CMGI - Diskussion mit CEO D. Wether. - 500 Beiträge pro Seite

[investor_007]

By: Sentinel
Reply To: None
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 1:35 AM EST
Post # of 56968


DW....A Question:

I have posted about this a couple of times, and the board seems divided on it. My question is about the possible
spin-off of @Ventures. I am concerned about the effect on CMGI`s stock price when such a major portion "of why
we invest here" is taken out of the pot and put on the table.

Obviously, this would be one hot company to own, and demand would be tremendous. It`s price would certainly
skyrocket, translating to CMGI`s own share price. My concern is the "multiplier" by which CMGI`s shares would
rise. ICGE`s parent company doesn`t appreciate nearly as fast as its child, and I guess I am stuck in that mindset.
DO we, the shareholders of CMGI, benefit more from such a spin-off than if we kept it in-house? I also am
interested in defining what "it" is. Are we talking about ALL the funds? a few? one?

Perhaps the converstaion about this is moot, or more perhaps you are necessarily restricted from talking about it,
but I am intensely interested in what CMGI management sees as the single biggest reason for something like this
to take place.

I just draw pictures for a living, so I confess to not knowing much about business/finance/accounting, so could you
perhaps put it in terms a simple guy like me can understand? Like...."You shareholders will make a LOT more
money!" LOL

Aside from the business stuff, I wish you and yours the very best for the holiday season. Thanks for everything!

Todd/Sentinel

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54291 by Sentinel
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 8:56 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Sentinel: Should CMGI take @Ventures public, we would own a much larger percentage of the entity than
Safeguard owns of ICGE. This would help insure that should @Ventures succeed in the market, CMGI should
benefit accordingly. There may still be some arbitrage between the two stocks, because the markets are not
perfect, but I would not expect the arbitrage to be as significant as it appears to be at times with Safeguard.

We are studying how to avoid a number of other issues that seem to be a part of the ICGE model, for instance,
their exposure to the 40 Act and attracting key employees, since they use stock instead of the more typical venture
carry approach. Hopefully, by sometime late in January, we will have a recommendation for our board to consider.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: cbAK
Reply To: 54319 by dwether
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 7:11 PM EST
Post # of 56968


ROTFLMAO! did you guys catch the post from DW and his VD...LONG! LOL well i hope so, could you imagine if
he put vd..SHORT SELL! LOL

cb

[investor_007]

By: bob3
Reply To: 54319 by dwether
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 10:26 AM EST
Post # of 56968


dwether

David...Thank you for a Great shareholders meeting and all the gifts you have bestowed on us Raging Bull
faithfuls.
I have doubled my charity giving this year and it gives me great pleasure to help the less fortunate, thanks to you.

As one of the Seniors in this group, I am honored to run with The Young Warriors.

I hope you can join us this spring in Hawaii, with Al (OPTDR) & BUCKS - this will be the event of the New Era.
How about a little Skins game on one of Hawaii`s fine golf
courses?

My best wishes to you and your family for a Happy and Healthy Holiday !

BTW....Raging Bull is my Homepage!

Regards....Bob

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54362 by bob3
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 10:32 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Bob:

I would enjoy that skins game. I would like to make it to the Hawaii event, but it`s too hard to schedule at this time.
It`s a long trip from Boston, and my family and I will be making that trip for an upcoming vacation - our first time
there as a family!! Thanks for the thought.

Golf is my favorite game by far. I am especially fortunate in that I get to play in the upcoming AT&T Pebble Beach
Pro-Am. I don`t know which pro I`ll be playing with yet, but I`ll see if I can get Bill Murray to autograph the RB CMGI
boxers. ;o)

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: RichieH
Reply To: 54365 by dwether
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 11:02 AM EST
Post # of 56968


DW,

Golf is a great game for all ages!
I plan to be playing when I`m 70!!
My ultimate goal is to wake up one morning with only one worry, where am I going to play today.

Question:
It is likely that the AV IPO is going to be severely oversubscribed. Keeping that in mind, has the determination been
made to what percentage of the IPO will be allocated to the DSP program? Is it possible that CMGI will increase
this percentage, given the popularity over the past months of AV?

Thanks in Advance,

Hope your you and the CMGI family have a wonderful holiday season!!!

RichieH

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54384 by RichieH
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 11:10 AM EST
Post # of 56968


RichieH: We will strive to make as many ALTA shares as possible available through the DSP program. Certainly,
we anticipate there will be a multiple of our prior offerings.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: RichieH
Reply To: 54388 by dwether
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 11:20 AM EST
Post # of 56968


DW,

Thanks for your response!
I look forward to be a shareholder for a VERY LONG TIME.

Have you played Andover Country Club? It`s a very difficult Donald Ross course, the greens run about a 12 on the
Stimp! I`m about an 8 handicap, and that course ate my lunch! I`m frequently in the Andover area on business and
hope to get another crack at it! I also heard that Scottish Highlands in NH is pretty good too, maybe I`ll give that one
a go in the Spring.

Good Luck at Pebble!


RichieH

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54393 by RichieH
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 11:24 AM EST
Post # of 56968


RichieH: Andover`s my home course, but it`s not really a Donald Ross course. Somehow that rumor got started
and stuck, but with the changes being made by the developer that bought it, it`s more like a Betsy Ross course.
Nonetheless, it`s still a good test of the game.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Sunday, 26 Dec 1999 at 10:38 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Peter Henig, author of Red Herring`s Top 10 Stocks of the Next Century just emailed the following. Note his
additional picks:

III. HOT STOCKS: `Da List


I put out a top ten stocks list for the Red Herring magazine -- I
graduated recently from being a lowly online editor -- and I would have
given it to you ahead of time but they tell me a move like that will get
you thrown in the slammer but good. So I`ll give you the list now and
you can read the rest in the January issue and, no, this is not a plea
to buy the magazine, ...you can borrow a copy from me.


The top 10 are (in alphabetical order, not rank):


Broadcom
Cisco
CMCI
Dell
EMC
Microsoft
Nokia
Schwab
Sun
Time-Warner


Names you `ve mostly heard of before, especially here, although I threw
in Microsoft,Schwab, and Dell to round out all parts of the tech
sector...Briefly, we chose only those companies with great managements
in growing markets, with proven track records of profitability and
business models that can react swiftly to changing environments and
trends. Valuations were less a concern than earnings growth and market
domination. Period. That`s about it in a nutshell. Most if not all of
these stocks have been winners in the past and will continue to be
winners in the future. But I do have a few others I figured I`d throw
at you for good luck, particularly stocks I want to own should the
market taper off into 2000.


These include, FedEx, especially if oil prices stay in check, Engage
Technologies, yes, it`s a Net stock but I know the CEO and like the
company, Dell, a reiteration of above, Schwab, again, for the reasons
laid out above, Enron, because it`s a big company that acts like a small
one, and a tiny play, and a risky play, Net Value Holdings (NETV)...a
CMGI like company that`s just gone from a billboard stock to
registration for listing on the Nasdaq. And if you can get your hands
on it, IT Capital, traded on the New Zealand and Australian stock
exchanges, again, a CMGI-like play that`s conquering Australasia but is
still in it`s nascent form...buy it.

Happy New Millenium!
David



(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: racebannan
Reply To: 54703 by dwether
Sunday, 26 Dec 1999 at 10:50 AM EST
Post # of 56968


DW, what do you think about W.Post article?
http://live.av.com/scripts/editorial.dll?bfromind=980&eeid=1…
And have you read Red Herring`s "The Internet Bubble?" If so, your reaction?
Thanks for the RH tips, by the way.
Peace and Happy Holidays,
Mike

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54704 by racebannan
Sunday, 26 Dec 1999 at 11:38 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Race: It`s difficult for me to comment on the markets. I would say I would answer more like Barksdale did in the
article. Major dislocations of industries are occuring. This brings with it major dislocations in valuation models.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: mulan
Reply To: None
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 10:55 AM EST
Post # of 48761


Dwether a couple questions..
If your are forced to pick the 5 most interesting properties from just the @Ventures arm which ones would it be?

It seems like the applications for Icast in the B2B world would exceed the entertainment applications in time, is that
a possible?

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 47169 by mulan
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 11:21 AM EST
Post # of 48761


Mulan: Your first question is tantamount to asking me which of my chidren do I love the most. I love all my children
the most. Sorry for what seems like a cop out, but any answer would cause problems for me with the companies I
did not mention, along with draw investment competition for the ones I did mention.

As for iCast, you are correct. There will be significant B2B applications in this space over time.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: OC_DOC
Reply To: None
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 11:07 AM EST
Post # of 56968


DW...HEALTHCARE

As a physician, I am frustrated by the large amount of ineficiencies in the system and the mountains of paperwork.
A number of companies are tackling this problem, Healtheon being an example.

Does CMGI have any plans to enter this arena. Seems like this area would generate a large amount of revenues.

By the way, thanks to you I have made enough to pay off money to pay off my med school loans. Thought it would
take 15 years or so...but with the help of CMGI...

Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54385 by OC_DOC
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 11:14 AM EST
Post # of 56968


OC_DOC: We are not considering any significant investments in the health care area at this time. It seems to me
others are doing a fine job in that space, but we remain open-minded. We did make an investment in Promedix, a
B2B ecommerce company, which was recently purchased by Chemdex (CMDX), another one of our investments.
Both are doing very well.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: kooler
Reply To: None
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 9:07 AM EST
Post # of 56968


DWether...Nice job on your CNN interview...when will they
learn to ask the type of questions we ask on this board.
LOL. Have a great holiday season...and once again thanks
for a great shareholders meeting...and running a great
company.

One note...I was very happy with how well you handled the
questions regarding charity. It is my opinion...your job
is to continue building CMGI so MY shares appreciate in
value...then I can CHOOSE to take some of the profit and
share with the needy. I for one have adopted a homeless
shelter in Mesa Arizona, and every time I walk into the
place I have my CMGI hat on...LOL

Great Job...have a wonderful holiday with your family.

BTW...why aren`t you out shopping in the malls for some
late presents....

Best Regards,

Mark

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54322 by kooler
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 9:32 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Kooler: Stories like yours with the homeless shelter help make it all the more worthwhile. I`m looking forward to
when I can spend more time on such endeavors.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: Verbatim
Reply To: 54339 by dwether
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 10:39 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Dear DW:

I read the interview you had with Business 2.0 this past summer and saw how you wanted to spend more time
doing other worthwhile endeavors (other than CMGI and your family).

I`m not a programmer, but I surf, MS word, excel, etc. I help out at http://byteback.org where computer industry
volunteers teach classes in computer skills to the unemployed and underemployed in Inner City DC. People who
show a desire and aptitude can do more than take classes, but participate in an intern program. Those who have
persevered and graduated after the year long course have gotten jobs earning on avg. 30k Not bad for being
homeless or in jail previously. We have also given our cirriculum and ideas to another organization in Philly.
Unfortunately I don`t know their URL. This morning I came across a few organizations that also might interest you
as you look to find how you want to give to society in whatever endeavor you choose: http://www.efn.org/~impact/
http://www.yte.org/ and of course, a great place to advertise and already mentioned by someone else on this
board: http://thehungersite.org and also .net and .com It could be another Blue Mountain Arts in the making if they
became more viral.

Wishing the best for you and your family in the New Year and many more to come, Verbatim/Frank

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54369 by Verbatim
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 10:59 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Verbatim: www.thehungersite.com is one of my favorites. My son turned me onto it, and I try and go there
everyday to do my click. I encourage everyone else to do the same. Another good site is www.igive.com.

Another worthwhile cause and model is www.pluggedin.org. A number of us CMGI`ers help/work with this org to
assist inner city youth use the Internet to level the playing field. Check out their web site. Communities all over the
world should follow their lead.

Regards,
David

[investor_007]

By: bikerbum
Reply To: None
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 9:16 AM EST
Post # of 56968


DW...Have a Merry Christmas!

You have give`n all of us a Christmas of more prosperity then we ever thought we could have!

Did it ever cross your mind to do a 3 for 1? LOL

Happy Holidays!

L_)
O O................bikerbum>

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54331 by bikerbum
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 9:38 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Thanks, Bum. A 3 for 1 did cross our minds, but I`d rather have more 2 for 1`s over time than fewer 3 for 1`s,
assuming healthy markets, of course.

I hope you get the back hoe under the tree you`ve been looking for.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: Givemethedays
Reply To: 54340 by dwether
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 9:42 AM EST
Post # of 56968


More Publicity for CMGI
Have you considered sponsoring something like a golf event to bring more attention to your brand

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54343 by Givemethedays
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 9:53 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Givemethedays: CMGI sponsors a Big Brothers golf tournament in the Boston area. I don`t think we`ll go after the
tour for the forseeable future.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: !BIGBUCKS!
Reply To: None
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 9:15 AM EST
Post # of 56968


DW,I was unable to make the shareholders meeting this year because I went for an Ultrsound with my wife.I
already told her if it`s a boy were going to name it David.I tried for CMGI as a middle name,but it did not go over
well.I have a picture of you,and I shaking hands at the last shareholders meeting I hope you will sign it
someday.Thank You and Happy Holidays. Bob

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54330 by !BIGBUCKS!
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 9:42 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Bob: My best to you and your wife. I like your choice of first names. What`s wrong with CMGI? Perhaps you could
get it in there with something like David Carlos Michael George InternetAddict ....

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: SteveG.
Reply To: None
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 12:51 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Re: dwether......I am so happy to say, dwether IS DW!

OK, so I`m an a$$....I admit it.

Now for punishment....hit me, kick me, beat me, suspend me from posting for one week....what`s it going to
be....just please don`t make me go to the zbeachbums doghouse, I hear it`s a pretty RUFF place to live.

So sorry again I caused up such a ruckus......geez, what a twit.

Oh, how do I know this is true? DW emailed me.
BTW....he didn`t say where I signed his boxers. LOL. But I believe him.

SteveG.bum

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 54276 by SteveG.
Friday, 24 Dec 1999 at 9:02 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Steve G: Sorry to not answer your question earlier and further authenticate myself, but your infamous signature on
the infamous boxers is right below the CMGI logo. Thanks to everyone who signed. I shall bring them to future get
togethers for more autographs.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Thursday, 23 Dec 1999 at 10:35 PM EST
Post # of 56968


Most memorable CMGI Web events of 1999:
(This is a repost without the personal reference from earlier to protect the individual`s privacy.)

JAN: Yahoo acquires Geocities.
JAN: CMGI splits 2-for-1
JAN: CMGI announces new startup, NaviNet (B2B).
JAN: CMGI acquires 2Can Media.
FEB: Lycos/USA Networks announce merger.
FEB: CMGI announces new startup, iCAST.
MAR: Critical Path IPO (CPTH - B2B).
MAY: Silknet IPO - (SILK - B2B).
MAY: CMGI splits 2-for-1.
JUN: Lycos/USA Networks call off merger.
JUN: CMGI announces acquisition of Altavista.
JUN: Prudential`s Merenbloom initiates coverage on CMGI.
JUL: Engage IPO - first CMGI startup goes public (B2B).
JUL: Chemdex IPO (B2B).
SEP: CMGI/PCCW investment and alliance.
SEP: CMGI acquires Flycast (FCST).
SEP: CMGI acquires AdForce (ADFC).
SEP: CMGI acquires Activate (B2B).
SEP: Engage acquires AdKnowledge (B2B).
SEP: CMGI acquires 1ClickCharge (B2B).
SEP: CMGI acquires 1stUp.
OCT: NaviSite IPO - second CMGI startup goes public (B2B).
NOV: Goldman`s Parekh initiates coverage on CMGI.
NOV: Altavista acquires Raging Bull.
NOV: @Ventures B2B fund announced.
DEC: CMGI announces new startup, CMGI Solutions.
DEC: Bell South acquires piece of MyWay.
DEC: Mother Nature IPO (MTHR).
DEC: CMGI announces 2-for-1 split.
DEC: CMGI acquires YesMail (YESM).
DEC: CMGI Annual Shareholders Meeting.
DEC: Altavista files S-1.
DEC: Merrill`s Blodget initiates coverage of CMGI.
DEC: more to come...?

Happy Holidays to all at Raging Bull.

Peace,
David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: brcmgi98
Reply To: None
Thursday, 23 Dec 1999 at 9:54 AM EST
Post # of 56968


DW thanks...did you get my gift?

I left my Christmas gift with Shannon at the shareholder meeting (you were busy giving us a show to remember)&
I was just making sure you got it. We appreciate everything you have done!! Health and happiness to you and
yours this holiday season.

Mark Galsky

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 53617 by brcmgi98
Thursday, 23 Dec 1999 at 10:03 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Yes. Thanks for the caricature. Some day maybe I`ll even have time to get back to playing some real poker vs. the
business variation on the theme.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Thursday, 23 Dec 1999 at 9:02 AM EST
Post # of 48761


Omission from list:

SEP: CMGI/PCCW share exchange and alliance

Humble apologies...especially after this past week`s performance of 1186 HK.

Regards,
David

[investor_007]

By: FoolsRushIn
Reply To: 46907 by dwether
Thursday, 23 Dec 1999 at 9:09 AM EST
Post # of 48761


DW, how about the SII alliance?

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 46910 by FoolsRushIn
Thursday, 23 Dec 1999 at 9:14 AM EST
Post # of 48761


SII is a MOU, not a contract yet. Nonetheless, it is significant, but only absolute deals made the list. There were
many other events, as well, such as @Ventures investments, and some smaller acquisitions. Hopefully, many of
these will make the most memorable list of 2000/2001.

- Stardad, this is work...ridin` the boards.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: Givemethedays
Reply To: None
Thursday, 23 Dec 1999 at 8:54 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Dw`s list omits PCCW
That may be inadvertent, but other seemingly lesser events made the grade. Food for thought.

