Registered Members Login:
   
Forgotten Your Details? Click Here To Recover +
Welcome To The ShareCafe Community - Talk Shares And Take Stock With Smart Investors - New Here? Click To Register >

9 Pages (Click to Jump) V   1 2 3 4 > » 

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 8 2006, 04:46 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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!

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??
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 8 2006, 03:58 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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 !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 7 2006, 07:39 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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 !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 7 2006, 03:58 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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/

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 7 2006, 12:49 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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??

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 6 2006, 08:41 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 5 2006, 08:46 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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 !!

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???
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 5 2006, 05:06 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 5 2006, 01:44 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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. 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

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 !!!
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 5 2006, 10:15 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 5 2006, 10:07 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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 ......?????

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 5 2006, 09:27 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 5 2006, 08:01 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 5 2006, 07:43 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 5 2006, 06:33 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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.

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 5 2006, 05:41 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 4 2006, 01:08 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: Varmi on Thursday 04/05/06 01:05pm

They really are funny ...... Crack me up!!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 4 2006, 12:25 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 4 2006, 12:04 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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.

smile.gif

LC

PS; And due respect to racing long departed, Ken Howard. ("London to a brick")
_______________________________________

Cheers to "The Ferret"


  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 4 2006, 08:41 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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 !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 3 2006, 07:01 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 3 2006, 06:06 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 3 2006, 04:43 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: Varmi on Wednesday 03/05/06 04:23pm

LOL !!

THAT'S FUNNY !!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 3 2006, 04:12 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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!"

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 3 2006, 08:44 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 3 2006, 06:55 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

NWS closed on it's HIGH of the day, overnight.

NEWS CORP (NYSE:NWS) Delayed quote data Edit
Last Trade: 18.26
Trade Time: 4:01PM ET
Change: Up 0.06 (0.33%)
Prev Close: 18.20
Open: 18.21
Bid: N/A
Ask: N/A
1y Target Est: N/A

Day's Range: 18.11 - 18.27
52wk Range: 14.76 - 19.07
Volume: 1,155,600
Avg Vol (3m): 1,672,100

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=NWS&t=6m

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 2 2006, 11:00 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: LookingConfident on Tuesday 02/05/06 05:20pm

And I WILL do so.

Here is the link to that story, as I NOW SEE IT.

http://bambi.blogs.com/bambi_francisco/200...omment-16798541

Hey, it's only an opinion, that's all.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 2 2006, 05:20 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

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.
smile.gif

LC

PS; And due respect to racing long departed, Ken Howard. ("London to a brick")
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 2 2006, 02:50 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Looking Smarter

Under the guidance of new CEO David Hills, LookSmart redefines its mission from one to hundreds
By Lauri Giesen

Dave Hills’ history in the television broadcast industry becomes apparent when he describes the direction he sees for Internet search company LookSmart.com. “I see Google, Yahoo and AOL being like the three major networks in television, while we’re like the Turner Broadcast Network,” says Hills, who took the helm of the faltering LookSmart.com 18 months ago. “They offer broad content to the broadest consumer range possible while we’re vertical in nature and are trying to appeal to specific niches.”

If the 21 years Hills spent with Cox Enterprises taught him anything, it’s that the trend among the cable television networks today is to appeal to niches rather than trying to be all things to all people—as evidenced by the number of channels dedicated solely to topics like entertainment news, cartoons, shopping, old movies and travel. And that is the same strategy Hills is applying at LookSmart, a once high-flying Internet search company that was nearly destroyed in 2004 when Microsoft took in-house the job it had been outsourcing to LookSmart.

Complete makeover

Until 2004, LookSmart produced the results that consumers saw when they searched the Internet from MSN.com. In addition, LookSmart sold the advertising that consumers viewed on the MSN search results page. But when Microsoft decided it could search the web on its own—and sell the ads as well—LookSmart lost 70% of its revenue.

The remaining 30% was the result of LookSmart syndicating its search results to other web sites. In the meantime, Yahoo, Google and AOL had come to dominate the Internet search business. Attempting to compete with those three from its newly reduced base was too daunting a challenge.

And so, few disputed that LookSmart needed a complete makeover when Hills accepted the CEO job in October 2004. For starters, LookSmart had to come up with its own look and feel. And it had to attract the eyeballs of consumers who may have used LookSmart’s search engine before, say, at MSN.com, but didn’t even know it because the search engine had someone else’s brand on it.

Because of its former strategy, LookSmart had no customer loyalty or even any consumer recognition. And while LookSmart had controlled the advertising relationships under the old MSN arrangement, without any unique content to offer, those contact lists became simply names and phone numbers, not advertising customers loyal to LookSmart or its product. LookSmart had to find new reasons for those advertisers to stick around.

At that point, rather than try to be everything to everyone, Hills decided LookSmart wasn’t going to even try to take on the big three search engines. Instead, he took a year to come up with an entirely new strategy that utilized the search technology already in house and that would retain as many of the old advertising relationships as possible, but with a fresh approach.

Attack the specialty market

His plan? Attack the specialty markets. Hills and his staff spent a year creating a new concept that they introduced last October—a new LookSmart that consisted of 13 niches or “clusters,” as Hills calls them (see box, p. 65). Each cluster appeals to a specific niche market—such as students, personal investors, fashion etc. Then within each cluster, there are nine to 18 additional web sites with more specific information.

Hills recognizes that even within a given niche, there are smaller more specific niches. “Take our education site for students. We know that the homework needs of a 12-year-old are going to be different from those of a college student so we can’t have just one site that tries to appeal to both. Instead of having one education site, we have three, one for junior high students, one for high school students and one for college students,” Hills explains.

Actually, a check of the education site shows the range is even more extensive—and finely honed—than that, with a section for graduate students and a section for parents looking to help their children study. Even then, users who click on the high school section find selections broken down further into science and math, writing and literature, social studies, lifestyles, educational publications and other topics. The advertising links in this group refer to companies that offer career training, student loans, asset management, concert tickets and computer peripherals, among other things.

Indeed, LookSmart’s advertising strategy is similar to its approach to search. “Take Kaplan, the provider of SAT preparation and other educational services. They run ads on our high school site about preparing for the SATs and run ads on our college site about preparing for the GMATs and run nothing on the junior high site. Our strategy lets advertisers focus on the specific niches they want to appeal to,” Hills says.

Similarly with the personal investor site, LookSmart breaks the market into beginning savers or younger adults, baby boomers who are planning for retirement, and retirees.

Not just stuff to wear

And the style section is not just for researching fashion items such as accessories, clothing, jewelry, makeup and watches, which of course are included. But there are also sections on spas, hair styles and weddings.

The idea is to give individuals “essential” information that helps them in their everyday lives, Hills says, but not “exhaustive” information that is more likely to confuse them.

That strategy of pursuing niches just might work, says Eric Matinuzzi, senior research analyst with Craig Hallum Capital Group, a Minneapolis-based investment company that follows LookSmart. “About 90% of the general search market is controlled by four companies—Yahoo, MSN, AOL and Google. If you want to play in that market, you have to look at the development money those companies are spending. LookSmart did not have the horsepower to play in that league.”

An alternative strategy would be to compete in the “mega search” market, where companies aggregate relevant information from the major search engines. “That would have been a possibility, but there are companies, such as Infospace.com, that have already gained strength in that space and it would have been difficult to take them on,” Matinuzzi says. “Plan C would be to specialize, and given LookSmart’s size, that approach made the most sense.”

In choosing LookSmart’s niches, Hills maintains that he and his team took a mathematical approach to determining what consumers were looking for when they went online. “We looked at the findings of all the major rating services to break out not only which sites consumers are using, but what they are looking for when they go to those sites,” Hills says. “We needed a mathematical underpinning to what we were doing so we could justify our decisions based on scientific evidence.”

Hills and his staff also looked at LookSmart’s existing advertising sources to find areas of concentration.

Flexibility

While LookSmart is pretty much wedded to the 13 original clusters, Hills admits the company is willing to make changes if needed. “Part of any good turnaround requires that you be flexible,” he says. “If we find some of these areas are not working out, we need the flexibility to change our orientation.”

And as part of being a provider of search services to niche audiences, LookSmart knows it needs to offer customers extra features. One such special feature is that when a user finds valuable information, the user can download that information to the LookSmart server and retrieve it as needed. “We realize with so many documents available, it gets to be unwieldy for individuals to save all the pertinent information on their own. We want to help them by keeping valuable information for them,” Hills says.

The strategy Hills devised was in keeping with the direction that had previously been set out by its board. “We knew we wanted to develop a set of vertical web sites with the LookSmart brand that could build upon the advertising base that we had,” says Ted West, chairman of the LookSmart board. “But as a board, we only had a fuzzy idea of what we wanted. It took Dave, who had built web sites in the past, to crystallize the ideas that we had.”

Analyst Matinuzzi agrees that Hills may just be the person to lead LookSmart back into profitability. “I think highly of Dave Hills and he is an Internet industry veteran,” Matinuzzi says. “If anyone can bring this company around, I think he is the one.”

While it is still early, Hills’ strategy seems to be paying off, at least in site visitors. When the new site debuted in October, LookSmart had an aggregate audience of 4 million visitors, including visitors to affiliate sites. By December, that number had more than doubled to 9 million.

Another year of development

And while Hills won’t divulge information about advertising revenue, he notes that the site just began selling advertising in the fourth quarter and “there has been good feedback from the advertising community.”

According to the company’s latest quarterly report released in February, LookSmart’s revenue was $10 million in the fourth quarter of 2005, up 9% from the previous quarter. The report shows the company is anticipating 3% to 5% sequential growth for the first quarter of 2006. [REPORTS PRE-MARKET OPEN - Friday morning on the ASX]

Still, Hills knows it will be a long road back to where the company once was. “We know it will take all of this year to develop a base of regular users, but we’re seeing progress and think we’re going in the right direction,” he says.

Those are somber words for a company whose stock soared for a brief period after it went public in 1999. “We were a high flying dot-com-er for about 25 minutes until reality set in,” Hills laughs. Indeed, LookSmart shares were trading at over $350 a share in early 2000; today, they’re at about $5 a share.

Because of its relationship with Microsoft and as a result of guaranteed income, LookSmart didn’t face the same disastrous scenarios that the other Internet companies faced in the early part of this decade—but only because its day of reckoning was delayed. “What other dot-com companies went through in 2001 and 2002, we face now,” Hills says. For example, in 2002, at its peak, LookSmart had 500 employees. Today it is pared down to about 130.

And in coming to LookSmart, Hills had to do more than just develop a successful strategy, he had to deal with a demoralized company. “After Microsoft was out of the picture, the company lost not only most of its revenue, but much of its energy,” says board chairman West. “Dave Hills breathed new life into the company and took an aggressive posture that we needed.”

On the way back

West has seen the good times and the bad at LookSmart, having become acquainted with the company when it started in the mid 1990s. He himself has 25 years of experience as an entrepreneur and advisor to emerging companies. He currently is a managing director of Sage Partners, a strategic advisory company.

Today, Hills spends much of his day talking to Wall Street analysts and investors and persuading them to be patient. “We’ve been clean with Wall Street for the past year. We don’t put up any false hopes or projections. They know it will be a while before we can break even, but they understand we have a new plan and we’re on our way back to profitability,” Hills says.

LookSmart had a net loss of $17.8 million on revenue of $41.4 million for fiscal year 2005. That compares to a net loss of $9.6 million on revenues of $77 million in 2004. Still, to get back to profitability, analyst Matinuzzi estimates the company’s quarterly revenue of $10 million need to get to get closer to $18 million.

Hills has been around the media business long enough to know there are ups and downs in the business. He spent 21 years with Cox Enterprises, mostly in advertising and sales. In 1994, he moved over to the Internet side of the business working on Cox’s online subsidiary as vice president of sales for interactive media. That latter experience was enough for him to become excited about the Internet world.

From Cox, he moved over to About.com as COO and president of sales. That was where he became part of a team that created 500-plus web sites—a valuable experience for what he would encounter at LookSmart. “It was at About.com where I became enamored with this business and I patterned much of the LookSmart strategy on what I learned at About.com,” Hills says.

Getting the word out

From About.com, Hills moved to marketing company 24/7 Real Media in August 2003 where he was president of media solutions before joining LookSmart in the fall of 2004.

Now one of his biggest challenges is to get the word out to a consumer audience about a site most have never have heard of. To do that, LookSmart is taking a multi-pronged approach. First it is paying the general engines, such as Google and Yahoo, to refer niche users to LookSmart. Then, it is identifying specialists who are considered leaders in their fields and trying to get them to make referrals.

“We have a good site on Italian cooking and we need to get the word out to people who like to cook Italian food,” Hills says. “The first thing we did was to identify some of the top Italian chefs and make them aware of our site so that they can refer people to us who need tips on this topic.”

The question now is whether LookSmart can indeed get consumers to use its search capabilities and as a result bring the eyeballs demanded by the advertisers. “It’s hard to say yet if Hills can pull this off,” says Matinuzzi. “So far, they’ve only made baby steps, but they have made progress. Every quarter, revenues are up, so at least they’re moving in the right direction.” l

Lauri Giesen is a Libertyville, Ill.-based freelance business writer.

The clusters

LookSmart breaks its site into:

Auto

Cities

Education

Food

Health

Home Living

Money

Music

Recreation

Sports

Style

Technology & Games

TravelEnd of Content

http://www.internetretailer.com/article.asp?id=18413

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 1 2006, 04:48 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Looksmart are "hiring"!! - Some interesting positions, too!! Check this one, here ....

Compliance and Reporting Manager

LookSmart is currently seeking a Compliance and Reporting Manager to join our Finance team based in San Francisco. Reporting directly to the VP-Finance, you will manage SOX compliance, SEC reporting and audit activities. SOX compliance already achieved, but modification, improvement, remediation and testing efforts continue. Will interface with the Audit Committee, executive staff, Disclosure Committee and the other finance and accounting staff. The ideal candidate will be a CPA with SOX testing and implementation experience, with an aptitude for technical accounting issues and standards.

Required Skills:

* SEC Reporting: Will manage process for preparation and filing of Forms 10-Q, 10-K, 8-K (earnings press release) and Proxy. Participates in the writing of all report sections along with shepherding reviews by internal and external counsel and auditors.
* Research, document and present to executive staff and Audit Committee recently issued accounting standards and new disclosure requirements applicable to the company.
* Assist in M&A activity, as necessary
* Interact with the audit process, internally and with the auditors
* Participate actively in Disclosure Committee meetings
* Work with FP&A and other accounting functions
* Internal accounting and finance policy development Work on special projects as required

Qualifications:

* BA/BS required, MBA a plus
* CPA required
* Minimum of 3 years' of Big 4 public accounting and auditing experience required
* Minimum of 6 years' overall experience, with 3 + years in a supervisory role
* Internal audit experience a plus
* SOX Section 404 testing experience required
* SOX implementation experience preferred
* SEC reporting experience strongly desired

FULL List, here .... http://aboutus.looksmart.com/p/aboutus/jobs/search/

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 1 2006, 02:46 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

A "STRONG SELL" poster, noted elsewhere ......

< Interestingly.....The CEO and or senior management do NOT own one single share. >

I strongly challenged this statement, with my reply:

"What's interesting is, the "fact" and a question to you, of" .....

Why would Directors be buying (at market) in this reporting quarter, if they did not feel, things were going ok?

Date Insider Shares Type Transaction Value*
28-Feb-06 WETSEL, GARY A
Director 5,000 Direct Purchase at $4.60 - $4.63 per share. $23,0002
23-Feb-06 HILLS, DAVID B.
Chief Executive Officer 5,000 Direct Purchase at $4.59 - $4.69 per share. $23,0002

I then added: "Now you show me a notice to the market, as to where they have sold these above shares, they bought "at market" ..... Ok"? (No reply, as yet)

I added: "But you haven't "trotted out" the fact, that "short" activity has increased, yet"? "Why"?

Elsewhere he had said:

< 246k this month over 191k last month someone is expecting the price to fall.>

I then replied to this, in that (in fact), the SP value had reached it's 12 month "high", of $5.75c, during this reporting period.

I then challenged his poor comprehension "skills", to which he then replied .......

< LC.....i know you are too bright....BUT!!!! LOOK hit $5.75 in MARCH!!!!!! NOT April!!!! - i remind you,........the short sellers have increased in APRIL. >

I then "stuck it up him" (tough scene, is Yahoo) once more, with:

You said ....... < LOOK hit $5.75 in MARCH!!!!!! NOT April!!!! >

"Yes, it was the 29th of march, actually ..... Righ in the middle of the reporting period!! If only you could read & comprehend"!!!

And ......

< i remind you,........the short sellers have increased in APRIL. > (is what he then said)

Exactly!! So, in spite of the increase in "shorts" by some 53,200 shares, (between 15/3 & 13/4 - the reporting period) the shareprice was STILL able to move up to that "12 month high figure", and on 13/4 it closed at, $5.08c ...... since then, I'd venture to say, that the "shorts" figure may have increased even more!! Yet, the SP is down ONLY, .13cps, since 13/04/2006.

Apr. 13, 2006 245,065 134,914 1.82
Mar. 15, 2006 191,864 84,245 2.28

Fact............, AN INCREASE IN SHORT ACTIVITY (in fact) IS DESIGNED TO RETARD THE GROWTH OF THE SP VALUE. To "drive it down", in fact. (Now, I do hope that he would then realise that? - I told him)

And, that as shares are sold, someone is buying them!

They, (those who are buying), are effectively getting a "bargain" from those who are 'shorting' .... "Surely you wouldn't dispute that"? (I asked him)

Now, as to WHO will have made the correct decision, remains to be seen following market close, on this coming thursday afternoon, 04/04/2006. (Pre-market, this friday morning, our "time")

But, I WANT YOU TO CONSIDER ONE MORE THING ....

If, the shorts hadn't increased by 28% during this period, what price do you feel LOOK would be at, by now? With the reality of, more that 53,000 more shares bought, than 'genuine' shares sold, during this period???

And, guess what, (as I have said earlier), I'd say it is ONLY shorts, that have kept LOOK's SP value, down at it's current closing levels!!

If you think this is an indication of shareholders SELLING, you have "rocks in your head" ..... But you already do, don't you?? - I replied. No reply from him, as expected.

LOL!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: May 1 2006, 09:35 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Bambi - And .......... "The future of search".....

When Bambi said:

"Sound-off: What other areas in search should I explore? Ping me at Bambi.francisco@dowjones.com"

http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Stor...d=mktw&dist=nbc

I took the opportunity, gladly ....And replied:

Bambi, From within your article, you asked:

“What about social search and other search engines”? And you go on to comment, (in relation to the growing membership of social networks), and then you asked the question, “how can advertisers get in front of this crowd, and would it marginalize the general search engines”?

Further discussion was had on Verticals. Today it's fashionable to even ‘align” your site with the ‘tag’ and you also point out, (John) “Battelle said his FM operation, is a vertical search engine as well”. Interesting. But the question remains, how can advertisers get in front of this crowd? And I am really surprised that the “experts” have somewhat failed with not even one mention of (any) a publisher & media Co “possible” involvement, as they discussed “The future of search”, with you.

Yet, they did in fact give a “wrap” for Barry Dillar’s (IACI’s) ask.com and rightly so I feel, as surely there would be some possible future plans, (for ask.com) in the IACI, “bigger” picture?

Over the past 12 months or, so there has been plenty of discussion relating to a ‘fight back’ or, at least, certainly a more involved presence on the net, by publisher & media companies. The “old world” print media.

< The panellists agreed that most people would still buy from the major search engines to get to the verticals. And, at the end of the day, most people will still be going to the major search engines, Todd predicted. That's because people are "inherently lazy." >

And some would say, even “sheepishly” lazy, too. Newspapers and Magazines and Media Co’s have the existing resources (it’s their ‘core’ business) to allow them to very easily promote (whatever their moves may be), any effort in improving their position or, relating to any future attempt made by them to help recover some of those many “lost” dollars (loss of their advertisers), to the BIG Portals of search.

And I thought you may have even been “probing” in that direction Bambi, when you posed the question: “How can this generation -- with such high lofty expectations -- get sufficiently personalized answers from a general search engine”?

It has often been said, that content is “king” and newspapers & magazines have a history of articles, reports & special interest type content (within their archives), & they currently offer this to their own (their existing) daily ‘visitors’, to their sites. Most have “site search” as part of their offering. Some “pay for view” is also available and there are archive Co’s who have existed for some time now, from the very indexing of many, (a collective of) various publisher’s content, etc. They too have been offering Libraries, Schools, Uni’s, etc, that same type of “pay for view” access for research, accordingly. That they (Publisher & Media Co’s) all need to get more traffic to each of their sites is an obvious requirement they would all agree on. If successful in achieving this aim, their existing advertisers then become a little more comfortable and they also have a reasonable case then, to help them all win back any advertisers that they may have lost to the Big Portals, over past years.

The suggestion has been, (that), if they were to “share” both their content and users, (by allowing access to all content to/from each other’s site) then the ‘traffic’ count to each of their sites would then probably rise, and in many multiples, no doubt. (As a result of their “sharing” of each other’s users). The potential of a future “pooling of content” or, a network of publisher & media Co’s becoming a reality has certainly been discussed in recent times and this possibility should never ever be discounted whenever discussions are had, on “The future of search”.

http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=...9351&mid=158123

http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=...9351&mid=158136

http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=...9351&mid=158138

http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=...9351&mid=158140

http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=...9351&mid=158142

And the (above) “concept” is universal in appeal for both “users” and advertisers. The likes of Google would do well to support any such move, to not only retain any of their existing “search the web” facility (that they may have), but “world wide” contextualisation of pages & pages of content (and with “Local” advertisers) is the extra bonus reward, for doing so. And MSN, Ask.com etc, can also participate under the same conditions.

And, from 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 ….. 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.

smile.gif

LC

ps; < But Marckini brought up an interesting point regarding paid inclusion: "Yahoo is the only search engine that is currently monetizing [its] 'natural' search results," he said. "They do this by selling their 'paid inclusion' product that charges advertisers for inclusion into the Yahoo index but does not impact their position in search results. ... I consider paid inclusion an underleveraged asset that more marketers need to test." >

A fellow shareholder commented that ….”It's ironic that Yahoo's revenue gains are from paid inclusion, the very same program Looksmart was so heavily criticized for, by the SEO crowd back in 2002”.

  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 29 2006, 07:45 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

< Singleton suggested that newspapers should team up to offer some sort of collective national Internet search engine to compete with Google, Yahoo Inc., and Microsoft Corp.'s MSN. Either that or land revenue-sharing partnerships with the online search leaders. >

Oh, that's not "new" news .... It's been discussed for some time now ..... I have previously posted, here ....

A "Content Consortium" with millions of quality articles on many topics could be made available and ads could be sold around it and in effect, all network "partners" could even be "sharing" those (their own) important "users", (being the daily visitors to each of their individual sites), with each other. Afterall, additional "eyeballs" would ensure more advertisers and any search for (it), this, their (now) "shared" content could provide that much needed (additional) ADS revenues resulting from all ensuing 'click throughs'.

And it was this further comment, (Link below) that got me thinking a while back:

< "FOR THE LIFE OF ME, I CAN'T IMAGINE why they haven't done it," says Tom Curley, CEO of Associated Press. Here's one reason: Doing it would require spinal implants for intimidated media barons. But the notion that some pushback is pending is not far-fetched. Curley says he is talking with potential partners about setting up subject-specific Web packages -- say, for travel or basketball -- that will include content from multiple media. Once partners are on board and packages are finalized, search engines will be invited to bid for that traffic. >

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/conte...04/b3968031.htm

And, it's no surprise for me to see that Tom Curley's Associated Press is now suplying late "news" content to one of Looksmart's Top Tier partners, in The NY Times ..... Topix.net were the previous provider, it had been noted. Topix.net has 'gone off the boil' for reasons unknown?

http://www.nytimes.com/

Yes .... MMmm?

smile.gif
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 29 2006, 01:36 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Hopefully the proven relevance of Looksmart's Verticals was demonstrated well enough in my previous story of The "Humble" TOMATO & Looksmart ....

It's easy to understand really ...... You only have to read the story slowly, absorb it & do some TEST exercises .... Hope you have found it interesting!

And overnight comes a story on an ever growing panic from publisher/media companies ... Well, (at least) they give the impression, that they are in a panic!!

< "There is no bigger problem today than the fact that we're not getting paid for online news," said William Dean Singleton, vice chairman and CEO of MediaNews Group Inc., >

< The American Press Institute is part way through a yearlong project to help the newspaper industry embrace a more diversified business model, one that relies on a broader mix of products targeting a wider array of readers. >

< Singleton suggested that newspapers should team up to offer some sort of collective national Internet search engine to compete with Google, Yahoo Inc., and Microsoft Corp.'s MSN. Either that or land revenue-sharing partnerships with the online search leaders. >

< "All of us are scrambling to try to serve the Internet audience," said Marilyn Thompson, editor and vice president of the Lexington Herald-Leader in Kentucky,... >

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/business/3825819.html

And, some excerps from a previous post advised:

< NEWSPAPERS have no future without online and digital services, media executives heard at a World Association of Newspapers meeting in Madrid. >

< "We are getting the whole organisation ready for a digital future," said Simon Waldman, director of digital publishing at Guardian Newspapers, whose Guardian Unlimited site is by far the most popular British newspaper online site, ahead of The Sun, The Times and The Telegraph. >

< Within "six to seven years", the group planned to dedicate 80 per cent of its time to digital activities, compared to 20 per cent at present, Mr Waldman told the conference, entitled Beyond the Printed Word. >

Looksmart's ....."Calling all Publishers" .. "Hear ye!! - Hear ye!! - Hear ye"!!

So, Looksmart's CEO David Hills then sat down with these, (by now), panicking publishers & media Co's and explained to them a plan, (being), that by using Looksmart Verticals, & by sharing content within those Verticals, effectively, "users" to ALL their own sites could not only be "shared", they would then stay longer within his suggested (a total) "network", thereby bouncing from one "partner's" site, and off onto another partner's site!!

We understand that the print/media world do have an existing massive audience both on & off the net and that as a "collective" & through their articles "content" (with both print & online interactivity), they can "drive" ongoing "repeat visitors" to each other's many websites, by using David Hill's ( or, Looksmart's) suggested, network type solution.

Now, of course, I am only assuming that this is what he has put to them. He hasn't exactly spelt it out to the market as such ..... He hasn't said, "This is what I am going to sell to them ..."

Just as I am assuming that these newspaper/publisher content providers will go ahead and place a "FindArticles in/on ...." search 'Box & Button', on each (& all) of their sites. But it does make sense.

Just a further insight and an opinion, that's all ......

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 29 2006, 10:37 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

The battle of which search engine is the most relevant has been going on for years. At a recent SES Toronto, the following question was posed for discussion ...... (Report)

http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060426-122653

"Is Google Search More Relevant Or Is There a Brand Factor"?

Gord Hotchkiss, president and CEO of search research firm Enquiro, points out:

That ........"At first glance one thing should stand out, which is the expansion of the scanning area on MSN and Yahoo!, " Hotchkiss told the standing room only crowd. "People had to go deeper on the page and look around more to find what they were looking for."

He then went on to say ...... "The ideal user experience, (according to Hotchkiss), would be if users would always find what they're looking for in the most prominent place at the top of the results listing".

Few have noticed that Looksmart are doing great things with Verticals lately and as CEO David Hills has pointed out, (for articles content for students, or, general 'research' needs), 'users' should take one more step and find the Vertical that best suits their enquiry. And, yes, Google appears to provide the best results, to assist in doing so......

By using a "FindArticles in/on ....." search term, Google results can quickly direct a user to that Looksmart Vertical, that may then go on to provide all/many of the answers sough after & simply put, "in a nutshell'. Read on.

The "Humble" TOMATO & Looksmart ....

When a friend said to me ..."I just searched Google on "Tomato" and got 31,000,000 results".

I replied that, Those 31,000,000 results were provided to you by the No1 search Engine, Google. And it's quite remarkable that it has so much information indexed on, the humble "Tomato" .......

I immediately wondered how many of those 31M results needed a further 'going through' to eventually find the required information sought,to fully satisfy a searcher's needs Looksmart feel that would prove both a "time consuming" effort and even sometimes, well, truly "exhaustive" type search.

No, Looksmart hasn't a "Tomato" Vertical, as yet (but again thanks to Google),they have articles on this topic highly listed in results that may present even more defined/refined results within some of these Verticals, thereby allowing "users" to "drill down" or, narrow their search enquiry, so much quicker.

Looksmart call it, "essential" type search. It's easy & can be much quicker. And it may very well be where search is heading, some feel.

Now check this out here:

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...tnG=Search&meta

We have now narrowed our search down to just 446,000 results in Google and you will note how Looksmart's Verticals "segment" this topic into what may now be considered by some, as a more practical and relevant 'set' of search results.

Do your own 'exercise' on Google using the "FindArticles in/on......" Search term as a prefix to your own topics of interest. Readers may be pleasantly surprise.

Cheers !!

smile.gif

LookingConfident
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 28 2006, 07:36 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: dawno on Friday 21/04/06 05:14pm

Hi Dawno ....

I think Telstra's CEO Sol Trujillo has put a dampener on this sector with his famous public statement about not recommending shares to his mother or, mother-in-law, or, someone!!!

Sentiment will change though. Just a thought.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 28 2006, 08:35 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Strange day on the Nasdaq (overnight), I feel. Volume was 20k over average and the SP was, 'well kept', IMO.

To me, accumulation was again, the order of the day ......

Those (possibly) "in the know", being those, who (may) understand where Looksmart are heading, are 'having a picnic' with unsuspecting shareholders, IMHO.

A reasonable, (but cautious) open @ $4.99c, then wait to see if any 'buyers' turn up, when they don't, then take it down to $4.87c & 'collect' a few "stop losses"..... A "shake the tree" a little, some more fall off ..... Then go up and "grab" those selling @ the higher $5.00pps level, say "thanks" and then take it down once more, before grabbing those few, near the end of the day!!

It's tough work, but someone has to do it!! - (Inett trades, within las half hourof the day).

