of Looksmart. Will it be the same arrangements that the Viacom's CBS Local TV sites already have with Looksmart? Both Furl & porn free, Search results"? (eg: Check bottom of both Links, below) http://search.cbs4.com/?__LOGIC=1212&HOSTN...chString=tomato And a "FindArticles on Tomato" search? (The "humble" Tomato?? LOL !!) http://search.cbs4.com/?__LOGIC=1212&HOSTN...icles+on+tomato Yes .... It all becomes more interesting, each day that goes by. NWS's myspace.com would be a nice "fit" with Looksmart's 'porn free' search & Furl ..Better still, NWS may buy into LOK? Just a thought! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  9. LookingConfident

    LOK

    QUOTE (quiktrade_1 @ Friday 05/05/06 07:50am) < Then again they could do a capital raising or get Rupert to buy in.. Regards Quik. http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/lmaosmiley.gif > Yes, LOL !! Better still, we could (initially) get Rupert, to partner us, couldn't we? When smuggler asked me, over on HC (the following), I then replied: < Ross...you have said ad nauseum..NEWS is coming!? > Yes, barry .... NWS comes in all different "shapes & forms" ......Did I just write NWS? (That's Newscorp, isn't it?) ANYHOW ........ A great post, from elsewhere ...... Recommend this Post Ignore this User | Report Abuse Re: Huge Good news for LOOK, UP we go! by: sickosmeggler Long-Term Sentiment: Hold 05/04/06 11:08 pm Msg: 158417 of 158417 < And another post on Looksmart on Bambi's blog, too!!!! > Well, it was there when I checked a few minutes ago ... Anyhow, I copied it, for here .... "It's become even more interesting (particularly in view of those thoughts expressed in those last two paragraphs of my above post) in that, during Looksmart's CONFERANCE CALL after the close of market, 05/04/2006, Looksmart's CEO Dave Hills mentioned (twice) of Fox TV Stations becoming a partner of Looksmart. Will it be the same arrangements that the CBS TV sites already have with Looksmart? Both Furl & porn free, Search results"? (eg: Check bottom of both these Links below) http://search.cbs4.com/?__LOGIC=1212&HOSTN...chString=tomato And a "FindArticles on Tomato" search? (The "humble" Tomato?? LOL !!) http://search.cbs4.com/?__LOGIC=1212&HOSTN...icles+on+tomato Yes .... It all becomes more interesting, each day that goes by. Posted as a reply to: Msg 158416 by sickosmeggler http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=...9351&mid=158417 http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC ps; And the "thoughts" within the last two paragraphs?? And Bambi, back to your question within your article: "My question was how can advertisers get in front of this crowd, and would it marginalize the general search engines?" "How can this generation -- with such high lofty expectations -- get sufficiently personalized answers from a general search engine?" Most (or, a lot) who frequent these “social†sites, (myspace.com, etc) also study full time. They “can†get the opportunity to mix some leisure & pleasure and get to prepare a report (or, an assignment), at the same time, that they are "interacting". Just a thought! Bambi …. Guess what? Looksmart have, both the expertise and “tools†to ensure a long lasting success of any “venture†of this type and a Licensed Furl on each publisher/media Co’s individual site, then allows “users†to “save & share†what is relevant to that site’s own “group culture†and at the same time, they “share†their ‘finds’, with users all over the world. Oh Yeah !!!
  10. LookingConfident

    LOK

    In reply to: filament on Friday 05/05/06 10:12am < You may well get some more shares for $6.50. > Thanks for that ..... I HOPE SO TOO!! As they will cost more than that on monday, is my opinion. Best of luck! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  11. LookingConfident

    LOK

    In reply to: filament on Friday 05/05/06 09:56am Are you serious? Or, is this just an idle comment? You may not have been reading this thread in it's full context, possibly? LOK has risen by 62.5% in the past 4 months or, so ......????? http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  12. LookingConfident