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 53576 by Givemethedays
Thursday, 23 Dec 1999 at 8:59 AM EST
Post # of 56968


Omissions from list:

SEP: CMGI/PCCW share exchange and alliance

Humble apologies...especially after this past week`s performance of 1186 HK.

Regards,
David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: mcnulty
Reply To: None
Sunday, 19 Dec 1999 at 9:34 PM EST
Post # of 56968


OT: David Wetherell Scolded Me! :-/

(Also posted to CMGI)

mcnulty, here. I`ve been lurking here for months. You guys on the CMGI boards are the best, and I`m glad to begin
participating.

I asked DW a question at the shareholder`s meeting and mentioned I posted to the Motley Fool and he scolded
me, quite amiably, suggesting I get with the program and register on Raging Bull!

I went up to him after the meeting, shook his hand, and promised I would. So here I am.

This is a message I posted this evening to the Fool board. It tries to explain why I believe CMGi will do just fine in
2000. I hope you enjoy it.

postscript: premier, you`re the best! Sentinel and Bikerbum, it was great meeting you at the shareholder meeting.
Happy Holidays to one and all!


"Do these guys ever get tired?"

A securities analyst asked this question last week on CNBC, referring to CMGi.

It got me thinking.

I have been invested in CMGi exclusively and the results have been dramatic. I have done far better than an
investor should expect to do, even a guy as good and deserving as I am.

So I`ve been pulling in the reins on my expectations and considering diversification. It is time and it makes sense.

After all, the rise of CMGi from obscurity to prominence has had a storybook flavor. They have done so well, so
quickly. How can this success continue? It can`t.

At least, that`s how things feel.

The Behemoth Lurches Forward

Not CMGi. Microsoft.

One day last week I was watching CNBC and a commentator remarked that Microsoft had advanced $4 on
expectations connected to the shipment of Windows 2000. This established a new all-time high for the stock and
gave MSFT a market cap of $575 billion.

This dismayed me. I fail to comprehend why anyone would invest in a company, even a fine company, with this
large a market capitalization. It`s blue chip tech, yes, but still, to double your money MSFT would have to grow to a
market cap of $1.15 trillion.

Less important, perhaps, than why someone invests in large caps is the fact that they do, for it impacts my and
your investment results if we own large caps.

I did some back-of-envelope calculations. Assume you own 100 shares of CMGi. As of last week`s close their
market value is $21,181. Say you hold them for the long term. If, when CMGi reaches a market capitalization of
$575 billion, CMGI then rises an additional $4/share, how much additional paper wealth will you have?

If the stocks split 2:1 each time it reaches $212, then you have 3200 shares at $146 share. Your holding is worth
$467,200, and the $4 move is worth $12,800.

This assumes you pay no capital gains taxes or trading commissions (you have held the stock), and the number
of outstanding shares of CMGi has not inflated other than by straight splits (which is not likely for this company),
and there is no dilution (again, unlikely).

Is long-term hold the way to go?

It depends on whether you are satisfied with making $12,800 on a $4 rise, assuming CMGi reaches the market
cap and within a timeframe you like.

The Big `R`

David Wetherell has a keen interest in seeing the stock price of CMGi appreciate in value. One could argue that
gratifying shareholders is a secondary interest. His primary interest is to gain leverage in stock-for-stock
transactions, and attractive return to shareholders follows as a consequence of vision and execution.

So within the bounds of what securities laws allow, he talks up his company; and, quite frankly, some of the things
he says startle and amuse me.

True, some CMGi forecasts, such as the launch date of CMGI Solutions, prove optimistic. But an announcement
that the company`s revenues will surpass those of Yahoo! by July 2000 is in a class by itself. As is, for another
example of aggressive augury, the forecast that CMGi will be profitable by the end of 2000.

It`s wonderful to hear these things, but do the benefits for marketing the investment value of CMGi outweigh the
risk that the statements will prove … wishful? My point is, the risk must be small. David Wetherell and his fellow
executives must be confident. They look at their numbers, make reasonable projections, and know how bold they
can be in forecasting financial results.

These are hints, direct from management, as to what the CMGi financials will look like in 2000. Hints, in fact,
abound. And this leads me to my main thesis.

I believe we can conclude, with a fair measure of certainty, that for several years out revenue growth at
CMGi is going to be stunning, and this, more than any other metric, will propel the stock.

Let`s consider revenues from several angles.

Growth versus Profitability

CMGi is in growth mode. In 2000, they will expand from 58 companies to 120. They will invest in some companies,
buy others outright, and start still more from scratch.

Operating expenses have increased sevenfold over the year-earlier period, reflecting an expansion of business
activity.

CMGi`s corporate development group, comprised of 37 "business integration experts," up from an original three,
will expand to 60 within two months.

Piper Jaffray analyst Safa Rashtchy: "There is no stopping or slowing down at CMGi."

DW: "CMGi will not rest. We`ll grow at in increasing pace."

DW: "We like B2B plays a lot. We`re going to do it in a massive way … on many fronts."

DW: "CMGi will drive the process, not catch up to it."

DW: "We are gaining momentum, not slowing down."

Now, consider the announcement of the $1 billion debt offering. CMGi wants to raise money, which is interesting
because not too long ago a CMGi executive plainly stated the company has enough cash and liquidity to serve its
needs.

When I heard that, I said, "Huh?" It clashed with my understanding of what CMGi was busy at work trying to do --
accelerate and maximize growth -- though I think the statement may have been made to offer assurance, where
none was needed, that CMGi enjoyed financial health.

Then the debt offering was announced. I said, "That`s better!" CMGi "said it plans to use the proceeds for …
acquisitions … and other business opportunities …" Bottom line: growth and more growth.

Imagine how David Wetherell operates. He looks out over the broad expanse of the Internet, decides where he
wants to go next and the moves he wants to make, and then asks himself if he has sufficient capital. If he doesn`t,
he raises more. He is too shrewd and capable to allow a shortage of available funds to stand in the way of his
plans, and the debt offering points squarely to additional growth.

Everything in the conference call and the shareholder meeting presentations points to growth. CMGi is
synonymous with growth.

The crux is this. In business, especially Internet business, profitability is often sacrificed on the altar of growth.
Sometimes for years. Sometimes profits never come. CMGi is focused on growth. But, CMGi is going to be
profitable in twelve months.

What does that tell you about revenues over the coming year?

The CC Figure

In the Q1 2000 conference call, CMGi reported quarterly revenues of $127.3 million, a threefold increase over the
year-earlier period, which surprised the street.

At the shareholders meeting, DW cautioned us against anticipating quarter-to-quarter revenue increases
comparable in magnitude to the one announced in the conference call. From a practical viewpoint, the rate of
increase is unsustainable. However, the increases can still be dramatic.

The precedent for revenue surprises has been set.

One Analyst`s Take

I`m going to enlist the aid of a professional here and quote a piece that has already appeared, in part, on this board
(emphasis mine):

No Surprises for CMGI: Complicated Financials & Stock Split
Friday, December 17, 1999 2:50 AM
by Mike Ogburn

A second means of measuring the success of CMGI is similar to other Net firms: look at the growth of its
operational revenues. CMGI`s goal in its current fiscal year is to grow its perational revenues near the
billion-dollar mark currently reached by only the elite Nets such as America Online (AOL). That`s a tall order,
but if CMGI continues to increase revenues by triple digits from one quarter to the next (as it has two of the past
three quarters), it will get there. …

As long as CMGI keeps growing near the speed of the Net, it probably doesn`t matter what the experts come
up with to measure the company. CMGI is the Internet, the Internet is considered the future and the future is where
today`s investors put their money.

And another quote (again, emphasis mine):

selected snippets from tbmorrissey`s post 26374:
This is from Internetstocks.com/BancBoston:

CMGI RELENTLESSLY REACHES MORE OF THE WEB

CMGI reported impressive Q1:00 results with revenues of $124 million, ahead of our $120-million estimate, and a
loss per share of $(1.08), better than our $(1.78) estimate. While we have tended to look past these operating
metrics and focus on our asset value estimates, we believe the company is well down the path to being viewed
more as an operating company, making quarterly results more important. We recently raised our revenue
estimates for F2000 dramatically, to $750 million from $200 million, to reflect several recent large acquisitions,
reinforcing the shift to an operating model taking place at the company

Based on the pace of projected investing activity, we believe we will have the opportunity to raise our asset value
estimates substantially over the next several months. In addition, we believe the shift to an operating model with
impressive revenue growth from its consolidated subsidiaries should support new levels for the stock. We
believe CMGI will continue to account for an increasing percentage of the market value afforded all Internet
stocks.

Show Me The $$$

Where`s the revenue going to come from? This is just off the top of my head:

Advertising

We know CMGi is assembling an advertising powerhouse to compete with DCLK. As DW said in the conference
call, the model is sound because there are several drivers of growth:

the number of users is growing
users are spending more and more time online
websites are growing in number
the websites are growing themselves
targetability is improving

DW said, "We`re seeing CPM rates going up across the board." He used the words, "steady incline," and said
online advertising should grow to "$200 billion per year."

Tellingly, he said, "He with the best targetability wins." This speaks directly to the importance of Engage
Technologies.

E-Commerce Enabling

I`m thinking here of CMGI Solutions, NaviNet, NaviSite, and 1ClickCharge.

I want to check this figure, but I believe CMGI Solutions alone was forecast to have $1 billion in annualized revenue
by 12/00.

Sales of Securities

CMGi`s equity position has increased to $6.9 billion. Sales are liquidity events, and as we know, can directly impact
earnings.

Margins

In answer to a question posed by a Goldman Sachs analyst during the conference call, DW stated that as CMGi
moves from "developmental expansion mode" to "maintenance and operating mode," he expects gross margins to
increase. This won`t increase revenues but it will decrease expenses.

So, mcnulty, Make the Case for CMGi

I want to further the case that the future looks bright for CMGi by making a few points about the company in relation
to that larger beast, the Internet itself.

Here, I will enlist the aid of Mr. Belec and Mr. Dines. This is a fascinating read (emphasis mine):

mulan in post 45264 on Raging Bull:
A river of cash will pour into Internet stocks
12/17 11:23 COLUMN - Making a stocks list and checking it twice
By Pierre Belec

NEW YORK, Dec 17 (Reuters) - A warning from the experts this Christmas season: If you`re going to make a list
of stocks, make sure you check it twice.

While the major market indices -- the Dow Jones industrial average, Standard & Poor`s 500 and Nasdaq
Composite -- have rocketed to the moon this year, the truth behind the numbers is the majority of stocks are in a
bear market.

Wall Streeters have been looking at the market with rose-colored glasses this year and they`ve failed to see that
most of the market`s strength has been generated by technology, notably Internet stocks, which have exploded.

The turbo-charged Nasdaq index, which is technology-heavy, has climbed an eye-popping 70 percent this year --
the biggest increase in the Nasdaq market`s 28-year history. The Dow is up 22 percent and S&P has gained 15
percent.

It`s the click-and-order companies that rule, not the brick-and-mortar ones.

"There are two separate stock markets, a bull and a bear market, running along side each other," said James
Dines, publisher of the Dines Letter.

"The NYSE is basically in a bear market, with the majority of stocks declining," he said. "And as the money
flows out of that market, it`s gushing into the high technology area on the Nasdaq."

The great sucking sound?

"So much money is going into the high-techs that it is sucking the life out of most other stocks and there is a lot
more that is just waiting to move in," Dines said. "People are not interested in Sears, or Goodyear or Philip Morris
-- those are yesterday`s heroes."

Dines said a river of cash will pour into Internet stocks next year, with an estimated 16 Internet mutual
funds waiting to come to market. Those funds will have to buy stocks.

The Belvedere, Calif.-based financial advisor, one of the original "Internet Bugs," who saw the potential for that
business in 1994, said he is convinced that cyberspace will redefine every business on Earth.

In the process, the non-Internet companies -- the brick and mortar guys -- will be in deep trouble, unless they see
the light. …

"The Internet is changing the world, but what most analysts and investors don`t understand is that it is the biggest
thing since the Industrial Revolution more than 200 years ago," he said. "Back then, there were no stock
exchanges as we know them today, so it`s impossible to draw a comparison between what is going now with
Internet stocks."

Dines said there are no traditional tools to measure if these companies are valued properly.

"You can`t use book value, or earnings, or dividends," he said. "What you are talking about is really footprint --
when a company comes out of nowhere with a bunch of pimple-faced teenagers who are working out of a garage
and have intellectual capital."

If this Internet thing is so great, why are so many people afraid of it?

"People don`t understand that the Internet is as profound as the formation of the first library after the Dark
Ages," he said. "It is a spread of knowledge and it isn`t just a bowling craze or any of the previous booms ... This is
really different."

Dines believes that the Internet stocks could hold their own even if the rest of the market suffers a big meltdown.

"It`s already happening," he said. "The overall market is in a bear market and Internet stocks are flying higher."

How should start-up investors jump into Internet stocks?

Dines recommends a basket of Internet stocks because of the difficulty in picking "winners" in this new industry.

The Dines Letters` recommended list includes two dozen Internet stocks, headed by what Dines calls his "Four
Horsemen" -- Amazon.com, America Online, CMGI Inc. and Yahoo! Inc.

"Buy $500 worth of the stock leaders, which comes up to some $13,000, and close your ears and hold your own
personal mutual fund for the long-term," he said.

The quote I like the best in the piece above is this: "So much money is going into the high-techs that it is sucking
the life out of most other stocks …

This is a validation, indeed a vindication, of early investors who placed their faith in the untested notion that the
Internet was revolutionary, real and rational. I was blind to the possibility that the lack of breadth in the market was
caused, in significant part, by a tectonic shift of investment dollars from NYSE to Naz, from real to virtual, from Old
Economy to New Economy. And yet it makes perfect sense.

Let`s approach this from yet another angle.

Take as a new starting point the premise that the Internet is the place to be if your objective is to maximize your
investment returns, and consider, very carefully, the import of something David Wetherell said at the shareholders
meeting:

"I really think we`ve got the best business model in the world for a new economy."

These are the factors that shape my thinking. It strikes me that diversification out of CMGI would be
diworseification.

We see other companies recognizing the viability of the business model and rushing to partake of its promise.
Internet venture funds and the like. These votes of confidence are certainly welcome, and I`m perfectly at ease with
the notion there are mini-CMGi`s readying themselves to launch invasions into cyberspace that will succeed
famously. The virtual cosmos is boundless.

CMGi has fortresses under construction that will act as nexi and foci in the void. It has prime mover status.

Who could create, now, from scratch, a company that combines the know-how, position, contacts, savvy,
alliances, reputation, personnel and financial resources, reach and momentum of CMGi?

The other three horsemen, Amazon, AOL and Yahoo!, all fine companies that will flourish, can best replicate
CMGi`s business model to varying degrees (and have, to varying extents) and participate in the harvest of riches
from the new economy. I would say that in light of their respective business models and current market valuations,
CMGi offers the best potential for return on investment.

CMGI did remarkably well in 1998 and 1999. 2000 may very well impress us with an uncanny ability to extend its
stellar performance.

Finally, I want to pay homage to David Wetherell, who scolded me at the shareholders meeting (in an amiable
way, for not having registered at RB), by reproducing this post:

Brian Moore in post 14882 at Silicon Investor:
reasons to buy this stock....

To me the biggest reason to buy this stock is the company president, DW.

People who work in high tech know how common it is for management to be clueless about high tech. Dilbert
points this up daily. I`m a senior software consultant who can find a job in a flash, but I have to interview ten places
to finally find management that`s good.

Look at Apple when they put that Pepsi marketer in charge. How hip is he?

How come IBM hasn`t been funding IPO`s like crazy?

In the conference call yesterday I heard DW for the first time. He obviously has his finger on the pulse of where
tech is and where it`s going.

The president of CISCO recently said that the CEO`s of Fortune 500 companies this year are about to realize that
they must get involved in the internet, and fast. These large, lumbering giants are no competition for a fast moving
CMGI. It`s easy for me to see CMGI growing larger than IBM in the years to come as they snatch away
opportunity after opportunity, 50 new companies this year, one a week, moving swiftly today into what will likely be
the dominate tech / business 2, 3, 4, 5 years from now.

I mean, have you ever seen one of those "vision statements" put out by the president of a Fortune 500 company?
While these guys are acting like Dilbert`s manager, DW is just eating their lunch, byte by byte.


I want to take care here to caution the new read

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 51559 by mcnulty
Sunday, 19 Dec 1999 at 10:03 PM EST
Post # of 56968


Welcome mcnulty!

Your post is exceptional - beats the hell out of those looking to date my daughter. A few clarifications. Profitability
will not come from operations any time soon, but from the returns on our successful venture investments, as has
been the case in years past.

It`s inappropriate to be showing profits from operations for many web businesses at this time of rapid market
growth. Fortunately, we can have profits from investments to plow into new business expansions.

To surpass Yahoo in revenues, we will have to continue to make acquisitions, which we plan. We will not do it
from organic growth alone, at least not by the end of FY00.

Thanks for making it over to this board.

Regards,
DW

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: manfmnantucket
Reply To: None
Sunday, 19 Dec 1999 at 8:18 PM EST
Post # of 56968


dwether, can you also clarify the public-holdings-doubling this-year comment?

Did you mean FY, i.e. by July?
And were you counting this $7B presumably in new equity
at the offering price - or assuming some premium in the
wild IPO aftermarket? Or was it just an aside, not
meant to be interpreted so literally?

If you can`t reveal more of course we understand;
just thought it was an interesting comment there.


MfN

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 51526 by manfmnantucket
Sunday, 19 Dec 1999 at 8:27 PM EST
Post # of 56968


MfN: The statement I made was it was our hope/goal that, given a healthy market, we should derive enough value
from our holdings of new IPO`s that occur between now and the end of our fiscal year to double our present
holdings of publicly traded securities. Of course, markets are subject to change...