Time B/S Shares Price
15:59:35.831 S 26 4.9600
15:59:31.768 S 700 4.9600
15:59:30.051 S 574 4.9600

15:59:16.632 B 400 4.9400
15:59:16.632 B 400 4.9400
15:59:16.288 B 400 4.9200
15:59:15.873 B 400 4.9000

15:58:56.292 S 100 4.8900
15:58:55.848 S 100 4.8900
15:51:17.196 S 200 4.8900

15:45:54.999 B 100 4.9000
15:45:30.255 S 200 4.8900
15:38:55.848 S 100 4.9200
15:37:57.266 S 100 4.9200
15:37:56.659 S 500 4.9200

15:31:36.722 B 100 4.9200
15:26:29.542 S 300 4.9200
15:26:29.370 S 900 4.9200
15:26:29.370 S 300 4.9300

15:25:58.312 B 300 5.0000
15:25:58.151 B 800 5.0000
15:25:58.151 B 200 5.0000
15:25:58.100 B 800 5.0000
15:25:58.100 B 200 4.9900
15:25:56.721 B 1,000 5.0000
15:25:56.528 B 600 5.0000
15:25:56.528 B 400 5.0000
15:25:54.754 B 400 4.9900
15:25:45.624 B 600 5.0000
15:25:45.227 B 1,000 5.0000
15:25:40.949 B 600 4.9900
15:25:40.949 B 400 4.9800
15:25:37.054 B 400 4.9900
15:25:35.032 B 319 5.0000
15:25:35.032 B 481 5.0000
15:25:35.032 B 200 4.9900
15:25:34.587 B 100 4.9900
15:25:31.698 B 519 5.0000
15:25:30.763 B 400 4.9700
15:25:30.763 B 400 4.9600
15:25:30.763 B 200 4.9500
15:25:29.126 B 25 4.9600
15:25:27.375 S 100 4.8800
15:25:27.375 S 100 4.8900

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)
Last Trade: $4.96c
Trade Time: 3:59PM ET
Change: Up +0.01c (+0.20%)
Prev Close: 4.95
Open: 4.99
Bid: 4.75 x 1200
Ask: 5.00 x 700
1y Target Est: 6.63

Day's Range: 4.87 - 5.00
52wk Range: 2.75 - 5.75
Volume: 133,644
Avg Vol (3m): 114,629
Market Cap: 113.07M

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 27 2006, 02:33 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Tuesday 11/04/06 07:55am)

And from that post, back on 11/04/2006 .....

A "Content Consortium" with millions of quality articles on many topics could be made available and ads could be sold around it and in effect, all network "partners" could even be "sharing" those (their own) important "users", (being the daily visitors to each of their individual sites), with each other. Afterall, additional "eyeballs" would ensure more advertisers and any search for (it), this, their (now) "shared" content could provide that much needed (additional) ADS revenues resulting from all ensuing 'click throughs'.

And it was this further comment, (within this article - Link below) that got me thinking:

< "FOR THE LIFE OF ME, I CAN'T IMAGINE why they haven't done it," says Tom Curley, CEO of Associated Press. Here's one reason: Doing it would require spinal implants for intimidated media barons. But the notion that some pushback is pending is not far-fetched. Curley says he is talking with potential partners about setting up subject-specific Web packages -- say, for travel or basketball -- that will include content from multiple media. Once partners are on board and packages are finalized, search engines will be invited to bid for that traffic. >

SURPRISE, SURPRISE!!!

Tom Curley, CEO of Associated Press has "bobbed up" again and this time with the loverly Marissa Mayer, VP-search products, of Google and must be one of the cutest multi millionaire, on the planet!!!

http://www.paidcontent.org/nab-aps-curley-...-ap-google-deal

< So where do things stand with Google? "We're under a non-disclosure."

Is it a non-disclosure for discussions or a non-disclosure because there's actually an agreement? - Ans: "Non-disclosure." >

I have noticed lots of articles indexted in Looksmart's FindArticles.com in recent times from Associated Press, yet, fewer from Topix.net, for some unknown reason??? They diminished somewhat around the same time as the disappearance of that NEWS Toolbar, that was at the top of each Vertical results page...??

UMMmm? Maintenance?? A Beta test period, during when it was noticed?

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...nG=Search&meta=

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=FindArti...en&lr=&filter=0

And, Topix.net .....?

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...nG=Search&meta=

2nd, & 3rd results pages show listings within the Looksmart Verticals ...... And .......

Marrissa ??? - I want to "SIT NEXT TO HER" on the bus!!! ..... LOL!!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 27 2006, 04:55 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Is Google Search More Relevant Or Is There A Brand Factor?

http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060426-122653

From within the above discussion Gord Hotchkiss, president and CEO of search research firm Enquiro, points out:

That …….."At first glance one thing should stand out, which is the expansion of the scanning area on MSN and Yahoo!, " Hotchkiss told the standing room only crowd. "People had to go deeper on the page and look around more to find what they were looking for."

He then went on to say …… “The ideal user experience, (according to Hotchkiss), would be if users would always find what they're looking for in the most prominent place at the top of the results listing”.

Few have noticed that Looksmart are doing great things with Verticals lately and as CEO David Hills has pointed out, (for articles content for students, or, general 'research' needs), ‘users’ should take one more step and find the Vertical that best suits their enquiry. And, yes, Google appears to provide the best results, to assist in doing so……

By using a “FindArticles in/on …..” search term, Google results can quickly direct a user to that Looksmart Vertical, that may then go on to provide all/many of the answers sough after & simply put, “in a nutshell’. Read on.

When a friend said to me …”I just searched Google on “Tomato” and got 31,400,000 results".

I replied that, Those 31,400,000 results were provided to you by the No1 search Engine, Google. And it's quite remarkable that it has so much information indexed on, the humble "Tomato" .......

I immediately wondered how many of those 31M results needed further 'going through' to eventually find the required information sought,to fully satisfy a searcher's needs? Looksmart feel that would prove both a "time consuming" effort and even sometimes, well, truly "exhaustive" type search.

No, Looksmart hasn't a “Tomato” Vertical, as yet (but again thanks to Google), they have articles on this topic listed that may present more defined/refined results within some of their Verticals, thereby allowing "users" to "drill down" or, narrow their search enquiry, so much quicker.

Looksmart call it, "essential" type search. It’s easy & can be much quicker. And it may very well be where search is heading, some feel.

Now check this out here:

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...tnG=Search&meta

We have now narrowed our search down to just 459,000 results in Google and you will note how Looksmart's Verticals "segment" this topic into what may now be considered by some, as more practical search results.

Do your own ‘exercise’ on Google using the “FindArticles in/on …...” Search term, as a prefix to your topic of interest. Readers may be pleasantly surprised.

Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 25 2006, 06:41 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: filament on Tuesday 25/04/06 02:41pm

Some nice thoughts "filament" that I'll try and answer, as I see the situation, but it's only my thoughts.

< If vertical search engines turn out to be successful then what stops Google from adopting the method into it's own general engine ? >

1stly, Looksmart have advised the market that the the Verticals have enjoyed a rise in unique 'visitors' (per month) from 3M, moving up to 9M, from january to 'mid' december. The articles 'content' is mostly provided under partnership arrangements, with a lot through Co's like Proquest who are appointed as archive managers, for many newspapers & magazines.

And who do Proquest look after?? ("Check" their newspaper & magazine lists, here)

http://www.pqarchiver.com/n_home.html?type=n

and ....

http://www.pqarchiver.com/m_home.html?type=m

I had mentioned their "growth" in providing articles previously, in a post, back on Sunday 23/04/06 08:23am

The object of the Verticals, as I see it, is to help Publishers/media Co's to encourage new (plus keep existing) "users", to/on, their own websites. They want them to stay longer and 'shared' articles is a way of doing so. They want "users" to make THEIR sites, their "home" page, and it's understandable, as to why. This will then help them keep their own advertisers & hopefully bring back some of those already "lost", to the likes of Google. Google would only 'confuse' the situation to even think of a 'duplication' of the system, plus Looksmart do have a unique "brand" in the FindArticles 'handle'. Plus, Google already partner and provide a stack of advertising on an international scale, through their Adsense programme. I hope that makes some sense.

< I had a quick look at furl, as a tool it may get some occasional use.>

Yes, it already does. The NY Times 'licence' it from Looksmart for their 'near on' 500,000 subscription members, to use on their site. Others (including Viacom's CBS Local TV web sites, ASK and Interchange's Local.com) also licence this tool. The dramatic increase in "user" traffic in the past few days, suggest one of those may have "openned" up the "gates" and joined Looksmart's own, estimated 4 - 500,000 users. Possibly, The NY Times, is my guess.

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_...//www.furl.net/

I personally feel they will stay with this model for a long, long time. It's only in it's infancy & will be an ongoing "work in progress", so to speak. It's a different way to get, a "slice of that pie" you mentioned, too.

I hope that helps you.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 25 2006, 01:31 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

And ......

10 Years of LookSmart - Visual Timeline ......

http://www.searchenginejournal.com/?p=3314

Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 25 2006, 11:39 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

And some more "logic" discussion, re; LOK, it's past & future endeavours ......

(Please do not consider this as a "ramp", at all. I do "hold" LOK (that's obvious) and they are ONLY my opinions, that's all.)

< If NWS wanted to buy LOK they probably would have done so already. Look have nothing that News Limited would want or more specifically they can’t do for themselves. >

Yes, I'd have to agree with the 1st part of the above, but with a slight variation:

"They (NWS) probably have done so, already"

And to say that NWS can do it for themselves, is rediculous!! You cannot seem to "grasp" (it appears?) the concept, as has been explained, over the last 12 months or, so ........ Right here on this board, too!!

Whatever their "settled for" 'buy-in' price was, (to gain that "controlling stake" in Looksmart) is an automatic, minimum "double" (at least!!!) upon any announcement, of them doing so!! Would you challenge that statement?? Hardly!! And then, it's "off to the races" ........ For both Looksmart & NWS, who would now be enjoying some 60% of ALL profits, generated from a massive esculation in search revenues!!

Newscorp don't "do it for themselves" ....... They go out and BUY!!!

(And, if it is NOT the case, it is still not too late for them to "sit down" and have me explain the "win-wins" for ALL concerned, associated with this, IMHO, "unbeatable" concept!!

And to think that Mr Rupert Murdoch & his Son actually listened to & 'bought the thoughts' of the likes of Mr John Ribot de Bresac, an electrician!)

http://www.looksmartmusic.com/ ?????????

http://www.looksmartmoney.com/?????????

< Its all templates, and its all basic technology parsing XML and RSS. >

It's a "means to an end" result, built around the "KISS" principal. That's all it has to be. Looksmart's neutrality is a central selling factor!! And they are not sites, to start a destination from, as such.

< There is no IP here and there is no audience. >

You may not be aware of Looksmart's Wisenut & Furl.net, that "both" have a 'role to play', and already do so!! Audience? Try a "potential" 1-2 hundred million!!

< Why did Microsoft ditch LOK years ago? Because the IP became so common, Microsoft could just do it themselves. >

Not at all!! MSN were more worried about the $39M "profit" LOOK made, rather than "how much" more can Looksmart now make for them, in ensuring years!! They "jumped into" a hornet's nest with another non-progressive BIG Portal (Yahoo), through it's Overture! They are now enjoying an approx 15% (only), of all search conducted!! MSN are a "gunna" Co, in relation to search, IMHO.

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 25 2006, 08:55 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Monday 24/04/06 04:12pm)

And when I recieved the following reply to my post, it helps demonstrate what a "force" in search, Looksmart's Verticals, will prove to be .......

Sighs.....Yes the internet sure is full of big numbers. I just searched on Tomato and got 53,200,000 results.

Those 53,200,000 results were provided by the No1 search Engine, Google. And it's quite remarkable that it has so much information indexed on, the humble "Tomato" .......

I immediately wondered how many of those results needed going through to eventually find the required information, to fully satisfy a searcher's needs? Looksmart call that both "time consuming" and frankly, "exhaustive" type search.

No, Looksmart hasn't a Tomato Vertical, (but thanks to Google), they have articles on this topic listed and more defined/refined within some of their Verticals, thereby allowing "users" to "drill down" or, narrow their search enquiry, so much quicker.

It's called, "essential" type search. It's where search is heading, IMHO. Now check this out here:

http://www.google.com.au/search?client=fir...G=Google+Search

We have now narrowed our search down to just 452,000 results and you will note how Looksmart's Verticals "segment" this topic into much more practical search results.

Wendy Boswell from About.com, (in a recent review of Looksmart), choose the topic of "cheese" for her search enquiry. (Google has 133,000,000 references, to cheese).

LookSmart Search Tips

LookSmart has a lot to offer. To show you just what I mean, we'll do a sample search for cheese.

Search results for cheese bring back many search options in LookSmart. First, obviously I have general Web results, but if I want to get deeper in the world of cheese, I can:

* see what others found with Furl: these results are what other people have Furl-ed and made available publicly.

* see what articles there are at FindArticles: not surprisingly there are quite a few articles about cheese over at FindArticles.

* LookSmart news results: find news about cheese; right now there's an article about a woman eating 26 grilled cheese sandwiches.

http://websearch.about.com/od/enginesanddi...a/looksmart.htm

That's great! But Wendy may not have (as yet) discovered the "joys" of a what is a simple "FindArticles in..." search term, where Google results again show how Looksmart's Verticals "narrow down" choices, even more concisely. (And only, a little over 1M results this time).

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...le+Search&meta=

For "cheese and Tomato" connesiours Looksmart's Verticals will make a lot of sense! Me? I was brought up on a more simple "toasted cheese and tomato" from 'Hec Kains' snooker room in Botany Road Mascot, many moons ago! And ............. I really haven't changed my eating habits that much, since!!

Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 24 2006, 04:47 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: quiktrade_1 on Monday 24/04/06 04:20pm

LOL !!

You really are becoming "childish" now .....

Oh, in a previous post I mentioned:

And, the growth of Articles?

Results 1 - 10 of about 15,300,000 from www.findarticles.com

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=si...nG=Search&meta=

Yes, that's Google Australia ..... Now here is Google USA !!!!

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=s...com&btnG=Search

AND DID YOU GET TO "GO FISHING"??

No luck? Only got "the crabs", did you?

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 24 2006, 04:12 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Monday 24/04/06 12:28pm)

No, Google are not buying Looksmart .... Posters suggested (both here & elsewhere), that was what I was trying to promote!! Far from it!!

< Google buying Look?????? Did you have a few too many last night ??? >

LOL !! This was a question intially asked of me, by Mikey_ ....... I clearly answered in the "negative", it's plain to see.

< You say "On the surface, it would seem one of the most logical things, Google should do." Now c'mon thats a bit much. You're basic reason is that Google have more money than sense. Blind Freddy could tell you Google have no reason to buy Looksmart. Sure $100 odd million is spare change to Google, but what would they be buying? 181 vertical sites? >

To me, it's plainly "logical". And I'll explain, why. And I will take you through this, nice and slowly, ok?

Looksmart's FindArticles.com (ATM) is showing listings within Google US, of ........ (or, references/links, to this site.)

about 33,500,000 for Google US.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=FindA...G=Google+Search

And, Google Australia has about 18,500,000 for findArticles

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=fi...le+Search&meta=

Millions of articles, contained in Looksmart's F/A's (and naturally, it's 181 Verticals) are indexed within Googles results, for that FindArticles' search term. They (this treasured & much sought after content) have been provided to Looksmart from many newspaper/magazine publishers & media Co websites.

< By the way how come you continually post links to Google search results. How come you are not posting links to looksmart search results? Particularly when you continually refer to NWS buying a stake in a search engine. >

It should (by now) become obvious to all, that the FindArticles "brand" is being assisted by Google's results, & that in effect Google helps "users" find Looksmart's Verticals, from a search conducted, on Google! Google will actually 'drive' many, many "eyeballs", (from a search conducted on the above newspaper/magazine publishers & media Co websites) to Looksmart's Verticals, for answers to their 'item of interest' or, a topic they may happen to have a passion for.

Looksmart is NOT a site that is designed to start a destination from. It won't be promoted as one, either. CEO David Hills quickly realised that the BIG portals had almost 90% of all (initial) search enquiries, so it was 'fruitless' to try and "take them on". Publishers & media Co's also understood, that a web search conducted on their sites would "drive" their own users (off their very own sites, &) out into the 'fairyland' of cyberspace. But they need a basic search the web facility, on their sites. He sat down with by now, these panicking publishers/media Co's and explained a plan, that by using Verticals, & by sharing content within the Verticals, effectively "users" to ALL their own sites could not only be "shared", they would then stay longer within this suggested "network", bouncing from one "partner's" site, off on to another!!

How? - By simply installing a search button that automatically directs a user to Vertical results contained in Google.. (etc)...

Lets search (on Google) for fishing .... You may enjoy the pastime? So, (effectually), a "FindArticles on Fishing" search gives us these results, both in the US and here in OZ.....

Whoops!! Google have 1.4M results, to choose from. And look at those Looksmart properties sitting up nicely, on page one!!

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=F...ing&btnG=Search

And Google Australia has 1.57M listings to select from. Again, note the 1st FIVE results !!!!

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...nG=Search&meta=

Now, I've chosen "commercial fishing" from within the Google US results, & we are now in the Looksmart "fishing" Vertical!!

http://www.looksmartfishing.com/p/search?q...0&y=0&vcat=cat4

Every article leads a searcher, (user) back to the content "origionator's", own site .....

And every step of the way can be "contextualised" with ADS to suit the interests & pockets of users!!! And it is only in it's infancy ....... Now tell me why NWS wouldn't want to be a part of this "universal" application, process? And you laughed at, & suggested Google would be wasting $100M of their "spare change" to buy Looksmart?? Hey, whilst there is the $2-billion-a-year Australian local-search market to 'capture', how much do you feel the "world" market will be worth, in a few years time?

Cheers !!

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 24 2006, 12:28 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (quiktrade_1 @ Monday 24/04/06 08:45am)

Ah, Quiktrade_1 .....

You really are starting to amuse me ....

< The aim of your post was to get people thinking that Google is going to buy it and then discount it. Why bother bringing it up at all??? Just ramping IMHO >

When the question was put , to me, ......"Any chance of google taking over LOK"?

I replied NO and gave very strong reasons as to why I thought so. And you imply that I am saying the opposite? I am saying, my feeling is News Corporation, that's what I am saying.

< The aim of your post was to get people thinking that Google is going to buy it...>

I find that very strange ..... I find it strange also that your comparison of SOT and LOK (with one down, over 50% and the latter up 100% in value) over a period of time, is NOT "the real bottom line", over that, my stated period. HMMmm?? (If we both start with $10, mine's got to $20 & your's has gone to $5.00 .... That make it any easier for you?)

You say that you've ....< been watching the company just as long as you have and I believe it's heading in the wrong direction.>

Yet, I'm continually posting incredible figures relating to growth in the FindArticles content "bank" and have stated that unique "users" to the Verticals (the same sites that all 'draw' from FindArticles) has risen from 3M up to 9M from january, through to mid december, 2005 yet you don't seem to want to take this into account, for some unknown reason?

You take little notice of what's happening with, or, what "value" Furl.net is to Looksmart and it's partners, yet "traffic" again, is growing in alarming fashion here, too .... I wonder why?
Perhaps you, (as a "follower") may care to tell me, as to why? Let alone the increased traffic to many of the 181 Vertical sites, that you will just have to take my word for. Sorry! Can't share that!

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_...q=&url=furl.net

And, the growth of Articles?

Results 1 - 10 of about 15,300,000 from www.findarticles.com

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=si...nG=Search&meta=

Yes, an increase of over 50% in content, from it's stated 10M articles, as is shown on it's web site. That's remarkable and I ask you .....where are they coming from, and why??

And it was from contextualised ADS (placed around this very same content) that Google has only just reported 16% increased revenues from .... Yes, and of the $928M, they pay near on 80% of this $928M of it, onto their partner sites!!!

< Google Network Revenues -- Google's partner sites generated revenues, through AdSense programs, of $928 million, or 41% of total revenues. This is a 59% increase over network revenues of $584 million generated in the first quarter of 2005 and a 16% increase over fourth quarter 2005 revenues of $799 million. >

UMMmm?? UP 16% on their Q4-2005 figures. (And TAC represented an approx. 78% or 32% of advertising revenues!!)

David Hills has Looksmart partnered with THREE Tier ONE publisher and media Co's already declared, yet you are saying ....... < Hills is taking shareholders up the garden path like the pied piper.>

And David Hills has lead the TOTAL sector in "ridding" it of the "click fraud" scourge, that was so prevelant under the "old" regime, prior to his joining the Co. He has done well. So much so, that in relation to "porn" on the net the Govt has asked the Co for full detail re; the intricate "workings" of Looksmart's NetNanny porn filtering software .....

Yes, LOK is not profitable .... But it is coming closer to being so, by the day!! LOK, with a current shareprice "value", of less that .07cps in the "old', is tremendous buying, IMHO. For there is little to NO downside from here in. David Hills has made sure of that too!!

Take your "blinkers" off, is my words to you, today.

Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 23 2006, 10:30 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: quiktrade_1 on Sunday 23/04/06 08:37am

< First it was Google then it was Rupert and now it's Google again??? >

LOL !!

If only you could read!!!

You see, never ever have I said, GOOGLE would be buying Looksmart. No one will be buying Looksmart, is my belief. But I do hold an opinion (and have stated it here on many, many ocassions) that NWS will buy a "controlling stake" in Looksmart. IT is only an opinion and I give my reasons as to why I believe that it is, a distinct possibilty. I buy a ticket, I get a ride!

I would remind you that when LOK was sub $4.00pps, you were "knocking" away too!! LOK did get to $8.00pps or, rose by 100% since those days ..... And in less than one year, too .....

You haven't "held" LOK shares for well over two years, (& you did well with them, you have said), yet you continually "chime in" here with "unsupported', (& at times, spiteful), negative opinions that do any reputation I have of you as a "judge" of a stocks, absolutely no favours at all.

You profess to be a T/A "expert" of some sort, but it is obvious that your "readings" have not helped you with Co's like SOT, that you do appear to have held since the $1.50cps levels. It is now "sub" $1.00pps ...... Your "mate" has "done a bundle" on stocks like AFT,BQT & now, QTK and I ask, where has you "TEA LEAVE READING" abilities been, when both you & he have needed them most? Your T/A readings still tell you LOOK is heading back to $1.31cps .... It traded @ $5.00pps, on friday in the US!! It traded as high as $5.75cps recently.

And LOK itself has risen by over 100% during this period. Yet, both of you post 10 to 20 times a day (elsewhere) chanting that old, "LOOKSMART IS A DOG", a childish & infantile, story!!

Now go back and read my previous post and see the reasons as to WHY I believe Google WON'T be buying Looksmart. I love REASONABLE discussions from a negative point of view, but yours need to improve a lot to warrant any further serious type replies to you, I'm afraid.

Cheers, and good luck with SOT.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 23 2006, 08:23 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

< Any chance of google taking over LOK? > was what Mikey_ asked over elsewhere???

I REPLIED:

On the surface, it would seem one of the most logical things, Google should do. Google have over $9 Billion in cash ATM and Looksmart, with a market cap of just $113M would not be an expensive purchase, IF it was for sale. And I say IF, for a number of reasons.

The CEO of Looksmart has said on a few ocassions, "Looksmart are NOT for sale". (In taking on the job, he has moved his family, "lock, stock & barrel" from their home in New York across to San Francisco and it's hard to imagine that his job was only about "dressing the Co up a little", for an eventual sale). But he did mention within a CC THAT he wouldn't discount a merger or, something to that effect ..... (similar, I recall).

Looksmart were then strongly "linked" with Newscorp (mid 2005) when Rupert Murdoch let it be known that NWS were ....... "talking of buying a "controlling stake" in a search engine, (WERE HIS VERY WORDS), in an interview. At this stage, there we not enough shares available in Looksmart, for that to occur. Looksmart then carried out a "reverse split" of 1 - 5 and suddenly, their 200 Million (maximum) number of permissable shares that could be issued, were now showing just over 22M, as being issued!! It, (IF a buy-in from NWS, could/should it be "on"), now becomes achievable.

What I am saying is, LOOK are not for sale! - But, why would NWS be interested in only buying a "controlling stake" in a search engine, if this was not the very reason, that they have to do it, this way??? (They have $2B to "spend" !!)

A close follower of Looksmart even said, (at the time) ....."we will either be acquired or, someone like Rupert Murdoch will take a major stake". I'm not so sure about being acquired, though, as I have reasoned above. From a CC (following a Newscorp report), when asked the question as to what he was doing in relation to search, his reply came: (Nov 11 2005)

'On Search' ??? Rupert replied, (to a querry on whether he could update on the possible deal mentioned in july) .."AHhh That has not been consumated" was his reply ... He then goes on with..."the one we were talking about is in fact, still in play" .... Then, following a slight pause, he says: "It was more to do with video search than ..." (Referring to Blinkz a video search Co they were also rumoured to buy, I feel & to get listeners off the scent) and when pressed, he then said "there are a lot of things happening but all are too sensitive, at this stage but I will say it was nothing big in terms of money" - (NWS did not go ahead with a purchase of Blinkz but since, now have a "deal" with them in the UK). He then summed it up with ..."We are a major project at it's very beginning.....We have a lot to do to intergrate all our sites, establishing a common navigation system"

On Oct 30th, (in a fortune.com interview), Rupert Murdoch said ..... "As we said, the grand plan is a work in progress"

On 6th of november, I wrote:

An investment of $250M by NEWS would see them buy some 33.33M shares from Looksmart to get that 'controlling interest', IF it's 'on'. LOOK currently have a little over 22M shares, since the reverse split last week. (NEWS would then hold 60% of issued shares. Surely enough for that 'controlling stake' as Rupert had spoke of, when he mentioned this, during the NEWS Q2 release.

On, Nov. 11th, I reported Rupert Murdoch saying:

"We're putting together a major network, if you like, of sites on the internet," & just two days ago, he had commented: "Whether we decide to call it a portal or a network, we don't know."

And, anyone who doubts the dramatic growth in Looksmart's FindArticles ( a "base" for current & future Vertical search sites) has "rocks in their head" .......

It was around August 23rd, when it was noted HERE ON THIS THREAD, that ........

"There are 688,000 results for a "Proquest Looksmart", (Google) search"

A check of this LINK (once again) will see where some of the growth of articles (now over 10M) into Looksmart's FindArticles and their new Vertical's, are (& will continue), coming....

from.http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=p...art&btnG=Search

YES, It has now grown to about 1,880,000 or, nearly by nearly 3 times!! Since august!!!

__________________________________________________

I have just checked that "link", above ......and ......

Results 1 - 10 of about 3,170,000 for proquest looksmart. Yes, it's now grown to OVER, 3M articles!!!

And who do Proquest look after?? (Click on newspapers & magazines, here)

http://www.pqarchiver.com/

http://www.pqarchiver.com/n_home.html?type=n and ....

http://www.pqarchiver.com/m_home.html?type=m

And, it was "enjoy" (thanks), who posted this, elsewhere ...

NEWSPAPERS have no future without online and digital services, media executives heard at a World Association of Newspapers meeting in Madrid.

"We are getting the whole organisation ready for a digital future," said Simon Waldman, director of digital publishing at Guardian Newspapers, whose Guardian Unlimited site is by far the most popular British newspaper online site, ahead of The Sun, The Times and The Telegraph.

Within "six to seven years", the group planned to dedicate 80 per cent of its time to digital activities, compared to 20 per cent at present, Mr Waldman told the conference, entitled Beyond the Printed Word.

I hope that answers your "Google buys Looksmart", thoughts, well enough, Mike_ .......But, ONLY mho, of course!!

Cheers !!

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 22 2006, 11:18 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

For "long term" thinkers, to disregard BPL and the likes of Google, would be very foolish, IMHO. Just a thought.

Google co-founder sounds like he'd like to Wi-Fi the world
Posted by Russell Shaw @ 6:09 am
Digg This!

googlenyc_2.jpg

During an investor conference call related to Google's first quarter fiscal year 2006 results announced late Thursday Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin offered some clues on where they would like to see Google's services go.

Audio and video link on this page.

Larry Page said he hopes "we and everyone else in the world would be excited about good Internet access that is free, ad-supported and profitable."

Brin said the Wi-Fi offering is based on Google's interest in "providing better, more transparent access to the Internet for our users."

That's code for Google wanting to be an access provider, not just a resource that happens to pop up when someone uses their broadband Internet connection to visit the Google site.

But it was something that Google CEO Eric Schmidt said that really has me wondering.

He said the company was sitting on $9.3 billion of cash reserves, which he noted would give Google "sufficient cash to take advantage of (opportunities) if they make sense."

Like buying out an ISP and rebranding it with the Google label, and then maybe even including Google Wi-Fi in a forthcoming service bundle?

http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=1042

Should the "sale" go through, the (more "mobile") competition will then bellow out ever so loud & clear, ..... "Let the games begin" ....

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 21 2006, 10:25 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

And when Andrew Feinberg wrote the following, I quickly replied with my thoughts, below.
_______________________

http://blog.kiplinger.com/blog/archives/20...le_at_2000.html

Google at $2,000?

By Andrew Feinberg
January 06, 2006

I promise I won't write about Google on Monday, but today I simply can't avoid it. While thinking about Google, I take the plunge on Yahoo.

I don’t really want to mention Google (GOOG) that often, but then circumstances always intervene. It’s embarrassing for a value guy, but what the hell? The stock up $17.07 today to $468.31, another all-time high. One of the catalysts for the move is a Street.com piece about Caris & Co. analyst Mark Stahlman’s view that Google “could” reach $2,000 per share, if it claims a reasonable portion of its total addressable market. Stahlman says the digital-services market is currently worth $2 trillion and has the potential to expand to $10 trillion per year. The piece is worth reading, especially if you are bearish on the stock. I think it’s crazy to short Google, and not just because I happen to be bullish. It’s always nuts to short a stock simply because you think it’s overvalued. You need a catalyst to help drive the price down. And there is no apparent catalyst on the horizon. Google’s potential is enormous, and it’s impossible to know with certainty that it will fail to reach the high targets set by the bulls.

Stahlman makes it clear that $2,000 per share is not his target. But it might be truly achievable. As I’ve said before, Google could become the most valuable company on earth. As far as I can tell, the company keeps doing everything right. That’s a very impressive sign -- and it’s not something that has ever been said about Microsoft (MSFT). I also like the Bear Stearns analyst’s comment earlier in the week that Google is creating its own “ecosystem.” That may not be a bad way to think about the company. I enjoy spending time in the Google ecosystem. Experience has told me, on the other hand, that I want to spend as little time with Microsoft as possible.