    LOK

    QUOTE (leppard @ Friday 05/05/06 08:40am) < then post split $US4.00, 5.00, 6.00 and now 5.26 > LOOK's shareprice value hasn't "HIT" $6.00pps, post split. Congratulations on your predictions! Did you make much from them, on LOK? What you have done, is help people perhaps buy-in, at a lower price and I (for one) am ever grateful to you for doing so. < You paint such a rosy picture but the road ahead (to profits) is still long and hard > Hopefully, I can get some more this morning @ $6.50c and incidentally, the shares are equal in all sense, with LOOK in the US and can be transferred accordingly, Looksmart have pointed out. Bye for now. http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  13. LookingConfident

    LOK

    In reply to: quiktrade_1 on Friday 05/05/06 07:50am So, LOK's shareprice has risen from sub $4.00pps a little over 4 months ago and yesterday I couldn't buy them for $6.50cps and you say I have it all wrong Quiktrade_1 ??? Perhaps we see things different in our investment stratergies?? Is that maybe, a possibility?? At this stage (and I do hope I get more on open @ $6.50cps, I doubt it though) I think you may need to have a second look at how you (yourself), judge a company. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=LOOK&t=1y&...=m&q=l&c=sot.ax But only MHO, of course. http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  14. LookingConfident

    LOK

    QUOTE (leppard @ Friday 05/05/06 07:12am) leppard ...... On the 30th of december, (when LOK's shareprice was "SUB" $4.00pps) I posted here that it was a "steal" at what was a rediculously low mark. Yesterday, I was able to get some more @ $6.50cps and that is a rise in the SP value, of some 62.5% .....In a little over, 4 months!! You continue to "knock", yet the share price value, continues to climb ..... I wonder why? Perhaps, and I say this as humbly as I possibly can, but perhaps it is possible that I may understand this business just a little "deeper" than you might do? Maybe? Now I will remain in the queue for the remainer of my bid (@ $6.50cps) but wouldn't mind betting you, that I do not get these, when the market opens. Naturally, I hope that I do ...... There is a "big" picture here that will unfold in due course. Those that look a little deeper can see it clearly. They (I feel) are the lucky ones!! But hey, most of it has been written right here on this thread. It may not be expressed as well as I would like it to be, but I've given it my best shot, so to speak. A very exciting future is ahead of Looksmart, but this is just my opinion and again, I respect you for yours. Cheers Leppard. http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  15. LookingConfident

