[thelist] One blowhard, hundreds of cubic feet of hot air

[.jeff]

brian,

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> From: Brian King
>
> In response to some of Martin Burns submissions to the
> list recently in regards to why web companies succeed
> or fail.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

you mean this post?

http://lists.evolt.org/archive/Week-of-Mon-20020107/020794.html

if you're going to attack it, the least you could do is give the rest of us
some context.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> M. Burns stated, a number of times mind you, that Amazon
> had a good business model, and had the profits to
> substantiate it.
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

he did not say they had profits to substantiate it.  he simply said that
their books sales were posting profits in most markets, and i quote:

  "who are profitable on books btw in most of
   their markets"

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> I simply point to the following news articles posted on
> a number of sites regarding Amazon's very first posted
> profit.  Read it for yourself.
>
> http://news.com.com/2100-1017-819688.html?tag=cd_mh
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

nice article, but it talks about amazon.com's overall profit/loss estimates,
not specifically about their book sales profit/loss estimates.

now, care to address the actual statement rather than your generalization of
it?

thanks,

.jeff

http://evolt.org/
jeff at members.evolt.org
http://members.evolt.org/jeff/