I cannot be taking other questions tonite. Sorry. I need to prepare for the week.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Sunday, 19 Dec 1999 at 7:55 PM EST
Post # of 56968


CMGI owns 448,347,107 shares of 1186 HK (Pacific Century Cyberworks), which at $8.7 HK/share gives CMGI
$501.87mm in value as of the close of market on 12/17/99. This adjusts for the exchange ratio of HK to USD
(8.7/7.7722). In other words $8.7 HK/7.722 = 1.119374179 x 448,347,107 shares = $501.87 mm. I`m still trying to
rectify the PCCLF ADR price of $1.3125 vs. the 8.7/7.7722 ($1.1194). I am no currency exchange expert, but I feel
comfortable in the HK adjusted value provided of $501.87mm.

Regards,
DW

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Saturday, 18 Dec 1999 at 5:35 PM EST
Post # of 48761


Thanks to everyone from this board who attended our Annual Shareholder`s meeting in Boston yesterday, either in
person or via our webcast. It was motivating to everyone at CMGI to see such great support. BTW, I could not
mention the ALTA IPO filing, because it was not official yet - tough news to sit on. Anyway, I really enjoyed the
meeting yesterday, and thank you for your support. Though I wish it could be otherwise, I cannot take questions at
this time via the RB boards, but hopefully that day will be coming.

BOMP!!

Regards To All and Happy Holidays!!
DW



(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Saturday, 18 Dec 1999 at 5:31 PM EST
Post # of 56968


Thanks to everyone from this board who attended our Annual Shareholder`s meeting in Boston yesterday, either in
person or via our webcast. It was motivating to everyone at CMGI to see such great support. BTW, I could not
mention the ALTA IPO filing, because it was not official yet - tough news to sit on. Anyway, I really enjoyed the
meeting yesterday, and thank you for your support. Though I wish it could be otherwise, I cannot take questions at
this time via the RB boards, but hopefully that day will be coming.

BOMP!!

Regards To All and Happy Holidays!!
DW

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Friday, 13 Nov 1998 at 5:34 PM EST
Post # of 48761


I am the CMG CEO, and I did not and would not post on Yahoo. The other person is an imposter. I will resume
posting and answering questions when Raging Bull introduces a feature that filters out the irresponsible/irrelevant
questions (e.g. monitored sessions). You will see many great features coming to this site soon. Stay tuned. I shall
return. Brad, your newsletter continues to improve. Your portfolio is doing quite well.

Regards,
David

[investor_007]

Real Time Quote
Chart
Free E-Mail
Raging CMGI Links






< Previous
Respond
Next >

By: granagus
Reply To: None
Monday, 17 Aug 1998 at 11:00 PM EDT
Post # of 48761


What effect do you think Bill Clinton`s speech will have? Why isn`t anyone on the stock boards talking about it? I
personally think that this whole thing is a non - issue; but, the market used to plunge on talk of this sex scandal,
why isn`t it a big deal now?

Thanks,
Enrique

[investor_007]

By: FlyCmgi
Reply To: 19 by granagus
Wednesday, 19 Aug 1998 at 2:18 AM EDT
Post # of 48761


Enrique, I think that the news about DELL and other techs has really helped out the markets. Everyone has been
expecting some bad news
from the White House. But the uncertainty isn`t too high. I think most people thought Bill was doing something with
Monica. The real question
is, can he be impeached for his actions? Or more importantly, what will happen to the state of the government? I
don`t really know what to tell
you other than that.

How about those Internet stocks? This is great and I love CMG more everyday. They are just too smart and they
have too much exposure.

FlyCmgi

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- long; LT Rating- buy)

[investor_007]

By: granagus
Reply To: 22 by FlyCmgi
Friday, 21 Aug 1998 at 10:07 PM EDT
Post # of 48761


I was wondering why CMGI went up today on a Nasdaq down day. Is it because of LCOS? Can anyone think of
another reason why CMGI should be up short term?

Slightly off topic, is there any way to trade on ECN:
http://www.wired.com/news/news/business/story/14564.html
without paying a few hundred a month? If you have an account with Datek, are you automatically trading on ECN?
How soon do you think this will an accessible system for the retail investor ( I really don`t like the large spread on
CMGI, usually 3 / 8 ).

Thanks,
Enrique


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- long; ST Rating- buy; LT Rating- strong buy)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 23 by granagus
Sunday, 23 Aug 1998 at 6:22 AM EDT
Post # of 48761


CMGI probably went up on Friday due to the strength in LCOS, plus it seems as though it overreacted on the
downside due to the pullback in GCTY.

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- long; ST Rating- strong buy; LT Rating- strong buy)

[investor_007]

Mir hat ds Posting
13:51:24
von mcnulty besonders gut gefallen.

Auch David W. sagt: "Your post is exceptional"

mfg
investor_007

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Sunday, 2 Jan 2000 at 10:00 AM EST
Post # of 57555


To all on this board:

Thanks for your questions. To better accommodate your questions, I would like to try an experiment, but I need a
volunteer ombudsperson that is willing to do a reasonable amount of work. In return, I will schedule a period at the
beginning and middle of each month to answer around 30 questions collected, selected and forwarded to me by
the volunteer. I am willing to start with tomorrow for the first "edition".

Here`s what the volunteer must do: collect questions by email, eliminate duplicates, eliminate previously answered
questions, select the 30-50 most relevant, and email them to me. I will then post separately each question, along
who asked the question and my answer.

Obviously, this ombudsperson needs to be on top of CMGI and commited to spending the time on this. If so, I am
willing to spend the time answering the questions.

To begin with, please let me know by posting on this board with your email address if you are willing to volunteer to
be the ombudsperson by 3PM EST today. I will select someone and an alternate and start with answering the first
set of questions by Monday, 1/3/00, at noon EST.

I hope this helps provide a better flow of information to people interested in CMGI. If you have ideas as to how to
make this effort more useful, please post your suggestions and/or let the volunteer know.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

Real Time Quote
Chart
Free E-Mail
Raging CMGI Links






< Previous
Respond
Next >

By: Jonas
Reply To: None
Sunday, 2 Jan 2000 at 11:28 AM EST
Post # of 49130


dwether: a better idea

Look at the way Steve Harmon has a board set up on Silicon Investor. Anyone can ask questions, and then Steve
responds to the messages he chooses to.

More democratic

Less dependent on one person

Jonas

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 48880 by Jonas
Sunday, 2 Jan 2000 at 12:24 PM EST
Post # of 49130


I`ve used Steve`s approach. My problem is one of time. I cannot monitor the boards regularly, yet I want to respond
to the more thoughtful questions with some regularity. With some help from an ombudsperson, I can do this.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 1 by Sentinel
Sunday, 2 Jan 2000 at 1:37 PM EST
Post # of 147


May this board live long and prosper. Thanks to Sentinel for setting it up. Give me a "B"...

BOMP!!
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: Sentinel
Reply To: None
Sunday, 2 Jan 2000 at 1:35 PM EST
Post # of 57561


dwether....Please have a look at the BOMP board and it`s dedication post #1. I think this would be a great place for
us to post questions for the "volunteer" to assemble them prior to submission to you. You could also reply there,
and we could transfer the results immediately to CMGI/CMGIOT. This way there is no extraneous clutter for
anybody to wade through, or at least magnitudes less than here on CMGIOT. I announced the board to all on Jan
1, 2000 as sort of a millennium celebration gift. I think this most generous offer of yours might be well hosted on a
board that bears the BOMP name. What do ya think? ;-)

(By the way, the "Don`t Ask!" in the description means, if you have to ask what BOMP is/means, you ain`t one of
the originals! Of course all are welcome anyway. LOL)

I sure would love to help in some way, but the key in life is to know your limitations, and I have VERY little in the
way of organizational skills. I think Zbeachbum is a GREAT choice. And thank you VERY much for your offer.
Happy Y2K to you, sir! ;-)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 57237 by Sentinel
Sunday, 2 Jan 2000 at 1:47 PM EST
Post # of 57561


Sentinel:

See post 15 on the BOMP board. I like weevil`s idea of using this board for the Q&A.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Sunday, 2 Jan 2000 at 2:10 PM EST
Post # of 57561


To all: OK, so it`s not 3PM. Let`s get going. Many thanks to all who volunteered to be the ombudsperson for CMGI
CEO questions and to the many excellent nominations and suggestions. Congrats to Zbeachbum!! She has
convinced me of her strong interest and organizational skills. However, she will need alot of help from a team, I
suspect, so I`d like to nominate Zen, Mulan and Aircooled and anyone else Zbeach wants to turn to for
assistance/consultation.

I like, as well, the idea of posting questions on the BOMP board. This will allow everyone to see what has already
been asked, keep the email down, and allow for easy assembly of questions by the ombudsperson and team for
subsequent answering.

If possible, I`d like to start with the first set of questions to be submitted for answers by 9AM Monday, January 3. I
will do my best to have all questions answered by noon, or as soon thereafter, as possible. Let`s see how it goes.

Thanks again,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Sunday, 2 Jan 2000 at 2:14 PM EST
Post # of 57561


One more point: I will post the questions, their submitters, and the answers to the CMGI board.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 57304 by lvlamb
Sunday, 2 Jan 2000 at 4:08 PM EST
Post # of 57562


lvlamb: RE: your suggestion that I post my answers on BOMP, no matter where I post, I am a company insider.
The thought was to keep BOMP for questions. Not all visitors to CMGI`s board will know about BOMP (most will
not). By having the Q&A`s listed on CMGI`s board, everyone will be certain to see them. I could always post the
answers to both. If this becomes a popular suggestion, someone will be sure to do it.

Regards,
David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 9:38 AM EST
Post # of 49139


Q: TimbaBear: What is your vision for CMGI in the next 2, 5, 10 years?

A: This is a hard question to answer with limited time, but here`s a scratch:

On the B2C front, CMGI will strive to continue to attract more eyeballs, keep them for longer periods of time, and
target them better than anyone else. This will be extended to other media as other media connect to the Internet.

On the B2B front, CMGI will construct an adaptive commerce platform that will leverage existing CMGI B2B
strengths and new technologies to follow. Our goal is to establish strong positions as the key technology services
and infrastructure provider in a broad array of verticals.

On the Internet infrastructure front, CMGI will continue to build out NaviSite, NaviNet and Engage globally in
conjunction with other strategic partners with a goal to provide the most intelligent caching, hosting and bandwidth
solutions for the Internet. New CMGI companies to be announced will complement this.

CMGI will continue to invest aggressively through @Ventures to better leverage our growing operating companies.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 9:42 AM EST
Post # of 49139


Q: redelman: CMGI`s goal to be top in MediaMetrix. Is this still a goal for the year 2000? "Wetherell says that
CMGI`s goal in the next 12 months is to capture the top
spot in MediaMetrix`s audience-reach numbers."

http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,6481,00.ht…

A: This continues to be a goal, but it now appears as though we need to look to a longer time horizon. With a
combination with Lycos, we could have achieved the goal, but such a combination does not appear to be in the
cards.

If you take the sites where CMGI is the largest shareholder, we are number three or four. Not good enough.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 9:49 AM EST
Post # of 49139


Q: tapirfoot: 1.How in the world do you keep track of so many different aspects of his business simultaneously? I
get dizzy just reading about it.

A: Attention deficit helps. Seriously though, we have over 3000 great people at CMGI and our wholly-owned
companies and a similar number across our venture investments. They supply a tremendous amount of input.

The Internet, especially email, is a big help. I get many emails daily on Internet news, as well as the fundamental
metrics of most of our companies. Also, the deal flow of over 2000 business plans/month from @Ventures helps
us stay on top of what is coming down the road.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 9:57 AM EST
Post # of 49139


Q: zen_warrior: What can we expect from the recent Logitech venture? Will CPQ be integrating new webcams
and software from the joint venture on to CPQ PC`s and Web Appliances? What sort of projects is the venture
working on?

A: Logitech will be enabling multimedia self-publishing for consumer and business environments. CMGI is looking
to deploy this across a number of our properties. I cannot speak to CPQ`s plans, other than what they have
announced publicly. Here, we are working with them to deliver online services to the B2E (business to employee)
users. MyWay.com, CMGI Solutions, NaviNet, Engage, Adsmart and NaviSite should all benefit from this
relationship. These services will begin to roll out in the first half of 2000.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 10:01 AM EST
Post # of 49140


Q:lvlamb: we have seen (and still are witnessing) the big corporate companies selling all their non-core
businesses to concentrate on their principal activities. Internet is more a matter of stickiness and having the surfer
stay on the site. Sites are going to be forced to offer extra services above their core business. (example: buy a
pizza on-line, while browsing the GM site). Is CMGI in a position to find sufficient partners to `sell everything`?

A: It is not our goal to sell everything, but it is our goal to enable sites to better sell everything through Engage,
Adsmart, Flycast, AdForce, Shopping.com and our newly announced acquisition in Germany, AdTech. We will
work with these services and technologies to continue to improve upon this objective.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 10:08 AM EST
Post # of 49141


Q: TimbaBear: As market penetration gets deeper overseas, what impact do you see that having on the face of
the Internet we experience here in America?

A: By overseas, I am assuming you mean outside the US. Many new Internet technologies will migrate to the US
Internet markets from outside the US. They already are. Wireless Internet appliances from Nokia and others are
transforming the way we think about and work with the Web.

Also, more and more content, products and services from outside the US will be made accessible in ways we
want to see them in the language(s) we want them.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 10:11 AM EST
Post # of 49141


Q: TimbaBear: If CMGI considered selling some of the stock it owns in it`s spun-off companies....what would you
consider to be a safe minimum percentage level that still would be held? Obviously, it is easier to influence policy
when you`re a major shareholder, but I would think that excessive ownership might not always be the highest and
best use of Capital.

A: CMGI has no plans to sell any of its holdings in its wholly-owned subsidiaries. From time to time, we may be
diluted by shares allocated to employees and strategic partners for one or more of our companies.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 10:21 AM EST
Post # of 49141


Q: lvlamb: Is CMGi going to `verticalize` it`s commitment to the Net ? About to become the B2C powerhouse, is the
company going to be more committed to deliver the shovels and axes: internet OS`es, eventually hard-ware.
Broadly accepted or disruptive ? (thinking of the Crusoe chip here). Could we, in the near future, imagine a brand
new type of Internet appliance (almost proprietary) developed with 1186.HK?

A: CMGI is going more and more vertical, while continuing to build platforms for general Internet purposes. We are
doing this fundamentally in the B2B arena, and in the B2C space, this is why MyWay.com was the first
dynamic-HTML online service. It is highly modularized, and thus, it is more readily customized and personalized.
Any business can put their name on MyWay and integrate their own online applications into this. This is happening
and CMGI Solutions is helping to deliver the integration and customization.

By adding Engage beneath MyWay, we are making it adaptive, as well. As time goes on, we believe most Internet
services will adapt automatically to the way you want to see and use the Internet. We believe we are leading the
way in this area.

It is unlikely CMGI will ever develop hardware, but we are working in conjunction with others to deliver a better
Internet experience for a variety of environments.

David





(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 10:35 AM EST
Post # of 49144


Q: Willie_Mays_24e-commerce)Although CMGi`s roster of e-commerce investments is long, it seems mostly to
consist of niche players. Is this the philosophy, aggregating vertical sites devoted to single interests? Or is there
consideration being given to acquiring some of the many b2c sites currently given very low value by the street
because of low margins? Egghead.com, for example, could boost CMGi revenues by half a billion or so at a
takeout price a tiny fraction of CMGi`s, using the price/sales metric. Do such opportunities appeal to you, or do you
consider many existing b2c sites already obsolete?

A: No one e-commerce company can sell everything to everybody, as the applications and content aggregation
necessary to insure optimal customer satisfaction is too great for any one company to pull off, by far. This makes
for numerous opportunities in vertical markets.

We like to invest in e-commerce companies with proprietary content and/or products, as well as first mover
advantage and strong strategic partners. This enables better defensibility, differentiation, margins and appeal to
customers. A great example of this is Chemdex. They started with Genentech as a strategic partner, later brought
in a number of others, had a first mover position in the area of life science products (a $260B market), and
developed strong content and online applications. In addition, they are now leveraging their position wisely to buy
into other market verticals with their acquisition of Promedix (surgical supplies).

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 10:46 AM EST
Post # of 49145


Q: redelman: Q about article in WSJ about net values. I wonder if you read the recent article in the WSJ on net
values, chaos theory and network effects?

http://www.ragingbull.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=CMGIOT&rea… .

As the leading `manufacturer` of net value your view of Michael Mauboussin`s theory would be of significant interest
to many. Thanks for your time on this one.

A: Mr. Mauboussin`s work is interesting, but I`m not sure what to make of it other than to agree with some of the
general conclusions. Statistical analysis can lead to some interesting observations, not all of which are true. A few
companies are bringing up the overall average market cap of Web companies, but it is interesting to note the
median market cap of a Web company is only $53mm. I find that encouraging, in that it reveals there is some
discipline, afterall, on behalf of the investment community when it comes to Internet companies - the point of his
article.


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 10:57 AM EST
Post # of 49151


Q: daveguy: Oncology.com. Just wondering what caught Ventures eye to make them invest in a medical related
web site with all the competition in the medical area? Why the
question? I`m finalizing a B-Plan on the Web`s leading Infertility Site and would be happy to send it to ventures
once I understood why they are looking at medical content sites. The only thing I can figure is that it fits into the
needs of Myway.com.

A: Oncology.com is a work in progress, and eventually, it`s goal is to be the most comprehensive source of
oncology related content and community. This is important work, as it holds the promise to help many individuals
and their families who are suffering. Oncology.com probably fits better with MyFamily.com than MyWay.com, but
both could benefit from the content and community.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 11:04 AM EST
Post # of 49151


Thanks to ZBeachbum and her team for reviewing and selecting questions to be answered, and thanks to
everyone who took the time to post the questions on BOMP. All questions forwarded were answered in the order
they were forwarded. If your question(s) were not answered, perhaps they will be submitted on the next occasion,
the evening of January 16.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 11:18 AM EST
Post # of 49416


Oops, Sorry Zbeach. I see you have sent me more questions. Back to work...