    LOK

    LookSmart Reports First Quarter 2006 Results Thursday May 4, 4:15 pm ET SAN FRANCISCO, May 4 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- LookSmart (Nasdaq: LOOK - News; ASX: LOK - News), an online media and search technology company, today announced financial results for the first quarter ended March 31, 2006. David Hills, Chief Executive Officer, stated, "We posted another solid quarter, and the LookSmart team is encouraged by the results delivered in our core advertising business and early signs of progress from our newer revenue streams. During the quarter our ad network continued to increase in volume, our proprietary audience grew by over 30% demonstrating interest in our vertical search properties, and our technology continued to perform well for both LookSmart and our publishing customers. While we are still in the early stages of implementing our strategic initiatives, this quarter's performance highlighted our initial accomplishments and the longer term potential of our strategy." Quarterly Highlights The Company's GAAP results of operations include the impact of expensing stock options resulting from the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123®, "Share Based Payment." The Company is using the modified prospective method under SFAS No. 123®, and accordingly, has not restated the consolidated statements of operations for prior periods. Revenue: Total revenue of $10.5 million in the first quarter of 2006 grew 5% from $10.0 million in the fourth quarter of 2005, at the upper end of the Company's prior guidance range of 3% to 5%. Key Advertising Metrics: Total paid clicks increased to 74 million for the first quarter compared to 72 million in the preceding quarter. Average revenue per click (RPC) excluding run of site advertising was $0.15 compared to $0.16 in the fourth quarter of 2005. Including run of site advertising, RPC was $0.12, unchanged from the previous quarter. Key Audience Metrics: Total unique visitors to the Company's network of owned sites increased to 12 million at the end of the first quarter from nine million at the end of the prior quarter. Cost of Revenue: Traffic acquisition costs (TAC) were within the Company's guidance range at approximately 59% of total advertising revenue in the first quarter, up from 57% in the fourth quarter of 2005. Additionally, TAC excluding the advertising impact of owned sites was 65%, compared to 63% in the fourth quarter of 2005. The Company continues to focus on its overall traffic optimization process with the primary objective of increased advertiser performance. Gross Margin: As a result of higher TAC, gross margin was 33% in the first quarter of 2006 compared to 34% in the fourth quarter of 2005. The higher TAC was partially offset by the growing contribution of advertising on our owned sites and publisher services revenue. Operating Expenses: Total operating expenses in the first quarter were $8.5 million, which includes $0.3 million of non-cash, share-based compensation charges. This compares to total operating expenses of $7.6 million in the fourth quarter of 2005, which included a restructuring benefit of $0.6 million. Net Loss: Net loss for the first quarter of 2006, which includes $0.3 million of non-cash, share-based compensation charges, was $4.5 million, or $0.20 per share. This compares to net loss in the preceding quarter of $3.8 million, or $0.17 per share, which included a restructuring benefit of $0.6 million. Cash: Total cash, cash equivalents and investments were $45.9 million at March 31, 2006 compared to $51.3 million at December 31, 2005. John Simonelli, Chief Financial Officer, stated, "As our new revenue streams develop initial momentum, we are refining our metrics, providing more detail on Average Revenue per Click and Traffic Acquisition Costs, allowing greater insight into our business and added visibility for investors. In addition, we will be providing gross margin guidance going forward." Financial Outlook LookSmart is providing the following outlook on a GAAP basis, including the impact of the adoption of SFAS No.123®. For the second quarter ending June 30, 2006: -- The Company's revenue is expected to increase 6% to 8% from the first quarter of 2006. -- Ad Network TAC is expected to remain relatively consistent at 63% to 66%. The Company plans to adopt this treatment of TAC going forward. -- Gross margin is expected to increase throughout 2006 with second quarter gross margin expected to reach 35%. The expected improvement in gross margin is primarily due to continued revenue growth from our owned sites. -- Operating expenses are expected to be approximately 5% higher in the second quarter due to increased sales and marketing efforts to support revenue growth as well as product development resources for improvements to the Company's technology platforms. -- Second quarter net loss is expected to improve slightly from the first quarter of 2006. -- Quarterly non-cash, share-based compensation for the remainder of the year is expected to be consistent with the first quarter. Conference Call LookSmart will host a conference call today at 5:00 p.m. ET (7:00 a.m. Australian ET, May 5, 2006) to discuss its financial results. To listen to the call from the U.S., dial 1-800-257-6566; from Australia, dial 1-800-730-220. The call will also be available live by webcast on LookSmart's Investor Relations Web site at http://www.shareholder.com/looksmart/. That's a nice improvement. Well done Looksmart. It's only a matter of time, I've no doubt at all. http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  16. LookingConfident