As a writer and a money manager, using search has changed my life. And I associate that positive change with Google. It reminds me of Warren Buffett’s comment decades ago that one of the great brand benefits of Coca-Cola is that people associate having a Coke with happy childhood memories. And Coke turned out to be a great stock (KO) -- until it ran into a wall that even happy memories couldn’t knock down.

Given Google’s recent romp, the shares of Yahoo! (YHOO) -- which have had a much less dramatic move -- seem more and more attractive. After owning some for clients for many months, I finally took the plunge and bought some for me this morning. Someday soon, a leading financial publication will have to run a piece titled, “If You Like Google, You’ve Got to Love Yahoo.” It will make particularly enjoyable reading to those of us who own both stocks.

Positions: Long GOOG, YHOO; long MSFT in certain client accounts.
________________________

Reply ....

Terrific post!! But, I'm not so sure?

< You need a catalyst to help drive the price down. And there is no apparent catalyst on the horizon. >

Watch out for movement from publisher/media Co's in the next few weeks or, so .....

It has been said that "Content is King" and newspapers, magazines & TV web sites already have that content, and have (collectively), many many "user"/eyeballs.......

By networking their content, and "sharing" those "eyeballs" amongst each other, they WILL not only retain existing advertisors, they will soon start to regain some portion of those, already lost to Google, Yahoo and others ....

The print/media world do have an existing massive audience that (interactively), they can "drive" to their many websites, as a "collective", or, by using network type methodology. National "efforts" can involve readers all over the country. They are a force to be reckoned with... The recent "dip" in GOOG's shareprice value, was testimony of their punitive power, IMHO. (china ?). And Google will co-operate, too .... (The growth of the Net is accepted, as almost unstopable. Current "hype" is purely a distraction, I feel).

< Google Network Revenues -- Google's partner sites generated revenues, through AdSense programs, of $928 million, or 41% of total revenues. This is a 59% increase over network revenues of $584 million generated in the first quarter of 2005 and a 16% increase over fourth quarter 2005 revenues of $799 million. >

UMMmm?? UP 16% on their Q4-2005 figures. (And TAC represented an approx. 78% or 32% of advertising revenues!!)

Yes, Adsense, makes CENTS!!!!

FWIW ....You may find this an interesting read .... But only MHO, of course.....

<Google snatched up a newspaper/online classifieds veteran right from the jaws of major newspaper companies to head up Google Local. Formerly of Classified Ventures' Homescape.com, Sam Sebastian is described as a new avenue to print advertising for Google.>

http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.mm=...9351&mid=157681

Just my thoughts, only.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 21 2006, 07:55 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797


Google Announces First Quarter 2006 Results
Thursday April 20, 4:01 pm ET

< Google Network Revenues -- Google's partner sites generated revenues, through AdSense programs, of $928 million, or 41% of total revenues. This is a 59% increase over network revenues of $584 million generated in the first quarter of 2005 and a 16% increase over fourth quarter 2005 revenues of $799 million. >

UMMmm?? UP 16% on their Q4-2005 figures. (And TAC represented an approx. 78% or 32% of advertising revenues!!)

Q1 Financial Summary

Google reported revenues of $2.25 billion for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, an increase of 79% compared to the first quarter of 2005 and an increase of 17% compared to the fourth quarter of 2005. Google reports its revenues, consistent with GAAP, on a gross basis without deducting traffic acquisition costs, or TAC. In the first quarter of 2006, TAC totaled $723 million, or 32% of advertising revenues.

Google reports operating income, net income, and earnings per share (EPS) on a GAAP and non-GAAP basis. The non-GAAP measures are described below and reconciled to the corresponding GAAP measures in the section below titled "About non-GAAP financial measures."

GAAP operating income for the first quarter of 2006 was $743 million, or 33% of revenues. This compares to GAAP operating income of $570 million, or 30% of revenues, in the fourth quarter of 2005. Non-GAAP operating income in the first quarter was $887 million, or 39% of revenues. This compares to non-GAAP operating income of $718 million, or 37% of revenues, in the fourth quarter.

GAAP net income for the first quarter was $592 million as compared to $372 million in the fourth quarter. Non-GAAP net income was $697 million, compared to $469 million in the fourth quarter.

GAAP EPS for the first quarter was $1.95 on 304 million diluted shares outstanding, compared to $1.22 for the fourth quarter, on 304 million diluted shares outstanding. Non-GAAP EPS was $2.29, compared to $1.54 in the fourth quarter.
Non-GAAP operating income, non-GAAP net income, and non-GAAP EPS in the first quarter of 2006 are computed net of certain material items: stock-based compensation (SBC) and estimated plaintiffs' attorneys' fees related to the proposed settlement of the Lane's Gift class action lawsuit. In the first quarter, the charge related to stock-based compensation was $115 million as compared to $58 million in the fourth quarter of 2005, which was also excluded from non-GAAP calculations. Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees related to the proposed Lane's Gift class-action lawsuit settlement are estimated to be $30 million. In the fourth quarter of 2005, the contribution to the Google Foundation of $90 million was excluded from the calculation of non-GAAP operating income, non-GAAP net income, and non-GAAP EPS. Tax benefits related to SBC charges, the estimated plaintiffs' attorneys' fees, and the contribution to the Google Foundation have been excluded from non-GAAP calculations. The tax benefit related to SBC was $27 million in the first quarter and $14 million in the fourth quarter. The tax benefit related to the estimated plaintiffs' attorneys' fees in the first quarter was $12 million. The tax benefit related to the contribution to the Google Foundation in the fourth quarter was $37 million. Reconciliations of non-GAAP measures to GAAP operating income, net income, and EPS are included at the end of this release.

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060420/20060420005952.html?.v=1

LookSmart to Report First Quarter Results, May 4

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 20 2006, 07:40 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)
Last Trade: $5.00pps
Trade Time: 4:00PM ET
Change: Up 0.04 (0.81%)
Prev Close: 4.96
Open: 4.97
Bid: 4.78 x 100
Ask: 5.16 x 100
1y Target Est: 6.63

Day's Range: 4.95 - 5.00
52wk Range: 2.75 - 5.75
Volume: 46,655
Avg Vol (3m): 124,930
Market Cap: 113.98M

< In addition to purchasing keywords on Google and Yahoo, marketers also are buying pay-per-click ads on "secondary" and "niche" search engines, like Ask.com, Kanoodle and LookSmart, Kingdon said. >

http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cf...e&art_aid=42341

And .....

Merrill Lynch Predicts Online Ads Will Overtake Magazine Advertising This Year


Yesterday Merrill Lynch said it believes the Internet will take in more advertising dollars in 2006 than will magazines……………..Fortunately, virtually every major magazine publisher is deeply involved in digital initiatives, trying to create business models that take advantage of putting their content on the Web--or, in the case of some magazines, actually replacing the print edition with an online publication.


NOT HARD TO "WORK IT OUT" FROM HERE, I (honestly) FEEL......

Results 1 - 10 of about 32,800,000 from www.findarticles.com

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=si...le+Search&meta=

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 19 2006, 07:53 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: LookingConfident on Tuesday 18/04/06 10:16am

In my previous post, I wrote .....

But, it is hard for MANY to understand, I do realise!!

Of course, it would mean “nothing” to some, that the Wespac banner shown here, (in an OZ result) is “targeting” an Australasian audience. Check the AD link, I’ve provided. (below). So, where has it come from? There is NO more of Looksmart Australia these days, as I am led to believe?

And it mean very little, or, “nothing” that Google Adsense also “target” the same region, again, all within Looksmart’s Verticals. (Those that I’ve checked).

http://www.looksmartrunning.com/ (These banners do "rotate", so "trust me"!!! LOL !!)

http://www.westpacinfo.com.au/platinum/def....cfm?source=B37

I have just found this "other" banner here ( for realestate.com.au) and MOST interesting ..... (check the Google "contextual", too!!)

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_go2730

So, what's so "special" about realestate.com.au you may ask? Just check WHO their "partner sites" are, here!!!!!

http://www.realestate.com.au/

Maybe "Rupert" even "owns" the above site? You should check that out HERE, too, possibly?? ........

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=re...le+Search&meta=

LOL !!!

It's great to see a little "spending" on ADS, on a Looksmart property!!!

CHEERS TO HOLDERS!!

smile.gif

LC

  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 18 2006, 05:30 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: gcl03 on Tuesday 18/04/06 05:04pm

YOU DIDN'T HAPPEN TO INSTALL THEIR NEW PROFANITY FILTER, BY ANY CHANCE?

lol !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 18 2006, 12:23 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (quiktrade_1 @ Tuesday 18/04/06 11:24am)

And thanks for your "well wishes", Quiktrade_1 ......

"If you build it, he will come." was that voice Ray Kinsella the corn farmer heard ......

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097351/

Of course, whilst David Hills hasn't quite admitted 'hearing voices', it must be said, he certainly IS building it!!

To buy now (@ less than .07cps, in the "old") is smart, Google Group members would say. They know what's going on and it's exciting "stuff", that's for sure!!

You see, IF you were able to get access to ONE HUNDRED MILLION unique monthly "users", to 'flit' through your properties (many even daily), the chances are (as they make their choices of article/s to read during their journey), they will "click on" one of your contextual ADS, on some of their "visits".

Of course, Looksmart haven't exactly said the above, as such. No, they are "collective" thoughts of the "group" who kind-of understand the significance of a constant (daily) supply of relevent articles, news, etc ......

I mean, how relevant is a "cluster" of articles purely based on "speed sliding Snails" from The Amazon, to you? Do you really want to know how fast they can actually go? Probably not. But rest assured, there are "enthusiasts" in the world who not only have an interest in these "Lightning Fast" snails, they "click on ADS" and book their travel arrangements from those very advertisers, (specifically contextualised on Looksmart's index page), where many "grouped" articles on this "topic", are contained. Yes, as you know ........... Readers are "targeted".

Looksmart hasn't a "speed sliding Snails" Vertical, as yet. But they have began with a total of 181 such (topic specific) sites, for starters. No doubt they will release more, when, "the cat is out of the bag". Absolutely, no doubts there! And I do see Looksmart "adding" messaging, too, soon. (Thanks to "Tiomike" LOL !!)

It was respected industry "expert" Bambi Francisco who allowed me to introduce her to a Looksmart "cycling" Vertical, some time back, when she had problems finding "info" on a certain mountain bike's weight, etc

I think she was impressed! So much so, she has even included some of my thoughts in the Recent Comments section, on her blog, here..... (on McClatchy's Triangle)

http://bambi.blogs.com/

Some how, (with Bambi) I feel confident in saying (that in relation to Looksmart and her), the "pennies may have dropped" .... What do you think?

smile.gif
LC

ps; < LOOK's like they're lining up to buy it now LC >

No, the "they" you are referring to are the "sheep" who are said to be some 80% of the market! They are mostly "followers" ..... The sheppards make the initial "moves" for them.

"They", then follow!![B][/B]
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 18 2006, 10:16 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

A possible "buying opportunity" today?

Another (possible) buying opportunity, again today I feel. They won't last forever at these "cheap" levels, that's for sure!!

Posters elsewhere continue to demonstrate (collectively), their complete 'lack of understanding' of what LOOK/LOK are about these days!! IMHO.

Their, (LOOKSMART'S) "new" model is based around relationships with publisher & media Co's and that the (articles) "content" (plus the all important "users") they WILL provide, for Looksmart's many Vertical sites. ADS are then contextualised around those (Vertical) 'content' results pages, wherever possible, & "tailor made" for the geographical demographics, of the "user".

But, it is hard for MANY to understand, I do realise!!

Of course, it would mean “nothing” to some, that the Wespac banner shown here, (in an OZ result) is “targeting” an Australasian audience. Check the AD link, I’ve provided. (below). So, where has it come from? There is NO more of Looksmart Australia these days, as I am led to believe?

And it mean very little, or, “nothing” that Google Adsense also “target” the same region, again, all within Looksmart’s Verticals. (Those that I’ve checked).

http://www.looksmartrunning.com/ (These banners do "rotate", so "trust me"!!! LOL !!)


http://www.westpacinfo.com.au/platinum/def....cfm?source=B37


http://www.westpacinfo.com.au/platinum/points.cfm#contactUs

It 'wouldn't be a bad idea' to check a few of those Looksmart Verticals yourselves, to see just WHO is advertising, within that Banner space .... Here are a few that 'caught my eye' .....

http://www.liverpool.ohecampus.com/index.php?Ref=wwcas1xxxx

http://www.stopimpaireddriving.org/

http://ga4.org/campaign/childact?qp_source=banners%5fchild

http://www.pva.org/

It's obviously, still "a work in progress", and far from complete. But is showing all the right signs of a potential long lasting solid structure, if the "foundations" are anything to go by!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 17 2006, 02:07 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: nizar on Monday 17/04/06 01:09pm

< A bit off-topic, but does any1 understand what exactly the Future Fund is? >

The Future Fund, which has been set up by the federal government to cover public services superannuation liabilities, could receive shares from the full sale of Telstra if the securities can't be sold, the head of the fund has confirmed.

Future Fund chairman David Murray said the government was still formulating its strategy for the sale of its remaining 51.8 per cent stake in Telstra, which is likely to occur in late 2006.

But if the government can't sell all of the six billion or so shares expected to be offered in a public float, the Future Fund might have to be set up a separate fund to manage any leftover securities.

"Clearly, the fund will either get cash from sale and/or shares," Mr Murray, the former head of Commonwealth Bank of Australia said in an interview with independent online financial news service Eureka Report.

"If there's a lot of shares there that don't match a normal weighting of investment in the market, then clearly a separate mandate is needed to characterise that brief from the main one to invest the cash.

"So yes, there would have to be separate mandates and what's in the mandate for any Telstra shares will come right back to the sales strategy of the government, so I can't predict that until they determine it."

Mr Murray also said the Future Fund's investment strategy would be based on a long term horizon that would aim to generate real rates of return of 4.5 per cent to 5.5 per cent per annum.

Amongst similar funds around the world, Mr Murray said he particularly admired the strategies of American university endowment funds, which invest to maintain income flows to support campuses and student education.

"So there are some fantastic examples around the world but the university endowments in America, I think, are probably the best example of what we've got to try and achieve," Mr Murray said.

As the fund's strategy evolves - and Mr Murray hopes to see it up and running by mid-year - it would likely take a balanced approach to onshore and offshore investment.

"That would be a matter for the board to determine but generally this fund should be viewed as a long-term pension fund in style and one that would have a proportion of its assets offshore and a proportion onshore, so the best lead to take is a balanced superannuation fund approach," he said.

The Future Fund will begin with seed capital of $18 billion and be topped up with another $25 billion or so upon the full sale of the government's Telstra stake.

It's expected to build up assets to $140 billion by 2020 to pay public sector superannuation liabilities falling due in ensuing years.

Telstra shares currently trade around $4, valuing its listed equity at $24.29 billion.
_______________

It was suggested elsewhere, that the following has been taken from some broker notes....

The Government could potentially create a "short squeeze" in TLS shares if they handle the T3 sale effectively - a risk the shorters and under-weight's have not considered.

Lets just say they shove $10bil of TLS stock into the Future Fund, place another $10bil via an entitlement issue to existing shareholders, then that only leaves about $5bil of stock to be placed via a global bookbuild. $5bil doesn't go far in a stock that will have a post deal index weight of 5.2% of the ASX200.

While the February interim result won't be great, that's already well known and priced in. The stock will pay an interim div in March of around 20cff. I think the physical short trade has run its course in TLS. Watch this space, the Federal Government and its advisors could call the bluff of all the shorts.

Cheers !! HOPE IT HELPS.
smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 17 2006, 09:45 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Looksmart ("rubbish"?) articles prominently shown in Foxnews.com results

http://www.looksmartjrhigh.com/p/search?qt...+Idol&sb=direct


Newscorp’s (foxnews.com) articles are clearly showing within some of Looksmart’s Verticals with an example in the above link: “'American Idol' Says Bye-Bye Bucky”. Being an article from off the Fox.news.com site, dated Thursday, April 13, 2006.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,191562,00.html


From the main page of this Fox site a search, using the term “FindArticles in Fishing” does provide results that display that both Google & Yahoo have Looksmart’s articles very prominently listed within their indexed results.


http://search.foxnews.com/_1_2YSRUSM037DYD...%2Bin%2BFishing


And “rated” results from Looksmart’s Furl.net are also shown within these results. Not bad!! With the same search term used direct in a Google enquiry, these Furl.net listing are not shown at all. This could suggest whatever you care to make of it & is best left to a reader's own imagination.


http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...le+Search&meta=


Cheers !!



smile.gif

LC


  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 16 2006, 09:13 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: quiktrade_1 on Sunday 16/04/06 08:42am

Yes, of course I disagree with your thoughts.

< Doesn't matter where they're coming from as the articles are rubbish. >

And with (just) 10M of these"RUBBISH" articles, "hits" to Vertical sites went from 3M Up to 9M per month (in just 9 months) and in it's infancy, too!!

LOL !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 16 2006, 07:07 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Those who may be interested in some of my posts on this thread may also find this recent post from over at Yahoo, of interest, too.......

Sky High Option Volume Jan 2007 22 1/2
by: chriscamillo 04/13/06 03:14 pm
Msg: 3528 of 3528

Someone has purchase nearly 10,000 Jan 2007 22 1/2 calls over the past 4 trading days. That's roughly $450k of options purchased at a strike price nearly 20% above the stock's 52 week high.

Does somebody know something?

___________________________________

NEWS CORP (NYSE:NWS)
Last Trade: 17.96
Trade Time: Apr 13
Change: Down 0.05 (0.28%)
Prev Close: 18.01
Open: 18.00

Day's Range: 17.85 - 18.03
52wk Range: 14.76 - 19.07
Volume: 644,000
Avg Vol (3m): 1,698,360

As to the veracity of this post, who knows .... it has remained "unchallenged", as such.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 16 2006, 06:59 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Friday 14/04/06 10:22am)

< Looksmart show http://findarticles.com/ as simply containing 10M articles & although CEO David Hills had mentioned in a CC that F/A's "now contained over 12M articles" (privately in a Looksmart Group) we have witnessed growth of almost "double" that total. A search just now on Google shows........................ "about 23,600,000 from www.findarticles.com" >

Whooops !!!!

I'VE JUST "CHECKED" AGAIN ...... MMMMmmmm??

Results 1 - 10 of about 51,400,000 from www.findarticles.com


http://www.google.com.au/search?client=fir...G=Google+Search

Now, I wonder where they are all coming from ???

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 15 2006, 06:44 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

There is some real significance in the following story IMHO, particularly for those that have been following my "hunch" of a behind the scenes NETWORK of publisher/media Co's forming and their POSSIBLE ultimate presentation of both their archived & current print content, and on a global scale, at that.

Google Local Grows New Head

By Jason Lee Miller - SearchNewz - 14/04/06

Google snatched up a newspaper/online classifieds veteran right from the jaws of major newspaper companies to head up Google Local. Formerly of Classified Ventures' Homescape.com, Sam Sebastian is described as a new avenue to print advertising for Google.

The news comes this way from a weblog post by Peter Krasilovsky of Krasilovsky Consulting.

Though many may be unfamiliar with Classified Ventures, or even real estate vertical Homescape.com, they most likely will have heard of sister sites like Apartments.com and Cars.com, as well as the six-member media partnership that owns Classified Ventures -- Tribune, Knight Ridder, Gannett, McClatchy, Belo, and the Washington Post Co.

Classified Ventures runs the online real estate sections of over 125 newspapers. Sebastian has a long history in bridging the print/online gap for Homescape.com through his involvement in marketing the site and building online real estate sections newspaper advertisers.

Indeed, sister-site Apartments.com announced just last week the launch of a new print advertising campaign entitled "More Under One Roof" as part of a larger media convergence effort.

"Apartments.com and our newspaper affiliates maximize exposure of our listings to renters through print newspaper ads and online ad promotion," said Michael Ricciardelli, Vice President of Marketing and Media Sales at Apartments.com. Ricciardelli also stated that the newspaper affiliates reached some 25 million households through Sunday circulation.

Krasilovsky theorizes that choosing Sebastian to head Google Local would be good for Google, but bad for Classified Ventures.

"Sebastian might build bridges to newspapers," writes Krasilovsky. "But he also poses something of a threat, since he conceivably knows all the details of classified initiatives of all the Classified Ventures' newspaper owners."

_________________________________________

Of course, the "bridge building" may refer to a Sam Sebastian (his) "understanding" of progress of any network formation to date and the importance of Google retaining their 'status quo' relating to it's search results, as have been demonstrated in previous posts. Google could not only retain any existing relationships (relating to web search) on all (network) partner sites, but could very well become the preferred Portal globally, for any (partners), currently, elsewhere. Google's Adsense programme is the most successful to date, no doubt. But the "threat" SAM is said to pose, could see MSN stepping into Google's shoes very quickly.

From a Looksmart (shareholders) point of view, we need to hear some "NEWS" in the next 3 or, 4 weeks or, sooner, (as has been said, an announcement is to be made) that would or, could even see some of those 187 affiliates of News Corp mentioned in this articles here (along with it's own properties), join the "party".

http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/topnews/...WebRevenue.html

But, only some thoughts of mine, that's all. And worth the same as what you have paid for them, probably? LOL !!

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 15 2006, 01:25 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

A Head Above the Clickfraud Tide
By Susan Kuchinskas

(Page 2 of 2)

A Way Around The Fraud

One company has admitted its click-fraud role, and its CEO says the company is better for it.

At the beginning of 2005, LookSmart CEO Dave Hills realized that the traffic the search provider sent to advertisers wasn't converting.

People clicked on the search ads, but when they reached the site, they failed to buy or perform other desired actions.

"I realized we had problem with the conversion of traffic," Hills said. "Some was just low conversions; others were fraudulent in nature. I told analysts, 'I have a lot of traffic I need to remove from the network.'"

In some cases, LookSmart removed publishers from its advertising network; in others, it worked with the publishers to help them understand how they might be enabling click fraud by affiliates.

"Being open allowed us to move through it really quickly," Hills said. But the process cut that year's revenue in half.

Revenue from clicks isn't the whole story, however.

Hills said that after the weeding process was completed in mid-July, LookSmart's cost per click (CPC) began to climb. By year's end, he said, the overall CPC was up two cents, showing that the traffic LookSmart was sending to advertisers' sites was more valuable to them.

Hill said that the cooperation of advertisers is key to combating click fraud. While some preferred to sit out the cleanup process, he said, others helped by sharing their own traffic and conversion analysis.

"One reason we chose to be so open was I wanted to make sure that both the advertiser and publisher community understood what we were doing," he said.

Full Story: http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article.php/3599201

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 14 2006, 03:11 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Apologies!!

That last "Link" to the posted story (in full), is here .....

http://www.searchnewz.com/searchnewz-12-20...gleBeatATT.html

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 14 2006, 02:46 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (drrc @ Tuesday 11/04/06 10:40pm)


< more future trouble for tls (and other mobile providers) >

And even more, it seems? (Later in this post). Back on Thursday 02/02/06 05:18pm in a reply to my (ALL TIME) favourite and MOST respected poster, DAWNO, I wrote:

<I continue to struggle with their ingrained, uncompetitive "culture" they have within (TLS), that still has too many 'features' remaining, from where they have come. They fail to listen to the market place & act too slowly for my liking. They certainly do not listen to customers, is my experience!! They retain too much of a monopolist mentality at most levels, for mine. Big is not always best and their years as the "Fat Controller" are numbered.>

Nothing has changed, it seems? Management still cannot make, simple $20.00 decisions, let alone $10,000.00 ones!!!! Policy overides "common sense" business and will remain so for a helluva long time. (My brother once explained that such "cultures" like the public service in Canberra can need at least 20 years to change, in "real terms". He said, you can change the Govt every three years but the incoming party within our democracy, is "lumped" with the same "culture" and safety "guidlines" as that, the outgoing party had. Nothing really changes!!)

Last month, (with 2 days of the month to go), my computer failed, completely! I eventually learned after 5 or, so calls to Telstra staff in both "service" & accounts (over a period of 1.5 hrs or, so) that my 10 GB "unlimited" download plan had been passed by some 200MB's and that (automatically), I had now been placed onto the 64KBPS "service". When I explained this was not "strong enough" to activate my "usage meter" it was then explained, that this unlimited download plan provides "UP TO" 64KBPS speed and that in reality, "you could be on 1 - 3KBPS, 7 - 13KBPS etc, dependent on how many had "overdrawn' on this "unlimited' download plan", the accounts manager said. (Thus the "weaker" download speed, that effectively shut down usage of my computer).

"You'll now have to wait untill the start of next month (2 days) before you can use your system", is what he explained!! I WAS IRATE. I explained that this is the 1st time I could recall having this problem, that I'd been a "customer", well over 45 years and that my business of 16 years had had all of it's services, (mostly with Telstra), during that period.

I THEN TRIED A NEW "TACT". "What if I approve right here and now, an additional charge of say, $20.00, to get it put back on"? Could not be done, he said in a sympathetic tone. I BECAME ANGRY!! ..... "What if I was to approve a $10,000.00 loading for the two days, could you get me back on then"??

"I'm sorry", he replied, "can't do" ....." that's the "deal" you signed up for"!! "You'll just have to wait the 2 days, because we have 100's of thousands of similar cases each month and we make NO exceptions"!!

I thought WOW !! Just 100,000 paying an additional $20.00 (reconnection) FEE each month would be revenues for TLS, of $12M each year? That all it needed was a "clause" in the agreement, stating of this additional charge, "fact".

I "whinged", told him of my addiction to the market and my urgent need to sell some stock on the Nasdaq that night, that I'd say nice things about Telstra if he could put me "back on" ........and .... HE SAID: "I'll do it for you this time, only"!

I THANKED HIM SINCERELY. In spite of the fact, that I had "chewed up" (at least) $150.00 in actual "manhour costs", for the 1.5 hrs I'd engaged TLS staff, over a $20.00 "decision", that ended up being FREE (& a nice PR effort), on this manager's final understanding.

OH, and about that predicted " more trouble" statement earlier, I really think it is worth reading this article:

Yes .......Telstra, their shareholders (in particular) and others need to fully understand the ramifications of this ongoing "barney".

04.13.06

Lost In Speculation: Can Google Beat AT&T?

Jason Miller By Jason Lee Miller

Imagining Google's next move has the same dreamy qualities of buying a lottery ticket - a mountain of cash pulls the heavens closer and the term "extravagance" loses its meaning. In short, it's fun to imagine the possibilities, even if a dream, of what Google can achieve.

One of the more interesting dreams is born of sheer perfect timing. In June, the U.S. government will auction off chunks of radio spectrum with bids expected to go as high as $10-$15 billion. The owners of these spectra can, conceivably, set up a wireless broadband network.

Prior to the upcoming auction, so the theory goes, Google and a host of Internet companies, frustrated with seemingly fruitless battles with a Congress sympathetic to telecommunication giants who want to tighten control over Internet access, take a peak at their account balances and realize they can become ISPs. And they can do it rather easily.

These same telecoms that have been muscling anti-Net Neutrality measures into federal and state-level legislatures have also been hounding Google and bandwidth-exhaustive content providers to share the cost of delivery.

But what if Google, either alone or with partners like Amazon and eBay (even Microsoft) could buy that radio spectrum, set up a wireless network, and bypass their struggles with the telecoms altogether? We the people, continuously under the thumb of telecom extortion, would herald them as heroes.

There are two upcoming spectrum auctions. The one in June offers 1710-1755 and 2210-2155 MHz frequency bands. A second one, which could happen as late as 2008, is for a larger and possibly cheaper 700 MHz frequency band.


"A consortium of new media companies could wind up leading the pack to buy that spectrum (700 MHz) and provide a third (broadband) pipe into homes," said Washington Analysis' George Dellinger. AT&T's Jim Cicconi, in that same Investors.com article, wouldn't be surprised at unusual bidding from companies who don't even have concrete plans.

"It wouldn't shock me to find a range of unusual bidders in the upcoming spectrum auctions," said Cicconi. ""Experience has shown that some companies haven't needed a well thought-out business plan to bid (in earlier auctions)."

FULL STORY - (Check the ADS too!! LOL !!)

http://mail01.mail.com/scripts/common/home...4984897&.intr=1

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 14 2006, 01:27 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

China may find Sprint Nextel Corp. to be "cheaper"?

< NEW YORK (Reuters) - Sprint Nextel Corp. (S.N), the No. 3 U.S. mobile service, on Thursday introduced a wireless service to help parents find their children, as it makes a bid to expand its presence in the family market.

The service lets parents look at maps on their cellphones or computers to locate their children who also carry mobile phones. Parents can also program the service to automatically send them text messages at specific times each day to confirm that their children have arrived at home or in school.

The so-called Family Locator service aims to bring in revenue from a location technology Sprint and its rivals are required by law to put into cellphones so that safety workers can pinpoint the location of 911 emergency service callers.

But the $9.99 monthly service fee, and a slim consumer demand for people-finding services, may limit Sprint's success at using the latest offer to boost its family customer numbers, Amoroso said.

"Before this service comes down in price, I think it will be marginal," she said, estimating that about 2 percent of U.S. subscribers are interested in people-locating services".

http://www.wallst.net/news/news.asp?Source...ERSNEWS&id=3397

HMMMMmmm??



smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 14 2006, 12:09 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Those following this thread carefully, will understand this post, I'm sure.

A Google (Looksmart) Alert was recieved this morning and already the "story", has been "pulled" from the newspaper that wrote (released?) the article. To soon, maybe? Too "close to the bone", possibly? Fact is, it has been removed ...... But why? (The headline, as was shown in the alert from Google, is also displayed within the Topix.net Looksmart news, here. - Link underneath).

Trend enables users to save, store online material - http://www.insidebayarea.com/business/ci_3705914
Insidebayarea.com | 14 hours ago

... Furl.net, a tagging site operated by LookSmart of San Francisco. "How to get back to where you were" or save a page or do a search of what you've saved." Web communities such as ...

http://www.topix.net/search/?q=looksmart&x=26&y=4

So why? Why has it been taken down already? - Well, insidebayarea.com and The San Mateo County Times - San Mateo,CA,USA (from where Google's Alert today was initiated), both "belong" to The ENG Newspaper Group. Privately, (back on 29/3/2006), it was written .......