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 11:26 AM EST
Post # of 49416


Q:RichieH: Revenues: According to the quarterly release on 12/15/99, net revenues were 123.7MM for the quarter
ending 10/31/99 for a sequential increase of 131%. Is CMGI comfortable with the analyst estimates for this quarter,
excluding amortization of intangible assets and stocks? (I understand that you can not be specific). Can we expect
similar growth for this quarter? Does CMGI have a time table when it expects that it`s operating side will become
profitable? (net income was -6.8MM for quarter ending 10/31/99) (a yearly date would be fine) I realize these are
sensitive issues and that you may not be able to divulge this type of information in specifics, so vagueness
is certainly acceptable!

A: We are comfortable with analysts estimates for the present quarter, but we will not be putting up the kind of
increase seen in the last quarter. First, we consolidated Altavista for the first time in Q1, and second, Q2 is
typically one of slower growth for us. We will see continued strong growth in subsequent quarters due to organic
growth and acquisitions.

As for profitability from our operating companies, we expect to see one or more of our subs turn profitable in our
FY 2001 (begins August 1, 2000). As we expect to be continue to start new companies every year, it is difficult to
forecast when our companies overall will turn profitable, as we will be starting companies in future years for which
we cannot forecasts the costs and revenues presently.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 11:31 AM EST
Post # of 49416


Q: redelman: Question about CPM pricing strategies. I`ve read that audience leaders charge lower CPM`s, but sell
more ad inventory, and therefore earn more money. Can you comment on this, since CMGI`s consumer online
business will rely on Madison Avenue ad dollars. (edited and abridged by DW)

A: We are seeing average CPM`s rise across all of our related properties. We expect this to continue over the
longer run as we see more rich media ads made possible by higher bandwidth and as ad targetability improves
due to technologies such as made possible by Engage Technologies.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 11:33 AM EST
Post # of 49416


Q: profit_guy: Question Re: ENGA and CMGI ad properties. DW, has CMGI planned some sort of re-alignment of
its ad properties?

A: Yes. Stay tuned.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 11:40 AM EST
Post # of 49417


Q: snowjoe: I listened to the annual conference call and I noticed that there were more than just a few positive
statements made by you regarding Engage Technology. Notably that you felt that the Engage data base would be
the most valuable data base in the world someday (soon I presume). Also you stated for those who would believe
otherwise that CMGI did have a plan to (integrate?) all of
the advertising entities that CMGI has recently entered into agreements with to purchase. As a shareholder of both
CMGI and ENGA I would be interested to know:
1. What is the grand plan for all of the advertising related companys that CMGI owns or has invested in?
2. If legislation is passed restricting the collection of annonymous clicks does Engage have a viable "plan b"?
3. When do you feel that the Engage data base will be the most valuable database in the world?

A: I have always said that Engage has the potential of becoming the most valuable database in the world, and I still
believe that. It is impossible to predict when that may occur. As for the grand plan, stay tuned.

As for legislation, we believe that if legislation is to limit the use of cookies, it will come down in favor of our
anonymous approach, but if not, there are many applications of Engage Technologies, including enhanced
intelligent caching and managing large numbers of simultaneous user interactions in an Internet environment with
millions of network appliances.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 11:44 AM EST
Post # of 49418


Q: healthy: Is it correct to say that DCLK is not capable of delivering ads to a select group of Net users who have
already demonstrated interest in a particular subject area, whereas Engage can? Does this accurately portray
Engage`s chief competitive advantage? Finally, how relevant is Engage`s targeted profiling for the Asian market?
What adaptations will have to be made?

A: DCLK has not developed, to our knowledge, the ability to scalably collect clicks and anonymous profiles. This is
the key differentiation between the two companies. It is a hard problem to solve. Engage`s technologies are
applicable anywhere in the world.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 11:49 AM EST
Post # of 49418


Q: ENGA vs DCLK..Should ad revenues increase to $200 Billion per year as Dave has quoted and Targetability
being so valuable to on-line advertisers, DCLK & ENGA appear to be fine long term investments. How important is
the anonymous profile capability of ENGA in terms of a competitive edge over DCLK?

A: CMGI believes anonymity of profiling is fundamental to insuring individual privacy, while still allowing for effective
targetability. Since DCLK does not provide this capability, and since it is a hard to develop software to handle the
scalability and speed requirements demanded by billions of clicks per month (eventually per day), we believe it is
an important competitive advantage.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 11:52 AM EST
Post # of 49418


Q: redheads: At the shareholders meeting you talked about a new CMGI company that would build data centers
around the world and use Engage profiling. Will NaviSite play a role in the new company? Will the new company
use DELL and CPQ servers? How many data centers will the new company build this year?

A: NaviSite will play a key role in our global data center and caching project. We will deploy both CPQ and DELL
servers. The number of data centers will vary based on partnerships that we are still working into the project.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 11:55 AM EST
Post # of 49418


Q: AntifreezeEngage)I think considerable apprehension regarding the hole issue of "cookies" stems form the fact
that cookies are planted into our computers without our knowledge. If users had control over "cookies" they would
have felt much more comfortable.

A: You do have control. You can set your browser to only accept cookies with your permission. Also, Engage is
developed to only apply cookies automatically on sites that comply with TrustE`s privacy standards. We do not
supply Engage Technologies to porn or other controversial sites.

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 12:02 PM EST
Post # of 49418


Q: Profundo: How do you plan to market cmgi solutions? Who do you see as your target client base? Are you still
looking for people for the Marketing department of CMGI Solutions?

A: CMGI Solutions will be marketed directly by CMGI Solutions to businesses and indirectly through strategic
partners, such as Compaq, PCCW, and SII. We are always looking for good people though our HR department.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 12:04 PM EST
Post # of 49418


Q: DreaminMan: Re: CMGI Solutions: can you build capability and capacity quickly enough to make Solutions
a major player in the e-consulting business?

A: Yes and no. We are growing organically and through acquisition. We plan to scale this business quickly.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 12:06 PM EST
Post # of 49418


Q: RagingElk: RE: MSGI: Can you comment on any strategic relationship still existing between CMGI & MSGI
since the sale of CMG Direct to MSGI?

A: I have met recently with the CEO of MSGI to review opportunities to collaborate, and I believe there are many.
We will continue to search for ways to make this more of a strategic relationship.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 12:12 PM EST
Post # of 49419


Q: zen_warrior: You have said that CMGI`s big future revenue stream will come from Net Appliances, both
"physical and virtual". What does this mean? Are we working
w/ CPQ to create Net Appliances? What sort of Net Appliances? Or do you mean indirectly via ad revenue,
commerce, etc.?

A: I`m not sure I put it just that way, but CMGI and many others will derive significant revenues by orienting their
businesses to better leverage Internet appliances. In our case, we will repurpose content, ad targeting and
delivery, and content caching and delivery to work efficiently with as many network appliances as possible. These
will include telephones, PDA`s, pagers and other consumer and business appliances.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 12:18 PM EST
Post # of 49420


Q: Antifreeze: (Navisite) Dell and Intel are VC investors in Navisite, at the same time Navisite has business
relationship with Compaq. My question, do Intel or Dell actively participate in nurturing many of their venture
companies (Navisite in this case) or their contribution is strictly monetary?

A: Thus far, Compaq has provided far more value add as a strategic investor, but despite "Internet time", the Web
is a long song.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 12:36 PM EST
Post # of 49420


Q: lobdell: On CNN`s Moneyline last week, you mentioned server farms. Could you elaborate on this more?

A: More and more, applications will be hosted and served on sets of servers (server farms), as PC`s over time get
displaced by network appliances. CMGI is working to optimize the serving of these applications on server farms.
Engage Technologies is key to this work.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 12:39 PM EST
Post # of 49420


Q: zen_warrior: Is CMGI considering offering free NaviNet DSL services via 1stUp, AV, etc when it becomes
available? When can we expect to see DSL rolled out?

A: As announced previously, we are planning to add DSL service through NaviNet this year. We cannot determine
at this time when that may be free through 1stUp or others. That will depend on a number of other developments,
such as the expansion of Engage Technologies in the marketplace and the continued decline in DSL.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 12:47 PM EST
Post # of 49420


Q: redelman: re: Navinet.
1. If the demand is there, can Navinet scale to 10 million ISP users by the end of this year?
2. Navinet uses Max TNT switching equipment from Ascend. These boxes can be software upgraded to carry high
quality VoIP. Can you tell us if a decision has been made to go with the upgrade?

A: I do not know the numbers off the top to answer this first question. I will have to get back to you on this. I do
know we can handle the scale necessary to be profitable with NaviNet in this year. As for the second question, I
need to check on what we can say publicly here. I have an email sent out to determine this. Certainly, we plan to
be competitive with NaviNet, and I suspect VOIP is fundamental to being competitive.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 12:56 PM EST
Post # of 49420


Q: jpiet: besides pcclf. What will cmgi do to capitalize on the tremendous growth potential of the asian markets.?

A: We announced a MOU with Compaq and SII, a venture group run by the Chinese government, to build a
consumer portal for China. In addition, we have a strategic partnership with Sumitomo in Japan, which has
resulted in Engage Japan and Lycos Japan. Furthermore, we are establishing @Ventures Asia in conjunction with
two partners to be announced soon.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 1:00 PM EST
Post # of 49420


Q: Optimist: re: pcclf: Could you please explain the relationship between CMGI and Pcclf going forward and how
you perceive the relationship benefits Pcclf.

A: In September, we exchanged $350mm in CMGI at a basis of about $84.50/share for $350mm of 1186 HK
(PCCW) at a basis of about $6.06 HK. Since then, we have been working on a number of fronts to advance our
strategic partnership, not just in Asia, but elsewhere, as well. Stay tuned.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 1:02 PM EST
Post # of 49420


To all: That is all I can answer for now. I will finish the list of questions I have received as soon as possible.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: zbeachbum
Reply To: None
Monday, 3 Jan 2000 at 1:16 PM EST
Post # of 49420


To All... re: dwether Q&A

FYI... I just wanted to let people know that David has many more questions on his list there to answer. The
questions yet to be answered relate to AltaVista, Raging Bull, WitCapital, the DSP program, iCast, and
@Ventures.

If you have more questions, please submit them to the BOMP board and they will be summarized for the next
session which will probably be Sunday Jan 16 (and every other Sunday from there... tentatively).

If you have any other input or suggestions on the forum David has started here, please e-mail me.

thanks

Z

[investor_007]

An die Leser dieses Threads,

ich werde diesen Thread fortführen.

Da er als Datenbank für die Statements von
CEO DW dienen soll, möchte Euch bitten,
keine Postings einzustellen, die nicht ein
Gespräch mit oder Statements von DW enthalten.

Vielen Dank

investor_007

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Sunday, 9 Jan 2000 at 10:45 AM EST
Post # of 63334


Interesting article from The Economist re: PCCW

The
Internet-share
bubble




AN ODD thing happened last month, just before Christmas. A Hong Kong firm, only eight months old, run by the 33-year-old son of an old-style property tycoon and with a business plan that almost nobody fully understands, suddenly became one of the biggest Internet companies in the world, with a stockmarket value of $21 billion. Odder yet: it might even deserve it.

The firm is Pacific Century CyberWorks (PCCW), a name still little known outside Hong Kong. That will soon change, thanks to the vaulting ambitions of its founder, Richard Li, and the billions of dollars he can marshal behind them. PCCW is assembling a satellite-based
broadband Internet network, modelled on America`s Excite@Home, with the aim of becoming the largest
broadband Internet business in the world. It has also
built a venture-capital arm, CyberWorks Ventures, that
has already invested $500m in cash and equity in nearly 30 companies. They include big stakes in SoftNet,
a broadband data-provider passing 2.4m cable
subscribers in America, and CMGI, an American-based
venture-fund with a similar investment strategy. PCCW`s venture-capital investments alone are now worth
nearly $2 billion.


At a rate of nearly a deal a week, PCCW is putting
together the pieces of what could soon be one of the
world`s biggest Internet conglomerates. It is building
the pipes-from satellite capacity and transmission to
deals with the cable-television network operators that
will reach individual subscribers-to bring broadband
data to millions of households in Asia. It is buying
stakes in dozens of companies that will fill these pipes with content and services, from portals such as Sina.com to
Internet telephony, gaming and e-commerce. And it is
starting joint ventures with heavyweights such as Hikari
Tsushin, a leader in Japan`s booming mobile-phone
industry, that may extend its reach to mobile multimedia
as well.


Overnight, PCCW has become Asia`s Internet darling.
Bankers are falling over themselves to praise it
(although it suffered badly in the stockmarket correction
that pounded Hong Kong this week). The firm`s
deals in the past month, says Credit Suisse First Boston,
have made it "the Asian e-infrastructure play". Credit Lyonnais calls it an "all-in-one of Excite@Home, Yahoo! and CMGI in Asia". Lehman Brothers proclaimed that "an Internet star is born". Not bad for a firm that, Credit Suisse notes, was a small telecoms-equipment distributor a few months ago.


Is PCCW really so magical? No firm could be. It is not
really eight months old-it just looks that way because
Mr Li bought a small local firm called Tricom Holdings
last May and used it to list the Internet ventures of his
existing property conglomerate, the Pacific Century
Group, which until then was best-known for winning a
sweetheart deal from Hong Kong`s government to build an
industrial park. Cyber-Port, as it is called, has
moved to the periphery of the firm`s operations-where it
belongs. The Internet ventures had been in the works for more than two years; indeed, the first sign that something was up was when Intel paid $50m for a minority share in Mr Li`s Internet project in early 1998.


Nor is Mr Li a newcomer to either satellites or
technology: he started Pacific Century in 1993 with the billion dollars he got for selling Star TV, his first media
venture and today the leading satellite broadcaster in the
region. He has a degree from Stanford in computer
engineering. And there is the small matter of his father, Li Ka-Shing, Hong Kong`s richest tycoon and a force in
telecoms thanks to his ownership of Hutchinson Whampoa, which last year made a fortune selling its stake in the Orange mobile network in Britain to Germany`s Mannesmann. The elder Mr Li has virtually no part in PCCW: yet few names carry more weight in Asia. When he started in business the younger Mr Li`s arrogance made him plenty of enemies, but he has since grown up, discovering his inner geek along with a softer style.


The younger Mr Li was already a wealthy man when he
started: last year Forbes ranked the Li family tenth-richest in the world, with about $13 billion. The
elder Mr Li`s canny trading last year probably added
$5 billion or so to that. But in the space of only a few
months, Mr Li junior has nearly equalled his father.
Sohaib Umar, an analyst with Credit Lyonnais Asia,
calculates that the junior Mr Li owns 54.5% of PCCW, a
stake that is now worth nearly $9 billion. Add his
property and other investments and the total may exceed
$12 billion, not counting his share of the family wealth.


In any case, it is easy to make too much of the family
connection. PCCW is not an outpost of the elder Mr Li`s
empire, nor is it the dalliance of an indulged son (the
elder Mr Li`s sole financial contribution was to invest
$62m to help set up Star TV in the early 1990s). But the
younger Mr Li did inherit one trait that has served
him well: a knack for deal-making perfectly tuned to the
frantic pace of the Internet. Aides describe him
negotiating billion-dollar deals in a few hours, sealing
clauses with rapid fire ("Done!") on a mixture of instinct,
experience and some of the best connections in the
technology industry.


Having the chairman as chief negotiator has allowed PCCW
to react to openings as nimbly as any startup: in
the dot.com industry these days, the ability to invest
and strike alliances quickly counts for more than
soldiering on behind a solid business plan. That might
make PCCW sound like Japan`s Softbank, but it is not.
Unlike the phenomenal Internet investor, PCCW aims to
build a real business, not just a portfolio.

A new star dawns

Yet in PCCW`s core broadband-access business, doubts
remain. On the face of it, there is something
counterintuitive about PCCW`s dream. It wants to bring
broadband Internet access to all of Asia (mainly
China, India and Japan) via televisions and interactive
set-top boxes. This is natural enough for Mr Li: take his
old Star TV business plan, replace "television" with
"broadband Internet" and you would not be far off. But
Star is thought to have lost more than $600m in less than
a decade and is still losing money. Asian viewers,
like European ones, turn out to have a taste for
expensive local programming. Most also refuse to pay for
content. They are, needless to say, poor-indeed, Mr Li`s
target audience is one of the least affluent in the world.

By contrast Excite@Home`s consumers are rich. Yet the
American company has fought to find customers for
its own broadband offerings. After four years, it has
only about 1m subscribers and its business is only now
taking off. Can Mr Li really thrive in India and China
when Excite@Home has struggled in Silicon Valley and
New York?


Bravely, Mr Li thinks that it can-and he might be right.
Excite@Home suffered because American cable
operators had neither the money nor the urgency to
upgrade their own systems to carry two-way data. But
broadband is taking off now because AT&T`s huge
investment in cable firms has kick-started the
market-and led to price competition with telecoms firms
that offer broadband services over copper wires.

In Asia, Mr Li argues, the cable operators have even more
reason to invest: many of the households he wants
to supply have no telephone at all. Asian cable
infrastructure, especially in China, is newer and easier to
convert to two-way data than America`s, and where it is
not in good condition (such as in India), it is cheaper
to replace, thanks to lower labour costs. Overall, PCCW
hopes to reach more than 16m households by 2005,
out of an Asian cable market of more than 160m by then.
These will be mostly rich, urban Asians. There are
an awful lot of these, even in otherwise poor countries.

Within a few months, PCCW will be able to prove its
point. It plans to launch its service, initially as
satellite-television channels with Web content, by
mid-year. One test will be whether PCCW can bring together
enough compelling content to create a service people will
pay for-something neither Cable & Wireless HKT
or Singapore Telecom has managed with their own broadband
services in those cities. Their potential
audiences, of just a few million, are too small to
justify the dozens of expensive channels of local content
required to attract viewers.