    LOK

    Looksmart report in a little over half an hour's time. I'm confident that the Co is on track for a bright future. Today, (in the US) LOOK's shaareprice opened @ $5.17cps (yesterday's close) and with steady buying have reached it's high of the day on several occasions. Go LOOK !!!! LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK) Delayed quote data Edit Last Trade: $5.25c Trade Time: 3:21PM ET Change: Up $0.08cps (+1.55%) Prev Close: $5.17cps Open: 5.17 Bid: 5.23 x 1100 Ask: 5.25 x 2000 1y Target Est: 6.63 Day's Range: 5.17 - 5.25 52wk Range: 2.75 - 5.75 Volume: 149,080 Avg Vol (3m): 107,500 Market Cap: 119.68M http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  17. In reply to: Varmi on Thursday 04/05/06 01:05pm They really are funny ...... Crack me up!!! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  18. Yes, The Good old days!!! (And the "young ones" just don't believe you!!! - Thanks dlux) Monty Python's Flying Circus - "Four Yorkshiremen" [ from the album Live At Drury Lane, 1974 ] The Players: Michael Palin - First Yorkshireman; Graham Chapman - SecondYorkshireman; Terry Jones - Third Yorkshireman; Eric Idle - Fourth Yorkshireman; The Scene: Four well-dressed men are sitting together at a vacation resort. 'Farewell to Thee' is played in the background on Hawaiian guitar. FIRST YORKSHIREMAN: Aye, very passable, that, very passable bit of risotto. SECOND YORKSHIREMAN: Nothing like a good glass of Château de Chasselas, eh, Josiah? THIRD YORKSHIREMAN: You're right there, Obadiah. FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN: Who'd have thought thirty year ago we'd all be sittin' here drinking Château de Chasselas, eh? FIRST YORKSHIREMAN: In them days we was glad to have the price of a cup o' tea. SECOND YORKSHIREMAN: A cup o' cold tea. FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN: Without milk or sugar. THIRD YORKSHIREMAN: Or tea. FIRST YORKSHIREMAN: In a cracked cup, an' all. FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN: Oh, we never had a cup. We used to have to drink out of a rolled up newspaper. SECOND YORKSHIREMAN: The best we could manage was to suck on a piece of damp cloth. THIRD YORKSHIREMAN: But you know, we were happy in those days, though we were poor. FIRST YORKSHIREMAN: Because we were poor. My old Dad used to say to me, "Money doesn't buy you happiness, son". FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN: Aye, 'e was right. FIRST YORKSHIREMAN: Aye, 'e was. FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN: I was happier then and I had nothin'. We used to live in this tiny old house with great big holes in the roof. SECOND YORKSHIREMAN: House! You were lucky to live in a house! We used to live in one room, all twenty-six of us, no furniture, 'alf the floor was missing, and we were all 'uddled together in one corner for fear of falling. THIRD YORKSHIREMAN: Eh, you were lucky to have a room! We used to have to live in t' corridor! FIRST YORKSHIREMAN: Oh, we used to dream of livin' in a corridor! Would ha' been a palace to us. We used to live in an old water tank on a rubbish tip. We got woke up every morning by having a load of rotting fish dumped all over us! House? Huh. FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN: Well, when I say 'house' it was only a hole in the ground covered by a sheet of tarpaulin, but it was a house to us. SECOND YORKSHIREMAN: We were evicted from our 'ole in the ground; we 'ad to go and live in a lake. THIRD YORKSHIREMAN: You were lucky to have a lake! There were a hundred and fifty of us living in t' shoebox in t' middle o' road. FIRST YORKSHIREMAN: Cardboard box? THIRD YORKSHIREMAN: Aye. FIRST YORKSHIREMAN: You were lucky. We lived for three months in a paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six in the morning, clean the paper bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down t' mill, fourteen hours a day, week-in week-out, for sixpence a week, and when we got home our Dad would thrash us to sleep wi' his belt. SECOND YORKSHIREMAN: Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at six o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of 'ot gravel, work twenty hour day at mill for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would thrash us to sleep with a broken bottle, if we were lucky! THIRD YORKSHIREMAN: Well, of course, we had it tough. We used to 'ave to get up out of shoebox at twelve o'clock at night and lick road clean wit' tongue. We had two bits of cold gravel, worked twenty-four hours a day at mill for sixpence every four years, and when we got home our Dad would slice us in two wit' bread knife. FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN: Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad and our mother would kill us and dance about on our graves singing Hallelujah. FIRST YORKSHIREMAN: And you try and tell the young people of today that ..... they won't believe you. ALL: They won't! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  19. LookingConfident