ANG Newspapers (Alameda Newspaper Group), based in Oakland, California, is a subisidary of the Denver, Colorado based MediaNews Group. The company publishes several newspapers in the San Francisco Bay Area, including its flagship, The Oakland Tribune. Other papers include The (Vacaville) Reporter, Alameda Times-Star, The (Fremont) Argus, The (Hayward) Daily Review, Marin Independent Journal, San Mateo County Times, Tri-Valley Herald, Vallejo Times-Herald, Milpitas Post, and Pacifica Tribune. (ANG has a state-of-the-art production facility in Pleasanton, California. The organizational structure allows for the company to share stories between its various newspapers, meaning one reporter can get the story for all the publications.)

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=FindArti...cial_s&filter=0

http://www.google.com.au/search?hs=Nzo&hl=...nG=Search&meta=

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&clie...nG=Search&meta=

Proquest appear to look after their archives. (They do)

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&clie...nG=Search&meta=

http://www.looksmarttrucks.com/p/articles/...20/ai_n14582089

CityXpress partners with ANG Newspapers to launch new classified marketplace The company currently provides services to newspaper companies including Knight Ridder, MediaNews Group, McClatchy, CanWest Global, Lee Enterprises, Scripps Howard, the New York Times Company and the Northcliffe Newspapers Group.

http://ecommwire.com/?id=299&keys=Auction-Classifieds-Online


Trend enables users to save, store online material San Mateo County Times - San Mateo,CA,USA ... for the personal information management problem," said Michael Grubb, chief technology officer of Furl.net, a tagging site operated by LookSmart of San ...

There it was written (as above), in that last "Link", but is NOT there now, from what I can see. (I must have JUST, "made it all up" back on 29/3/2006??)

Readers can, "MAKE UP YOUR OWN MIND", but I HAVE FIGURED ALL ALONG, that this can be HUGE!! (Darryl Easlake!!) - But, some could consider, ALL is but a ramp! It is complicated.

Only MHO, of course!!

smile.gif
LC

ps: And there's that FOX NEWS popping up, once again !! Third story .... (from FindArticles - One of ENG Newspapers, the sourse!!)

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&clie...nG=Search&meta=
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 14 2006, 10:22 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Tuesday 11/04/06 07:55am)

Content from Looksmart's FindArticles in FOX News 'results'.

From my previous (lengthy) post ....

< From this juncture, (FindArticles.com) the many articles that can constantly be "fed" (& daily) into F/A's, can then be "sliced & diced" (David Hill's own words used) into those special (type), "topic only" Looksmart Vertical search sites. Many articles? >

Looksmart show http://findarticles.com/ as simply containing 10M articles & although CEO David Hills had mentioned in a CC that F/A's "now contained over 12M articles" (privately in a Looksmart Group) we have witnessed growth of almost "double" that total. A search just now on Google shows........................ "about 23,600,000 from www.findarticles.com"

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&clie...nG=Search&meta=

Recent new (and additional) suppliers of content has been noticed. Examples have been both Topix.net and Newsday.com

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&clie...nG=Search&meta=

Here are examples, of what continues to get my interest of a possible, soon to be announced Newscorp "involvement" with Looksmart being, this type of result recently found, following a search term of "FindArticles in newsday", as shown. (link)

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&clie...nG=Search&meta=

It's more than interesting, that the 5th 'result' : < Search: Michael Arad - FOX News > is origionally from newsday.com, is now permanently "domiciled" in Looksmart's FindArticles.com and it's destination/location site, where it can (now), also be found, is:

http://search.foxnews.com/_1_2USJUSM04V4HT.../Michael%2BArad

And that, within these (above listed) 34/35 generalised page 1 results shown above (in NWS's "FOX News") for "Michael Arad", Looksmart's FindArticles, get to appear twice.

Esquire: Man of the Month: Michael Arad
Access the article, 'Man of the Month: Michael Arad' from Esquire, a
publication in the field of Home & Garden, through LookSmart's
FindArticles service. ... Man of the Month: Michael Arad....
www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_kmesq/is_200405/ai_kepm416451

And .....

FindArticles search for ""Michael Arad""
IN free articles only all articles Arts & Entertainment Automotive
Business & Finance Computers & Technology Health & Fitness Home &
Garden News & Society Reference & Education Sports. Find...
www.findarticles.com/p/search?tb=art&qt="Michael+Arad"


These results within FOX NEWS are "obviously" being taken out of FindArticles ..... right? With the former being from "Esquire" and is "provided in partnership with Keepmedia", a content archiver company, who supply "much" content onto FindArticles.

smile.gif
LC

http://aboutus.looksmart.com/i/us/aboutus/...orpOverview.pdf
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 13 2006, 10:50 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: LookingConfident on Tuesday 04/04/06 12:25pm

Are online PR tactics appropriate for any business?

< If a business has news, they should make it easy for the media to find out about that news. Tools include press releases, wire servies such as PR Newswire and PRWeb, an online media kit, an optimized blog and a good SEO effort. Whenever a company gets online media coverage, they should be sure to use social bookmark services such as [Looksmart's] Furl.net and [Yahoo's] del.icio.us to archive them. >

http://www.furl.net/

Full story .....

http://www.webpronews.com/blogtalk/blogtal...orOnlinePR.html


From my previous post:

< Furl.net is a free, online personal filing cabinet that solves a compelling personal information management problem. Furl enables readers to quickly save and organize Web documents plus "tag" and annotate those items for quick reference and retrieval at a later date.

"While there are other 'social bookmarking' web sites out there, PC World recognized what truly distinguishes Furl: the ability to save the full text of the article versus a link that can quickly expire or become inaccessible," said Michael Grubb, chief technology officer for LookSmart.

"With Furl, you don't have to worry about losing an article -- it's saved." >

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 11 2006, 07:55 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (quiktrade_1 @ Monday 10/04/06 07:26pm)


< Only recently LOOK has risen above $1 but it retreated just as quick >

And, "popped" back UP again, just as quick! And with Q1 figures to be released soon, could very well be an indication of some more "positives", hopefully?

LOOK closed UP overnight in a STRONG performance although volume was below the normal 3 month average. My "tip" is a "run up" this week, to test that recent high of $5.75cps. Should get through it too, IMHO.

LOK equivalent today, (based on $1.37078c exchange rate) ='s $7.06c

Where could Looksmart be heading from here? - (An opinion)

It was from within Jon Fine's blog in BusinessWeek Online (January, 2006) that a reasonable "clue" was given, as to where Looksmart may very well be heading from here. And maybe even a few "hints" were given, if we now look a little closer?

Early on in the article, was written:

< A Content Consortium would wreak havoc with the Web as we know it in its bid to restore the role of content owner as gatekeeper. It could shrink some opportunities for lucrative targeted search ads à la Google's AdWords or Yahoo! (YHOO ) Search Marketing, applications that seriously rankle more than a few media executives. >

A "Content Consortium" with millions of quality articles on many topics could be made available and ads could be sold around it and in effect, all network "partners" could even be "sharing" those (their own) important "users", (being the daily visitors to each of their individual sites), with each others. Afterall, additional "eyeballs" would ensure more advertisers and any search for (it), this, their (now) "shared" content could provide that much needed (additional) ADS revenues resulting from all ensuing 'click throughs'.

And it was this further comment, (within this article - Link below) that got me thinking:

< "FOR THE LIFE OF ME, I CAN'T IMAGINE why they haven't done it," says Tom Curley, CEO of Associated Press. Here's one reason: Doing it would require spinal implants for intimidated media barons. But the notion that some pushback is pending is not far-fetched. Curley says he is talking with potential partners about setting up subject-specific Web packages -- say, for travel or basketball -- that will include content from multiple media. Once partners are on board and packages are finalized, search engines will be invited to bid for that traffic. >

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/conte...04/b3968031.htm

It is almost as if Looksmart have been developing it's business (under new & vibrant Ceo David Hills) along this path. Some may even say it's current total of 181 Vertical Sites is "ideal" to "house" the many articles that could be provided, for any real move, in this direction.

And it's established FindArticles site (a repository of many FREE articles) has been seen by some, to be growing in article "numbers", in recent times. Look currently have a figure of (showing), over 10M articles, on the site - David Hills said in a CC some time back now, "OVER 12m" and a search on Google is showing:

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=si...le+Search&meta=

Reliable US "sourses" say this is almost "doubled" again, with a search generated from over in the US. Interesting?


From this juncture, (FindArticles.com) the many articles that can constantly be "fed" (& daily) into F/A's, can then be "sliced & diced" (David Hill's own words used) into those special (type), "topic only" Looksmart Vertical search sites. Many articles? Well, is it just coincidental that Tom Curley's own (Associated Press) already have a considerable total of it's own artices, indexed into those Looksmart's sites.?

http://www.google.com.au/search?client=fir...G=Google+Search

Looksmart are known to have already established "relationships" with BIG (Yes, Tier One) Publisher/Media Co's in Viacom (CBS Local sites), The NY Times and IACI's Ask Jeeves. And just recently, it appears that a confirmation of a further partnership could be 'on the cards', as another "content provider" (Topix.net), very much looks to be a latest development.

Most interesting?? I'll say so. But only, my opinion. Do your own research, as always.

smile.gif
LC

ps: Interesting observation from within McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory

< Globalisation and concentration of large media companies tend also to lead to cartel forming, and the very large firms co-operate in various ways as well as compete. They also exhibit ownership connections. Tunstall and Machin (1999) reported a complex pattern of interrelated interests amongst the three leading American Media firms (Time Warner, Disney and Viacom) and also four foreign firms with a stake in the US market: Seagram (Canada), Bertelsmann (Germany), Sony (Japan), and News Corporation (Australia). >

The "NUMBERS" ??

If 10 separate newspaper groups had 10 publications and each had a web site that attracted just 1000 regular (daily) ‘visitors’, (collectively), we would then have 100,000 “users”, daily.

Now, If all of those abovementioned publications then had 10,000 (no duplicates) archived articles each, (collectively) we would now have a total of ONE million articles. So, currently, for each publication’s (individual) user to get the opportunity to access their particular interest or, "passion" (from within all of those 1M articles), they would then, (all) need to laboriously “bookmark” 100 different websites, or, hope to “pick up” a (particularly) popular & informative article they seek (written by a journalist or, reporter of any of those 100 publications), through a ‘natural search’ process on a BIG portal, such as Google, Yahoo, MSN or, AOL. That's what David Hills refers to as, "exhaustive search". Looksmart's Verticals provide, "essential" search results. With a "FindArticles" button eventually placed on partner sites, their "users" get to access a FULL listing of their particular interest, in the ONE set of results! eg: "FindArticles in Cycling" - Now check Google's results, here:

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...le+Search&meta=

Again, only MHO.
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 10 2006, 04:56 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: glen99 on Monday 10/04/06 03:34pm

Hi glen99 ...

The consolidation (20 for 1) brought our CDI's in line with the Share "value" in the US. There has been a "reverse split" since, (a five for one) so, 1000 become 50 shares that are now, 10 fully paid shares!!

The closing price today was $6.66c or, .0666c, in the "old".

Pleased to be of assistance to you.

smile.gif
LC

ps: The 'reverse split" was to maintain a Listing on the Nadaq main board according to their regulations. The shareprice had "ducked" under the minimum $1.00pps condition, for listing.
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 7 2006, 08:09 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

NEWS CORP (NYSE:NWS)

Last Trade: $18.03c
Trade Time: 4:01PM ET
Change: Up 0.13 (0.73%)
Prev Close: 17.90
Open: 17.91

Day's Range: 17.84 - 18.05
52wk Range: 14.76 - 18.18
Volume: 1,043,900
Avg Vol (3m): 1,807,520

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 6 2006, 10:17 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Wednesday 05/04/06 03:16pm)

The real significance (of the pixy.com "apparent" deal posted yesterday) is in the Contextuals, in relation to Looksmart's 181 Vertical Sites and Looksmart's potential in the many, many newspaper/publisher sites, that will/should definately (in time) make thing really hum!!

Long ago, David Hills (CEO of Looksmart) mentioned opportunities for "top up" ADS to compliment partner efforts, in due course. (or, something along those lines ...) .I see Google Adsense (or, these, Looksmart's own contextuals - depending on what is most suitable, popular, best paying, etc) in place of that banner AD currently down the RHS on all/most Vertical results pages .....(Where the City Kids Foundation or, Lance Armstrong Appeal Banner, is located). AD campaigns can apportion some of their budget around the very aspects of this concept and will. (Check these Links, as we go through it)

http://www.looksmartcollegesports.com/p/se...0&y=0&vcat=cat3

Take LooksmartCollegeSports as an example. Fans of the many college sports will/can be targetted with contextual ADS that can/will be "drilled down" to their (almost), every need. (Dependent upon their respective demographics - M/F, age group, sporting equipment, thirst revivors drinks, supplements, uniforms, trophies, etc).

http://www.looksmartcollegesports.com/

And there are plenty of Sports/Vertical results pages (just in sports alone) that can be supplimented with such type ADS in time to come.

http://www.looksmartsports.com/

LOOK (Looksmart) was down overnight and closed right on resistance, of $5.05c - Now is an excellent time for an entry, particularly if an announcement of Looksmart's introduction of those (it's own?) Contextual ADS was forthcoming. Just MHO, of course.

Cheers !!

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 6 2006, 08:29 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Google are the "heavyweight champions" of search & have a SP value over $400.00, a market cap of $121B whilst the B grade ("photocopy") contextual's Co (LOOK), have a little over $5.00pps & $115M respectively. And reasons for their relative positions need no real explanation. Looksmart do currently partner with Google with it's Adsense programme. With a "shellout" from Google of "up to 80%" of click revenues generated, the "pay" is good. It makes sense with (ATM) Google having that commanding type audience & consequently attracting a multitude of "clicks" (purely with "weight of no's"), thus revenues, accordingly. Yahoo MSN & Looksmart have similar type offerings. But Looksmarthave no intention of ever challenging these giants of the industry, as things currently stand.

Verticals

With the understanding that "eyeballs" & advertisers are the fundamental requirements for their success, Looksmart quickly realised that if they could attract both by becoming a "niche" player in what they should offer (and by doing it 'best'), they could then be assured of gaining (1stly), a constant share of regular daily "users", & subsequently, that required stream of advertisers chasing after their newfound crowd. They went ahead & introduced Vertical search sites (currently 181 in total) with "each" of them containing special interest (specific topic) type articles (carefully segregated into/within each site), that are generally 'pitched' to an audience that (as individuals), all share a certain passion for this (their chosen), concentrated, 'cluster' of content, that is now being offered at all of these Looksmart, "one stop shops".

Publisher/Media Co's

Looksmart had grown their FindArticles Site (containing FREE articles of interest) from 2 to 5 million, over time. Content was (primarily) articles supplied from publishers, via archiver management Co's/Groups and were generally considered (in some quarters), as 2nd rate, (excess to requirement type), offerings.

Looksmart then realised that (both) publisher & media Co's had a somewhat "urgent" need to stop dwindling circulations and a steady loss of viewers (now moving onto the net) that in turn, has caused a loss of their treasured advertisers, who have (also) move away from their own traditional newspaper/magazine/television offerings. (est. loss - approx. $10B -FY 2006). So, Looksmart have offered them a plan that could or, should prove successful.

A Concensus - The plan of attack

The rest of the story becomes a little like guesswork or, entirely surmission. Co's are never exactly going to spell out their "plan of attack" for any opposition to then pick it up and try and "run with it", so to speak. But in Looksmart & their partner's challenge, who are the "real" opposition? Shareholders discuss possibilities, watch certain moves taking shape and generally get a picture or, an overall view of a concept, that they hope will come to fruition. Anything better, is "fruit for the sideboard". And poor management may even see things a lot differently? Human nature gets to play it's role and in between much "flexing of ego's" & "common sense", a roll out takes shape ..... With Looksmart, many hope the "old world" publisher media Co thinkers can agree with the "mix" of new world technology and marketing ......

It's a winner, should they choose to do so ....

smile.gif

LC

LOOK closed down overnight and closed right on resistance @ $5.05c with low volume. The share price opened stronger, went to it's high of $5.20c and drifted down through lack of buyers. With the weakness in the greenback, $1.37453 AUD, the approx, value for LOK today, should be $6.94c, but no doubt buyers will do better. A buying opportunity prior to resuming an upwards path, I feel.

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK) Delayed quote data Edit
Last Trade: $5.05c
Trade Time: 3:59PM ET
Change: Down $0.08c (-1.56%)
Prev Close: 5.13
Open: 5.11

1y Target Est: 6.63

Day's Range: 5.02 - 5.20
52wk Range: 2.75 - 5.75
Volume: 92,930
Avg Vol (3m): 136,946
Market Cap: 115.12M
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 5 2006, 03:16 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

(drum roll - A yet to be announced) NEW PARTNER - Pixsy Corporation

Check out the Looksmart Contextual ADS down the LHS here !!

http://www.pixsy.com/search.aspx?p=25

(Hold the mouse over these three ADS, right click for properties, HMMMmmm??)

Now “click on” all three ADS and see the results, with the 2nd & 3rd through existing (old time) partners, upspiral.com/redzip.com

Now ………. Go to this page: http://www.pixsy.com/

And ………Browse By Category
· World News
· Celebrities & Entertainment
· Politics
· People & Dating
· Photo & Video Sharing
· Posters & Products
· Tech News

Plus ………Check the …….”From Popular Sources”, click on them for lots more ADS … It’s only just begun, folks!!!

http://www.pixsy.com/About.aspx

About Pixsy Corporation
Pixsy Corporation is a developer of image search solutions with offices in San Francisco, CA and Seattle, WA. Pixsy owns and operates www.pixsy.com, a web-based visual search engine that aggregates and searches RSS feeds. Pixsy was founded by a team of engineers and business talent hailing from Microsoft, Sony, InfoSpace, and Corbis.

http://www.google.com.au/search?client=fir...G=Google+Search

Chase Norlin is the Founder and CEO of Pixsy Corp. Prior to Pixsy, Mr. Norlin was a Senior Business Development Consultant to InfoSpace and VP of PR at Mercent. Mr. Norlin has a deep background in the online media space having been responsible for creating Sony's first online photo sharing venture. Additionally, he founded the Web's first online photo and video sharing company and was a New Venture Consultant to Boeing where he helped launch Boeing's online media licensing division. Mr. Norlin received his BA from UC Berkeley and MA from the University of Chicago.

http://www.digitalhollywood.com/%231-06SpD...H06Thurs14.html

Sourse : http://www.adotas.com/2006/04/pixsy-turns-...-search-engine/

“Visitors to Pixsy.com can search images by keyword, category, or click one of the source logos on the left hand side. For example, clicking the New York Times logo brings up the most recent images and videos from the New York Times web site. Search results are displayed in a nice AJAX interface, with contextual Looksmart ads in a bar along the left-hand side of the page”.

Results from scout.com

http://sfgiants.scout.com/2/515456.html?refid=3655

That is owned by FIM (Fox Interactive Media) – Mr “Uncle” Rupert!!

http://newmexicostate.scout.com/2/419243.html

coming from

http://www.pixsy.com/search.aspx?p=35

And it’s not a surprise to see pixy.com “pop up” in results, here ….

http://www.looksmartsurfing.com/p/search?q...surfing&sb=furl

And here

http://www.looksmarthobbies.com/p/search?qt=Rare+Birds

These full range of contextual Looksmart ads (that, has been suggested by a prominent LOOK long, could be from another advertiser provider, who could be “white labelling” LOOK's ad technology...) would be appropriate to replace that Lance Armstrong “banner” prominent on the RHS of Vertical results pages ….

Ala “Rabbits” Warren ……. “Hold the phone”!!!!

Great news for shareholders, when it all unfolds, for sure. Just MHO, of course.

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 5 2006, 02:39 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

And news, that Looksmart partner The NY Times is to "expand" the usage of Furl within their TimeSelect feature ....... (it's working!!)

< Beyond their standard access to Times archives, TimesSelect subscribers will also be able to tag stories on their "My Times" pages. The feature, dubbed "My File," is the first instance of the Times tapping the tagging phenomenon that is generating so much excitement among Web developers, bloggers, and other proponents of collectively influenced Web sites. Tagging, also known as bookmarking, is a popular way for Web communities to locate, classify, and/or rank Web content. >

NY Times Takes On Yahoo, Google

by Gavin O'Malley, Tuesday, Apr 4, 2006 6:00 AM EST

FACED WITH INTENSE COMPETITION FROM rival news sites and Web portals, The New York Times expanded its Web site's horizons on Monday, debuting a widened and cleaner page layout; a further embrace of multimedia, blogging, and "favorites" features; and a new "topics" section, which gives topics broached by the Times--from Madonna to Mars--their own multimedia pages.

http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cf...=19542&p=313201

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 5 2006, 02:16 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Wednesday 05/04/06 01:17pm)

Hey Quiktrade_1 ...

< Now check out, (not only the sourse of the articles - being the content provider) but check the relevance too! Try newsday.com, for starters!! >

Some of those links have now vapourised!! Disappeared !! (Must be "working on them"? This does happen at times. But I have the origional (Vertical) results page still "open". Not sure if this will work?)

Best Results for Your Search — News See what others found useful!

Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas | WFAA.com | Colleges: National
... RSS | Discuss Sunday's Southwest college baseball scores 08:24 PM CST ... MLB Columnist Gerry Fraley Fantasy Baseball ...
www.wfaa.com

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Colleges: Oklahoma
... Subscribe | Archives Saturday's Southwest college baseball scores 01:54 AM CST ...
www.dallasnews.com

USATODAY.com
... News Money Sports Inside Colleges College home Scores Polls Football Football ...
www.usatoday.com

College Basketball - MSNBC.com
... NFL Super Bowl XL NBA College Basketball Baseball NHL NASCAR / Motors Golf Dog ... Dateline NBC MSNBC Home » Sports » College ...
www.msnbc.msn.com

The Seattle Times: Northwest and national college sports news
... Northwest and national college sports news Home delivery Contact ...
seattletimes.nwsource.com

Baseball Tickets at RazorGator
... GAMES :: Major League Baseball :: College Baseball ALL-STAR WEEKEND DATE LOCATION ... TICKETS OUR PARTNERS RazorGator RazorGator Baseball Tickets Baseball ...www.razorgator.com

Newsday.com - AP Baseball
... EST) AP Sports Wire • Sports • Baseball • Football • Basketball • Hockey • College • Tennis • Golf • Soccer KBQB Blog ... Newsday.com - AP Baseball ...
www.newsday.com

komo news | Husky Baseball Team Gets First No-Hitter In Nearly 50 Years
... komo news | Husky Baseball Team Gets First No-Hitter ...
www.komoradio.com

OrlandoSentinel.com: Baseball : Orlando Sports, Magic News
... the Lake-Sumter Community College baseball team's otherwise fast start ... El Sentinel Orlando CityBeat FindLocal Baseball LSCC ...
www.orlandosentinel.com

1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - Next
Search for More
All Results · Articles · Shared Pages · News · Web

Now Quiktrade_1 ..... Are we getting any warmer??

fwiw ... here is the link for the above, but (no doubt), results have changed!! (A "WORK" IN PROGRESS)

http://www.looksmartcollegesports.com/p/se...eball&sb=direct

No .. They're there!! (I just tried it on the link!!)
smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 5 2006, 01:17 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (quiktrade_1 @ Wednesday 05/04/06 12:43pm)

LOL !!

Ah!! Quiktrade_1 ...... They say that "seeing is believing" ..... What a true statement, if ever their was one! It reminds me of "UFO" sightings ....... unless you have seen one (or, two, or, more & I have INDEED been lucky enough to have!!) you remain a disbeliever!! But that's the very essence of human nature and sadly, it's (historically) suppose to be understandable, I grant.

Is there ANYTHINK you see of Looksmart's Verticals that you possibly may find attractive?

Have you tried a "FindArticles on baseball", fishing, travel, etc, etc (Using this Search Term?)

So, with baseball, you'd get. (These "Links" won't be live, as such - Copy & Paste)

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...btnG=Search&met a=

Try it!! - (FindArticles on ....)

With baseball, I've chosen the LooksmartCollegeSport's Link ....

http://www.looksmartcollegesports.com/p/se...eball&sb=direct

Now check out, (not only the sourse of the articles - being the content provider) but check the relevance too! Try newsday.com, for starters!!

Now go to the top RHS, (of the baseball site) type in "Golf Results", use the drop down for the GOLF (hit it) and drill down to all the current news on Golf you'd imagine!!

You should now be at .....

http://www.looksmartgolf.com/p/search?free...sults&x=13&y=11

Now see that Lance Armstrong (Unity is Strength) banner on your RHS .... This afternoon I will post here, what I feel is (well there is no doubt - it spells it out) Looksmart's OWN set of Contextualised ADS that may be swung into each & every Vertical results page, in the near future. Rather than a negative "bag", ask the question, do some research of your own, or, forget about what you feel, LOOKSMART could have been!! DON'T LINGER IN IGNORANCE, IS MY ADVICE. This new model will be sensational, Google Group longs feel & know.

You have a lot of ground to make up .... It's obvious!! LOL !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 5 2006, 12:27 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

MMMmm?? A “recipe” Vertical sold for $66M !!!

When “tiomike_ca” posted (ironically) that, "The Reader's Digest Association (RDA) has agreed to buy online food and cooking community site AllRecipes.com for $66 million, in an effort to spice up its brand with digital media...."

http://www.clickz.com/news/article.php/3595971

.....He also made the point that this valued this (one) single vertical at the approx. current market cap of LOOK minus cash. LOOK is way undervalued imo, he went on to say.

Yes, Looksmart even have recipes verticals too!! With a (FindArticles on recipes) search term (used on Google) results give you lots of instant choices, for recipes and from different countries, too!!

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...Sear%20ch&meta=

And best to check the 1st 4 - 5 pages of these Google results to see the variety of the many Vertical recipe site “choices” provided by Looksmart.

Of course, LOOK currently have 181 such type (full of content) Verticals and will continue adding to this total.

Soon, Looksmart will indeed fly, many "longs" feel. And I couldn't help but agree.


smile.gif

LC


  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 5 2006, 11:09 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

NWS closed UP again (.51%) overnight and continues a predicted shareprice upwards movement.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=nws

And private research has discovered a little more on the growing Internet capabilities too!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 5 2006, 10:37 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Thursday 29/12/05 10:45am)

Just a little over 3 months ago (29/12/2005) I had posted:

"I predict an 'easy' 10% can be made on the current $5.40cps being offered (5500 shares) by the end of january, or, before". (And gave very accurate reasons why).

It was immediately greeted with:

< An easy 10% from $5.40??? 10% on how many shares? The liquidity of LOK is disgraceful. You could just as easily Loose 10% from $5.40. IMHO it's more likely that the SP will drop but I've been saying this for so long now... >

Yes, you have been saying that for quite some time now, haven't you. You see, LOK got to close @ it's recent high of $8.00pps (29/03/2006) representing a rise of $2.60cps or, a rise of 48% !!!

LOOK (in the US) got to a new 12 month high, of $5.75c. In the past few days, it's shareprice has seen a healthy (& normal) type retrace, to close overnight @ $5.13c. (down 5.52% on the night). And you would think the world was about to cave in!! LOL !! After what must seem ages, LOOK/LOK is going down!! (As I predicted, is what someone has today posted!)

And even 40% (let's forget the 48% rise) on those 5500 shares that I had pointed out were available (above - 29/12/2005) would have netted someone a handsome profit of up to $14,300.00 were they able to get some of the top!!

And that's a lot of money for me, I can assure you.

LOOK, it is said will possibly get to resistance of $5.05c tonight, before heading back up to test resistance of the new high, of $5.75c. Once through that, it's all systems go!! Should any news based on research become official, then, the sky is the limit. I say this with very extreme confidences and support my view with my pocket!

A BUYING OPPORTUNITY, is my opinion.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 4 2006, 08:24 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: slick7 on Tuesday 04/04/06 02:33pm

Thanks slick7

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 4 2006, 01:30 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: slick7 on Tuesday 04/04/06 12:51pm

Thanks for that early "feedback" slick7 ... I gather that "popurls.com" has a certain compatibility with all three (del.icio.us / furl.net /digg.com) mentioned, by you?

I'll go check it out.

Thanks again.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 4 2006, 12:38 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Are there any ShareScene members who are using Furl.net? Care to comment here on what you think of Furl? Thanks.

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/060403/20060403005500.html?.v=1

"While there are other 'social bookmarking' web sites out there, PC World recognized what truly distinguishes Furl: the ability to save the full text of the article versus a link that can quickly expire or become inaccessible," said Michael Grubb, chief technology officer for LookSmart. "With Furl, you don't have to worry about losing an article -- it's saved."

A fundamental underlying benefit of Furl's full-text saves is that it allows for full-text searching. With Furl, users can easily retrieve relevant documents by entering keywords that can be detected in the document, not just the subject or title.

Added Grubb: "The ability to find anything you have saved by recalling a few words in the article, rather than just the title or topic, is the key to truly making it easy for you to find what you have saved. In essence, Furl can become your personal search engine."

A visitor can begin saving Web content and building their own personal search engine with the click of a button. The name, link, date, and other aspects of the content are automatically entered into Furl's archive.

Other advanced features include a toolbar, site-wide search, Web site recommendations, "people who saved this also saved," daily headlines, and the ability to import existing bookmarks and export personal archives in various formats.

PC World's "Fabulous Freebies" article (link above) is live at www.pcworld.com and will be available on newsstands April 11. Downloads or services named to the "101 Fabulous Freebies" list including Furl.net were chosen by PC World editors based on features, design, and performance. Each product had to be a fully-functioning version consumers can obtain at no cost.

Those who wish to take advantage of Furl and its permanent 5GB personal storage can sign up for a free Furl account at www.furl.net. -

http://www.furl.net/

Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 4 2006, 12:25 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Looksmart closed UP overnight and may continue on it's way, with it's upwards trend. LOOK (in the US) should test it's recent high of $5.75c this week. Current exchange of $1.40292 AUD gives us an approx. price for LOK, of $7.62c

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)
Last Trade: $5.43c
Trade Time: 4:00PM ET
Change: Up +0.05cps (+0.93%)
Prev Close: $5.38c
1y Target Est: $6.63c
Market Cap: $123.78M

(check how LOW that market Cap is!!)