Mr Li`s audiences will at first be even smaller and
spread over even more disparate cultures. Hence the
venture fund, whose investments are intended to supply
the content that PCCW cannot. Sometimes being a
billionaire really does have its advantages.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

Als Erläuterung, zu dem vorhergehenden Posting,
möchte ich anfügen, daß CMGI 448,347,107 Aktien
von 1186 HK (Pacific Century Cyberworks PCCW)
besitzt.

mfg
investor_007

[investor_007]

Als Erläuterung möchte ich anfügen, daß
CMGI 448,347,107 Aktien von 1186 HK
(Pacific Century Cyberworks PCCW)
besitzt.

mfg
investor_007

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:01 PM EST
Post # of 56825


Q: Lisa6: I saw the question on server farms - I`m wondering if there are
any plans to move into the Storage Area Network (SAN) arena?

A: CMGI is developing a global content distribution network of data centers leveraging Engage profiles for intelligent caching. Currently, our plans are to optimize this caching with other forms of intelligent caching, beginning with Akamai. This will lead to many new opportunities including numerous applications for storage networks as web hosting gets redefined to incorporate global network resource leveling based on the dynamic needs of the Web.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:02 PM EST
Post # of 56825


Q: AirCooled: Does Free AltaVista plan to eventually offer Free AV access for MAC users?

A: Yes

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:02 PM EST
Post # of 56825


Q: paulh54: re: FreeAV and WIN2000 OS: I was told today by AV tech support that AV`s free access service is not yet ready to run on Windows 2000 (which I am running on now and can confirm it is not compatable). Will FreeAv be ready for the official launch date of Windows 2000 which I am told will be on or about February 1st?

A: We will strive to have 1stUp (the provider of the ALTA and Excite free web access services) working as close to the delivery of WIN2000 as possible. A date has not been announced, but we do not see this causing any significant issues.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:02 PM EST
Post # of 56825


Q: montycris: Was wondering about the man behind the words.. kids? hobbies? handicap?

A: Though I shy away from mixing my personal life with business, I will share some basics: Married, father of three, who when not on the Web is a 6-handicap golfer who enjoys playing piano (mostly improv blues/jazz), working outdoors, reading (mostly non-fiction, with occasional sci-fi and humorous fiction) and taking long walks in wildlife sanctuaries. Allergic to most forms of pollen and politics, but I`m grateful there are some talented folks who take care of both maladies. Favorite golf book: Missing Links. It`s hilarious.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:02 PM EST
Post # of 56826


Q: Nothing.But.Net: As an individual who has worked at times in the advertising and broadcast industries (the old bricks and mortar stuff), I am aware of the magnitude of trade and barter revenue and expense that is reported according to generally accepted accounting principles for customers/advertisers who, for the moment, do not have the cash to pay for the requisite services.

May I inquire:
a) To what extent is the practice of non-cash trade and barter used in
"cross-pollinating" the respective P&L`s of majority owned CMGI and minority owned @Ventures investments and in your opinion, does it represent a material percent of reported revenues and expense?
b) Do you forsee this percent as increasing or decreasing in the future?

A: Typically, we have very little barter revenue (from 0-5 percent), but some of it is good business, as it can greatly increase the traffic to your site by exposing it to new customers/users you may not otherwise reach. We have no barter revenue between the CMGI companies, as we work hard to integrate them anyway. I do not foresee that we will alter this practice.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:03 PM EST
Post # of 56827


Q: CurveRider (long form question broken up into several Q&A`s by DW):

Part 1: "ENGA vs. DCLK".
In his article "The Battle for Eyeballs: In the race for new media
advertising hegemony, bet on DoubleClick", published in the January 15, 2000 issue of Barron`s, Bill Alpert makes certain statements I`d appreciate your comment on. [For clarity, his comments are in quotes, my questions are in brackets.]

"The Engage Knowledge database has profiles of more than 42 million
consumers, accruing from those consumers` visits to 900 Websites." [Are
these numbers current and accurate? If not, what are the correct numbers?]

A: This is roughly correct as of about 45 days ago, but we recently started collecting the clicks from the over 1700 sites in the Flycast Network. We have set up a new program, whereby sites can automatically add themselves to the Flycast network, and we are getting thousands of smaller sites in the process.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:03 PM EST
Post # of 56827


Q: CurveRider: Part 2: "Abacus should enable marketers to target ads more precisely than Engage. Why? Because its database of $3.5 billion purchases, combined with demographics and Internet viewing behavior, is likely to be far more predictive than `Net gathered information alone. Abacus` 1999 revenues of better than $60 million, says DoubleClick`s Epstein, attest to the value of its database." ["Likely to be far more predictive..."?? Isn`t this simply Mr. Alpert`s opinion? How would you refute this statement?]

A: Certainly, this appears to be Mr. Alperin`s opinion. We looked carefully at Abacus before DCLK purchased and decided to pass for several reasons:

First, the Abacus database is offline data that has no application to online targetability unless it can be matched up with the names and addresses of individuals` online data. This is hard to do, because the vast majority of the time, sites do not know the name and address of an individual at their site. In 100% of these cases Engage will be better.

Second, there is a privacy issue here. Before DCLK goes ahead and matches online data with offline data, they should get the permission of the user, which should include their ability to view just what data is being maintained on them. My guess is that for the few percentage points of the Abacus database that DCLK can match up with online names and addresses, a similarly small percentage of people will give them the permission to do this. Engage cannot violate people`s privacy, because its profiles are 100% anonymous, a critical decision we made four and a half years ago, when we first planned out the path of Engage. Again, for everyone that chooses to not have their online data merged with online data, Engage is better 100% of the time.

Third, the Abacus database is mostly North American. Engage is global and captures 100% of the clicks through a website and can target 100% of those individuals, regardless of where they are from. There are many countries in the world, such as Germany, that will not allow direct marketing to an individual by name and address without the express permission of the individual ahead of time. Engage is already being used by most of the largest ad networks in Europe, since it does not invade privacy.

Fourth, Engage profiling can be more targetable than Abacus info, that is, if a site happens to have a match with Abacus. It depends on the application. This is because the Engage clickstream profile tends to be a more recent and comprehensive profile of an individual`s interest. With the Abacus database, someone may have become part of the list because of a bird feeder or some other obscure product that they bought for themselves or someone else. Perhaps that Abacus product purchase occured two years ago, and the individual has no more interest in another such product, whereas Engage may have numerous subject areas of interest with varying levels of known recency, frequency and duration of those interests, all numerically tabulated and indexed for extremely useful targetability.

Fifth, each Engage profile is no older than 90 days, whereas the average Abacus profile is 365 days old. Typically, the more recent the direct response in a given interest area, the more responsive the individual is to a direct marketing offer.

Lastly, if a site so desires, matches of Engage profiles can be made with offline data, with the customer`s permission, of course, and derive the best of both worlds, and there are other databases besides Abacus for accomplishing this. However, independent tests show that Engage dramatically increases response to targetable and non-targetable web site pages without having to do this.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:03 PM EST
Post # of 56828


Q: CurveRider: Part 3: "DoubleClick hopes its Swiss -- like neutrality will gain it the ad business of publishers nervous about showing their click traffic to CMGI, itself a huge Web publisher." [Are you aware of customers or potential customers ever expressing such nervousness? Could you comment on how you might reassure them if they did?]

A: The opposite is true. Sites do not need to contribute to the Engage Knowledge repository of profiles to enjoy the benefits of the profiles. It simply costs a little more if they do not contribute. Most of Engage`s customers readily agree to contribute. In fact, we asked the permission of each site in the AdSmart and Flycast Networks (over 2075), and to my knowledge, virtually not one site chose not to have their site contribute to Engage, and many of those sites are publishers. Why would they care? Engage cannot violate their customers` privacy (as could be the case with the DCLK/Abacus approach), and Engage profiling should help them make more money from our ad networks.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:03 PM EST
Post # of 56828


Q: CurveRider: Part 3: "DoubleClick hopes its Swiss -- like neutrality will gain it the ad business of publishers nervous about showing their click traffic to CMGI, itself a huge Web publisher." [Are you aware of customers or potential customers ever expressing such nervousness? Could you comment on how you might reassure them if they did?]

A: The opposite is true. Sites do not need to contribute to the Engage Knowledge repository of profiles to enjoy the benefits of the profiles. It simply costs a little more if they do not contribute. Most of Engage`s customers readily agree to contribute. In fact, we asked the permission of each site in the AdSmart and Flycast Networks (over 2075), and to my knowledge, virtually not one site chose not to have their site contribute to Engage, and many of those sites are publishers. Why would they care? Engage cannot violate their customers` privacy (as could be the case with the DCLK/Abacus approach), and Engage profiling should help them make more money from our ad networks.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:04 PM EST
Post # of 56829


Q: CurveRider: Part 4: "DoubleClick`s ad-revenue run-rate is double that of rival CMGI, and DoubleClick`s gross margins run about 50%, compared to 35% for CMGI`s publicly held ad units." [Do these numbers seem right to you?] "Rival CMGI should likewise prosper in the `Net ad business. However, those results are likely to be obscured by the firm`s other Internet operations and its rapid-fire wheeling and dealing. In other words, DoubleClick is the pure play in this business."
(FYI - personally, if given a chance, I would have rewritten it this way:
"CMGI should likewise prosper in the `Net ad business. However, their
results are likely to be bolstered by the firm`s other Internet operations
and its rapid-fire wheeling and dealing. In other words, DoubleClick has all
its eggs in one basket, while CMGI has its many eggs in many baskets -- and hens, roosters, and a hot hen house! .
===============================

A: I`m not sure about the numbers, but I do know that we are seeing an overall improvement in CPM rates, so margins should improve as well. Furthermore, I suspect that DCLK`s highest margin revenue was the keyword targeted inventory of ALTA, which they are losing. As for revenues, if you add Adsmart, Engage, and Flycast revenues together and take 50% of ALTA`s revenue away from DCLK, DCLK is nowhere near double our group, and that does not include AdForce. My guess is we are growing faster, as we are adding more sites to our networks than DCLK, and DCLK lost a significant portion of ALTA by virtue of the terms of their contract with ALTA.

As for our own variation on a direct marketing pure play, please stay tuned....phew!! Curve, you trying to where me out?

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:04 PM EST
Post # of 56829


Q: Infidel re: Engage: If possible, could you explain the strategy behind
IPO`ing Engage and keeping it as a separate and independent company from the Advertising entity (AdSmart/AdForce/Flycast/AdTech) instead of combining it with the Advertising entity to create a company similar to Doubleclick?

A: We are working on ways to better leverage and integrate our direct marketing business units and hope to share those plans shortly.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:04 PM EST
Post # of 56829


Q: profit_guy:re: ENGA, can you help me out on this math please?
I came across this excerpt on "technology evaluation.com"..."AudienceNet
itself is expected to grow to about 1000 sites by the end of the year 2000.
We estimate that the sites in this network will be serving 25 billion ad
impressions each month by that time. While there are no estimates for the
percentage of impressions that will be served through AudienceNet, a simple calculation is instructive. If 1 percent of those 25 billion ads go through AudienceNet at an average CMP of $50 (i.e., five cents per impression) Engage would gross $12.5 million per month. Since a large percentage of their inventory payments would go back to other CMGI companies, and since their largest website is CMGI`s AltaVista, the net result would be that Engage does very well, and CMGI, in technical terms, makes out like a bandit."
http://www.technologyevaluation.com/research%5Fnotes/12%2D99…
F12%5F99%5F1.htm Are these extrapolations accurate? Also, I was not able to attend the recent ENGA/CMGI shareholders` meeting, but some one quoted you as saying something to the effect that "ENGA will literally have to envelope all of the CMGI properties"...can you share any insight?

A: Your CPM assumptions may be a bit high, and it is not accurate that a large percentage of the revenue goes back to CMGI companies. It depends on who the customer is. Sometimes, it will be a CMGI, such as ALTA, MyWay, iCast, etc., but most ENGA customers are not CMGI companies. Nonetheless, we anticipate that within 5-10 years the majority of the $200B of advertising being spent in the US will be spent on interactive advertising, since TV, radio, and network appliances will increase the amount of time that Americans spend viewing online media will increase dramatically from the present 9%.

As for my comment at ENGA`s shareholder meeting, I only joked about ENGA getting big enough to buy its parent.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:04 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: rmarcusb: The recent annual report brought HotLinks to my attention, and I think it`s a great service. HotLinks.com provides a link
(http://www.redherring.com/cod/121699.html) to a recent article that
suggested added value by incorporating a service like HotLinks into a portal like AltaVista. I concur. What`s your opinion?

A: IMHO, HotLinks is a great product/service that is of benefit to many. ALTA is one of the many.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:05 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: saveslivesbyday:re:Internet Radio: My question is regarding the rapid development of Internet radio and CMGI`s plans to enter the "audio advertisement" space. Also, could Engage capture the "listening preferences" in a way that would enable advertisers to target
listeners based on their interests?

A: A click is a click, and as long as the subject area of the click is useful to targeting, ENGA can monetize it. This applies to radio stations and listening preferences, as many advertisers today target just that.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:05 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: BIGBUCKS! Do you or does anybody know when legislation will decide if the type of tracking ENGA does on the net will pass and continue to be allowed? Will this be a prolonged dragged out affair? Or is this answer coming soon? Or am I missing something?

A: Given that Engage provides anonymous profiling and targeting, and given that it satisfies governments where direct marketing laws are more stringent than the US, such as Germany, we do not foresee this being an issue. The same may not be the case for others in the field that do not provide for anonymity of profiling. To my knowledge, Engage is the only scalable anonymous profiling technology today. It certainly has the most profiles.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:05 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: mcmom: I wonder what CMGIs strategy is for dominating the interactive
television based internet market. Recently uncovered a company that seems to be headed in a similar direction as ENGAGE in that they collect demographic data on users. The company is IATV or hyper TV as the product is called.This seems to be the next area of growth.

A: Engage`s technology applies to all interactive environments, which includes the Web, TV, radio, and network appliances of all kinds. Engage`s approach should be the most useful in these new arenas, as it is accumulating the largest set of anonymous profiles.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:05 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: Caleb: re: image compression tech: What is the importance of
image compression technology in this era of the Internet and Internet
appliances? Would you say it`s extremely important, very important or just
plain old important? :-)

A: It`s extremely important, as we are a long time away from unlimited bandwidth.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:06 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: qiuboy: What is CMGi`s China strategy? Will CMGi team up with some Chinese internet companies(other than the Shanghai venture) to penetrate the huge potential China B2B market? I think the biggest barrier for Chinese enterprises to use internet as a business tool is the language. One of my friend and I are planning to establish a internet B2B company to serve small Chinese companies for their international trading. Is CMGi also planning to cash in this area?

A: Pacific Century Cyberworks is our primary partner for China and all other countries in Asia. More on this relationship will be forthcoming soon. In Japan, we also have a significant strategic relationship with Sumitomo. In addition, we are working with the Shainghai Information Investment group, a venture firm owned by the Chinese government, to build a large consumer portal. All of these relationships and initiatives will be complemented by @Ventures Asia. We anticipate this to be comprised of a few limited partners, which we are looking to announce soon.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:06 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: djames: Front page of the Investors Business Daily (January 3,2000) headline "Is China ready to bully Taiwan?" (Missile buildup seen as threat to Island Security..) CMGI`s recent foray into the ASIA markets implies more risk then just market movements. Given that China (And Russia) have broken EVERY major trade pack with the US since the `70`s (They must have studied the US agreements with the indigenous peoples of the Americas) Given the possibility of technology (An open Internet in China) possibly changing how the people of the biggest nation on earth view and interact with the world, How does CMGI feel about its involvement with such a volatile political, social and moral issue? The involvement with China seems to have the possibility of doing a lot better good then just
increasing the bottom line of CMGI. Can you comment on this? (Without
writing a book)

A: I view China far differently. They are now a member of the World Trade Organization, and they have not broken "every major trade pack", as you state. Quite the opposite. The country is making dramatic progress on all fronts, as is evidenced by the fact that the average per capita income in the metropolitan areas of China is between $7,000-$10,000 US/year, much higher than most realize.

The Chinese are extremely entrepreneurial. Hong Kong is the greatest example of free market capitalism in the world today, and in many regards, greater China is taking its lead from Hong Kong. For example, today thousands of independent franchisees sell, service and install satellite dishes and install cable and fiber head ends allowing TV signals to reach tens of millions of households in China (and over 135mm hhlds across 60 countries in Asia). This has been going on for nearly 9 years, and the founder of this endeavor, Richard Li, is the chairman of Pacific Century Cyberworks (PCCW), our primary partner in China. PCCW`s task is to convert many of these households to be high bandwidth interactive. We anticipate that many of CMGI`s products and services will be deployed in achieving this endeavor.

As for the benefits of the Internet on China, it is of great benefit to all peoples of the world, regardless of geographic origin or economic circumstance. Through the community features of the Web, it helps break down barriers caused by misunderstandings. I see little else but good that can come from it for China and other nations as they embrace it more.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:06 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: djames: Front page of the Investors Business Daily (January 3,2000) headline "Is China ready to bully Taiwan?" (Missile buildup seen as threat to Island Security..) CMGI`s recent foray into the ASIA markets implies more risk then just market movements. Given that China (And Russia) have broken EVERY major trade pack with the US since the `70`s (They must have studied the US agreements with the indigenous peoples of the Americas) Given the possibility of technology (An open Internet in China) possibly changing how the people of the biggest nation on earth view and interact with the world, How does CMGI feel about its involvement with such a volatile political, social and moral issue? The involvement with China seems to have the possibility of doing a lot better good then just
increasing the bottom line of CMGI. Can you comment on this? (Without
writing a book)

A: I view China far differently. They are now a member of the World Trade Organization, and they have not broken "every major trade pack", as you state. Quite the opposite. The country is making dramatic progress on all fronts, as is evidenced by the fact that the average per capita income in the metropolitan areas of China is between $7,000-$10,000 US/year, much higher than most realize.