    LOK

    QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Tuesday 02/05/06 05:20pm) Ah 'The Ferret' .... All is forgiven!!! - Lest we forget!! - (From his/her latest newsletter) < If a stock was rising sharply for no apparent reason on a certain day - and the theory worked best when there was a mining boom of some sort in progress - he would bet London to a brick on that the stock would be that week's selection in The Speculator column in The Bulletin magazine that came out the next day. > "London to a brick on" ...... Yes, Ken Howard!! And we shouldn't forget these colourful characters from past years, nor the 'coloqialisms' that are truly Australian that should never be forgotten, IMHO. It's part of our own "unique" history but sadly, it's quickly being forgotten, only to be replaced by the "americanisation" of our venacular. Who, in racing could forget. But, those sayings? If "Eddie everywhere" is reading this post, do yourself a favour and have Bert Newton compare a QUIZ show with questions based on those very same "Australianisms", being the theme of the show. This topic knows no politics, no religions, no race, just "pure" Ozzie "lingo", that all sexes and ages both young and old, should/would embelish!! Advertisers on the show would include, Drizabone, Vegemite, etc, dispite the fact that anything uniquely Australian, is now owned overseas!! But "London to a brick on" ?? Has "The Ferret" been reading my posts, lately?? http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=co...le+Search&meta= http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=of...nG=Search&meta= ________________________________ LookingConfident Posted on Tuesday 02/05/06 05:20pm QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Monday 01/05/06 09:35am) re; < Bambi - And .......... "The future of search"..... > It was most pleasing to recieve a reply from Bambi Francisco and I was wrapped when she invited me to place my notes to her, on her own blog. After-all, Bambi is a celebrated internet columnist of Marketwatch.com. (see first paragraph of E Mail, below). Lot's of today's internet "experts" have blogs including a Rupert Murdoch adviser and the "doyen of the Internet", John Battele. They do have their "finger on the pulse" and a readership in the millions! It was this column, that prompted my contact to her. She wanted "to be pinged", she said. http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Stor...teid=mktw&dist= From: "Francisco, Bambi" <BFrancisco@marketwatch.com> Subject: RE: re; "What other areas in search should I explore"? Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 14:12:57 -0700 Show Full Headers Back To [iNBOX] This is tooo good. Why not post this on my blog? Don't you think this is worth the attention of others? Please feel free to put this on there. ____________________________________________________________________ And I WILL do so. Problem now is, Yahoo have deleted all those posts that were "linked" from my research, for whatever reason. I would bet "London to a brick" that they were "too close to the bone", but that's just my opinion. Dave Hills of Looksmart had recieved a copy earlier. http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC PS; And due respect to racing long departed, Ken Howard. ("London to a brick") _______________________________________ Cheers to "The Ferret"
  20. LookingConfident