LookSmart's Furl.net Named to PC World's ''101 Fabulous Freebies'' List
Monday April 3, 8:01 am ET


SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 3, 2006--LookSmart's Furl.net (Nasdaq:LOOK - News), one of the first tagging and social bookmarking tools to hit the Web, was honored in the May 2006 issue of PC World, the most widely-read computer or business magazine, as one of the "101 Fabulous Freebies." Chosen by editors, Furl.net was recognized as a top pick to "Nail It Down" on the Web.


Furl.net is a free, online personal filing cabinet that solves a compelling personal information management problem. Furl enables readers to quickly save and organize Web documents plus "tag" and annotate those items for quick reference and retrieval at a later date.

"While there are other 'social bookmarking' web sites out there, PC World recognized what truly distinguishes Furl: the ability to save the full text of the article versus a link that can quickly expire or become inaccessible," said Michael Grubb, chief technology officer for LookSmart. "With Furl, you don't have to worry about losing an article -- it's saved."

A fundamental underlying benefit of Furl's full-text saves is that it allows for full-text searching. With Furl, users can easily retrieve relevant documents by entering keywords that can be detected in the document, not just the subject or title.

Added Grubb: "The ability to find anything you have saved by recalling a few words in the article, rather than just the title or topic, is the key to truly making it easy for you to find what you have saved. In essence, Furl can become your personal search engine."

A visitor can begin saving Web content and building their own personal search engine with the click of a button. The name, link, date, and other aspects of the content are automatically entered into Furl's archive.

Other advanced features include a toolbar, site-wide search, Web site recommendations, "people who saved this also saved," daily headlines, and the ability to import existing bookmarks and export personal archives in various formats.

PC World's "Fabulous Freebies" article is live at www.pcworld.com and will be available on newsstands April 11. Downloads or services named to the "101 Fabulous Freebies" list including Furl.net were chosen by PC World editors based on features, design, and performance. Each product had to be a fully-functioning version consumers can obtain at no cost.

Those who wish to take advantage of Furl and its permanent 5GB personal storage can sign up for a free Furl account at www.furl.net. -

http://www.furl.net/

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 4 2006, 11:38 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Whilst I do not hold NWS stock, I do honestly feel it will continue to rise in shareprice value, at least for the next year or, two, maybe more. My interest in NWS is it's continual development of it's Internet stratergy and my belief there will be a possible "connection" shortly, for a stock I do hold. I feel (or, is it purely hope?) that an overdue annoucement of a "controlling stake" in Looksmart (ASX - LOK) could shortly be forthcoming. Looksmart have both the "tools" and expertise to compliment part of NWS's effort, on a world wide basis. The Looksmart Vertical approach created from it's FindArticles base, will be (I'm confident in saying) the central point for articles content "distribution" to many (eventually) thousands of websites reaching all parts of the world. It's all taking shape as each day goes by. I watch it. But this is sounding like a ramp for my own stock. Sorry. But funily enough, the mention of this (above) possibilty over on the YAHOO stock boards has resulted in ALL my posts being removed, along with de-activation of my ability to post!! And someone said that I was banned for abusing another poster. Yes, Newscorp will be a star performer in 2006 and years to come, I feel. I only wish I was both younger & cashed up! Just MHO, as always of course!

This 3 month chart should "warm the cockles of shareholder's hearts", I'd imagine? And the NWS share price value, was UP another .91% overnight.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=NWS&t=3m

This post from over on Yahoo supports much of my views of what I have written, since my posting here on this board. It's worth the read.... The writer says:

< I'm not so sure Ice Age alone can or is responsible for moving the stock. Yes its a successful movie, but its not a reason to buy. News Corp is very diversified company (think of the newspapers and TV etc).

I have 2 theories on the jump.

1) Rumors of a facebook buy out + some positive press recently - buy the rumor sell the "News" (no pun intended - ok maybe a little one)

2) NWS's internet strategy is finally starting to take shape and be understood by Wall Street.

Look what happened to Disney recently. The street went crazy for Disney when it became clear that Disney's internet statagy was a success.

Wall Street is looking for a repeat with NWS since more and more it looks like Rupert has big plans (and a cohernet strategy) for myspace/the internet. Expressing interest in the facebook and some other statements have shown that NWS is putting forth the effort to be the next big media internet innovator.

I think that's what's behind this. Hopefully NWS repeats what Disney has done in the past month. However, I think with NWS there is more money to be made because of the low volume and thus higher potential volatility, and also because this is the second time around and the pro's play better in the second round.

If this is true though, and I don't know much so maybe you shouldn't be listening to me, be careful. Traders made out big on DIS and they're sitting back and waiting for the last pieces of the puzzle to fall into place with NWS so they can start the hype. I'd say either get in early or don't get in at all. And don't get greedy or you'll get burned. Because every dollar the pros make is a dollar someone like us looses.

But whatever you do, don't buy because of ice age. It's just one movie. Anyways, Cars is going to kick its ass. Once I sell my last batch of NWS calls - hopefully soon - I'll be back to the Disney boards. Hope to make some quick money with ya'll.

________________________________________

CHEERS !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 3 2006, 09:39 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

And, the things kids say ..... (thanks to pirate on HC)

After putting her grandchildren to bed, a grandmother changed into old slacks and a droopy blouse and proceeded to wash her hair. As she heard the children getting more and more rambunctious, her patience grew thin. At last she threw a towel around her head and stormed into their room, putting them back to bed with stern warnings. As she left the room, she heard the three-year-old say with a trembling voice, "Who was THAT?"



-------------------------------------

A grandmother was telling her little granddaughter what her own childhood was like: "We used to skate outside on a pond. I had a swing made from a tire; it hung from a tree in our front yard. We rode our pony. We picked wild raspberries in the woods."



The little girl was wide-eyed, taking this in.

At last she said, "I sure wish I'd gotten to know you sooner!"



------------------------------------

My grandson was visiting one day when he asked, "Grandma, do you know how you and God are alike?"



I mentally polished my halo while I asked,"No, how are we alike?"



"You're both old," he replied.



------------------------------------

A little girl was diligently pounding away on her grandfather's word processor. She told him she was writing a story. "What's it about?" he asked.



"I don't know," she replied. "I can't read."



-----------------------------------

I didn't know if my granddaughter had learned her colors yet, so I decided to test her. I would point out something and ask what color it was. She would tell me, and always she was correct. But it was fun for me, so I continued. At last she headed for the door, saying sagely, "Grandma, I think you should try to figure out some of these yourself!"



-----------------------------------

A Sunday school class was studying the Ten Commandments. They were ready to discuss the last one. The teacher asked if anyone could tell her what it was. Susie raised her hand, stood tall, and quoted, "Thou shall not take the covers off thy neighbor's wife,"



-----------------------------------

Our five-year-old grandson couldn't wait to tell his grandfather about the movie we had watched on television, "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea." The scenes with the submarine and the giant octopus had kept him wide-eyed. In the middle of the telling, my husband interrupted Mark, "What caused the submarine to sink?"



With a look of incredulity Mark replied, "Grampa, it was the 20,000 leaks!!"



----------------------------------

When my grandson, Billy, and I entered our vacation cabin, we kept the lights off until we were inside to keep from attracting pesky insects. Still, a few fireflies followed us in. Noticing them before I did, Billy whispered,



"It's no use, Grandpa. The mosquitoes are coming after us with flashlights."



----------------------------------

When my grandson asked me how old I was, I teasingly replied, I'm not sure." "Look in your underwear, Grandma," he advised. "Mine says I'm four to six."



----------------------------------

A second grader came home from school and said to her grandmother, "Grandma, guess what? We learned how to make babies today."



The grandmother, more than a little surprised, tried to keep her cool. "That's interesting," she said, "How do you make babies?"



"It's simple," replied the girl. "You just change "y" to "i" and add 'es'"



---------------------------------

Children's Logic: "Give me a sentence about a public servant," said a teacher. The small boy wrote: "The fireman came down the ladder pregnant." The teacher took the lad aside to correct him. "Don't you know what pregnant means?" she asked.



Sure," said the young boy confidently. "It means carrying a child."



---------------------------------

A nursery school teacher was delivering a station wagon full of kids home one day when a fire truck zoomed past. Sitting in the front seat of the fire truck was a Dalmatian dog. The children started discussing the dog's duties. “They use him to keep crowds back," said one youngster.



"No,” said another, "he's just for good luck."



A third child brought the argument to a close.



"They use the dogs", she said firmly, "to find the fire hydrant."


smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 3 2006, 09:02 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

"There was movement 'round the station, for the word had passed around" ..... That .....

There is a possibilty that my recent ..."The case for a (possible) Newscorp involvement", may have been just a little to close to the bone, maybe? They are just my own opinions, that's all.

Yet, since posting it on Yahoo, the post and all my other posts have all been deleted ....

HMMmm??

They mustn't like my research!! LOL !!

smile.gif
lc
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 2 2006, 05:50 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

And the "try" to icemonger with a final pass that was OBVIOUSLY a metre forward was let go without a "whimp" by Sterlo & Gould. After the conversion, the 2nd best caller, (on the sidelines - can't think of his name ATM) voiced his opinion, that this WAS the case, in his opinion.

I'm losing interest quick!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 2 2006, 05:27 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

The "bias" of some on the ch9 Rugly League commentary team, at times, leaves a lot to be desired.

Phil Gould & "Sterlo", in particular. The St George try by the dragons, after their try scorer Hornby (?) clearly tackled the Bronco's full back to the ground (without the ball - took him out of the play unintentionally) to go on to score was greeted by Phil Gould with ... "They can't take THAT try off us, can they"?

An earlier incident was the disallowed try of St George when an "up & under" clearly showed that the Bronco's winger contesting the "catch", was clearly pushed out of the "contest" with the right hand by the St George attacking player and Phil Gould bellowed out that it was a "fair" contest!!

Forward passes are constantly (conveniently) "missed" in the call by the "expert" commentary among other obvious errors, that it seems, "suits the pocket" of this same expert commentary!!

I'm hoping that the video referee's haven't got "sound" on their screens when adjudicating a tight decision as these "galah's" are (almost) endeavouring to influence all with their "usual" questionable interpretations. My partner will not even view a TV football game these days, let alone allowing me to "kid" her into going to a game! She has had "enough" after being a fan for many years. In general, (in both League & Rules) she says now-a-day it's purely about "putting bums on seats" with even a "clear" bias being shown from many a referee/umpire decision, that at times are obviously favouring the "home" crowd. That's her opinion that I do find hard to dispute at times. The "team on the road" has the job ahead of them, it seems.

Just MHO, of course.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 2 2006, 11:03 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

"According to Information Week, the DOJ's crackdown on child porn widened to include subpoenas for a broad range of companies, including Sunnyvale-based LookSmart(NASDAQ:LOOK)"

" Many of the subpoenas asked for information about ways to filter out adult content for underage Internet users".

http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/sto...ml?surround=lfn

And NetNanny .....

http://search.looksmart.com/p/search?free=...Nanny&x=13&y=11

http://netnanny.com/

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Apr 1 2006, 01:33 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

This is a copy of a follow up dicussion I've had with a poster on another site......

The case for a (possible) Newscorp involvement.

Hi once again tps216. In my previous (reply) posted to you (on 27/03/2006) I endeavoured to highlight to you, the certain synergies that make both LOOKSMART & INTERCHANGE very attractive propositions for a NWS (Newscorp) involvement. It may appear to make even more sense with some of the latest developments to be highlighted today.

Within my post I was suggesting an initial buyout (or, merge) of INCX (Interchange) with Looksmart and then, that often talked of Rupert Murdoch (NWS) “controlling stake” involvement with LOOK, then taking place. I like it even further now.

From within that post I had written: (of Looksmart)

< My gut feeling about a 'hook up' with Local.com is somewhat supported by the message in INCX's initial announcement to the market, of the Furl deal with Looksmart. That announcement included the provision that ..... "Furl enables readers to bookmark -- to click on anything interesting on the Web and save the page to their personal online file. A visitor can begin saving Local.com results and content anytime they click on the "Save" button.” > (Link below)

http://www.shareholder.com/looksmart/relea...eleaseID=181787

The “key word” in the Interchange CEO’s statement is ….”and content”. You see, with the launching of this further partnership (both Co’s have had other long time arrangements with search) it becomes clear, that at some stage, content will be added to the Local.com search page. All that’s required is to have a much talked of (by me) Looksmart “FindArticles in/on.. ” type “button”, installed. It really is the logical step. And a step (I imagine) that will take place with all newspaper/publisher/media company sites worldwide, that get to network in a massive articles, content sharing concept. So, with Local.com, it simply picks up (by geographical region or, a location) and mainly targets those businesses & consumers, as does it’s name imply.

My example in my previous post, (was with the Morris Group of 22 or, so newspapers) and their “Yellow Advantage” shows exactly how white labelling of Local.com (with Looksmart’s Furl “save” technology yet to be installed in this instance) can operate either within a small group (or, separate network) yet is (in fact) flexible enough (in due course) to extend or, be “linked” to any part of the world.

http://yp.savannahnow.com/ - (check this site out - Yellow Advantage is all over it).

Type in pizza, or, whatever, for “local” results. ( check bottom of result's page)

On Thursday, 30/03/2006 Interchange announced a deal that was (in reality) poorly received. The market is yet to catch up! They announced a beta release of Local.com for the United Kingdom that... < features business listings for the entire UK market searchable by name, category and geography, and also incorporates advanced mapping capabilities >
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060330/lath037a.html?.v=1

And they will < combine it with web-sourced content to enable users to more easily and accurately find up-to-date information about local businesses in the UK. >, they advised. IN fact, they spell it out clearly in that link, when they say added that they will be < enhancing the site with fresh local content and services >

And that …“Local.com (UK) also plans to offer a private-label http://www.local.com/LocalConnect/
local search engine to regional media providers”
.
Try it here: http://uk.local.com/ - I used a simple “pizza - surrey” search term. In your results, (under listing Options) note the Looksmart “save & share” button??

Significance? “ ….online ad spending in the United Kingdom has grown by 66 % to 1.4 billion British Pounds (about US$2.4 billion) in 2005”

Now, why wouldn’t Rupert Murdoch be more than interested in both technologies, with obvious synergies to his worldwide print & media divisions and want to be left out of what will/can be a massive universal offering to thousands of separate web site users, all over the world? I can’t make it any clearer. I wonder if Ross Levensohn , the CEO of NWS’s FOX Interactive Media, feels the same way?

Does he happen to read ShareScene?

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 31 2006, 08:19 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Been a while since anyone posted on this board ...... Is it any wonder I found it hard to find!!

LOL !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 31 2006, 06:50 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: balance on Friday 31/03/06 03:30pm

Anyone have QTK in their tips?

I'm having trouble locating the board, even??

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 31 2006, 03:34 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

I E Mailed this article to a fellow shareholder of Looksmart (in the US) who is a retired Fire Fighter there. Note where the article comes from. (Be patient, we are going backwards. We have to.)

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stor...43?OpenDocument

Note, also, that a "FindArticles in/on ..." search querry on Google, shows Looksmart are recieving plenty of articles from this newspaper (offline & online I gather) & have them neatly indexed within the suitable Looksmart Verticals.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...nG=Search&meta=

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=FindArti...=&start=10&sa=N

Even more interesting is the story's origion? Read all this carefully ........I found this article here in Topix.net, an "unnofficial" (yet to be announced) partner of LOOKSMART that has me excited .......

http://rss.topix.net/rss/us/federal-court-8th.xml

And it was listed in results of Newscorp's FOX, here ......

http://search.foxnews.com/_1_2ZLCUSM0DWK2W...%2Bof%2BAppeals

>From a search on Google for: (CHECK THE very LAST ARTICLE)

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=FI...nG=Search&meta=

Now I'm not going to jump to conclusions, (& one swallow doesn't make a summer) but isn't it fair to say that FOX are now taking a "feed" from Topix.net, AS WELL AS Looksmart?

And of interest (I feel) is the enormity of this Topix.net, yet to be announced partnership!! I do note though, Looksmart has "dropped" that announcement (The "in partnership with Topix.net") from that retirement site, where it was initially found. THEY MUST READ STOCKBOARDS Like ShareScene and say, YAHOO? - (Funily enough, my account has been deactivated at Yahoo and ALL my posts have been "deleted". Now, how about that for a coincidense??!!)

Here is an early account (posted here) of the three newspaper groups & their "stable" of sites, that I feel, a Looksmart Furl & "FindArticles in/on....." type "button" installed would look ever so good, if they happen to go with this (origional) idea (of mine) and install it on all partner sites .....?? Hope so .... Makes sense ....

And Topix.net???

"Initial rollout on the 177 Gannett, Tribune and Knight Ridder news sites has seen over 200 million articles categorized and driven over two million readers in the first sixty days."

http://www.keepmedia.com/pubs/PRNewswire/2...?ba=m&bi=4&bp=7

Now bear in mind that McClatchy Newspapers have just bought out Knight Ridder & in doing so, are "inheriting" the part ownership of Topix.net held by Knight Ridder & it is now a certainty to "add" their own swag of newspapers to this "network" .....

It can only get better from here in .... Bring it on!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 31 2006, 12:46 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: Marnice on Friday 31/03/06 12:34pm

Thanks Marnice ....

And sierra .... Your ability to "fossick" is unmatched without a shadow of a doubt! I follow your work on the MST board, too!!

ASX Announcement
23 March 2006

Mediation Date set in Ericsson Case

QPSX Ltd (ASX:QPX) provides the following update in respect of QPSX's case against
Ericsson and others in the Federal Court of Australia. The case concerns a licence
agreement executed between QPSX and Ericsson which provides for payment by
Ericsson of royalties at a rate of 5% on Ericsson's global ATM Sales for the first year
from 1 July 2003 and 3% for subsequent years.

QPSX is seeking damages for breaches of the licence agreement, as well as for
misleading and deceptive conduct in contravention of the Trade Practices Act 1974
(Cth).

At a directions hearing on 1 March 2006, Registrar Jan referred the proceedings to
mediation pursuant to the Federal Court Rules. The Federal Court has now informed
QPSX that the Court ordered mediation has been listed for Friday 26 May 2006.

Mediation is a method of resolving a case prior to trial. A mediator is not a decision
maker and the mediator will not express a view on the strengths or weaknesses of each
party's argument. Rather, the mediator will encourage open discussion about the
matters in dispute and attempt to bring the parties to a mutually agreeable settlement.
At the listed mediation, both parties are required to have their legal representatives
present, as well as a commercial decision maker. QPSX would expect the mediation
process to be completed within a week from commencement. If the parties are unable
to resolve the dispute amicably through the court ordered mediation, the matter will
proceed to trial.

In the interim, the case is next listed for a directions hearing on 11 April 2006 before
Justice French to review Ericsson's progress in providing documents to QPSX in
accordance with previous discovery orders made by the Federal Court.


QPSX
QPSX's focus is the profitable commercialisation of a range of physical and life science
technologies on a global basis. QPSX identifies valuable intellectual property from
research institutions and companies across Asia Pacific, and realises value through
international IP licensing programs. QPSX's subsidiary Offspring Ventures is a leader
in the provision of commercialisation services and the formation and incubation of spin-
out companies.

Further Information: Graham Griffiths, Chief Executive Officer, QPSX Ltd

Cheers Fella's

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 31 2006, 11:54 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: sierra on Friday 31/03/06 11:04am

It's looking strong today, Sierra ..... Have you seen the article in the Fin? I haven't ... I wonder if anyone is able to copy and paste it, possibly?

TIA, it that is possible ...

Might be a strong close today?

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 31 2006, 10:57 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Bananas have gone up since Tropical Cyclone Larry hit ......

We should compare LOK's rise with a chart of the price of banana's too, perhaps?

No sellers today? What's going on?

LOK holding nicely @ $7.60c ?? Buyers will have to put their "bid" up, don't you think?

Or, take out the $7.90c on offer ?? Probably will later, I imagine? Just MHO of course.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 31 2006, 09:18 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: quiktrade_1 on Friday 31/03/06 05:52am


< I was trying to point out the difference between LOK's rise and Googles rise. >

I FORGOT ....

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=3m&s=LOOK&...=GOOG&c=%5EIXIC

Oh yeah!!

LOL !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 31 2006, 08:44 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: quiktrade_1 on Friday 31/03/06 05:52am

< Say you had $100,000 or $200,000 worth of shares in LOK.. Could you sell them at 100% profit right now?? The answer to that question is obvious. >

The answers to your above are ...... YES I do ..... YES I can (100% realised profit) ..... and NO, it is not obvious, to you!!

I deal through a large brokerage that has representation all over the world. Through this situation, I am able to buy stocks traded in the US and have done so!!

Are you telling me that I can't sell them? In the US?? Or, BUY more shares, in the US?

Do you think I do this for "fun"??

And I do have a few MORE points for you that I will bring up later, but after I can get myself some more LOK here on the ASX today ...... For someone that has always considered himself somewhat of an "expert" in this game, I feel you still have a lot to learn. Oh, and with LOK ?? Have you forgotten that I have made it clear to you that my average is just $4.6140pps (?), of course, that's appart from the "additionals" purchased on 21/03/06 for just $6.65cps ......

LOK has risen around 100% whilst you have stuffed around with your (still) predicted .31cps or, $1.55cps in it's (LOOK's), current value! Don't you realise how silly it all reads, when LOOK in the US got to a recent HIGH yesterday, of $5.75cps?? Coming off a low of .55cps or, $2.75c in the new (post reverse split) shareprice value? Well it sure does to me. I mean, particularly as the shareprice had risen by $3.00 per share!! Since you made your prediction.

And yesterday, you have once again comfirmed here, that from your "charts", you still say, it is going back to .31c or, $1.55cps ......

You posted: < So are they saying it can't get back to $0.31? I beg to differ as you know.>

Quiktrade_1 .... Best you stick with a stock you know something about, & that's the best advice I could give to you .......

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?t=3m&s=LOOK&...ot.ax&c=%5EIXIC

Yes, I ALMOST FORGOT...... lol !! - Catch you later!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 30 2006, 12:52 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: quiktrade_1 on Thursday 30/03/06 11:39am

An amazing reply, Quiktrade_1 ....

< LOOK/LOK is treading water IMHO.>

A stock that has risen by over 100% in recent times is treading water?

I won't go any further .... Cheers and good luck with SOT !!
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 30 2006, 11:01 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: quiktrade_1 on Thursday 30/03/06 10:10am


Thanks for that charting info, Quiktrade_1 ...

I'm not sure as to whether you are aware or, not but in the Looksmart Group I belong to, there are three excellent chartists, just like yourself. But none of them see LOOK in the US (in their charts) returning to your "predicted" .31cps or, the equivalent these days, of $1.55cps .......

LOOK Has move from it's recent 12 months LOW of $2.75c (when you initially made your prediction) to last night's 12 month's high, of $5.75c. This is a rise of exactly $3.00 per share. or, over 100% !!!

Can you advise me if you are still predicting this return to your stated $1.55cps for LOOK. Or, perhaps you have revised your thoughts in regards to this prediction, that you made?

What are your thoughts on this 7 Year chart for LOOK? What do you see? Click on the 7 year Time Frame here .......

http://quotes.nasdaq.com/quote.dll?page=ch...T&selected=LOOK

I'm most interested in both your thoughts on your LOOK to return to the $1.55c scenario and, you thoughts for the future, based on the 7 year charts. With an average cost of $4.6140pps (I did buy a 3000 parcel on 21/03/06 @ $6.65c) it is important to me, that I get it correct, you would understand.

Quiktrade_1, you have stated today, that it is a good time to .........."Get OUT.....NOW"!!!

And that ...... "Me thinks it's a great time to short this dog"

Is that how you feel about Looksmart (LOK) and why? And, where have you access to "shorting" LOK shares? Or, are you just suggesting others should do so? Will you be going ahead and shorting some LOK shares? Or, were you just a little over enthusiastic in making that statement?

With tomorrows action needed to confirm a "bearish engulfing pattern", (as you have posted) what does one do today? Buy, Sell, Or, hold? According to your charts? What does your charts tell me to do with LOK between now and the close of the ASX today?

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 30 2006, 09:16 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In what looks like a normal retrace, LOOK (Looksmart) closed down, .20cps or, down 3.55%. A buying opportunity.

One chartist described it like this : "we have had a perfect Fibonnaci retracement to today's close (i.e. retracing the break higher) means this is the copybook technical buying opportunity"

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK) Delayed quote data Edit
Last Trade: 5.44
Trade Time: 3:58PM ET
Change: Down 0.20 (3.55%)
Prev Close: 5.64
Open: 5.68
Bid: 4.60 x 800
Ask: 5.99 x 400
1y Target Est: 6.63

Day's Range: 5.42 - 5.75
52wk Range: 2.75 - 5.68
Volume: 140,769
Avg Vol (3m): 137,424
Market Cap: 124.01M

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 30 2006, 02:36 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

I rather liked the following reply (below) to a post by syril80, on Yahoo.

Syril had likenned the current position to a "Casino economy" when he posted:

< The media has been lying to the American people. Millions upon millions of boomers kids are living at home with no employment..

The only economy in the last 2 decades has been a "casino economy" meaning the stock and real estate markets...everyone in the 90s was making money in some form or shape off the stock market...when that collapsed, a depression would have resulted had it not been for the real estate economy, whereby everyone was making or connected to making money off that....which begs the question, what will happen when that goes bust????

Yes indeed a casino economy in other words no economy. there are a lot of losers out there >


The reply said.....

< "Casino economy my ass. Deluded shorts are still living in a fantasyland that's come crashing down all around them. The hopelessly clueless such as syril are still in a dreamland where everything they short justs falls & falls. Shorts are having the same problems longs had in 2000, not quite understanding that the party is over.

With a booming economy todays shorts are getting fried time after time while dreaming of their glory days. Folks, the shorts guns are empty when all they've got are rambling idiotic remarks that the sky is falling.

All we need are a few cords of "Won't get fooled again" playing in the background" >


smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Investment Discussion

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 29 2006, 07:26 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: LookingConfident on Wednesday 29/03/06 08:15am


< The equivalent value for LOK today in OZ (based on a current exchange rate of $1.41903 AUD) is an approx. $8.01c. >

And closed today @ $8.00pps exact. Moving up ever so nicely!! The exchange rate has since moved up to over $1.42c mark.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 29 2006, 08:15 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

LOOK finished "square" overnight in the US (@ $5.64) but was supported strongly going into the close. Just 100 shares were sold, to bring it down to it's close value. Volume was a little over the 3m average. (Volume: 158,040 - Avg Vol (3m):136,213 )The "ask" in the A/HRS on Inet (of $5.98 for 500 shares) is not exactly letting punters "get on", if you know what I mean.

LOOKSMART LTD (RT-ECN)
Symbol: LOOK
Last Trade: 5.65 3:54PM ET
After Hours Change: N/A
Today's Change: Up 0.01 (0.18%)
Bid: $5.35
Ask: $5.96

Inett shows (below) that following a "build up" of sellers @ $5.65c, they were then "hit" and the "ask" was taken away from buyers into the close, ( moved up to around the $5.69c level) and yet, only a handful at that price were being offered. It was a good effort on a night that many felt a "retrace" was probably "due" following the spike in the last two days.

The equivalent value for LOK today in OZ (based on a current exchange rate of $1.41903 AUD) is an approx. $8.01c.

LOOK Stats Symbol Search
Time B/S Shares Price
15:54:17.282 B 100 5.6500
15:44:04.716 B 600 5.6500
15:41:37.066 B 300 5.6500
15:41:37.050 B 300 5.6500
15:41:37.001 B 100 5.6500
15:41:37.001 B 300 5.6500

15:41:36.989 S 100 5.6500
15:41:36.924 B 200 5.6500
15:41:36.924 B 200 5.6500
15:41:36.916 B 100 5.6500
15:41:36.895 B 100 5.6500
15:41:36.895 B 300 5.6500
15:41:36.875 B 100 5.6500
15:41:36.875 B 200 5.6500
15:41:36.859 B 100 5.6500
15:41:36.840 B 100 5.6500
15:41:36.840 B 300 5.6500
15:41:36.819 B 1,700 5.6500
15:41:36.807 B 1,100 5.6500
15:41:36.807 B 300 5.6500
15:41:36.660 B 800 5.6500
15:41:36.660 B 300 5.6500
15:41:36.637 B 1,700 5.6500
15:41:36.637 B 300 5.6500
15:41:36.623 B 1,700 5.6500
15:41:36.623 B 300 5.6500
15:41:36.456 B 100 5.6500
15:41:36.456 B 1,752 5.6500
15:41:36.456 B 300 5.6500
15:41:36.405 B 2,100 5.6500
15:41:36.405 B 300 5.6500
15:41:36.354 B 2,042 5.6500
15:41:36.354 B 100 5.6500
15:41:36.354 B 158 5.6500
15:40:58.606 B 100 5.6400



Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 28 2006, 08:43 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

(Thanks to AP on HC)

How about the Chinese newlyweds on their wedding night, he says we can try anything you like (in his Chinese accent)

she says "ooh me want number 69"

he looks puzzled.......

"you want beef with black bean sauce??

lol !!

smile.gif
LC"
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 28 2006, 02:23 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

How to hypnotise a man..... (cheers bendigo - HC)

http://vili.us/hypno.html

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 28 2006, 11:45 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: dory on Tuesday 28/03/06 11:42am

LOL dory!!

good one!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 28 2006, 10:47 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

LOK - Reasons for the run up............

Thanks to Lookinsmart2002 for his following thoughts:

About 18 months ago the new CEO, David Hills arrived to find a company still struggling from the loss of their one major partner MSN. They had a number of problems:- click fraud - 99% of revenue was from distribution of listings to third party sites- No "home grown" traffic to speak of - high costs still in place from before the loss of MSN. In the last year or so Hills has started to turn this company around. He has introduced the following initiatives:

1. Technology licensing - Hills realised that the software tools that LOOK had developed for internal use were valuable. He then licensed their Ad Center to Ask Jeeves, their search framework to Viacom, and licensed advertiser tracking software to a multitude of other companies.

2. Whitelabelling - Hills has provided some of LOOK's main consumer products to third parties to rebrand as their own. New York Times among others has licensed Furl for their popular Times Select offering. Local.com also licensed Furl.