The Chinese are extremely entrepreneurial. Hong Kong is the greatest example of free market capitalism in the world today, and in many regards, greater China is taking its lead from Hong Kong. For example, today thousands of independent franchisees sell, service and install satellite dishes and install cable and fiber head ends allowing TV signals to reach tens of millions of households in China (and over 135mm hhlds across 60 countries in Asia). This has been going on for nearly 9 years, and the founder of this endeavor, Richard Li, is the chairman of Pacific Century Cyberworks (PCCW), our primary partner in China. PCCW`s task is to convert many of these households to be high bandwidth interactive. We anticipate that many of CMGI`s products and services will be deployed in achieving this endeavor.

As for the benefits of the Internet on China, it is of great benefit to all peoples of the world, regardless of geographic origin or economic circumstance. Through the community features of the Web, it helps break down barriers caused by misunderstandings. I see little else but good that can come from it for China and other nations as they embrace it more.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:06 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: redelman: Question about CMGI`s buttons on CPQ keyboards. When does it start? Which CMGI companies will be on those buttons?

A: Altavista derives millions of page views today from Compaq`s integration and bundling. We expect this to embrace other products and services in the CMGI family over the next few months. Likely candidates include iCAST and MyWay, among others.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:07 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: manfmnantucket: CMGI operational structure: The topic of how CMGI is organized is interesting to me, as I think it`s a new kind of company. An operational incubator, so to speak. The only thing I can compare it to organizationally is DEC in the early 80`s, which had matrix management for what were essentially 7 different operating companies. The market growth was such that the inefficiencies of this mgmt structure were necessary for speed to market. CMGI`s incubator structure, though, would seem to avoid the problem DEC later faced - that of integrating the sub-companies into one. Still, there is much to be gained from synergy between the startups. I have noticed the various sites all being AKAM-ized and integrated into the kieratsu. So my question (finally) regards what sort of management structure you have in place to make it efficient for startups to integrate with the other startups` technology. As CMGI grows, Metcalf kicks in - the Nth startup needs to learn and integrate with N-1 other companies/technologies. I would think the ideal solution would be to have a roving engineering SWAT team to help each startup so that the learning curve happens once instead of N*N-1 times. I recall your saying that CMGI options functioned as a motivator, which is good, but can you elaborate on what operational structures you are putting in place (or thinking of) to help this turbo-kieratsu?

A: We meet regularly (ranging from weekly to semi-annually) as a group between the companies at the CEO, CTO, VP Marketing & Sales, and VP Business Development levels. This includes CMGI`s subs and @Ventures investments. There is an active ongoing exchange of info, leads, issues, technologies and what works and doesn`t work. What may be good for one company may not work optimally for another, so having the separate business units helps.

As we add more companies and investments to the mix, the leverage of the group increases for eachother and in the marketplace. More partners approach us, and more overall growth occurs. It is a highly successful model that is not without its management challenges, but we are finding many ways to improve upon it. Importantly, it is not limited to any one segment of the web, such as B2B. Many of the most important B2B partners in the world, such as PCCW, will begin as B2C partners, and quickly become B2B. I think our more comprehensive, diversified set of companies has it obvious advantages in these and other areas.

I could write a book on this topic, but I do not have the time right now, as we have all these companies, and I have all these other questions.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:07 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: JrKeller: When do you anticipate iCAST will be up and running? Its debut has been delayed, hasn`t it? How come?

A: We anticipate the iCAST delivery to be within the next few weeks. They are on the home stretch. We chose to wait, because it wasn`t ready with enough of the features we wanted to see for prime time. Since first impressions are lasting ones, it`s important we do it right the first time. That being said, there is much more that will continue to roll out in the months and years to follow the initial launch. Though the team is exhausted, they are charged, as well, by the sense of mission of launching something special. That`s always the hope in any massive development project.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:07 PM EST
Post # of 56830


David

Q: jstrom: Would you consider allowing CMGI shareholders to fund
the new @Ventures B2B fund (and other @Ventures Funds as well) before
placing the balance with Investment Bankers for public sale? [your core CMGI shareholders would relish this opportunity to participate in new Venture Funds and it would save CMGI money as well]

A: No, it is not efficient, even though we realize it has broad appeal. People will just have to settle for CMGI shares as a vehicle to participate.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:07 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: swd999: Just wondering if you think DSL or Cable will be the winner for high speed access in the future.

A: Both DSL and cable will service many customers in the near to medium term. Different forms of wireless may win over the longer term.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:08 PM EST
Post # of 56830


Q: gitmonee
In regards to ICast: I want to know if CMGI has any friends left in the
old-line media world. It seems that CMGI has burned bridges because of:
1: USA Networks argument
2: Braun and the other old media executive left ICast
3: ICast is moving into 1st place in internet broadcasting, but I am sure
NBC and others are not pleased to see `their` spot occupied. I want to know
if CMGI needs the help/acceptance/support of the old world media companies?
If not do we plan to go it alone? I don`t want ICast to be an outcast,
shunned by the traditional players. It makes me think of that Soap Opera
star (Susan Lucci) who was nominated Emmy about 20 times but never got the
award because the `traditional establishment` never accepted her- only the
fans accepted her. I think she later got it, though. Any comments?

A: We have many friends in the media industry, some because of some of the reasons you listed above. I do not see what we are doing to be competitive with anything I`m aware of coming out of NBC. In many ways, iCAST`s goals reinvent much of traditional entertainment and media, leveraging new media is some new ways. We suspect there will be many in traditional media that will see value is working with us, rather than against us.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:08 PM EST
Post # of 56831


Q: djames: CMGI depends on using its own stock for buying new companies. In the advent of a prolonged downturn in the market does CMGI have a significant war chest or "other" strategy to rely on that will last through ANY drought?

A: As our companies go public, they can always use their own equity and cash. In a downturn, presumably the equity of others goes down as well, so CMGI equity may still be a relevant, relatively valuable currency. Furthermore, we have over $8.5B of cash and marketable securities on this date. It is our expectation that this amount will grow significantly, as others within the CMGI family go public, markets willing.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:08 PM EST
Post # of 56831


Q: p40warhawk: My question has to do with anti-virus software/solutions. Does Cmgi have any interest in the production of----or alliance with----this part of the industry? Do you see it as a permanent and growing part of internet life?

A: We have no fundamental plans in this area, but it will continue to play an important role going forward.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:09 PM EST
Post # of 56831


Q: Caleb: Are any of CMGi`s holdings/subsidiaries involved in the unified messaging arena? If not, are there any plans to enter it? (e.g. AltaVista?)

A: We have been watching this space for years, and yes, we have companies involved. We are doing a great deal with email through a small acquisition we did called Nascent, and with instant messaging through Tribal Voice (recently ranked number one in the category by PC Magazine) and Activerse. We will not deliver a unified messaging solution ourselves. Rather it is likely we will work with emerging standards.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:09 PM EST
Post # of 56831


Q: Dannyboy: What is your view on how taxes will be applied to the internet? (or current taxes collected.) I can`t believe that the states and cities will just let all those sales tax dollars slip through their fingers...Not to mention foreign countries.

A: I do not see how governments could adequately regulate taxes on the Internet. IMHO, that`s a good thing.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:09 PM EST
Post # of 56831


Q: gitmonee: According to this weeks Business Week (BW) article on the Asian internet market, Lycos is late to market and will have trouble catching up to Yahoo. BW says CMGI owns Lycos. While this is only partially true, (I think we own about 16-18%), I want to know how much influence CMGI has over Lycos, especially since rumors say you do not get along at all with the CEO of Lycos (due of course to the USA Networks fiasco). How can CMGI be late to market in China (gasp!)? Due to the overwhelming potential of that market, shouldn`t CMGI be devoting 50% of its attention there? I am aware of the deal with Pacific Century, but Yahoo is hooked up with a Chinese Red Chip which may open up more doors for them...

A: We have no influence over Lycos` direction, but we are working with them on a few fronts, while exploring others. It`s getting late early for partnering in Asia, and I believe that we have the premier pan-Asian partner in PCCW.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:09 PM EST
Post # of 56831


Q: Jonas :Why not BOMP all CMGI holdings? One thing I liked about the internet is, that it allowed the collective wisdom of people to be harnessed, esp. customers. So far, none of the sites run by CMGI really has a very good, internet enabled suggestion box. People do submit suggestions, but they are never seen nor commented upon, like on this BOMP board, which discourages further suggestions. The question is, why not BOMP them all? Not you, necessarily, but some type of ombudsman holding court, on how the design, usability, etc. of all CMGI holdings/products might be improved.

A: Good idea. The companies that do the best are the ones that listen the hardest to their customers and act smartly on it. We do this, but clearly, we could do a better job of letting others know it.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:09 PM EST
Post # of 56831


Q: jaman1: Have you given any consideration to lengthening the holding period of CMGI for participation in your babies being release into the wilds? It would seem that this would be a great way to reward those with a longer horizon, as well enhance their chances for participation. It would also seem to be another way, other than the great returns!, of encouraging people to maintain their positions...

A: No, but we will think it over.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:10 PM EST
Post # of 56831


Q: gitmonee: Is 1Clickcharge the same as 1click (isn`t this what Alta Vista uses)? Is this a low margin business with explosive growth potential?

A: Not sure what 1Click is, but 1Clickcharge, along the entire market for micropayments, has significant growth potential.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:10 PM EST
Post # of 56831


Q: RichieH: What is the cutting edge these days for PDA? Wireless is just now coming on-line with the Palm VII and wireless modems for the other manufacturers units. Are any of the CMGI babies doing anything to capture this rapidly expanding market? Is there anything on the horizon (application) that will make these PDA`s a MUST HAVE?

A: PDA`s and other web appliances will gain an increasing percentage of online viewing time over the next decade, perhaps the majority. MyWay through its relationship with BellSouth and another company to be announced will be unveiling work it has been doing within the next couple of months. This work should reach millions and will be shared by others within the CMGI family.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:10 PM EST
Post # of 56831


Q: djames: Long Question: When my wireless pda and my Internet cell phone fully merge into a single product that can talk to my car computer my desktop and my household appliances, as well as serf the web and order services on line i.e.: My plane lands in L.A, I open my phone hit a single button log into Alta Vista and with my stylus click on "Search by current location" "as opposed to ("Search by specific address" ) (Did I mention my new phone will also have a GDS chip in it to provide my location anywhere in the world?) Then I click on "Search for Hotel" "Or "search for Restaurant" or "Search for car rental" , I get to choose how far the location is from my current position, for instance I want a car that I can pick up AT THE airport so I thin a 1/16 mile radius of my current
location. Up pop four or five banners for car rentals within my range, I
click on a banner and I can scroll through price size etc. I can then click
on a button that says "Dial current" and my phone calls the rental place. I
then find a local hotel and restaurant and entertainment in the same manner (luckily my phone remembers my past preferences and only shows me banners of what it thinks I will like). Is CMGI ready to compete in this space? How will CMGI compete in this space. It seems to imply an enormous amount of infrastructure (each business will have to update there own information, restaurants may want to display a scaled down menu etc. Individual business may want to pay for inclusion in such a network. It would also need specific targeted advertisement. Do you
see your current holdings ENGAGE 1click charge etc. participating in this
space and how will they do so?

A: The short answer to your looooonnnngggg question is, yes, we are ready to compete. Today, Vicinity, a company in which we are the largest shareholder can deliver the location assistance you are seeking. We are in the process of integrating MyWay content with pagers, cell phones and other devices. In addition, we should have an advantage when it comes to targeting on these devices, because of Engage. Many of our companies will play a role in this space. How can they not? It`s where a significant part of the Internet is moving.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:10 PM EST
Post # of 56832


Q: gitmonee: Can you disclose the amount of money that CMGI has invested since its inception? For Example, Internet Capital Group has invested about 335 million. (This does not seem like a lot considering their 50 billion valuation). 335 million is a multiple of the federal minimum wage from the mid 1980`s- remember $3.35 per hour? Just a coincidence?

A: CMGI has invested roughly $250mm through @Ventures, in addition to more than $300mm in companies it has started, such as Engage, MyWay, AdSmart, NaviSite, NaviNet, iCAST, and CMGI Solutions, and we have acquired over $4.5B worth of companies. I think the 335 numerology you cite is stranger than fiction.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:11 PM EST
Post # of 56832


Q: turtle4444: First I want to mention how cool I think the Blaxxun Interactive virtual worlds are. My question though is how long you think it will be before the internet becomes a truely virtual place, with 3D worlds and characters(avatars) able to interact with each other. Also is this why CMGI has a stake in Blaxxun Interactive and does CMGI plan to pursue this new realm of the Internet further?

A: The Web is a virtual place already, and Blaxxun adds an extra dimension. The work they are doing will become increasingly important as bandwidth improves and more 3D worlds and related functionality are developed. It`s remarkable how far they have taken the technology.They appear to be leading the Web by a large margin in this area.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:11 PM EST
Post # of 56832


Q: turtle4444: First I want to mention how cool I think the Blaxxun Interactive virtual worlds are. My question though is how long you think it will be before the internet becomes a truely virtual place, with 3D worlds and characters(avatars) able to interact with each other. Also is this why CMGI has a stake in Blaxxun Interactive and does CMGI plan to pursue this new realm of the Internet further?

A: The Web is a virtual place already, and Blaxxun adds an extra dimension. The work they are doing will become increasingly important as bandwidth improves and more 3D worlds and related functionality are developed. It`s remarkable how far they have taken the technology.They appear to be leading the Web by a large margin in this area.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:11 PM EST
Post # of 56832


Q: gitmonee: Does CMGI prefer to pay cash for stock for its investments? Our stock "currency" is very valuable, but on the other hand I do not want my equity position to be diluted if we are issuing shares (except for splits). Also, will CMGI take a majority stake in more investments, (please)?

A: It is likely that CMGI`s stock will remain the preferred currency for acquisitions, as long as the markets stay healthy. We anticipate continuing to grow, in part, through acquisitions.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:11 PM EST
Post # of 56832


Q: jjstaff: Does the AOL/Time Warner deal put extra pressure on AltaVista to link up with an "old media" company, possibly in conjunction with iCAST? Also, does this deal validate the subscription business model of internet access and cause a problem for AV/1stUp`s free access model?

A: No, but eventually, it will make sense to leverage traditional media content to a greater extent than is currently the practice by most portals.

This deal may have been accelerated, in part, by the move to free access. Too much of AOL`s revenues may have been at risk. Already, 1stUp, through its services to ALTA and Excite is experiencing more downloads per day than is attributed to AOL, and we think it may have passed NetZero in number of downloads/day to become the largest player in this space. This trend should only continue.

Eventually, most people will access the web for free. Today, if you are a high bandwidth provider of either DSL or cable access, you need to provide dial-up service for when your customers are on the road and need to access the Web or get their email. What better way to do this than with a free service?

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:11 PM EST
Post # of 56832


Q: CIO: B2B and B2E: With companies like Commerce One and Ariba (Procure to pay arena) being so large and well known, do you think this is a thriving market for additional players? Also, I noticed some conversation in the past few weeks about the B2E market. Can you enlighten us to your thoughts and appropriateness of a CMGI B2E strategy.

A: B2B is somewhere between 10-20 X B2C. This allows for many players. I do not believe the winning platform has been built.

B2E (business to employee) has tremendous potential in that it can incorporate the best of B2C and B2B for what, in aggregate, is the largest market in North America. Employees can be trained (distance learning), purchase what they need, stayed informed on corporate and industry news, collaborate on projects, publish to eachother, etc., all within an integrated environment. I hand it to Compaq to recognize the opportunity, and we are proud to be their partners.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:12 PM EST
Post # of 56832


Q: saveslivesbyday: My question is regarding the B2B Space. Tom Kerr`s recent RB article on the B2B phenomenon suggests that potential B2B revenues have been grossly over-estimated, that there is growing competition in this sector, and that an ever-evolving position as market intemediaries will make it difficult for any one company to prosper, and clearly difficult at this point for anyone to predict who the "winners" will be.
What new general concepts in the B2B arena do you see as so ubiquitous or universal that they can be supported by CMGI or Venture funding, and thus successfully developed in this highly competitive space?

A: Depending on how it`s measured, the US B2B market opportunity is well in excess of $1Trillion, a relatively small percentage of the US GDP. Take this worldwide, and it`s several trillion, so it`s big.

CMGI has several plans in this area, including:

1. to leverage intelligent caching from Engage in conjunction with other caching approaches to create the largest hosting network (global content distribution) for the Internet.

2. to build upon one or more B2B commerce platforms deep vertical commerce places for a number of large markets in conjunction with key content and commerce partners in the respective spaces. We were involved in Chemdex from the beginning and see their approach with a few variations happening in every major B2B market. We will complement this with heavy venture investing in this area. Many of the endeavors in this area to date are too shallow in the development of vertical applications, because they were not constructed on a proper platform. This will improve.

3. creating a way to manage multiple applications serving millions of users simultaneously from a server farm, such as the global content distribution network mentioned above, so as to extend to more powerful applications to a broader set of network appliances.

Q: Willie_Mays_24: What happens to isps whose business models rely on subscription fees? Is there room in the market for "premium" (paid) access and "basic" (free) access?

A: I suspect there will always be room to provide service for a fee. Some people will pay for the convenience of receiving their access as part of a monthly bundle of other services, or some other form of packaging, but as stated earlier, free access will be the mode for the larger set of Internet users over the longer term, even for high bandwidth.