    LOK

    From Time Warner's 1 Report ...... < Time Warner has been revamping its AOL business from a subscription model to one based on Internet advertising, an approach used with great success by Google Inc. and Yahoo Inc. Yet while AOL's advertising revenues grew 26 percent to $392 million in the quarter, that wasn't enough to offset the 13 percent decline in subscription revenues to $1.54 billion. As a result, overall revenues at AOL fell 7 percent. > http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060503/earns_time_warner.html?.v=12 Google's Adsense ?? Placed down the RHS of/on the Vertical 'results' pages?? They (Google) paid out an average 78% of over $900M such revenues, for Q1 ...... http://www.looksmartdrinks.com/p/search?qt...=free&vcat=cat1 The thought or, suggestion of a Looksmart newspaper/publisher/media Co "hook-up" possibility being announced tomorrow morning, pre -ASX open, (with the concept outlaid within the Bambi blog post), really does put an emphasis on the potential "universal" nature, of any such move. But it IS all, just MHO, of course! There are few certainties in life .... LOL !! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  21. Just one more .... (Thanks to balmersdog) A man feared his wife was not hearing as well as she used to, and He thought she might need a hearing aid. Not quite sure how to approach her, he called the family doctor to discuss the problem. The doctor told him there is a simple informal test the husband could perform to give the doctor a better idea about her hearing loss. "Here's what you do," said the doctor. "Stand about 40 feet away from her and in a normal conversational speaking tone see if she hears you. If not, go to 30 feet, then 20 feet, and so on until you get a response." That evening, the wife is in the kitchen cooking dinner, and he was in the den. He says to himself, "I'm about 40 feet away. Let's see what happens." In a normal tone he asks, "Honey, what's for dinner?" No response. So the husband moves closer to the kitchen, about 30 feet from his wife and repeats,"Honey, what's for dinner?" Still no response. Next he moves into the dining room where he is about 20 feet from his wife and asks, "Honey, what's for dinner?" Again, no response. So, he walks up to the kitchen door, about 10 feet away. "Honey, what's for dinner?" Again, there is no response. So he walks right up behind her. "Honey, what's for dinner?" ..... She replied: "Earl, for the 5th F#*%&@g time, CHICKEN http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  22. And now we have ..WMD's ... Weapons of MATHS DESTRUCTION !!! (Thanks again, jacoba1) NEW YORK- A public school teacher was arrested today at John F. Kennedy International Airport as he attempted to board a flight while in possession of a ruler, a protractor, a set square, a slide rule and a calculator. At a morning press conference, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez said he believes the man is a member of the notorious Al-gebra movement. He did not identify the man, who has been charged by the FBI with carrying weapons of math instruction. "Al-gebra is a problem for us," Gonzalez said. "They desire solutions by means and extremes, and sometimes go off on tangents in a search of absolute value. They use secret code names like 'x' and 'y' and refer to themselves as 'unknowns', but we have determined they belong to a common denominator of the axis of medieval with coordinates in every country. As the Greek philanderer Isosceles used to say, 'There are 3 sides to every triangle'." When asked to comment on the arrest, President Bush said, "If God had wanted us to have better weapons of math instruction, He would have given us more fingers and toes." White House aides told reporters they could not recall a more intelligent or profound statement by the president. http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  23. In reply to: Varmi on Wednesday 03/05/06 04:23pm LOL !! THAT'S FUNNY !!! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  24. LOL !! a "good ole" Collingwood Girl - Thanks to jacoba1 on HC A Collingwood girl walks into the local dry cleaners. She places a garment on the counter. "I'll be back tomorrow afternoon to pick up my dress." she says. "Come again?" says the worker, cupping his ear. "No" replies the Collingwood Girl . "This time it's mayonnaise." ****************************************** Another Collingwood girl was involved in a serious crash; there's blood everywhere. The paramedics arrive and drag the girl out of the car till she's lying flat out on the floor. Medic: "OK, I'm going to check if you're concussed." Collingwood Girl: "Ok." Medic: "How many fingers am I putting up?" Collingwood Girl: "Oh my god I'm paralysed from the waist down!" ***************************************** A Collingwood girl goes to Centrelink to register for child benefit. "How many children?" asks the assessor. "10" replies the Collingwood girl. "10?" says the council worker. "What are their names?" "Wayne, Wayne, Wayne, Wayne, Wayne, Wayne, Wayne, Wayne, Wayne and Wayne" "Doesn't that get confusing?" "Naah..." says the Collingwood girl. "Its great because if they are out playing in the street I just have to shout WAAYNE, YER DINNER'S READY or WAAYNE GO TO BED NOW and they all do it..." "What if you want to speak to one individually?" says the perturbed council worker. "That's easy," says the Collingwood girl... "I just use their surnames" *********************************** Collingwood Girl enters a sex shop & asks for a vibrator. The man says "Choose from our range on the wall." She says "I'll take the red one." The man replies "That's a fire extinguisher." ********************************** A Collingwood girl was driving down the Eastern Hwy when her car phone rang. It was her boyfriend, urgently warning her, "Treacle, I just heard on the news that there's a car going the wrong way on the Eastie Highway. Please be careful!" "It's not just one car!" said the Collingwood girl, There's hundreds of them!" http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
  25. LookingConfident

    LOK

    LOOKSMART NOW HAS ..... Results 1 - 10 of about 39,900,000 from www.findarticles.com On Google.com.au http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&lr=&...=Search+the+Web More articles to choose from and "contextualise" with advertising......Put the "dots" together. http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/smile.gif LC
×
×
  • Create New...