3. Increased Content - Hills realised early on that FindArticles was LOOK's premier source of traffic, and quickly increased the number of articles from 5m to 10m, then 12m, and has recently increased again.

4. Vertical Search - Hills realised that traffic to FindArticles would be worth more if it was more qualified and demographically segmented. So using the About.com approach with a twist, he launced 181 vertical search sites, providing access to web search, news, blogs, artices and furled items.

5. In-house advertising - Hills realised that if LOOK could license their advertising software it made sense to bring inhouse all banner advertising on their own network, and start looking at inhouse contextual advertising.

6. Leveraging of Furl - Hills saw the value LOOK had in Furl, and saw the impact it could have on search results. He integrated furled items into LOOK's search streams, providing a better user experience.

7. SEO - LOOK's millions of content pages did not feature prominently in search engines. LOOK hired an SEO, changed the pages, and subseuqently doubled their traffic during 2005.

...Most of the above actions occurred with little fanfare to the market, and have never been completely priced into the stock.

So .... Few understood the consequences those actions would have on the bottom line of the company. They are as follows:

1. Diversified revenue - Previously LOOK had nearly all its revenue from one product (distributed search listings), and from one customer buying that product (MSN). Now it has revenue from :

- licensed technology - white labelled technology - Distributed listings traffic - Owned listings traffic

- Owned banner advertising - Owned skyscraper advertising - Owned Contextual advertising

- Google Contextutal advertising - Parental protection software subscriptions

2. Increasing immunity to TAC (Traffic Aquisition Costs) - Previosly LOOK was at the mercy of TAC, and as TAC went up, LOOK's margins would shrink. Now since the above revenue sources are high margin and not related to TAC, as they increase LOOK's margin increases despite TAC. In Q4 2005, TAC went up, and for the first time, LOOK's margin did not decrease.

3. More advertiser value - the ROI advertisers enjoy by advertising on LOOK's vertical sites is a lot higher than that of previous partner sites. This means that :

- advertisers will ultimately pay more per click
- more advertisers competing will drive auctioned click rates up
- audience will be more receptive to advertising.

Keep an eye on "RPC" - revenue per click. It has been rising for the last couple of quarters. As advertisiers increase linearly, revenue increases exponetially because they are competing for the same space, driving up click rates.

--------------------------------------------

LOOK's revenue bottomed out in Q3 2005. It has risen since, and will continue to do so. Analysts are not fully comprehending the effect the new high margin revenue streams will have on the breakeven point. Break even revenue level will be a lot lower than it was last time they reached profitibility. In fact I would not be at all surprised to see profitibility achieved this year.


The way things are tracking, this stock should run to the $10-$11 (UD$$$'s) mark in the relatively near future, provided no unexpected bad news comes along. And if we get upside surprise, well take a look at a 7 year chart to see where we could head.

A great post Lookin2002

Thanks

smile.gif

LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 28 2006, 07:52 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: LookingConfident on Tuesday 28/03/06 07:17am

As a matter of interest ......For those who hold LOK shares ....

LOOK'S "official" close price on the nasdaq (of $5.64cps) makes the "value" of LOK's shares an approx. $8.00pps.

(Calculated @ $1.41865 AUD - current)

Nice !!

smile.gif
LC

Mar. 27, 2006 Market Closed
Common Stock Market : NASDAQ-NM
Last Sale: $ 5.64 Net Change: +0.24 +4.44%
Share Volume: 301,245 Previous Close: $ 5.40
Today's High: $ 5.65 Today's Low: $ 5.36
Best Bid: $ 5.34 Best Ask: $ 5.83
52 Week High: $ 5.43 52 Week Low: $ 0.55
P/E Ratio: NE Shares Outstanding: 22,797,000
Earnings Per Share (EPS): $ -0.79 Market Value: $ 128,575,080
NASDAQ Official Open Price: $ 5.43 Date of Open Price: Mar. 27, 2006
NASDAQ Official Close Price: $ 5.64 Date of Close Price: Mar. 27, 2006[B][/B]

Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 28 2006, 07:17 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Another good effort from LOOK (Looksmart) as it continued it's journey upwards on the nasdaq. With a current exchange rate of $1.41728 AUD, the approx. "value" for LOK shares here on the ASX today should be........$7.96cps ......

And a "steal" at that price too! In MHO. lol !!

Mar. 27, 2006 15:48 ET Market Open
Common Stock Market : NASDAQ-NM
Last Sale: $ 5.62 Net Change: +0.22c +4.07%
Share Volume: 280,235 Previous Close: $ 5.40
Today's High: $ 5.62 Today's Low: $ 5.36
Best Bid: $ 5.61 Best Ask: $ 5.62
52 Week High: $ 5.43 52 Week Low: $ 0.55
P/E Ratio: NE Shares Outstanding: 22,797,000
Earnings Per Share (EPS): $ -0.79 Market Value: $ 128,119,140
NASDAQ Official Open Price: $ 5.43 Date of Open Price: Mar. 27, 2006

Good luck to those who bought yesterday. You will not be dissapointed, let me assure you. LOK will be going much higher, when "news" of latest involvement with publishers/media Co's is announced to the market. MHO, of course.

Cheers to ALL holders!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 28 2006, 05:12 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

I have just woken up to see a "sea of green" for LOOK over in the US. This is terrific for holders of LOK, here in OZ!! Currently at it's high for the session and Volume:220,469 well over the daily Avg Vol (3m):133,484

Symbol Time Rows

top LOOK Stats Symbol Search
Time B/S Shares Price
14:05:02.067 B 100 5.5500
14:02:02.453 B 200 5.5500
13:59:20.088 B 300 5.5500
13:56:10.152 B 400 5.5500
13:50:20.352 B 400 5.5500
13:49:13.595 B 100 5.5500
13:49:12.863 B 3,300 5.5500
13:49:12.863 B 900 5.5500
13:48:00.688 B 100 5.5500
13:48:00.061 B 1,220 5.5500
13:48:00.061 B 780 5.5500
13:47:06.463 B 220 5.5500
13:47:06.463 B 80 5.5500
13:44:08.372 B 100 5.5500
13:41:32.041 B 400 5.5500
13:41:12.204 B 300 5.5500
13:37:58.580 B 20 5.5500
13:37:57.979 B 100 5.5500
13:37:57.695 B 100 5.5500
13:34:59.446 B 200 5.5500
13:34:44.151 B 800 5.5500
13:34:38.499 B 1,365 5.5500
13:34:38.499 B 1,000 5.5500
13:34:38.378 B 4,000 5.5500
13:34:38.378 B 1,000 5.5500
13:34:38.267 B 404 5.5500
13:34:38.267 B 101 5.5500
13:32:26.474 B 200 5.5500
13:32:10.668 B 699 5.5500
13:32:10.559 B 100 5.5500
13:32:10.559 B 100 5.5500
13:32:10.559 B 1,000 5.5500
13:32:10.482 B 3,701 5.5400
13:29:32.388 B 300 5.5400
13:29:05.516 B 100 5.5300
13:27:12.516 B 800 5.5000
13:27:12.516 B 200 5.5000
13:27:12.516 B 100 5.5000
13:27:12.516 B 300 5.4900
13:27:12.516 B 400 5.4900


Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 27 2006, 06:22 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

"Earlybird" readers of this thread may have got some of those $7.07's at the open, this morning? I hope so!!

9% was loverly but it is still a long & patient road ahead ..... I certainly won't be letting any more of these go, so to speak.

Not for some time now. I intend to wait until the $15.00pps before (maybe a third?) I sell any. Of course, "one swallow has never made a summer" but with LOOK/LOK, this really is the beginning of a wonderful journey, some feel with confidence.

Tonight in the US? Well LOOKINSMART2002 says:

< I think we will bounce off $5.90 first, probably tonight (perhaps only intraday), with a move to $6.70-$6.80 not far in front of us.

Conservatively (with no big news) I think we will trade in a range between 5.05 and $6.80ish for around 3 months or so with $5.90 eventually developing as support, and probably a final bounce off $5.90 propelling us to $10.00

If we get any upside surprise news wise, we could go to $10 much quicker.
Either way, after $10, I see it bouncing off $14. Beyond that if we ever break $24 I will be buying big time. But it will take a hell of good run to get there. >

I concur.

Today, in discussing Looksmart's dropping of ZEAL, (on the Google Looksmart Group board), I had this to say:

LOOK has arrived at a "use by" date, for Zeal, it seems. It will be "mothballed". It has been terrific! But......

I do see the new model as purely being in the "numbers crunching" game, based around many many "eyeballs", advertisers (both being, theirs & ours) and plenty of (old and new) content in the form of articles, with new stuff constantly supplied (daily) from the many partner (newspaper & magazine & all the TV web news/page) sites. (Via daily feeds, such as, is currently from Topix.net)

I see the Looksmart Verticals as simply the "Fat Controller" in the middle, shunting users from each of it's results pages, off to the many "partner sites", who are (of course) providing the content. (A central point. The "slicing & dicing" of all those articles that can be found in the FindArticles "bank", or, the "common interest", articles repository).

Looksmart can of course have their own advertisers on each results page of it's 181 Verticals (plus Banners & Google's Adsense as already exists) and collect 100% of any "clickthrough revenues" as all those partner site "users" pass through, (they mostly will only be, "just visiting"), off on their way to an article/s of their choice, ON ONE OF THE MANY PARTNER WEBSITES.

A new way of searching the net, for what is required, or, "clustered information", by a user. David Hill's has called it, "essential, but not exhaustive" type search results.

Now, if Looksmart were to "give" them (all those partner sites - there are potentially 100's & 100's of them really, & worldwide, too) Furl, and give it for FREE, an agreement could then be arrived at whereby, LOOK could then index all of the "suitables" (articles "saved") among them into it's F/A's bank. They could then contextualise those pages with ADS (of those saved/Furled), being articles coming from the net, "other than" (articles being saved, day to day from an origionating) partner's sites. Looksmart (again), would recieve the 100% revenues on ALL resulting "click throughs" on this type content. They would naturally come up (or, be shown) in the Vertical results pages, according to their known popularity. (By the number of "hits" on a page).

But (of course), I'm only assuming that a, (that "magic") "FindArticles in/on......" button is installed on/alongside a partner site's normal (existing) "search the web" arrangement. (The Google's, Yahoo, MSN's or, AOL). It seems logical?

I'm talking about all those known sites belonging to The Tribune, Gannett, The McClatchy Group & those Knight Ridder Sites (that they will retain), for starters!! They (those three), the abovementioned, own Topix.net, our new, yet to be announced partner!!.

They are all MONSTER Co's !!!

Hey, in reality, it's virtually almost all sites that can be found to be providing content (in results & linked) currently within the Verticals, that really are contenders. I am saying ....Just give them a "button" ...... (yes, there are 100's & 100's of Sites!!). Just my thoughts though.

Feel free to ask any questions about any of my posts.

Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 27 2006, 01:54 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Don't fight the market ......

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2006-01/21642841.jpg

It's too BIG !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 26 2006, 11:51 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Morningstar.com
Why the Media Sector Is Far from Dead
Friday March 24, 6:00 am ET
By Jonathan Schrader, CFA

At Morningstar, we spend a lot of time with great investors. Our favorites tend to buy and hold great companies at bargain prices. We realize, however, that there are lots of ways to make money in the stock market, including by buying stocks solely because they have fallen out of favor. The theory behind this approach is that stocks always revert to some mean valuation level, and stocks that have experienced sustained price and valuation declines will eventually enjoy gains that will move their valuation ratios up to the mean.

If this style of investing makes sense to you, then you might want to spend some time evaluating stocks in the media sector. Over the past five years, Morningstar's index of media stocks has dropped more than any of our 12 sector indexes: negative 3.49% annually (including dividends), compared to a 4.33% total return for the S&P 500. Almost half of the 83 stocks in the index with five-year records had negative annual total returns during this period. Subtracting dividends, this percentage decline would be even worse.

Lest you think that the media sector's underperformance is limited to just the past five years, a quick glance at our sector performance tables show that the media sector has been the worst-performing sector--according to Morningstar's market-cap-weighted sector indexes--in every time-period we calculate. As of March 20, the media sector was dead-last over the five-day, year-to-date, one-month, three-month, one-year, three-year, and five-year periods. Needless to say, the media sector has presented numerous humbling experiences to our team of analysts--and many highly respected investors--over the past several years.

We suspect that future returns for media stocks will be much better than those of the recent past, however, and we're not just saying this because the past several years have been so bad. Our argument is also supported by the Morningstar Ratings for stocks and our fair value estimates, which are grounded in discounted cash-flow valuation. Of the 60 media stocks that we cover, 40% of them have ratings of either 4 stars or 5 stars, while just 15% have 1- or 2-star ratings. The media sector has more undervalued stocks (as a percentage of the total stocks in the sector) than any of our 12 sectors.

One of these 5-star stocks is a media-sector favorite of ours: The Washington Post Company (NYSE:WPO - News). Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway (brk.b.B) has long held this family-run media and education firm for which long-term orientation and prudent capital allocation have led to market-beating performance over the years. Other big owners include the respected stock-picking teams at Franklin Mutual, Oakmark, and Weitz Wallace. Besides newspapers, Washington Post's other big business is education--it owns Kaplan--which is another sector that has fallen out of favor with investors recently.

Washington Post isn't the only company with roots in the newspaper business that looks attractive right now: Six of Morningstar's eight 5-star media stocks operate in the newspaper industry. Newspaper stocks have been pummeled recently due to concerns that the Internet will make newspapers obsolete. While we appreciate that the Web has changed many of the rules in the newspaper publishing game--and reduced the inherent competitive advantages of newspaper publishers--we're not ready to count newspaper publishers out just yet.

We actually believe that in a world filled with way too much information--much of it inaccurate--delivered via more media and channels than any one consumer can possibly manage, the editorial skills found in the newspaper industry could prove to be very valuable. Study after study has shown that the average consumer actually doesn't like to have too many choices, which is exactly what the Internet provides. In the long run--and recent research suggests that this has already started--consumers will gravitate to a handful of trusted information sources for their news.

We suspect that newspapers like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal will benefit from this, as will local newspaper publishers. To this end, newspaper publishers have been allocating significant amounts of capital in recent years to make their Web sites attractive destinations. They have also begun to partner with high-traffic sites like Google and Yahoo in order to drive more consumers to their news. By employing some tech-savvy and embracing new business models, newspaper publishers with strong brands and topnotch content may actually thrive in an increasingly fragmented media landscape.

We also think that companies like Journal Register (NYSE:JRC - News), McClatchy (NYSE:MNI - News), and Lee Enterprises (NYSE:LEE - News) can survive and even thrive in the future. These firms own scores of small, community-based newspapers that, in our opinion, are much less vulnerable to changes in technology. Whether online or in print, people will always want to know the goings-on of the local townsfolk, and Google and Yahoo aren't likely to provide coverage of the Guilford County Fair or the Ragsdale High School soccer game. The local media will be the only real source of this type of info, which will keep people reading, watching, or listening, and as long as that's the case, the advertisers will keep buying ads.

Market concerns about the impact of the Internet on media businesses haven't been limited to newspaper publishers. Broadcasters in both radio and television have seen the price of their shares dwindle recently. As with newspapers, it's clear that technology is changing the economics for broadcasters, but for those broadcasters willing to embrace this and use the technology to their advantage, the situation is not dire. The argument that we made above about local coverage holds true for broadcasters just as it does for newspapers.

The market has also seemingly overlooked that the real value in broadcasters is not necessarily in the content that they distribute but rather in the FCC licenses that enable them to distribute that content. While broadcasters have always profited from these licenses by transmitting television or radio programming to the public, the spectrum that broadcasters control can be put to other profitable uses. While the broadcasters would need regulatory approval to make major changes to the way in which they use their licenses, we suspect that they'd get it: The broadcasting lobby is easily one of the strongest in the United States. (Politicians usually try to keep the people who put out the local news happy.) So, while we believe that technology has changed and will continue to change broadcasting economics, we still see lots of value in broadcasting assets.

The Internet and other new technologies have clearly had an impact on the way that news, information, and entertainment are distributed. But while the market has taken a pessimistic view of media company prospects, we're more sanguine. After such a long period of negative returns, we think future results will be very satisfactory.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ms/060324/159741.html?.v=1

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 26 2006, 10:34 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

LOK is said to have had an Ascending Triangle formed. (See my post on the LOK thread)

http://www.stockscores.com/quickreport.asp...er=look&x=0&y=0

Cheers

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Investment Discussion

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 26 2006, 10:19 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

From : Stockscores.com Sent : Saturday, March 25, 2006 10:32 PM

Subject : Stockscores.com Perspectives For March 25, 2006

...

Strategy of the week

A common theme among Head and Shoulder Bottom, Ascending Triangles, Pennants and Rectangle Consolidation patterns is a break through resistance from low price volatility, usually with volume supporting the breakout. Rising price bottom formations in to the breakout point are common, but what market dynamic do these patterns really represent?

Rising bottoms are a sign of growing optimism among investors. As time passes, they demonstrate a weakening of selling force and increase power among buyers. As a stock moves up toward a resistance price point, the market is faced with the upper limit on what investors believe the company to be worth. We often see that stocks will go in to narrow trading ranges under resistance as investors come to a consensus on the value of the company. When stocks break out from this condition, they may be signaling significant new fundamental information at work in the market since resistance has been broken from strong consensus out of a period of optimism.

The Sentiment Stockscore is useful for finding optimism in the market, and the Signal Stockscore is heavily weighted on the abnormal market activity that comes with breakouts. By looking for stocks that have a Sentiment Stockscore of 60 or higher, and a Signal Stockscore of 80 or higher, we can consider charts that may have a good chart pattern set up. The Stockscores Simple Market Scan adds in some other technical filters to shorten the list of potential candidates further.

This strategy is not solely about finding stocks with good Stockscores. The most important step is visually inspecting the charts to ensure that the chart patterns are what we are looking for. A good chart pattern will have the following characteristics:

# A break through resistance

# Abnormal activity, in terms of price and volume activity

# The break through resistance should be from a period of low price volatility. Low price volatility is characterized by the price range of trading on each day (how tall the trading range is on the chart) and by the range of trading over a number of days (are the trading days side by side on the chart, or is there a price trend?)

# A show of optimism leading in to the break through resistance from low price volatility.

It is necessary to have all of these criteria, many traders forget to check whether the stock was trading with low price volatility before the breakout, or to make sure that the stock is truly breaking through resistance and will not encounter more selling pressure soon.

Stocks that meet the featured strategy

1. LOOK

Look at LOOK and you will see a good example of a stock breaking through resistance, from optimism, with abnormal activity and out of a period of low price volatility. The pattern on this chart is called an Ascending Triangle and it is a good indicator that an uptrend is likely. Support is at $4.75, a close below that would void the bullish chart pattern set up.

http://www.stockscores.com/quickreport.asp...er=look&x=0&y=0

Cheers

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 25 2006, 04:24 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

I'm not sure if their is any real significance in that "short" interest in LOK had climbed from 97,410 shares up to 191,864 shares, january - march, in the US.

March 2006
Short
Interest Percent
Change Average Daily
Share Volume Days to
Cover
LOOK LookSmart, Ltd. - Common Stock 191,864 18.02 84,245 2.28

February 2006
Short
Interest Percent
Change Average Daily
Share Volume Days to
Cover
LOOK LookSmart, Ltd. - Common Stock 162,575 66.90 159,260 1.02

January 2006
Short
Interest Percent
Change Average Daily
Share Volume Days to
Cover
LOOK LookSmart, Ltd. - Common Stock 97,410 (22.87) 163,970 1.00

http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/asp/short_inte....x=49&View.y=12

smile.gif

LC

  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 25 2006, 12:29 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

I've just posted this over on the Looksmart (private) Google Group board. For any existing shareholders who may "ghost" or, any recent new holders, I thought I would share it with you. (Please excuse any enthusiasm. Members of the Group don't mind it at all .... lol )

WHAT A GREAT FRIDAY ON THE NASDAQ !!

Just check the relevancy of these articles, once again!! Today is, Friday, March 24, 2006 (in the US - For the OZZIE members of the Group)

http://www.looksmartretirement.com/p/searc...t=entertainment

For the "exercise", I choose the article, "Tom Cruise Reenacts Oprah Moment"

Tom Cruise Reenacts Oprah Moment
Tom Cruise reenacted his sofa-jumping escapade on The Oprah Winfrey Show when he appeared at Yahoo's Influential Speakers showcase on Tuesday.
KCBA | Mar 24, 2006

Now "click on it" to find that it happens to be a FOX property. KCBA35

http://www.kcba.com/entertainment/story.as...63-F8BA6ED32759

Yes, it is a "feed" from new partner Topix.net but as shareholders, doesn't it "warm the cockles of your heart" knowing that NWS happen to "own" FOX ??

And Looksmart are advertising new jobs, too!! (Hiring).

http://www.yorz.com/searchListingResults.h...zid%3aLookSmart

11 new jobs advertised today! (friday in the US)

And how about this one!!!

http://www.yorz.com/posting/275225.htm

This position; CPA, "* Assist in M&A activity,.. " ???

Now who would LOOK be wanting to aquire? (INCX?) - Or, be aquired by? NWS ??

And a merger?? - With (INCX?)

It's all happening, that's for sure!!

smile.gif
LC

PS: I'm sure shareholders will find the above, of interest. Cheers!!
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 25 2006, 09:55 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Very few investors both here on ShareScene and the ASX in general, have any interest in LOK (Looksmart) these days .... Many were burnt (including me) when they lost MSN a few years back. But times have changed. Things are looking more solid nowaday .....

LOOK/LOK's close overnight in the US of $5.40c now has the shareprice rising over 96% (from off it's low), in the past 12 months.

Not a bad effort.

Looksmart will prove to be (in time) one of the greatest "turn around" stories, ever to be seen on the ASX. I feel VERY confident in saying that too.....T/A exponents (at least three) predicted this rise, almost to the day. They now see LOOK (in the US) going up to around the $10.00 - $11.00pps level over the coming 3-4 months, if not earlier. One says:

" Anybody that goes to the NASDAQ home page and gets a 7 year chart of look will see ... no matter how basic we are. See that massive pop through the trendline"? He asks.

When sm#ggler objected, based on current earnings & projected figures/fundamentals, another chartist offered:

"Well as you know, the technicals of today are the fundamentals of tomorrow. And LOOK is turning into new roads and reinventing itself. I based my projection on chart-reading. My advice to you is to not fight the tape". Which made sense to me.

Wait until the "news" of the Topix.net involvement hits the nasdaq!! Institutions will climb over each other to get a stake in LOOK, now that it has surpassed this, their $5.00pps "criteria" level, overnight.

Truly a great night for the private Looksmart Google Group who have watched every move possible, so to speak, over the past 12 - 18 months or, so. No doubt there will be other surprises unfold too!

Volume was terrific, too. With the "close" @ $5.40cps and a current exchange rate of $1.41095 AUD, the approx. value for LOK here on the ASX on monday, is $7.62cps .....

But it has only just begun.

MHO, of course. Do your own DD.

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)
Last Trade: $5.40cps
Trade Time: 3:59PM ET
Change: +$0.39cps (+7.78%)
Prev Close: $5.01cps
Open: $5.00pps

1y Target Est: $6.63c

Day's Range: $4.93 - $5.43
52wk Range: $2.75 - 5.05c
Volume: 325,702
Avg Vol (3m): 128,828
Market Cap: 122.96M

Worth a look, once again, IMHO!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 25 2006, 04:45 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

lol !! lol !! lol !! lol !! lol !! lol !!

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=LOOK

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 24 2006, 04:25 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: PeterH on Friday 24/03/06 02:35pm

All makes sense to me, for sure .....

" The blue chips which pay steady dividends but are a bit monotonous represent the base rhythm, while the more volatile stocks which carry company specific risk represent the treble which adds melody and colour".

And the odd "Tiny Tim's" come along now and then?

" with each kind of risk, [the ratio] being entirely up to the individual".

MMMmmm .... Once again, I must agree entirely.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Investment Discussion

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 24 2006, 04:18 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: neo99 on Friday 24/03/06 12:20pm

You have done a mighty "job" with this .... You're clever!!

Thanks.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 24 2006, 03:25 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: sierra on Friday 24/03/06 03:01pm

I'm excited about this one too, sierra .... Good luck!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 24 2006, 03:23 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

THE TOPIX.NET "UNOFFICIAL" PARTNERSHIP, IS MOST SIGNIFICANT.

I'm very excited about the "Content provided in partnership with Topix.net "unofficial" partnership announcement, shown on this Looksmart Vertical, right here .... (bottom RHS)

http://www.looksmartretirement.com/p/searc...lts&qt=entert...

It means, that LOOK's 181 Verticals will (or, can, potentially) now recieve up to the moment "news" on the hour, from Topix.net

This (Topix.net) "feed" will also (most likely) go to all the newspapers (sites) within the "network" group. That being McClatchy, (their existing sites, plus all the Knight-Ridder "stable's" sites, they have just bought), the Tribune & all of Gannetts newspaper sites. Potentially, hundreds of newspapers.

An example is demonstrated here in the (Tribune's) LA Times. Note here, how the LA Times has Topix.net, "powering" their site. (down the RHS here)

http://www.latimes.com/search/la-advanceds...77523.htmlstory

What I'm really suggesting is that this "partnership" with Topix.net (who are majority owned by those three newspapers groups) ............

[ "We're very pleased to announce that Topix.net has taken a majority equity investment from three of the largest newspaper and media firms in the US"

http://blog.topix.net/archives/000071.html ]

.....would, (it's more than fair to say), then "formalise" a contextualised ADS feed (Google &/or, their "own") upon all content supplied from this very (new) partner "network", into (both) Looksmart's F/A's and the current 181 Looksmart Verticals.

The logical final step is, for ALL these (above) publisher sites to then have a LOOKSMART "FindArticles in" BUTTON installed to provide that "merry-go-round effect" on all of their own, individual "user" eyeballs searching for special content of interest, when visiting any/all of these partner sites. ADS "click" Revenues would be apportioned accordingly.

I've also accepted that they don't necessarily have a need to change their "current" web search provider, (be it GOOGLE, YAHOO, MSN) who will be "co-opted" (accordingly), to at all times provide full & prominent (page one) Looksmart Verticals in their results at all times. A compromise understanding, you could call it.

Everyone would agree that it's ALL about "users" and advertisers. That LOOKSMART ARE IN THE BUSINESS OF ADVERTISING, THESE DAYS. The Looksmart 'concept' of Verticals and the placing contextualised ADS from Google (adsense or, EVEN Look's own) into all content result pages within them, ensures that the growing number of partner "eyeballs" passing through, can "click" on an add while "just visiting", besides the direct effect of helping those partner "users" stay longer, within the "stable" loop. Advertisers then remain (or, even start to return) to/with the "old world" publishers, as a result!! They follow the "eyeballs".

It is just a little complicated, for sure, but I hope it all makes sense. I also Hope that's what "they" (The Publisher/Media Co's) see, too. It's logical.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 24 2006, 08:12 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Approx. "value" for LOK today, is $7.01cps

Looksmart closed UP once again (overnight) & with an exchange rate of $1.40021 AUD (current) the approx. value for LOK here on the ASX today is $7.01c. Volume was up too!!

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)


Last Trade: $5.01c
Trade Time: 4:00PM ET
Change: +0.03c (+0.60%)
Prev Close: $4.98
Open: $4.99
Bid: 4.75 x 900
Ask: 5.27 x 700
1y Target Est: $6.63c

Day's Range: 4.90 - 5.05
52wk Range: 2.75 - 5.05
Volume: 146,175
Avg Vol (3m): 130,274
Market Cap: $114.08M

LOK (Looksmart) is a STRONG BUY .....IMHO

smile.gif

LC


  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 23 2006, 02:40 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

LOK could "spike" tonight in the US .....

With a current exchange rate of $1.39326 AUD the current "ask" of $6.85c for LOK is great value when you consider LOOK closed overnight @ $4.98c ......

The converted price for LOK is an approx. $6.9386c

LOOK (I feel) will break through resistence of $5.00pps tonight on the nasdaq following discovery of an "unofficial" massive partnership (yet to be announced) that should send the shareprice north in no uncertain fashion when announced.

Just MHO, of course. But it does look great!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 23 2006, 01:10 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: LookingConfident on Wednesday 22/03/06 11:08pm

< Back at (in) The LA Time's site map (on the LHS) I've chosen the "Burbank Leader" from the Community Newspapers list.

http://www.latimes.com/about/site/la-about...04194.htmlstory

Note that this "local" paper has Site Search only, along with the typical outdated type, archive search facility.

http://www.burbankleader.com/ >

I haven't had time to check those other community sites (of The LA Times, own by the Tribune group) but will later on. What I am excited about is what (for some reason) appears to me to be, (& that is), a compromise with Google. Google can continue to have web search on those new partner sites. They may even gain some existing sites from Yahoo or, others should "they" not play the "new" game. They will/could also gain those community newspaper sites (like the exampled "Burbank Leader") with the understanding that "FindArticles in/on..." will always be fairly & fully (page one results), indexed. It's in Google's & the other BIG Portal's interest. They will get plenty of adsense ADS in many circumstances. In PARTICULAR, the situation that exists for LOOK, (relating to international search carried out within the Verticals) & having country/regional "relative" ADS for each (LOOKSMART) home page of Vertical content, to whatever country is in question.

http://classifieds.burbankleader.com/share...search=advanced >

http://www.google.com.au/searchhl=en&q=Fin...le+Search&meta=

It's a "no brainer" when any listed community newspaper article from (say, eg;) the "Burbank Leader" in the US has a reader in OZ (or, any english speaking country in the world where Google is located, including china) reading that article "out of an interest" or, a "passion" and then potentially generates "click through" revenue for the owner, (The LA Times/Tribune), through the proven Google contextualisation -adsense programme, through their (Google's) "local" advertisers!

All we (Looksmart) need is that extra search "button" that leads a "user" to the Vertical choices within Google's (or, other major SE's) "page one" results, to be installed on all partner (newspaper/publisher/media Co's) sites. In MHO, of course.

How good it that?

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 23 2006, 07:51 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Wednesday 22/03/06 11:08pm)

< Whoops !! - That figure has now "jumped" to about 24,500,000 from www.findarticles.com !!!!!!!! >

Lookinsmart2002 reports that Looksmart's Zeal is finally being retired as they probably need the servers elsewhere. He added that he also feels that it appears the "Decks are being cleared ...... Something big is brewing" ...... were his exact words!!