David

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:13 PM EST
Post # of 56832


That`s is for now. There are a few more to follow. Many thanks, once again to zbeach and her team.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 7:14 PM EST
Post # of 56832


repost: Q: jstrom: Would you consider allowing CMGI shareholders to fund
the new @Ventures B2B fund (and other @Ventures Funds as well) before
placing the balance with Investment Bankers for public sale? [your core CMGI shareholders would relish this opportunity to participate in new Venture Funds and it would save CMGI money as well]

A: No, it is not efficient, even though we realize it has broad appeal. People will just have to settle for CMGI shares as a vehicle to participate.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 9:20 PM EST
Post # of 56832


Q: grassfarmer: There are a number of post on the CMGI board indicating individuals have made a personal investment decision to hold 100% of their investment capital in CMGI common and affiliated companies. There are very few executives that feel comfortable with that level of concentration (Warren Buffet excepted).
1)What % does CMGI and affiliates represent in your liquid net worth?
2)Do you ever question the wisdom of that level?

A: CMGI represents over 95% of my net worth, but I do not recommend that anyone be that highly concentrated. Even CEO`s should not be that concentrated, but it`s understandable how that can occur on occasion. CMGI
does represent a diversified basket of Internet assets, but despite the dramatic growth rates occuring in the Internet, it seems prudent to diversify to other sectors. Personally, I`m heavily oriented toward technology, simply because it delivers such major productivity gains.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 9:23 PM EST
Post # of 56832


Repost:Q: grassfarmer: I apologize, but I left out a paragraph from my answer to your Question, which follows:

However, this may be a good year for Mr. Buffet. I always wish him well. He`s a remarkable person, with a great sense of humor, a gifted public speaker, and I`ve been a fan of his nose for value for years. I`ve seen few
that can capture a crowd the way he can. I find it amazing that he has been able to put up the numbers over the years without the advantage of investing in technology. It just goes to show you how good he and his team are.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 9:24 PM EST
Post # of 56832


Q: crbiecolo: Does CMGI use/plan to use software that translates web pages to different languages? If you would like me to give more detail let me know.

A: When we bought ALTA in July, you could query the web in 12 languages with it. Today, it is over 30. This is one of the reasons that it is so popular around the world, with over 55% of its traffic coming from outside North America, while only 33% of the Internet traffic overall is outside NA.

David



(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 9:25 PM EST
Post # of 56832


Q: bjpack: Are there any specific companies whose business plans you have reviewed and turned down but now regret the decision? Do you track some of the companies that have been turned down to help refine your decision making process?

A: Yes, Akamai and Mirror Image, both in the space of intelligent caching. Both were without their management teams in place and there were a number of other more established players. In the near term, it appears we should
have worked to help them build the team. There was no telling Akamai would get the Cisco deal, which was a king maker. However, there continue to be new approaches to this space, so the game is not over. That being said, we
are partners with Akamai, we use or have agreed to use their technology in a number of our companies, and we are a proud owner of 250,000 shares of their company.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 9:32 PM EST
Post # of 56833


Q: Losharic: Dave, If this question is too personal, then please ignore it. I`m just fascinated with your "drive" to success. I truly appreciate it, as a stockholder and as an individual. You have put together a great enterprise,
and were rewarded accordingly. Yet, you show such a day to day hunger to make it bigger, better, brighter. What is your motivation? Is it a proliferation of Internet to reach people? Make their lives better? I think that the vast majority of people (me included), will probably retire, or will do something else, after they reach fame, security, and authority in any chosen field of their professional life. What are your 5, 10 years goals?

A: This is a unique moment in human history. The Internet changes not only every major industry, but the way people communicate with and understand one another. It`s a chance to wipe the slate clean of so many mistakes and start over. Sea changes of this magnitude have never occured before in such a short period of time. Gutenberg`s metallic movable press, the Industrial Revolution, Noyce`s integrated circuit, Ventor`s human genome project, and Berners Lee`s WWW. To be able to play a roll that can make a difference is a privelege not to be wasted by anyone. Every day is an incredible adventure in creating a part of the future. Certainly, it is unlikely I
will ever get another chance to see such a great show from such a great seat.

As for longer term goals, I do not foresee anything in addition to CMGI for me, other than working with the foundation CMGI has made possible.

As for goals for CMGI, I would like to see it become the most successful business model for the new economy.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 9:40 PM EST
Post # of 56833


This completes the questions to be answered for this session. The next time that I will be able to answer questions will be the February 6-7 timeframe. Please have your questions posted to the BOMP board by Saturday, February 5th for that session.

Thank you to all who took the time to ask questions, even if they did not get answered this go around. And of course, thanks to zbeach and team!

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: zbeachbum
Reply To: 56682 by zbeachbum Monday, 17 Jan 2000 at 10:13 PM EST
Post # of 56833


CORRECTION: To Anyone w/ Questions for DW
(Revised for date only)

This is a repeat of the guidelines for any newcomers who want to submit questions for David Wetherell.

1. All questions should be posted on the BOMP board and will be answered by David on the CMGI board at his convenience, tentatively every two to three weeks on a Sunday evening or thereafter. Questions should be submitted by midnight EST every other Saturday (next Feb 5). If any of you see questions being posed on the other boards, please help out and redirect them here. It would be a great help. Note that the timing for DW`s response is flexible in that his schedule may not always allow for these specifics.
http://www.ragingbull.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=BOMP

2. Before posting a question, please make sure that you have read ALL of the prior DW posts as well as questions already submitted, and the guidelines as to what he will and will not answer. If questions are duplicative or violate the guidelines, they will automatically be omitted. Also, if the information is readily available in the public domain, the question will not be included. A limited number of questions will be forwarded to him for consideration (about 40)... so that means your question should be the best if it is to be selected. Do not hesitate to take a question already asked (but not yet responded to) and build on that question... or improve upon it. All questions are reviewed by a team of individuals to get a broad perspective (team: Zen, AirCooled, lvlamb, kooler, Sentinel, and curverider)

Guidelines:
1. Here is some input on the type of questions that dwether CANNOT answer due to SEC rules or does not feel appropriate to answer (his guidelines...not mine):
- Questions regarding stock price, valuation, or forward looking statements not in the realm of the general public
- Comments on health or well-being of non-CMGI related companies
- Comments or speculation on potential relationships, acquisition targets or the like, as that is considered forward looking and confidential.

2. Things he WILL comment on, in addition to CMGI information:
- Speculation on trends or opinions on technologies
- CMGI strategic relationships

I have been made aware, that in some cases, individuals may want to pose a question anonymously. Please feel free to e-mail me with those questions directly. I will respect your privacy and not share the source of the question with anyone ( [e-mail] )

If you have any other questions, please feel free to ask!

For those interested in how this began, here are a couple links:
http://www.ragingbull.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=CMGI&read=…
http://www.ragingbull.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=CMGI&read=…

Zbeachbum... your humble ombudsbum.

[investor_007]

By: mcnulty
Reply To: None Saturday, 22 Jan 2000 at 12:50 PM EST
Post # of 60483


Phileo|WN|AV|Flood Plain

(Posted earlier to TMF.)

Phileo in post 28523:
The b2b e-commerce companies that are currently associated w/ CMGi are all @Ventures investments. All the Wall Street suits believe that b2b will be big this year. Why doesn`t CMGi acquire some more b2b e-commerce companies to own and operate/incubate?

CMGi has announced the launch of a $1 billion B2B venture fund, and in fact the fund has already made its first investment.

WeatherNut in post 28531:
Here`s the latest on money market fund balances:

Thanks, WN! Here`s the text:

U.S. money market mutual fund assets rose in week
01/20/00 WASHINGTON, Jan 20 (Reuters) - Total money market mutual fund assets rose to $1.662 trillion in the week ended Jan. 19 from $1.651 trillion the prior week, an industry trade group said Thursday.

ICI said assets of the nation`s retail money market mutual funds increased by $1.51 billion to $957.68 billion in the week.

Of the retail funds, assets of the taxable money market funds increased by $983.5 million to $793.75 billion, while assets of the tax-exempt funds increased by $527.6 million to $163.93 billion, the group said. ICI said assets of institutional money market funds increased by $10.14 billion to $704.70 billion. Of these, assets of the taxable money market funds increased by $10.37 billion to $653.57 billion, while assets of the tax-exempt funds decreased by $230.5 million to $51.13 billion, it said.

Cash inflows continue and the Nasdaq is hitting new highs. The money has to go somewhere and a lot of it appears to be chasing sectors. Generic Inets are hot, then biotechs, then telecomms, then B2Bs, then high-techs, and the new hot sector appears to be fuel cells.

I have a rhetorical question, too, with regard to AltaVista.

Look at how important this asset has become. CMGi is building AV into the hub of its virtual world, terra firma virtu, as it were. Without it, all of its websites are like stars in the cosmos, beautiful to look at but lacking familial connection.

AV has first-rate search technology, cutting edge language capabilities, a growing international stewardship, and its viewership is expanding.

Expectations are high for its public offering, tentatively scheduled for March. Aggressive prognosticators on the message boards look at Yahoo!`s market capitalization, around $90 billion, and predict AltaVista`s valuation could vault to as much as a third of that right out of the gate.

Might happen, might not happen. But if it does, what a return on investment, considering CMGi acquired AV for $2.3 billion.

CMGi is looking for AV to give Yahoo! a run for its money in the race to be the web`s preeminent portal. AV does not have to ascend to the summit in March. Dave Wetherell and Rod Schrock know how to grow the company and there will be sustained effort that will translate into ever rising value for AV.

This, in turn, will raise the floor of support for CMGI.

So, again, look at the importance we have come to place on AltaVista, and then stop to consider that CMGi announced the acquisition of AltaVista last June.

We have owned the asset for only seven months.

When you watch an investment as closely as we watch CMGi, days seem like weeks, minutes like hours. Breaking news at market open is ancient news by lunch, and shareholders clamor for more!

So a relatively recent acquisition can seem like the stuff of myth and legend.

This is one reason I resist the urge to place artificial restraints on the growth of CMGi. AV-type announcements can come out of nowhere at any time.

CMGi`s business model does not lend itself to confinement.

In Africa, there is a broad plain, about the size of Texas, that for half the year is parched. With the arrival of spring, snow melts in the mountain range to the north and the plain begins to flood, ever so slowly. The film footage is fun to watch. The water seeps into each small depression in the ground, rises to fill it, a tiny rivulet breaks to fill an adjacent depression, another rivulet forms, and gradually and inexorably hundreds of square miles of arid plain are transformed into lush flora.

Before and after satellite photos of the region tell the story. Before, desert beige. After, dark green.

The Internet|flood plain metaphor is strongest in one particular: absent constraints, the flood|growth is unstoppable.

The metaphor is weakest in two particulars, both in CMGi`s favor. CMGi`s growth is much faster and, unlike the natural process, is not seasonal and reversible.

As one Internet growth area matures, CMGi can launch initiatives in other areas. At the moment, the company is building businesses in content, infrastructure, access, marketing and commerce.

These businesses will grow to generate a diverse revenue stream. This in turn will support enterprises in new technologies.

The business model is ideal for the virtual universe.

Arthur C. Clarke was asked if the cosmos was stranger than we imagine. He responded that the cosmos was stranger than we can imagine.

It makes me think we can`t estimate how large the pure-play Internet firms can get. Which means the potential for our investments is open-ended.

Regards,

Ron



(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long; ST Rating- Buy; LT Rating- Strong Buy)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 59600 by mcnulty Saturday, 22 Jan 2000 at 5:03 PM EST
Post # of 60483


McNulty: Your rivulet analogy of CMGI`s business model is the best description of CMGI thus far. It is precisely what we have going on here. The Web is just such a leverage of multiple tributaries coming together is a stronger way, and CMGI`s model is to invest in and build upon this phenomenon.

Thanks for the post.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 59600 by mcnulty Saturday, 22 Jan 2000 at 5:14 PM EST
Post # of 60501


More McNulty: Your post also noted Phileo`s observation:

Phileo in post 28523:
The b2b e-commerce companies that are currently associated w/ CMGi are all @Ventures investments. All the Wall Street suits believe that b2b will be big this year. Why doesn`t CMGi acquire some more b2b e-commerce companies to own and operate/incubate?

DW: The fact is CMGI has been investing heavily in B2B for the last four and a half years. e.g. CMGI home growns include Engage Technologies, NaviSite, NaviNet, CMGI and Solutions. We have acquired a number of others, such as AdForce, AdTech, Nascent and Activate, as well, and through @Ventures, we`ve had several investments in the area for years in advance of the B2B fund, such as Chemdex, SilkNet, WebCT, BizBuyer.com, Radiate, Critical Path, Speech Machines, Virtual Ink, CarParts.com, OneCore (which we tracked for 2 years before investing), and Boatscape, amongst others.

Thanks for introducing Phileo to RB. I hope we hear more from him.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: 59688 by dwether Saturday, 22 Jan 2000 at 5:17 PM EST
Post # of 60504


Repost to More McNulty with correction:

More McNulty: Your post also noted Phileo`s observation:

Phileo in post 28523:
The b2b e-commerce companies that are currently associated w/ CMGi are all @Ventures investments. All the Wall Street suits believe that b2b will be big this year. Why doesn`t CMGi acquire some more b2b e-commerce companies to own and operate/incubate?

DW: The fact is CMGI has been investing heavily in B2B for the last four and a half years. e.g. CMGI home growns include Engage Technologies, NaviSite, NaviNet, and CMGI Solutions. We have acquired a number of others, such as AdForce, AdTech, Nascent and Activate, as well, and through @Ventures, we`ve had several investments in the area for years in advance of the B2B fund, such as Chemdex, SilkNet, WebCT, BizBuyer.com, Radiate, Critical Path, Speech Machines, Virtual Ink, CarParts.com, OneCore (which we tracked for 2 years before investing), and Boatscape, amongst others.

Thanks for introducing Phileo to RB. I hope we hear more from him.

Regards,
David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:28 AM EST
Post # of 68082


Q: invest_dude: One discriminator between CMGI`s position and that of DCLK is that CMGI is also a major Web publisher. Might it be possible to leverage this
distinction: to focus on the delivery of tailored content, not just advertising, e.g. personalized `portal`, personalized newspapers, personalized lists of sale items, etc. Oops forgot one point: an advantage of the targeted content approach versus the target advertising approach may be that it is feasible, in the former case, to enlist user cooperation in creating the profile.

A: You are correct. Engage`s anonymous profiling works as well for customizing content and promotional offers as it does for targeting ads. Utilizing Engage, shopping and content sites can provide "first time relevancy" of information for first time or repeat visitors to their sites by recognizing that someone has an Engage profile, checking with Engage on what the interest profile is, and custom designing a set of content or product offers more relevant to that user`s interest. This is just now beginning to be explored by the more progressive web sites, but eventually, I think most sites will use this to optomize revenues and profits.

In addition, this approach allows for adaptive services, where sites can "learn" about a user`s interest pattern from their Engage profile and use this to more intelligently adapt content and promotions to the profile. For instance, if someone is consistently checking out box scores for certain baseball teams, present the scores for those teams at the top of the set of major league scoreboards. Or if someone consistently is checking out movie reviews for a certain genre of movies, offer promotions on new movies of that genre. Sites that require your registration, such as Amazon, do some of this now, but this can be done without requiring registration, and hence, it can apply for a much larger audience. Again, progressive sites are just beginning to explore this application of Engage. It holds great potential. CMGI is preparing to use this throughout all of our sites.

There are many other interesting applications of Engage profiles and technology, but more on that later.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:28 AM EST
Post # of 68081


Q: snowjoe: In you last question and answer session you mentioned that it seems that making a deal with Lycos is no longer in the picture as a way of increasing
"eyeballs" to boost CMGI`s Media Matrix ratings to number 1. You also mention that AltaVista alone was not good enough. I think everyone acknowledges that the dollars follow eyeballs. Do we (I say "we" because I am a long term shareholder...lol) have a plan to reach this goal? Are you able to discuss it with us? Steve Harmon on Friday I believe wrote that buying "eyeballs"....for example about.com might be the new trend. What do you think?

A: I did not mean to say that Lycos is no longer in the picture. It just does not appear to be for the time being. Altavista is buying (and growing) more eyeballs and page views, as is evidenced by its recent purchase of Raging Bull. It will continue to make more such acquisitions over time to further build out its offering, but this is not a new trend, as this has been going on for years for many of the portals.

David

Q: redelman: Internet access in the Chinese home: PC`s or TV`s with set-top boxes, which will dominate?

A: Initially, I think the big winner will be set-top boxes, but down the road, the technology for high bandwidth interactivity will be built into our net appliances. Much of the application processing will be done at server farms, where Engage technology may be uniquely applied in conjunction with scalable operating system(s) to allow for better managing the millions of simultaneous user needs and customizations.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:28 AM EST
Post # of 68092


Q: Sentinel: Is it still true that CMGI will only assign IPO underwriting privileges to
brokerages which initiate coverage of CMGI, as per your remarks at the last
Shareholder`s Meeting (at least as far as I recollect - apologies if I
misunderstood)? Also, is any such brokerage prohibited from such coverage
of CMGI prior to the IPO because of SEC "quiet period" or other
restrictions?

A: Yes, it is a strict CMGI policy to not have any underwriter for an IPO of a CMGI subsidiary that does not provide coverage of CMGI. If such coverage is written or pending, it could not come out during a quiet period due to SEC restrictions on gun jumping (stock hyping).

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:29 AM EST
Post # of 68092


Q: 1Steven1: With the vast amount of companies that you are looking to acquire in the foreseeable future, have you experienced any difficulty in attracting
CEO-type caliber managers? Certainly this could potentially hamper the
future growth of smaller entities which makeup CMGI`s future. Former CEOs
like Craig Benson (I know he has his detractors) of Cabletron strike me as
the type of executive that would allow you to focus on the big picture while
knowing the company is in good hands.