It was a great night for LOOK with buyers returning late in the session (see Inett sales, below) to see the shareprice close UP .12cps, or, UP 2.47%

Calculated @ $1.3910c exchange rate, this gives LOK an equivalent shareprice value today in OZ, of approx. $6.93cps

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)
Last Trade: $4.98c
Trade Time: 4:00PM ET
Change: Up 0.12 (2.47%)
Prev Close: $4.86c
Open: 4.85
Bid: 4.97 x 100
Ask: 5.02 x 100
1y Target Est: $6.63c

Day's Range: $4.85 - $4.99c
52wk Range: 2.75 - 5.05
Volume: 67,611
Avg Vol (3m): 131,126
Market Cap: $113.40M

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=LOOK&d=t

LOOK Stats Symbol Search
Time B/S Shares Price
15:59:28.710 B 500 4.9700
15:59:26.483 S 400 4.9600
15:58:56.434 B 2,400 4.9900
15:58:56.434 B 600 4.9900
15:57:05.604 B 98 4.9900
15:57:05.604 B 100 4.9900
15:57:05.604 B 2 4.9800
15:56:49.345 B 99 4.9800
15:56:49.206 B 99 4.9800
15:56:30.225 B 100 4.9800
15:50:30.813 B 100 4.9800
15:50:30.746 B 100 4.9800
15:42:07.394 B 1,890 4.9900
15:42:07.394 B 10 4.9900
15:42:07.394 B 100 4.9900
15:41:52.829 B 30 4.9900
15:41:52.829 B 300 4.9900
15:41:52.829 B 100 4.9900
15:41:52.768 B 360 4.9900
15:41:52.768 B 200 4.9800
15:41:52.768 B 340 4.9800
15:41:14.089 B 160 4.9800

I'll repeat my own belief that big news is close and that the $5.00pps level in the US will then be "blown away", when it is forthcoming ......

Good luck to all holders.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 22 2006, 11:08 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (LookingConfident @ Wednesday 22/03/06 09:22am)

< So, this "FindArticles in..." concept (& search BUTTON) will quickly become the new search "standard", rather than the exception. Promotion within their (own) print media, can ensure this happens. >

I am convinced, that (with the advent of Topix.Net on the scene), all systems are "go" with a very big involvement for F/A's & the Verticals, along the lines that I have surmised within my earlier posts. If it is any better than I imagine, then that's all the better for shareholders! I think it all makes sense and would certainly love to see it eventuate.

Back at (in) The LA Time's site map (on the LHS) I've chosen the "Burbank Leader" from the Community Newspapers list.

http://www.latimes.com/about/site/la-about...04194.htmlstory

Note that this "local" paper has Site Search only, along with the typical outdated type archive search facility.

http://www.burbankleader.com/

http://classifieds.burbankleader.com/share...search=advanced

When we apply the "FindArticles in..." search term (on Google) we find that many articles have been indexed within LOOK's Verticals.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...le+Search&meta=

A lot of this content may even be "new" (as such), for when we look at this article here....

[ LookSmart Low Fat - Best results for "food vegetables" Burbank Leader | Mar 17, 2006. Cookbook celebrates Irish 'pub grub' at home Ease into a comfortable booth in an Irish pub. Settle your pint on the seasoned ...]

http://www.looksmartlowfat.com/p/search?sb...food/vegetables

....we then find that Topix.net (part owned by Tribune who happen to own both The LA Times & the Burbank Leader) have supplied the content on this "LooksmartLowfat Vertical" results page. On this page, Google (Australia) has relevent (adsense) ADS, displaying Australian sites. I have no doubt that Looksmart will continue with Google adsense (remember, upwards of 80% is paid out to adsense partners, by Google) because of the established "reach" of Google, universally. Looksmart would retain 100% revenues for "click throughs" on these Vertical result pages. Publishers/Media Co's that currently use Google for search on their sites, can retain them, accordingly. Both points make it imperative for Google to show "FindArticles in" content, prominently, on the page one results. Past this junction, (Looksmart's Vertical result pages), I'd then imagine newspapers (or, all articles from all publisher/media Co's) would then retain revenues similarly, on their own respective sites. (Whatever their arrangements, on their own sites). Verticals become the "content bank" for ALL partners and will attract "click throughs" as the many future users "pass through", (just visiting?) on a daily/weekly/monthly/annual basis. If just those three "monster" owners of Topix.net alone were to place a "FindArticles in/on......" BUTTON on ALL of their sites (including Local Community Newspapers), how good would that be for ALL concerned, in time to come? I figure, MORE publisher/media Co's will in turn, "COME ON BOARD".

By keeping an "eye" on, (as Lookinsmart2002 points out) the number of Articles found by Google, we get an idea of progress. (currently about 12,200,000 from www.findarticles.com, at this point of writing.)

http://finance.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?.m

Whoops !! - That figure has now "jumped" to about 24,500,000 from www.findarticles.com !!!!!!!!

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&clie...icles.com&meta=

Readers who have got this far may be able to "work that out" for yourself from here now, surely?

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 22 2006, 09:22 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

LOOK closed UP overnight @ $4.86cps. The approx. value for LOK (here on the ASX) calculated @ $1.39217 AUD ='s $6.77cps

Like a "Jigsaw puzzle" all the "parts" are coming together.......

< Topix Delivering Local News Search to Ask Jeeves

Topix.net today announced that it has been selected by Ask Jeeves, Inc. to provide news to Ask Jeeves for its Local News channel. Through this partnership, Ask Jeeves becomes the first major search engine to feature Topix.net’s news technology.

Topix.net provides visitors to Ask Jeeves access to local news gathered from over 7,000 sources. Unlike any other news aggregator, Topix.net provides localized news for over 32,500 U.S. and international localities. Ask Jeeves’ utilization of Topix.net includes the use of NewsRank™, Topix.net’s algorithmic story editing technology, which improves the user experience by leveraging a set of semantic category filters to improve the relevancy of the news selection in favor of major and interesting stories.

“We’re excited to provide Ask Jeeves’ users with neighborhood-level local news,” said Topix.net Chief Executive Officer Rich Skrenta. “By featuring the news we aggregate from every newspaper, radio and TV station, and thousands of other sources, Ask Jeeves users will be able to quickly find the news that matters to them.” >

http://www.searchenginejournal.com/?p=885

What's next? A "FindArticles in... " button for all players???

Well, it does seem a natural, most would agree. The 'cosy' network of publishers & media Co's that has formed of late, will ALL take the Topix.net (local & national) "news" feed to ALL their respective sites. This not only provides an 'up to the minute' service to the many "users" of those sites, but also provides "shared revenues" daily, for all levels of direct involvement. (Via Contextualised ADS).

Newspapers & magazines, TV sites, etc, all have archives "chock-a-block" full of historical (& interesting) articles on many & varied topics. These (articles) are then indexed into Looksmart's FindArticles. The articles (following some "slicing & diceing") find their way into the many (currently 181 & more to come) Looksmart Verticals. Looksmart's Furl "collects" even more articles (by the minute) each day, & the more 'popular' ones (contextualised with suitable ADS by Looksmart), also end up in the Looksmart FindArticles "bank" and Verticals, accordingly.

All (other) participating publishers & media Co's (simply), then install a "FindArticles in... " BUTTON on their individual sites that allows their "users" to search the web for articles relating to their chosen topic of interest or, individual passion. The BIG Portals provide page one results for the FindArticles "Brand" and will continue to do so, as they also have an interest in retaining existing (general) web search, on most of these sites, they have, already. Try it out yourself. Choose a particular interest (of yours) and then use the search term ("FindArticles in/on...") as a prefix to it, on most sites. I've chosen water skiing, with a search term of ..... "FindArticles in water ski-ing"

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&clie...nG=Search&meta=

Looksmart's Verticals are very prominent in those results, as can be witnessed. Each page of results has Looksmart "banners", etc

The most popular articles contained within those Looksmart Verticals are then "contextualised" with ADS by the origional content (article), publisher provider. Revenues from any resulting "CLICK THROUGHS" are then probably "shared" with the partners concerned.

Will it work?? You betcha!! There are hundreds of millions of "eyeballs" each month initiating search requests from those very same sites daily, already!! How in the hell has GOOGLE, (adsense), Yahoo, MSN & AOL recieved the bulk of their revenues, if not from partner sites??

Now, with publisher/media Co's regaining control of their "own" advertisers, placing ADS on their "own" content, it then becomes imperative that they then (ALL) "promote" the "FindArticles in..." BUTTON, to further increase their own (individual) revenue generating prospects!! It becomes the ultimate, "you scratch my back, etc"

So, this "FindArticles in..." concept (& BUTTON) will quickly become the new search "standard", rather than the exception. Promotion within their (own) print media, can ensure this happens.

Just MHO, but, wait and see......

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 21 2006, 04:52 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Looksmart is a definate "Strong BUY" - More Partners !!!

Looksmart are now very close to a major announcement that centres around what looks like a comfirmed involvement with Topix.net.

Check out who the "content" supplier is here:

(Content provided in partnership with [Results by] Topix.net)

http://www.looksmartretirement.com/p/searc...t=entertainment

Check out the relevance, too !!!!

And Topix.net ??? - Read on!!

"We're very pleased to announce that Topix.net has taken a majority equity investment from three of the largest newspaper and mediafirms in the US -- Knight Ridder, Tribune and Gannett. We see a huge opportunity with this deal, and wanted to share why we did it, what it means and what we're doing going forward".(A good read here)

http://blog.topix.net/archives/000071.html

This other, 'older' deal announcement is an insight into where this can now take us, I feel.

http://knightridderinfo.com/releases/index.php?id=524257

It means that LOOK's Verticals will (or, can potentially) recieve up to the moment relevant "news" to all 181 Vertical sites, from Topix.net

This (Topix.net) "feed" will also (most likely) go to all the newspapers (sites) within the network group. That being McClatchy, (their existing, plus the Knight-Ridder "stable" they have just bought), the Tribune & Gannett.

Potentially, hundreds of newspapers. As is demonstrated in the Tribune's LA Times. Note here, how the LA Times has Topix.net, "powering" their site. (down the RHS here)

http://www.latimes.com/search/la-advanceds...77523.htmlstory


smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 21 2006, 03:55 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: LookingConfident on Monday 20/03/06 11:35am


Yes ....

< FindArticles is crap and can't be compared to print media let alone a website. >

The above reference was to a result from a "FindArticles in Travel" search on Google. Of the 12,800,000 results, Looksmart have prominence on this page one of results for this search term.

http://www.google.com.au/search?client=fir...G=Google+Search

Looksmart's Verticals are there!! But the "crap" reference was about the No1 F/A result, being.........Travel America

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCQ

Holidays away & 'Collette Vacations offers five- and six-day holiday-themed trips ...'

< This is what you call great content?? > was the question put....??

drw4home provided the answer.

< Did you know that Collette is considered a very good client in advertising sales. They are well known throughout travel publications and speacialties (i.e. travel sections in newspapers) as someone to have very good relations with. LOOK treats them well as you point out.

They may not account for enourmous expenditures, but they are constant and have a well defined advertising budget. However, they are influenced by special sections and events for particular circumstances in which they allocate special budget... meaning they can be sold.

Someone here pointed out from the 10K LOOK is expanding the sales force.

What is important to note about developing these relationships with people who mean little to you overall budget, is that they are constant and can be influenced. So, good relations with small advertisers are crucial in this business. The big guy may not alwyas be there. Imagine a newspaper losing a major department store advertiser. LOOK knows what it's like to loose a big one.

What is also interesting about Collettee here is that they are tradtionaly a print only advertiser. It has been further pointed out the marketplace trend of traditional media advertisers embracing online media, and LookSmart was the online media example.

About Collette Vacations:

http://www.collettevacations.com/sp/why/index.cfm

<Started in 1918, Collette Vacations has earned the distinction of being the oldest vacation tour operator in the United States. Under the leadership of the Sullivan family since 1962, Collette has seen its presence expand from that of a regional motorcoach operator to a global vacation company that travels to all seven continents, with offices in three countries (United States, Canada and the United Kingdom).>

Note the "learning vacations" mention in the link. This is an example of how LOOK can take advantage of Collette's budget. Collette might be interested in the education verticals or Find Article results pertaining to subjects that are of interest to them. The resulting factor for Collette is called a qualified audience... with passions and enthusiasms that are not crap to those that embrace them. >

It is a great reply!!

smile.gif
LC



  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 21 2006, 12:24 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (Mission X @ Tuesday 14/03/06 09:57am)

Hi MX ....

< LC... Hey the Comp...... HOW ARE WE GOING with it ????? Well lets see..

Hey L.C LOOKING GOOD MATE..UP 14.9 % from your locked in price. Which was $5.74..
Go Go GO LOK...Mine with some luck today will get to (PDN 4.00) will give me a tad under 100% the other 2 are going great as well.. they are around the 50% mark... oxr should have a good day today pushing it over 50%.. >

MX.....You're truly, "on fire" !!!

But.....There is an "age old" story about the "tortoise & the hare" that I want to remind you of!!

I'll also remind you that LOK's current shareprice value (compared to yesteryear's, as we knew it back then), is just 6.65 cents!! That's pretty low, you'd agree. And it is UP .20cps today, too.

I've 'hung in' here simply because of the tremendous growth predicted for advertising on the net and with the appointment of a new CEO (aided by some additional quality Directors & Senior VP's) along with a completely "new" model, I have taken the big "chance". Yes, a real risk it has been, I will admit. (My current average, this time around, is $4.6140). Some say, "the bigger the risk, the bigger the returns"!! And I do admit, that I have really laid it all on the line this time around & now hold over 10 times my previous holdings!! Crazy?? No doubt many would say so, I'm sure. I've been posting away here with very little response from others because of the "complex" involvements (partnerships) the Co are slowly building, step by step. I have learned to understand it much better by watching many moves surrounding "old world" publishers (newspapers/magazines) & media Co's who have learned the hard way that the Googles, Yahoo's MSN's and AOL's of the net, are taking billions ($$$'s) belonging to what were once, their "traditional" advertisers, off of them.

They (old media) had to fight back at some stage. Looksmart went back to "square one" and with new CEO David Hill's backgound experience, have now "pitched" their effort at them.

MX .... IT'S STARTING TO WORK. I do feel that an announcement that could come any day now will surely make the market well and truly aware of the tremendous "value", the current share price is. Look's market CAP is just $110M and the Co has approx. $50M in cash!! An announcement (a few days back) that a "start up" AD serving group were given 48 million dollars to come up with a competitor to Yahoo and Google by some Venture Capitalist types. And the market see LOOK's intrinsic value at just $60M?? LOOK are now established.!!

http://www.smartmoney.com/bn/ON/index.cfm?...317-000938-1431

A fellow shareholder commented (privately), "How happy would those venture capitalists be if the little project they are backing could sign a company as big as IACI's search entity right out of the gate? How hard would that be to pull off? Would they feel vindicated for the risk then? Sure they would!". (Looksmart now provide their search platform to IACI's ASK - [Jeeves] along with other "deals" including CBS Local TV Sites & The NY Times, newspaper.)

This "ugly duckling" is about to grow up!! And quick, too!!

Cheers MX !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 21 2006, 09:32 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Looksmart was "strong" overnight in the US and whilst the "official" close on the nasdaq shows $4.85cps a close of $4.88c was more appropriate, I feel. Not to worry. Buyers returned and the "high" of $4.93cps is equal to an approx. $6.84cps (Calculated @ $1.38875 AUD exchange rate). The actual close price is an approx. $6.72cps for LOK here on the ASX today. LOK has opened (up .20cps), @ $6.65cps.

News is very close (I feel) and it wouldn't surprise me if an announcement was forthcoming pre-open in the US tonight.

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)
Last Trade: $4.85cps
Trade Time: 4:00PM ET
Change: Up 0.05cps (+1.04%)
Prev Close: $4.80c
Open: 4.79c
Bid: 4.72 x 2000
Ask: 5.50 x 2300
1y Target Est: 6.63cps

Day's Range: $4.66 - $4.93
52wk Range: 2.75 - 5.05
Volume: 121,129
Avg Vol (3m): 134,661
Market Cap: $110.44M
(Topix)

Good luck to those who hold!!

smile.gif
LC

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 20 2006, 11:35 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Obvious price manipulation, IMHO. It's been going on for months. But not to worry....this is a long road!!

Today: 20-Mar-2006
Time(AEST) Price Volume Value Condition Codes
12:21:33 6.4500 25 161.25
11:06:57 6.6000 550 3,630.00
11:06:57 6.5500 200 1,310.00 XT
10:45:03 6.4500 50 322.50
10:05:01 6.4500 75 483.75

Quiktrade_1 says over on Yahoo:

< FindArticles is crap and can't be compared to print media let alone a website. >

UHMMMMmm?? i wonder if you really are showing your ignorance or, lack of understanding?!!

FindArticles is THE largest inventory of content on the net. And Looksmart's Furl has many hundred's of thousands of "users", daily. The most popular "Furled" (saved) articles are indexed into FindArticles and consequently, then find their way into one of the many Looksmart Vertical sites, according to content topic. The most popular articles are provided on/in page one results of LOOK's Verticals, for searchers seeking information according to their own personal interest, or, passion.

He then went on to say: < Occasionally I accidentally click on a Google result only to find its a FindArticles document. >

Oh really? As time goes by and publishers of newspapers/magazines adopt the FindArticles "concept", their own "users" will also be directed to Looksmart's Verticals, where contextual ADS will ensure ongoing revenue "splits" for all Looksmart, newspaper/magazine network partners.

Looksmart have made it quite clear that FindArticles is not necessarily a destination site. It's purely a repositary of many millions of articles. (Content). Those (more suitable) articles then are placed within the Verticals.

FindArticles on travel? Yes, Google has about 13,600,000 results for findarticles on travel.

Now check the 1st page of google's results to learn how Looksmart have "verticalised" those results, for info on where you may intent to travel to.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hs=qjn&hl=...nG=Search&meta=

You'll get it, one day!! It's not that hard, surely?

LOL!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 15 2006, 07:28 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

PatrickGeorge asked the question, elsewhere......

"Your stock is looking quite good ....you must be reasonably happy?"

Yes, things are finally looking up. There was that period where a lot of faith was required, but (thankfully) the stock price has risen some 80% since those shaky days. LOOK'S future chances are best summed up by Lookinsmart2002 who posted on Yahoo:


Ten reasons why Looksmart is a bargain.....
by: lookinsmart2002 03/15/06 03:35 am
Msg: 156431 of 156431

1. They have split their revenue generation into three diverse streams instead of the concentrated revenue source of the MSN Days

2. Their RPC (revenue per click) is rising due to the greater segmentation of their audience via their new vertical network. Advertisers are starting to pay more to be displayed to a more qualified audience

3. LOOKSMART'S audience to their OWNED and OPERATED network has more than doubled in 12 months, and rose over 15% in the last month alone despite seasonal downturns. Analysts Piper Jaffery already stated "watch for LOOK's verticals gaining traction". They are.

4. They now own and operate most of their banner, contextual and listed ads removing acquisition costs.

5. They have licensed their technlogy to Ask Jeeves, Viacom, New York Times, and recently announced many other new customers, due to kick in this quarter and next.

6. Revenues have bottomoed out and are on the rise

7. Margin is improving each quarter despite rising TAC last quarter. If TAC stays the same this quarter, we will see an even bigger jump in margin.

8. LOOK is still trading at the price it did last year when:

- it had delisting hanging over its head (now resolved)
- it had shrinking revenues (now rising)
- it had click fraud in its network (now irradicated)
- it was losing advertisers (now gaining)
- it had no licensing revenue ( now has many licensing customers)

9. Hills the new CEO arrived in fall 2004, and is turning the company around getting out and about in the media as an authority on vertical search, click fraud and segmented advertising.

10. LOOK are currently running an extremely cost effective targetted marketing campaign at advertisers.

Cheers to all holders....

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 14 2006, 01:11 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Grab a cup of your favourite coffee and have a play around with Google Mars, here....

http://www.google.com/mars/

It's FASCINATING!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 14 2006, 12:57 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: Mission X on Tuesday 14/03/06 09:57am


< LC... Hey the Comp...... HOW ARE WE GOING with it ????? Well lets see.. >

MX ..... You are "on fire" and have a strong lead at this stage. I must let you know though, that LOK (Looksmart) are almost ready to start what will be an incredible run and a rising shareprice value to match. If we can get some news in the next few days, it will start the show, good & proper.

Look's good.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 14 2006, 08:10 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Looksmart closed UP 10cps overnight and @ $1.35823c (exchange rate), the approx. value for LOK here on the ASX will be $6.80cps......

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)
Last Trade: $4.97c
Trade Time: 3:59PM ET
Change: Up $0.10cps (+2.05%)
Prev Close: $4.87c
Open: $4.90c
Bid: 4.89 x 100
Ask: 5.00 x 1000
1y Target Est: $6.63c

Day's Range: 4.76 - 5.00
52wk Range: 2.75 - 5.05
Volume: 95,400
Avg Vol (3m): 147,687
Market Cap: 113.17M

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 12 2006, 09:07 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

ODI no. 2349
Australia in South Africa ODI Series - 5th ODI
South Africa v Australia 2005/06 season

Played at New Wanderers Stadium, Johannesburg, on 12 March 2006 (50-over match)


Australia innings (maximum 50 overs) R M B 4s 6s SR
wicket-keeper AC Gilchrist c Hall b Telemachus 55 70 44 9 0 125.00
SM Katich c Telemachus b Ntini 79 90 9 1 87.77
captain RT Ponting not out 112 81 10 5 138.27
MEK Hussey not out 51 33 7 1 154.54
Extras (lb 2, w 3, nb 4) 9

Total (2 wickets; 40.4 overs) 306

To bat DR Martyn, MJ Clarke, A Symonds, ML Lewis, B Lee, NW Bracken, SR Clark

Fall of wickets 1-97 (Gilchrist, 15.2 ov), 2-216 (Katich, 30.3 ov)


Bowling O M R W Econ
M Ntini 8 0 62 1 7.75 (1w)
AJ Hall 7 0 48 0 6.85 (1nb)
JJ van der Wath 8 0 58 0 7.25 (1nb, 1w)
R Telemachus 7.4 1 41 1 5.34 (2nb, 1w)
GC Smith 4 0 29 0 7.25
JH Kallis 5 0 58 0 11.59
JM Kemp 1 0 8 0 8.00


South Africa team
wicket-keeperMV Boucher, AB de Villiers, HH Dippenaar, HH Gibbs, AJ Hall, JH Kallis, JM Kemp, M Ntini, captainGC Smith, R Telemachus, JJ van der Wath


Toss Australia, who chose to bat first

Player of the match tba

Umpires Aleem Dar (Pakistan) and BG Jerling
TV umpire KH Hurter
Match referee BC Broad (England)
Reserve umpire M Erasmus

Match notes

* Australia innings
* Australia: 50 runs in 7.5 overs (47 balls), Extras 0
* 1st Wicket: 50 runs in 47 balls (AC Gilchrist 29, SM Katich 23, Ex 0)
* AC Gilchrist: 50 off 35 balls (8 x 4)
* Power Play 2: Overs 15.1 - 20.0
* Australia: 100 runs in 16.3 overs (102 balls), Extras 4
* SM Katich: 50 off 60 balls (6 x 4, 1 x 6)
* Australia: 150 runs in 22.6 overs (143 balls), Extras 6
* 2nd Wicket: 50 runs in 50 balls (SM Katich 20, RT Ponting 33, Ex 3)
* RT Ponting: 50 off 43 balls (6 x 4, 2 x 6)
* Australia: 200 runs in 28.5 overs (178 balls), Extras 6
* 2nd Wicket: 100 runs in 85 balls (SM Katich 34, RT Ponting 69, Ex 3)
* Australia: 250 runs in 34.3 overs (213 balls), Extras 8
* 3rd Wicket: 50 runs in 39 balls (RT Ponting 23, MEK Hussey 30, Ex 2)
* RT Ponting: 100 off 71 balls (9 x 4, 5 x 6)
* Australia: 300 runs in 39.5 overs (246 balls), Extras 9
* MEK Hussey: 50 off 33 balls (7 x 4, 1 x 6)

http://content-aus.cricinfo.com/rsavaus/en...ertype=frameset

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 11 2006, 02:38 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

It is also worth noting that the MM's are starting to make a habit out of a quick "sharp", low open of LOOK and then drag it down even further and it allows them to "pinch" shares as a result of "stop losses" being set off......

Almost 10% of the overnight total volume of 81,870 were "stolen" in the 1st couple of minutes of trading......Note the solid blue line (between 7K & 8K in total) shown ON THE LEFT HAND MARGIN, here in the one day graph.....

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=LOOK&t=1d

And the five day chart may just be the start of a trend?

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=LOOK&t=5d

Although the trading range for the day is shown as $4.60c - $4.94c the 1st hour of sales recorded here (for Inett trades) show nothing below $4.73c were sold.

10:57:11.680 B 1,500 4.9200
10:57:11.604 S 140 4.9200
10:56:53.637 S 200 4.9200
10:56:51.363 S 100 4.9200
10:56:22.100 S 1,000 4.9200
10:51:18.958 S 60 4.9000
10:42:12.339 S 1,000 4.9000
10:37:53.490 B 300 4.8800
10:36:27.056 B 200 4.8700
10:34:37.370 B 100 4.8800
10:31:56.605 S 100 4.7900
10:30:59.471 S 200 4.7900
10:18:40.073 S 100 4.7300
10:17:43.536 S 100 4.7300
10:16:43.812 S 100 4.7300
10:15:36.830 S 800 4.7300
10:15:36.830 S 200 4.7400
10:04:35.541 B 200 4.7700
9:57:16.554 B 400 4.7400

I have maintained for some time now, that sellers have been scarce for LOOK and to get them, you really have to buy them.....

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 11 2006, 11:23 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Lack of sellers again (overnight), clearly demonstrated the fact, that if you want LOOK shares in the US, you will have to pay for them. (A contrast to the discounted price for LOK in recent timeshere in OZ). Looksmart closed UP by 3.4% @ $4.87cps after getting to $4.94cps at one stage. Volume was a little over half the average (3m) figure and I can only comment that with any positive news, LOOK/LOK will explode!!!

And I feel we are not to far from what will be, the potential of a string of good news relating to search partnerships involving newspaper publishing groups, for starters.

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)

Last Trade: $4.87c
Trade Time: 3:58PM ET
Change: Up $0.16cps (+3.40%)
Prev Close: $4.71c
Open: $4.66c

1y Target Est: $6.63c

Day's Range: $4.60c - $4.94c
52wk Range: $2.75c - $5.05c
Volume: 81,870
Avg Vol (3m): 152,141
Market Cap: $110.89M

With an exchange rate of $1.36620 AUD (currently), an approx value for LOK shares on monday here on the ASX should be $6.65c - LOK closed @ $6.24cps here yesterday.

Holders of the stock (IMHO) should remain patient and enjoy a great ride over the next 12 - 18 months, at least!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 10 2006, 10:30 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

A very good interview with Michael Grubb (Senior Vice President of Technology and Chief Technology Officer) of Looksmart. He fully explains a lot about Furl and the Verticals. Good for those wanting a better understanding of both.

http://netsquared.org/grubb

With Furl, he 'boils down' the major features, as:

* saving
* tagging
* searching
* discovering
* sharing
* privacy
* syndication
* interoperability
* tools
* ease of use

Looksmart closed UP one cent overnight and has an approx value for LOK (@ $1.36340 AUD) of $6.42cps, here on the ASX today.

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)
Last Trade: $4.71C
Trade Time: 3:58PM ET
Change: Up +0.01C (+0.21%)
Prev Close: $4.70
Open: $4.73
1y Target Est: $6.63

Day's Range: $4.67 - $4.78
52wk Range: $2.75 - $5.05
Volume: 79,386
Avg Vol (3m): 156,007
Market Cap: 107.25M


smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 9 2006, 01:48 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: filament on Thursday 09/03/06 01:19pm


< Weren't the Chinese subscribing for some shares ? >

"goldennugget" may be buying them now?

It's been a game of "pass the parcel" in recent times.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 9 2006, 12:15 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: LookingConfident on Thursday 09/03/06 10:16am

LOOKINSMART2002 had pointed out in the Looksmart Google Group, that:

< apparently LOOKSMART'S netnanny won the 2005 iparenting media award >

He was then challenged with:

"u have always been a champion of netnanny, havent you?"

"Yes". (he replied). "The general public has reached the stage that they are willing to spend hundreds of dollars on virus protection a year to protect their PCs.

And In time the public at large will be very willing to pay similar amounts in order to protect their kids.

Netnanny is now quite cheap to the consumer, it costs LOOK virtually nothing to run whilst bringing in a modest revenue, and quietly sits there accumulating users organically. When it's time comes it will be an extremely valuable asset to LOOK".

I CAN'T HELP BUT AGREE......

http://www.netnanny.com/

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 9 2006, 11:56 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: filament on Thursday 09/03/06 10:44am

Hi filament.....

< Microsoft are moving into the lucrative search market. LOK are being squeezed further and further into the niche corner. >

That's good for Looksmart. Although only 'early days', Looksmart results on Microsoft's live.com are very encouraging, to say the least.

http://www.live.com/

A few examples that have been noted, include "family meals" .....

http://www.live.com/#q=family%20meals&offset=1

"Hybrid autos" ......

http://www.live.com/#q=hybrid%20autos&offset=1

"SUV's"......

http://www.live.com/#q=suvs&offset=1

LOOK results are closely aligned with The NYT's About results, on the same pages.

< Not a good place to be when there are bucketloads of search money to be made.>

On the contrary ...... If those examples shown are indicative of MSN's regard for content in Looksmart Verticals, the $$$'s will look after themselves, in due course. How? With millions of MSN "users" being pointed to those rich results (as exampled), it soon becomes a formality. At Look's Verticals, they are then greeted with, (As Lookinsmart2002 points out), as follows:

- Looksmart Contextual advertising

- Third party syndicated Contextual advertising

- Looksmart Banner advertising

- Third party syndicated Banner advertising

- Looksmart "skyscraper" advertising

- Search listing advertising on category pages and search results containing the free articles

- Distributing the content to other search providers

- Users clicking "Save" on the free content seeing furl ads every time they look for something they furled previously

- Publishers realising their content can make money deciding to license LOOK's technology to do so

All of these avenues generate $$$. >

I say ......... Three cheers for MSN's live.com

smile.gif
LC





  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 9 2006, 10:16 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

There are a lot of "goings on" and plenty of positives from Looksmart today, for holders ......

Lookinsmart2002 advises of a "new" Netnanny site up & running today:

http://www.netnanny.com/

< Lots of cross promotion to relevant verticals going on too. That should be good, since Netnanny gets nearly as much traffic as the entire education vertical cluster.

I particularly like this one: "Protect your family with netnanny software for less than $3.50 per month".

Also apparently netnanny won the 2005 iparenting media award.

Also, they seem to have replaced the netnanny search with searching of the verticals. A good move to get netnanny searchers more targetted and segmented ready to be more receptive to advertising. >

Well worth a Look !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 9 2006, 09:18 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

LOOK closed UP .10cps @ $4.70cps overnight and with an exchange rate of 1.36272c is an equivalent $6.40cps for LOK today on the ASX. Volume was thin with shares hard to come by.

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)
Last Trade: $4.70c
Trade Time: 3:58PM ET
Change: Up +0.10c (+2.17%)
Prev Close: $4.60c
Open: $4.60c
Bid: 3.16 x 7000
Ask: 5.00 x 2300
1y Target Est: $6.63c

Day's Range: $4.58c - $4.70c
52wk Range: 2.75c - 5.05c
Volume: 58,854
Avg Vol (3m): 157,197
Market Cap: 107.02M


smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 8 2006, 10:32 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Cheers & thanks, sierra....

A close today of, over .15cps would be oh so nice!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 8 2006, 08:37 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: LookingConfident on Monday 27/02/06 09:50am

As I look into my crystal ball.......a PREDICTION!!!!

On 27/02/2006, in that post, I wrote:

< What I clearly see is an announcement that will tell us of "Looksmart LOCAL". It could even be an involvement with INCX's Local.com.

A buyout of INCX with an 'all script' deal? Who knows? Or, will it simply be a deeper kind of relationship whereby Looksmart work 'hand in hand' with Interchange's Local.com. >

Interchange announced the following after market close today:

Interchange hires banker to review search options

"The investment bank will help the board analyze options including, but not limited to, the combination, sale or merger of the national search business with another entity, the company said."

http://yahoo.reuters.com/stocks/QuoteCompa...l=INCX.O&rpc=44

Looksmart closed DOWN one cent @ $4.60cps but this was questionable. The share was clearly trading @ $4.62c - $4.63c in the last moment or, so..... doesn't matter!!

An approx value for LOK today is $6.27cps calculated at an exchange rate of $1.36391 AUD

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 7 2006, 05:08 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: Dknow on Tuesday 07/03/06 04:56pm

Peter Beattie won't be around much longer (as PREMIER OF Qld). Rupert will make sure of that!!

A change in policy from a new Govt, following the next election, here in Qld.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 7 2006, 04:34 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

UP 7.4% today, although volume was nothing to write home about. Moving in the right direction for holders.

Last Price +/- % Open High Volume
$0.1450 +$0.0100 +7.4% 0.1300 0.1450 421,313

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 6 2006, 09:09 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

YES.....

And "goldennugget" values the stock at over $4.28 per share, too......

http://www.pacificepoch.com/forum/threads/50812_0_16_0_C/

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 5 2006, 09:55 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Looksmart’s FindArticles can provide relevant answers for many Search enquiries.

Bambi Francisco in her Net Sense article "Behond single searches - How shared searches can create an audience" over at Marketwatch.com comments on problems she recently encountered when searching for some information she was after:

"if someone knew what I cared about, they might help me ask the right questions in the search box. For instance, I've had to do half a dozen searches to find the weight of a certain carbon bike frame made by Giant. I didn't know what question to ask, really".

http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/3PGn...teid=mktw&dist=

My reply to her was, that (in most cases) when using a simple search term of “FindArticles on……” , I am now no more that just “two” or, maybe “three” clicks away from all the information I need and on the topic of my choice

http://bambi.blogs.com/bambi_francisco/200...w.html#comments

In this reply to her, it was explained that I had gone ahead & applied the above search term to her query (on Google), as follows:

"FindArticles on carbon bike frame made by Giant", for the following result.....

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Fi...le+Search&meta=

I then selected the 3rd result (Looksmartcycling.com) and arrived at this looksmart Vertical site.

http://www.looksmartcycling.com/p/search?q...l&sn=21&se=1,78

I then placed Bambi’s own search term in the search box. (top right, on this page)....In an attempt to narrow down the results, even further.

http://www.looksmartcycling.com/p/search?f...Frame&x=13&y=11

I found that cycling was part of the Looksmart Sports, (cluster). I even checked out their “see what others found useful” (SHARED PAGES) on this page, being an additional aid that features heaps of other useful information and on (in this exercise), Bambi’s interest in cycling.

Try it yourself.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 4 2006, 05:44 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

From HC earlier....

A man on his way home from work, comes to a dead halt in traffic and thinks to himself, "This traffic seems worse than usual. Nothing's even moving."

He notices a police officer walking back and forth between the lines of cars, so he rolls down his window and asks, "Constable, what's the hold up?"

The constable replies, "It's Eddie McGuire. He's just so depressed about his personal life - the thought of moving with Carla & Joseph to Sydney and the state of disruption amongst his beloved Magpies, Channel nine losing the football coverage, having to give up The Footy Show, Who wants to be a Millionaire, and his Triple M radio show, that he's stopped his motorcade in the middle of the freeway and he's threatening to douse himself in petrol and set himself on fire. He says his family hates him and he doesn't have the money to pay for the new house renovations at Point Piper and to bring his current house in Toorak up to scratch to put it on the market. We're taking up a collection for him."

"Oh really? How much have you got so far?"

"About three hundred litres, but a lot of people are still siphoning."

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 4 2006, 12:54 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: happy2 on Friday 03/03/06 11:05pm

< Ask yourself, Why would you hold on to a stock that is diminishing in value and has little hope of recovery? >

I read your posts with interest Happy2 but should remind you that in every transaction, someone buys that parcel you have advocated, selling.....

Just as beauty is in the 'eye of the beholder', so is "value". It's measured in many ways, shapes or, form and certainly some see it a lot different than you often do.

< Shareholding is a risky game. But we know the odds. >

Absolutely!! Each to their own. The bigger the risk, (at times) can provide the bigger the gain!

Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Investment Discussion

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 4 2006, 12:07 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Markets were down overnight so holders of NWS will be pleased with a 1.09% rise!!

NEWS CORP (NYSE:NWS)
Last Trade: $17.55cps
Trade Time: 4:01PM ET
Change: Up 0.19cps (+1.09%)
Prev Close: $17.36cps
Open: $17.30c
Bid: N/A
Ask: N/A
1y Target Est: N/A

Day's Range: 17.28 - 17.59
52wk Range: 14.76 - 18.63
Volume: 1,625,700
Avg Vol (3m): 2,269,290

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 4 2006, 09:34 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: whambam on Saturday 04/03/06 12:08am

Thanks for that list, that you posted.

< Here's a comparison to the top 20 as at 31 October 2005 >

Very interesting ..... It's no big deal, but I must advise that small time investor LC has also increased his holdings by 25,000 share, (@.25cps the previous friday), in what can only be described as, a 'warm', fuzzy type feeling, purchase.....

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 3 2006, 02:19 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: kathy on Friday 03/03/06 02:09pm

lol !!

Kathy, I thought you may like that !!

Cheers

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 3 2006, 01:55 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

And anyone with a talent for music can "knock up" a tune here quite easily !!

http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~nesson/sequencer.html

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 3 2006, 01:44 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Hi Kathy ......

Did you enjoy the skating in the Winter Olympics?

I thought you may enjoy this "clip" over a nice cup of long black!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAjtW2DqwSI

Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 3 2006, 09:53 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: kiwi kid on Friday 03/03/06 09:43am

Possibly ..... Dknow said in the post prior to my last one, that there had been a delay as a result of bad weather...... The announcement on 21/12/2005 said:

"Assay results have only been received for hole MTD005 with assays for the other three holes not expected until mid to late January 2006. Significant copper and molybdenum assay results returned from drilling at Maitland in 2005 are summarized in Table 1 below".

SOUNDS LIKE SOME MORE GOOD NEWS!!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 3 2006, 09:39 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Some good interest again today. This can go a whole lot higher with success from mediation, for sure. Something/nothing!! - (SUMPIN/NUTIN)

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 3 2006, 09:24 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Having another "run" this morning ..... Results shortly??

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 3 2006, 09:04 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Down .07cps overnight (1.5%) in another low volume session. (Just 27% of the 3m av. Volume). The approx. value for LOK is $6.15cps calculated on an overnight weaker $US conversion rate of 1.33639 AUD.

LOOKSMART LTD (NasdaqNM:LOOK)
Last Trade: $4.60cps
Trade Time: 3:59PM ET
Change: Down -0.07c (-1.50%)

Prev Close: $4.67c
Open: $4.68c
Bid: 3.16 x 7000
Ask: 5.00 x 1000
1y Target Est: $6.63c

Day's Range: $4.53c - $4.69c
52wk Range: $2.75c - $5.20c
Volume: 43,797
Avg Vol (3m): 159,926
Market Cap: 104.75M

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 2 2006, 10:42 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: aimhigh on Wednesday 01/03/06 08:48pm

< Looks like we are close to getting a result, either via mediation or trial. About time.>

Yes, I second that. Things are looking mighty OK it seems ....QPX is heading much higher, IMHO.

Good luck to holders.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 2 2006, 09:02 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Looksmart rose again overnight (following a decline of a over 4% last week) to close @ $4.67cps after trading around the $4.69c - $4.70c mark, for most the session. Volume: 49,235 Avg Vol (3m): 156,840. Buyers will be paying more to get them in future times, IMHO.

Value for LOK shares on the ASX here today is an approx. $6.27cps based on $1.34323c exchange rate.

Mar. 1, 2006 Market Closed
Common Stock Market : NASDAQ-NM
Last Sale: $ 4.67c Net Change: 0.07 1.52%
Share Volume: 49,235 Previous Close: $ 4.60
Today's High: $ 4.70c Today's Low: $ 4.58c
Best Bid: $ 4.66c Best Ask: $ 4.90c
52 Week High: $ 5.05c 52 Week Low: $ 0.55c
P/E Ratio: NE Shares Outstanding: 22,771,000
Earnings Per Share (EPS): $ -0.79c Market Value: $ 106,340,570
NASDAQ Official Open Price: $ 4.59c Date of Open Price: Mar. 1, 2006
NASDAQ Official Close Price: $ 4.67c Date of Close Price: Mar. 1, 2006

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 1 2006, 12:38 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (quiktrade_1 @ Wednesday 01/03/06 12:32pm)

Put them glasses back on .....I asked you....

< What's your TA reading on this one, today? >

Could be a "bargain" at these prices today.....Please read all the posts to you, slowly and thoroughly, ok?

lol

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 1 2006, 12:25 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

QUOTE (quiktrade_1 @ Wednesday 01/03/06 12:13pm)

< Then again maybe TF just want's to make it all happen faster >

Possibly.... What's your TA reading on this one, today?

TIA

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 1 2006, 11:54 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: andy20020 on Wednesday 01/03/06 10:21am

< I may buy this dip once it confirms a bottom, >

Hi Andy et al....

I've only been reading the board of late and I do understand that we all have differing views on certain aspects of investing and how we choose to make comments on stocks of interest, on the boards. Long term investors, day traders, short term traders or, whatever at times show their "label", within their posts. That aspect may need to be understood when reading the various thoughts posted.

I rarely post on a board of a stock I am not holding unless to query what I feel is an obvious 'stretch of the imagination', by another poster.

It 'gets up the nose' of long term holders to read negative 'half truths' (not quite the full story) and in particular, if it can also be perceived as simply putting some "sh#t" on the stock, that may hopefully create enough selling, for the poster to then buy at that lower price. The storyteller has absolutely nothing to lose. The seller may jump out thinking the SP is going lower and make the wrong decision. Although it is often said that decisions should never be made from posts one reads on a stock board, a certain respect is built up over time, for certain poster's thoughts, etc.... I guess it's a matter of learning to read into a poster's (current) reasoning, to determine the possible thoughts behind his or, her post. Andy, you have made your intentions clear, “once it confirms a bottom”, to your liking.

I rarely post a 100% "negative" on stocks that I currently hold. (I may bring the subject up in the form of a question to the board). Ask yourself that same question. Does anyone?

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Mar 1 2006, 06:37 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Press Release Source: LookSmart

LookSmart Releases New API for Advertisers, Ad Agencies and Distribution Partners to Increase Use of Its AdCenter

Tuesday February 28, 7:00 am ET

Company Also Signs Several Agreements With Pay-Per-Click (PPC) Management and Analytics Software Providers

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 28, 2006--LookSmart® (Nasdaq:LOOK - News; ASX:LOK - News), an online media and technology company specializing in vertical search, is releasing a new version of its AdCenter API to allow advertisers, agencies and partners to connect any type of marketing or reporting software to LookSmart's search network with minimal effort. The company also announced the signing of several agreements with pay-per-click (PPC) management and analytics software providers to use the LookSmart API in their applications for easier access and operation when buying advertising campaigns on the LookSmart network.

"As we've rebuilt the distribution network and launched the vertical search sites, our customers are telling us they need easy access and integration with their systems in order to be able to operate efficiently and express their budgets effectively," said Bryan Everett, senior vice president, sales at LookSmart. "We will continue to develop innovative technology solutions to meet the market demands of today and tomorrow, and distribute the solution to the end user in the most efficient way. The release, coupled with the integration partnerships, will help increase advertisers' options for buying and managing campaigns with LookSmart."

LookSmart has signed technology partner agreements with leading tool vendors that include APEX Pacific, BidRank, ClickTracks, LivePerson, MakeMeTop, Omniture, Trellian and WebSideStory. For LookSmart, the goal of these partnerships is to maximize availability of its technology to the largest possible number of advertisers. At the same time, partners have an opportunity to offer an additional source of quality traffic to their users.

While many agencies, vertical search engines and other large, sophisticated advertisers already use LookSmart's AdCenter API, these new partnerships will allow smaller and medium enterprises (SMEs) to also take advantage of the AdCenter's benefits and increase the sophistication of their in-house programs without needing to invest in additional software development. As a result, SMEs can access the same additional sources of web site traffic and centralized campaign management and reporting as larger advertisers.

For larger customers, these agreements ensure they will be able to minimize the amount of time spent buying and managing campaigns, thanks to LookSmart's inclusion in advertiser tools they already use. This will allow for more time and effort spent on increasing the effectiveness of their campaigns, and as a result, the ROI.

In response to demand from advertisers, agencies, bid management software providers, and other vertical search engines, LookSmart's new AdCenter API utilizes SOAP web services to minimize set up time for new API users and allow for easier management of changes and support for a user's existing connection.

smile.gif
LC


About LookSmart

LookSmart is an online media and technology company specializing in vertical search. The company provides relevant content, advertising and technology solutions for consumers, advertisers and publishers. LookSmart's owned and operated vertical search sites are where customers look for what they need. The Company's sites and web tools offer essential search results with the ability to find, save and share articles. In addition to owned and operated properties, LookSmart's distribution network includes selected, monitored syndicated publishers and search engine partners that maximize advertiser ROI. Distribution partners include CNET, InfoSpace (Excite, MetaCrawler, Webcrawler), Cox Interactive, Apple's Sherlock, and U.C. Berkeley. LookSmart offers a comprehensive and customizable set of syndicated solutions for publishers to grow their advertiser relationships and audience. LookSmart is based in San Francisco, California. For more information on LookSmart, visit www.looksmart.com or call 415-348-7500.

  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 28 2006, 03:55 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

JupiterResearch Finds Many Search Marketers Are Missing out by Neglecting Alternative Engines

NEW YORK --(Business Wire)-- Feb. 27, 2006 -- JupiterResearch, a division of Jupitermedia Corporation (Nasdaq: JUPM), today revealed that 40% of search marketers are missing out by using only Google and/or Yahoo! for their campaigns.

"Vertical search providers will play an important role in the paid search market in the next five years," said Zia Wigder, Vice President and Research Director at Jupiter Research.

"Search marketers must establish a robust management strategy and an efficient testing and inclusion process to profit from this growth," added Wigder.

http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2006/02/27/1409978.htm

Looksmart, with 181 Vertical sites (to date) will benefit immensely, as this news sinks in.

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 28 2006, 02:35 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Looksmart CEO David Hills is reported to have bought 6000 shares on 23/2/2006.

He's putting $28000 of his money where his mouth is........

That's great !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 27 2006, 09:50 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

As I look into my crystal ball.......a PREDICTION!!!!

Well .....As I look into my crystal ball.....I see some news very soon...... I see news on a release of one or, more Verticals, possibly.... What I clearly see is an announcement that will tell us of "Looksmart LOCAL". It could even be an involvement with INCX's Local.com.

A buyout of INCX with an 'all script' deal? Who knows? Or, will it simply be a deeper kind of relationship whereby Looksmart work 'hand in hand' with Interchange's Local.com. "Catch & Kill" your own and a 50-50 'share' revenue from any 'click throughs' generated, vis-a-vis, for (any) paid listings as signed. (This revenue 'split' can then extend to third party (publisher) sites whereby the (publisher) 'owner' of a listing would recieve say 50% of click revenue and 25% paid to both the site where the click was generated on & INCX, the lOCAL.COM technology provider.

What does a "Looksmart LOCAL" conjure up in anyone's thoughts?

It's coming........

Hey, my "guess" is as good as any!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 25 2006, 01:27 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Joe Holcomb (an expert on search & everything about it) gave me a real "dressing down" when I replied to his BLOG here..................

http://www.agotoguy.com/news-articles/?p=92#comments

Part of which, is as follows:

Joe Holcomb Says:
February 24th, 2006 at 2:49 pm

Looking Confident,

I can’t tell you how wrong you are. LookSmart doesn’t have a freaking clue what it is doing and neither does David Hills. It’s a company that has been in turmoil for a long time and that’s only going to continue. I know people working at the company and frankly many of them are telling me they don’t have a clue on its true direction either.

I replied again with the following: ( Will not appear on his site, until monday, I imagine)

# LookingConfident Says: (Your comment is awaiting moderation.)
February 24th, 2006 at 9:12 pm

Thanks for your reply Joe Holcomb. Yes, my understanding is limited. But as a user of the Internet I often search for & find articles on my own various interests.

So Danny Sullivan is absolutely wrong (by your reckoning) as you correctly point out that “No internet end user wants to look at 50 different sites to find what they need”. But aren’t they doing that now? Isn’t that the very reason (I imagine?) for the establishment of & surely the “real” role of Vertical search? To now be able to eliminate this particular aspect of search? That unnecessary time wasted ‘to look at 50 different sites to find what they need’? Perhaps you may have misunderstood what Danny Sullivan was saying?

I have quickly learned (through Looksmart) that I am now no more that just “two” or, maybe “three” clicks away from all the information I need and on the topic of my choice. I don’t have to remember 181 different sites.

You should try this, yourself. Use any major portal and always use the search term (brand ?) of “FindArticles on…… .” ……….. I choose five topics at random.

Hobbies - Ford Cortina cars - Fishing - Holidays & Pets

Whilst there were about 2,050,000 for FindArticles on Hobbies, I actually found what I was looking for, on the very 1st page of results.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&clie...nG=Search&meta=

There were 80,600,000 for the single search term of, “hobbies”, would you believe!! That’s “exhaustive” search, going through them all, to find what I like.

I choose LookSmart Hobbies - Best results for “Children’s Games”. I was really after something for my kids, that they could possibly take an interest in.

And “bingo”, I found what I was looking for! The third result!! On page one, too!!

http://www.looksmarthobbies.com/p/search?q...2&y=5&vcat=cat3

I found that Hobbies was part of Looksmart’s Home Living (cluster) Vertical. I even checked out their “see what others found useful” SHARED PAGES feature to find heaps of useful information. Try it yourself.

I then realised that PETS was also part of LookSmart’s Home Living cluster that includes:

Collectibles · Crafts · Family Tree · Frugal Living · Gardening · Hobbies · Home Decor · Home Improvement · Pets

Joe Holcomb, you are a very knowledgeable man. I’ve read your blog since your reply to me. I am only your everyday “joe average” that spends many enjoyable hours on the net daily. A user. But I am most important, as you well know. I’m a “pair of eyeballs” that becomes part of those monthly counts that you guys in the industry work around. No, you won’t find me at myspace.com with 45M other “users” but you won’t necessarily find advertisers for “party games”, etc, there also …..

So, as Looksmart educate users with that (their own) simple search term “brand” of “FindArticle on…”, then that’s where the advertisers will find themselves wanting to be, IMHO….And they will pay for the privilege of being there, too!!

Cheers Joe …..

(Never a dull moment)

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 23 2006, 06:33 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: SleepyOSU on Thursday 23/02/06 05:07pm


< This means that naked shorting has occured >

Nice find, SleepyOSU ....

For those unfamiliar with reg. SHO it means that 10,000 shares (or more) per security are, or, have been sold "short", without having the stock to have sold them! (It's permissable).

http://www.nasdaqtrader.com/aspx/regsho.aspx

It's safe to add another 10,000 to the 215,800 (january figure) stated, and if the US do as you have advised, we could be in for some fun!! Particularly as the daily average volume is only, 63,238 .....

Settlement
Date Short
Interest Avg Daily
Share Volume Days
to Cover
Jan. 13, 2006 215,800 24,425 8.84
Dec. 15, 2005 213,184 31,780 6.71
Nov. 15, 2005 240,003 47,373 5.07
Oct. 14, 2005 235,073 74,799 3.14

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 23 2006, 09:09 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

LOOK @ $4.61ps = LOK $6.26cps.........Calculated on an exchange rate of $1.35879 AUD


David Hills rids LOOK of any "click fraud"

"From an industry perspective, I think we're in a really high growth market and in a market like that you're always going to find folks who are trying to game the system," LookSmart CEO David Hills said. "Sometimes I wonder if this was what it was like in San Francisco in 1849 when the gold rush started and how people always try to take advantage of those environments."

http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/J7830u...y-Focuses-on-Fe rreting-Out-Click-Fraud.xhtml

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 22 2006, 05:29 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: drrc on Wednesday 22/02/06 05:24pm


< i got banned @sharescene.com >

LOL !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 22 2006, 04:41 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Three wonderful quotes from an article (pasted below) that somewhat parallels the very concept of Looksmart's Verticals, the "Calling All Publishers" message and what I do feel is, the very essence of what Looksmart are about, these days...... I'll share it as a ShareScene "exclusive", for those who may not have read it, as yet.

"And who would have thought that any page of text, no matter how meager or insignificant, could be monetized through advertising before AdSense"? (Bearing in mind that Google paid out over $700M to it's adsense partners, in Q4 - 2004)

"A world where search allows each content creator to be his or her own distributor"

And.......

".... I'd be thinking about search not as a potential threat, but as the organizing principal that could send folks to my sites, where I can control my distribution".

Does the writer mean, like .... Looksmart's own , being the "Calling all Publishers" concept, possibly???

Read on......

IP Or TV, Which Will Rule Video?

by Christopher M. Schroeder,
Wednesday, Nov 23, 2005 7:30 AM EST

I AM SO TIRED OF everyone thinking Google is going to rule the world. We are the creators and owners of the content, so why do we cede all power to them?" So said a top broadcast executive to me last week. He had been thinking about the future ways in which to distribute content in a broadband, IP-driven world. "Why should Google, Yahoo!, or even a multi-service operator control distribution?" he continued. "Imagine if Fox Sports and ESPN created a joint distribution venture online -- it'd be the only place to get quality sports content. Who would need a middleman then?" Who indeed?

There isn't a content creator who isn't wondering the same thing. And, frankly, the current aggregators of video content -- cable, phone, and satellite -- are looking for ways to ensure their indispensibility (and revenue) in the new world as well. One possible world for the future of video distribution is the one-stop aggregator a la iTunes. Whether it be in a partnership among content creators, an alternative role for the traditional middleman (like cable), new lines of business for music distributors (iVideo), or a host of startups, maybe people just like to go to one or a handful of places to find what they want easily. And content creators, who have previously relied on others' distribution for decades, will be equally happy to stick to their knitting.

Maybe.

There's another world -- a world that already lives in text. A world where search allows each content creator to be his or her own distributor.

In this world, there are no middlemen. A consumer goes to Google, Yahoo!, MSN, Ask Jeeves, or some new site with video-search capability and simply finds what he wants, when and how he wants it. If he wants a 30-minute or three-hour chunk of video, search will guide him right to the source -- to sony.com, mtv.com, or hbo.com. And once the consumer finds what he wants, he can purchase it right then and there. This is video on demand, only with exponentially more choices. And the "organizing principal" is not a cable, satellite, or telecom provider taking fees. It's free, advertising-supported search. This is how people behave online today with text and some video. Find what you want, when and how you want it. Interact with it. Forward it. Why, in a broadband world, should video consumption be different?

Well, for one, we're talking about a pay model here. This would entail a Pay Pal-like experience that would have to be embraced not only by major content-producer destinations but also by smaller content creators. This is no small point. But Pay Pal is out there, ready for new applications. And who would have thought that any page of text, no matter how meager or insignificant, could be monetized through advertising before AdSense?

Second, movie execs are wary to put content online because of privacy/piracy issues. But those issues will have to be resolved anyway, in either scenario.

I'm not sure how all this will play out, but if I were in these businesses, I'd be thinking about search not as a potential threat, but as the organizing principal that could send folks to my sites, where I can control my distribution without having to pay a middleman a lot of
money to do it for me.


Christopher M. Schroeder is CEO and president of ChoiceMedia, and formerly the CEO and publisher of Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive. (schroeder@choicemedia.com). Schroeder is a regular contributor to MEDIA magazine. This column is re-published from the November issue.

Christopher Schroeder is CEO and president of ChoiceMedia, and former CEO and publisher of WashingtonPost.Newsweek Interactive.

Interesting ... ?? You "betcha" !!!!

Cheers !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 22 2006, 03:47 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797


"Looksmart - Looks Good"....Where?

@ ShareScene.com of course...........

Be There!!!!!



LOL !! Sorry ..... I just couldn't resist!!
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 22 2006, 03:40 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

FWIW..........

The Motley Fool, (in it's newsletter "spool" for THE RULE BREAKERS) had this to say, today:

In the next 5 years you'll see old Industrial Revolution stocks dropped from the S&P.... Companies and even entire industries will disappear.... Much of their shareholders' wealth will disappear with them.... You may even own some of those stocks right now.

In their place, you're about to see a new breed of company that will dominate the markets for the next generation and beyond, brought on by a warp-speed convergence of technologies.

"Right now, as you're reading this, new industries are being born. Old industries are dying. New millionaires are being made, and someone's fortune is being wiped out as old guard companies fail to innovate.

Technological revolutions are coming at us faster and faster. Today, at the same time, we're living in both the nanotech revolution and the biotech revolution.

All of these revolutions are colliding, bringing us a new economy that's built on the melding of formerly separate technologies. It's technology's Big Bang.

And incredibly, this Big Bang of technology is allowing scientists and scientific entrepreneurs to manipulate the very forces of life and matter.

It started when Francis Crick and James Watson decoded the structure of DNA 53 years ago. Since then, scientists have been taking molecules apart and tinkering with them.

Now we're putting them back together, in surprising and whole new ways. Ways that dramatically alter medicine, energy, information technology, machine fabrication, materials... even textiles.

Biotech is already a $300 billion industry, and Ernst & Young projects growth to $2.5 trillion by 2025. Nanotech is in its infancy, a $13 billion industry. It could be $1 trillion in just a decade.

Together with advanced computing and information technologies, they promise to bring us the greatest wealth generator the world has ever known.

CHEERS !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 22 2006, 02:57 PM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Nice accumulation going on here, with this one.......

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 22 2006, 10:30 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

"Into the market"?

Go to......shareScene.com

"THE place to be"!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: Off Topic Chat

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 21 2006, 10:39 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

POWERING !! - (Hancock's Half Hour!! LOL !! Anyone remember that episode?)

Looks good!!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 21 2006, 10:19 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

Looksmart ADS on WebProNews ... Targetting 5 million eBusiness professionals!!!

Looksmart have what looks like an advertising campaign here ....

http://www.webpronews.com/

They look great, and may be variations on others previously seen. (Keeping the same theme.)

I recieved the SearchNews E Mail, that feature two 'shared' banners and then got another E Mail from WebProNews that was simply an AD entitled:

"Where To Look For A Qualified Audience"

So it's a "three pronged" attack, through this outlet ....Those that don't recieve their "daily" may care to join. There are lots of interesting things, daily. (As Below)

WebProNews is the number one source for eBusiness News. Over 5 million eBusiness professionals read WebProNews and other iEntry business and tech publications.

WebProNews provides real-time coverage of internet business.

Free Email Newsletters:
WebProNews SearchNewz
WebProWorld DevWebPro
Marketing SecurityNews
Plus over 100 other newsletters!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 21 2006, 09:48 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

In reply to: sierra on Tuesday 21/02/06 09:46am

Thanks sierra ....

Looks good !!

smile.gif
LC
  Forum: By Share Code

LookingConfident
Posted on: Feb 21 2006, 08:13 AM


Group: Member
Posts: 1,797

LOK shareprice value on the ASX today, is $6.31cps......

LOOK closed @ $4.68c on friday, in the US. With the current exchange rate of $1.34973c the approx. value for LOK here on the ASX today, is $6.31cps. LOK @ around yesterday's price of $6.10c represents great value, IMHO.

LookSmart's 3 Key Market Assumptions

1) The internet will fragment overtime, just like in traditional media, and opportunities to capture specific audiences with similiar wants and needs will abound.

LookSmart strategy: World's largest vertical serch network.

2) As internet advertising evolves, Advertisers will demand a more qualified audience and will be willing to pay for it.

LookSmart strategy: As evident of the shrinking revenues in 2005 due to the cleansing of the distribution network (i.e unproductive clicks), LookSmart has taken an industry stance on improving the quality of their distribution network. Combine this with the quality of their owned and operated traffic via the vertical sites and it clear that LookSmart is building a network to satisfy advertisers.

<