A: Often with acquisitions, the calibre of CEO we are seeking is already in place. Other times, we may be making the acquisition to be a part of another one of our companies, so we may not need the CEO permanently, which allows us to acquire companies with CEO`s that have less experience, or we can try and find another company for that individual to run. Overall, I believe we do an excellent job of recruiting at all levels of our organizations.

The greater challenge is with the venture investing side of the business, where we often invest so early in a company`s life cycle that they have not found the longer term CEO yet. That`s where we earn our stripes. We are in the process of building out the recruiting function of @Ventures with a significant number of inhouse recruiters that specialize in staffing Internet companies at all levels.

We have many people at CMGI that allow me to focus on the big picture. David Andonian, president of CMGI`s Corporate Development, manages a group of 45 (and growing) professionals. They do a great job of freeing up much of what I use to spend my time on. A little over two years ago, this group did not exist.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:29 AM EST
Post # of 68092


Q: redelman: re: TV or HDTV over IP.... I`ve been trying to sort out the potential for
webcasting TV or HDTV networks. Do you see any approximate date where DSL
copper wire or cable coax can deliver an acceptable quality(whatever that means). I recently came away with the impression that fiber to the home might be required for TV-like webcasting.

A: The question is "acceptable quality". DSL will not provide TV-like webcasting anytime soon, but it will provide high quality sound and lower than TV quality video. This should prove useful for many applications, but not for the Super Bowl on HDTV.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:29 AM EST
Post # of 68093


Q: NoGuano: Any plans for a CMGI University or College; Also any plans for CMGI and its affiliates to establish charities?

A: Over the next few years, I`d like to see CMGI set up a "campus" a la Microsoft, with a management training program a la GE. I do not see us establishing charities, but certainly, we will continue to support established charities.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:30 AM EST
Post # of 68107


Q: Mac7
Re: Rising interest rates and CMGI share price valuation.
For a company with no debt, the "snap shot" of the article attached below
mentions that the present value of a companies future cash flow is
discounted by the discount rate. The discount rate is the cost of borrowing
capital for the company, typically tied to short term interest rates.
My question, CMGI has a very low debt/equity ratio. Does the company(s) have
capital requirements that would cause them to regularly borrow money, such
that higher interest rates would impact the future cash flow present
valuation or do you perceive share price impacts as a result of rising rates
to be tied to presumed spending reductions by CMGI`s customers.

Why Interest Rates Matter

Daily Stock Brief by Briefing.com
Updated: 18-Jan-00
Even if a company does not borrow itself, chances are that some of its
customers do. Whether the company is selling its products to other companies
or to consumers, some customers will almost certainly be less willing buyers
due to the higher borrowing costs that will reduce their spending power.
These factors are admittedly less significant for fast-growing, debt-free
Internet companies, who are often not affected by higher borrowing costs,
but they are still factors -- virtually all companies have customers that
will be affected by higher rates. But as much as the real world business
impact of higher rates is overlooked, many are completely missing the bigger
issue of valuation.

The Valuation Impact

To make this point clearly, let`s consider an extreme example. Let us
imagine an Internet company with no debt or need for debt financing in the
future that has only one customer which also has no debt and no need for
debt financing; we`ll call it whatFed.com. This company`s business will not
be affected by rising rates. Forecasts for whatFed.com`s earnings don`t
change even after rates are increased.

Even for this enviable company whose business is immune to higher rates, an
increase in interest rates will affect its stock price. The value of a
company is determined by discounted future cash flow. Put another way, a
company is worth the present value of the future stream of cash that its
business will produce. Makes sense, right?

The key factor here is that word "discounted" -- future cash flows can be
translated into present values only after they are discounted by a discount
rate. That discount rate is the cost of capital for the company in question.
Though these rates vary for reasons unrelated to Fed policy, the fed funds
rate does serve as the basis for the pricing of other rates. If the Fed
raises rates, individual companies` discount rates will also rise.

A: I`ll try to provide a short-winded answer to this long-winded, though pertinent, question. Yes, CMGI has very little debt in proportion to its equity, so interest rate fluctuations do not directly affect us significantly. Yes, there is the indirect effect mentioned above for the economy as a whole, but I believe that for high growth Internet companies, this indirect effect is far outweighed by the fundamental drivers of growth of the Internet.

To prove the point: Among others, these drivers include the number of new users coming online, the increase in the amount of media viewing timing spent online, and the network effect of certain "viral" applications. Let`s just take these first two off these drivers, users and time spent with interactive media. Today roughly 200 million, or 3% of the world`s population, is online. In North America, we are spending roughly 9% of our media viewing time online. Let`s assume that within ten years the number of people online goes to 1.4 billion (a seven-fold increase). Let`s also assume the amount of media viewing time spent connected to an interactive service increases to 54% of media viewing time (a six-fold increase - possible with interactive TV and the increased use of net appliances). This provides a seven times six or 42-fold increase in total eyeball time in ten years. Consider the growth in eCommerce, advertising, and infrastruture buildout that goes along with servicing this many eyeballs. Interest rates fluctuations (up and down) will not have an appreciable impact on this massive of a sea change. This does not mean Wall Street will not respond differently from time to time. (OK, so I was long-winded -- symmetry is preserved)

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:30 AM EST
Post # of 68098


Q: cmginumber1fan: David, I would appreciate any comments you can offer.
CMGI Silently Beating AOL... Excellent business strategy! Co-branding free
net access is probably the best business strategy I`ve seen in a long time!
With 1stup.com signing a deal with Kmart, and now Fox (Simpson`s) I could
just envision other companies co-branding free net access with 1stup.com and
CMGI. For instance pop stars, sports stars, shopping malls, major
corporations, etc etc. I could see where this could be a major revenue
stream for CMGI a few quarters from now. AOL missed this one.

A: AOL has the advantage and disadvantage of being a first mover. The disadvantage comes from building a business model around subscriber fees. It was not possible until recently to cost justify free access. Since AOL obtains somewhere between 66 to 75% of their revenues from access fees, it is hard to switch to a free model, hence the disadvantage of being a first mover. By the way, 1stUp does not provide KMart`s service. They do provide free access for Altavista, Excite, Fox`s Simpsons, and a long list of others. They should be able to continue to announce other such private label free access partners.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:30 AM EST
Post # of 68098


Q: djames: Icast: If I have a digital video camera, film an event and load the file on
my pc. Will I ,by using Icast, be able to Icast that file to a select group
of people on my Icast Buddies list by clicking on, ohhh say the "Broadcast
file" button.? Of course my "buddies" would have to click on the "Receive
broadcast from (buddy username here) button. Can the software that drives
a "buddys" list be used in such a way? Wouldnt it be great to be able to
Icast a wedding video or birth announcement in this way? Does anybody else
do this?? Sound do-able?

A: Variations on these themes are coming. Some of the applications that you mention and others will take new PC`s, software and appliances to make it really easy, or in other words, ready for the mass market, but all of that is coming and sooner than most think.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:31 AM EST
Post # of 68107


Q: Pink_Floyd: iCast and RealNetworks DW, 85 percent of streaming programming is done with RealNetworks` RealPlayer. Since RealNetworks has the most popular streaming software, it seems imperative that iCast programming be accessible on the RealPlayer. Can we access iCast programming on the RealPlayer or do we need to download the proprietary streaming software of CMGI/iCast?

A: For the first six months of the iCast service the iCast player, called iCaster, will be driven in part by Microsoft`s media player. After that, iCaster will support the RealPlayer. Bottom line, Microsoft offered a tremendous deal to iCast that included substantial revenue, distribution and no cobranding requirements. We are hopeful that the experience will be so far superior to what else is out there that a large number of people will want an iCaster. It`s free. It will be bundled with millions of PC`s. It will be promoted on iCast, as well as on major traffic sites within the CMGI family and elsewhere. It`s coming very soon to a PC near you.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:31 AM EST
Post # of 68111


Q: pac1: Does it not make sense to offer a paid ISP (using 1st up) through CMGI`s
relationship with Compaq. A deal similar to that of the Gateway - AOL
relationship comes to mind. CMGI may further benefit by using AltaVista`s
Live as a home page. Or it could be a co-branded Live type site. CMGI and
CPQ may split revenue derived from the ISP payment, but CMGI drives further
traffic to its properties and subsequently yields more ad revenue. As I am
only a senior at Georgetown University, I am sure you know better, but it
seems to be a Win-Win situation, no?

A: It makes sense to have tiers of services, free and for fee, whereby the user gets something extra for the extra cost, such as higher bandwidth or no persistent advertising. As for a relationship with Compaq on this, we do not speculate on potential deal partners.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:31 AM EST
Post # of 68111


Q: dude_ily: David, I came to the CMGi family by way of AdForce and have followed the development of your internet advertising strategy as it has unfolded since last summer. So I was surprised that AdForce was not combined into Engage today (Jan 20). Will this perhaps be done at a latter date? Or, are there
good business reasons to keep AdForce independent from Engage? I know that
AdForce managment, before the merger deal with you, felt their independence
was an asset, allowing them to ad-serve for any potential client. Indeed,
they even touted that position (briefly) in some of their paid advertising.
Is that kind of independence still valuable?

A: Several scenarios for AdForce hold merit: standalone, part of Engage, or part of NaviSite, since AdForce is a form of ASP - application service provider. We are reviewing each of these scenarios.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:32 AM EST
Post # of 68111


Q: JrKeller: How many IPO`s will CMGI release this year? I`m hearing different numbers- 6?? AltaVista, Navinet, 1stup.com, CMGI Solutions, MyWay.com and Vicinity.

A: We do not announce such numbers, as this is neither possible nor in compliance with SEC regulations. The list you mention, along with a number of others, certainly represent what we consider possible candidates for IPO`s. Two of these companies, Altavista and Vicinity, are in registration.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:32 AM EST
Post # of 68111


Q: RILARRY: In the old days before the internet, companies like to manage earnings where possible to have a nice earnings graph with a 5-15% growth rate. There are a lot of people on the Street who have this ingrained in their thinking. They dismissed the internet companies as a passing fad. A lot of money will be
made but sooner or later there is going to be the BIG correction and many
people will be hurt.

Up until recently CMGI was not as well known as Yahoo, AOL to name a couple.
(Maybe if you had a catchy name things would have been different). Also,
CMGI is a complicated company to analyze and many on this board believe that
analysts did not have the time or inclination to study it. Your acquisition
& IPO activity in 1999 as outlined in your annual report would take a
Fortune 500 company 10-15 years to accomplish. It is mind boggling.
I think you can make believers of Wall Street if your bottom line were more
like what they would want to see. Namely, a nice upward trend from qtr to
qtr. As CMGI acquires more companies and either consolidates them or
presents them on the equity basis, these co`s early year operating losses
will pull down CMGI`s consolidated operating earnings. Since your game plan
is to continue to acquire, the next few years` bottom lines will continue to
be negatively affected.

Meanwhile CMGI has this big inventory of stocks. Selling a portion of them
to generate earnings may be an effective strategy. Ideally, if CMGI were to
have extraordinary gains every quarter, sooner or later the Street will look
at such items as part of your operating income. The Street will also, in my
opinion, look at CMGI differently. An internet company that is profitable.
The trade off as I see it: CMGI may be giving up investments that will
increase in value in the near future. In return, its own stock price would
increase significantly as more and more mutual funds, brokers, money
managers jump on the bandwagon. When you are negotiating stock for stock
deals, as I`m sure you intend to continue to do, you will be paying with
fewer shares.

Note: I am not being critical of the gains you have accomplished in the
stock price in 1999, I believe that the Street needs results more to their
old way of assessing companies to fully recognize CMGI for what it is.
After this dissertation for which I appologize, typed at 10 words a min, my
questions are:
1. What would you challenge re the above?
2. Do you see any advantage to CMGI in adapting the above or a variation of
the theme?
3. Has CMGI`s market recognition advanced to the point where the above has
lost some of its relevance?

A: The CMGI model is built and continues to be refined around the needs of the new economy. We believe our model is tried and true and the stock performance for the last six years since we went public supports this (last I checked it was number one of all stocks during that period). Hence, it seems we have made some believers of Wall Street. Perhaps it is complicated for some, or "mind-boggling", as you put it, but it is a necessity. The new economy demands a flexible, aggressive model built on investment, development and M&A. That is what we have. That is what we will continue to have. By the way, we do not hold a candle to GE in the number of our acquisitions. They do more in a month than we did last year.

To put earnings first with early stage developments would be a script for disaster. Until our operating companies get more mature, we provide earnings from our successful investing and developments. There is a story and a long term plan that continues to unfold as time progresses. With time we will end up with about 6-10 major areas of Internet businesses. Engage is one. The mega-portal space built around Altavista is another. @Ventures is another. The rest will become more and more evident over the next few years. To divulge it all now would tip our hands unnecessarily to our competition.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:32 AM EST
Post # of 68112


Q: phileo99: DWether in CMGI post #59688 to McNulty: "Thanks for introducing Phileo to RB. I hope we hear more from him." Thank you! I certainly appreciate Ron and your support.

As requested, here are my questions......
In CMGI post 59688, dwether writes: "The fact is CMGI has been investing
heavily in B2B for the last four and a half years. e.g. CMGI home growns
include Engage Technologies, NaviSite, NaviNet, and CMGI Solutions. We have
acquired a number of others, such as AdForce, AdTech, Nascent and Activate,
as well, and through @Ventures, we`ve had several investments in the area
for years in advance of the B2B fund, such as Chemdex, SilkNet, WebCT,
BizBuyer.com, Radiate, Critical Path, Speech Machines, Virtual Ink,
CarParts.com, OneCore (which we tracked for 2 years before investing), and
Boatscape, amongst others."

Thank you for taking the time to reply. I guess I should be more specific
with my question: In your opinion, what is the future growth potential of
the following markets? 1) b2b trading community, and 2) b2b supply chain
procurement process automation and management systems. Also, does CMGi have any sort of relationship with www.ebuilt.com?

A: 1) Since B2B in the offline world is in the trillions of dollars worldwide (I haven`t heard a consistent number for this), the potential size online is significantly larger. How could it be larger? There are B2B services for the online world, as well, such as Engage, NaviSite, and Silknet. Certainly, many of the online B2B services displace offline services, but many do not, so they are additive to the total B2B market pie. Many people and businesses do not barter or trade what they have in the offline world because there is no convenient system in place. With the Internet, there is. But trying to put a number on the potential size of the market is impossible, as no one can surmise all that will be sold, since some of what will be sold does not exist today and has huge potential. Take for instance limited edition digital collectibles (e.g. your favorite movie clips or best plays of your favorite sports star).

2) Very large. Bigger than big. Sorry, what can I say? It`s impossible to estimate meaningfully.

3) To my knowledge, we do not have any relationship with ebuilt.

Phileo, it`s good to see you have a mind of your own.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:33 AM EST
Post # of 68111


Q: ffunksr: We have been riding your coattails for a while now, so it`s time for us
(your shareholders) to apply our talents, liberally and freely, to assist in
the resolution of a few of your minor problems. In reading your responses
to questions on the DSP, it`s clear you would like the program to continue,
even though the program is a significant operational problem inhouse. Would
you allow the talents of your shareholders to be applied to the problems of
the DSP, with the objective of refining both internal and external
procedures to eliminate (in so far as possible) the problems in the current
system? My request is this... Would you please elaborate your vision of
what the DSP should be in its objectives. From there, you may turn loose
your thousands of inquiring minds on the CMGIDSP Board (a new RB message
board). Respectfully, and thankfully, Fred

A: I appreciate the idea, as collective problem-solving is a great application of the Internet, but I do not think there are any of the problems I`ve heard with the DSP can be solved in this way. If you have suggestions, post them to WITC`s board , send them an email, and/or notify CMGI`s IR.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:33 AM EST
Post # of 68111


Q: saveslivesbyday: What plans does Engage have to aggessively pursue the advertising dollars spent on traditional TV networks when "Web-TV" hybrids expand with the proliferation of broadband? A recent article from USA Today makes the following points:

"Those who head network ad sales say there has been a big change in attitude
among big advertisers toward online spending. While many were not sold on
Web ads even a year ago, most are asking sales reps to help them be players
online."

"We`re not taking money away from network TV, we`re finding new sources of
revenue," says Laura Nathanson , executive vice president of prime-time
sales at ABC. "Some of our mainstream clients recognize that they would be
missing the boat not to communicate through the Net."

"It`s not as hard a sell as it used to be," says Pam Haering , senior vice
president of CBS Plus. "Most major companies are trying to figure out how to
use the Web," says Jay Linden, NBC senior vice president, sales and
marketing.

Examples of such synergy:
Oldsmobile`s sponsorship of The Drew Carey Show`s November Webcast. The Net
show drew 2 million , an audience rivaling some cable channels.
The General Motors unit`s sponsorship of Saturday Night Live`s 25th
anniversary on NBC last fall. Olds used the Web for a giveaway of trips to
the show. Grand prize: an Intrigue.
Fidelity Investments` sponsorship of American Dream segments on CBS` Evening
News. CBS put a Fidelity mini-site on CBS.com with archived segments,
message boards and a link to Fidelity.com.
CNN has had great success extending TV advertisers` buys to its Web site,
says Larry Goodman, president of sales and marketing. In 1998, 22% of
advertisers also appeared on CNN.com; it was 33% in 1999. He says it could
pass 50% this year. "My hope is that some of the separation between TV and
Web buying will be eliminated."
"The industry knows that advertisers want integrated advertising
opportunities," says Drew Ianni , an analyst at Jupiter Communications.
"Advertisers are demanding it, and content players are offering it."
The online ad market has been waiting for packaged-goods companies like
Procter & Gamble to embrace the Web the way they do TV. But those heavy
hitters are wary of jumping in until they see how the Web can boost sales.
"By putting first one toe, then a foot in the water, packaged-goods
companies are going to recognize that there`s huge value there," Nathanson
says. ""
Thanks!
- Saves

A: Engage`s target market is all advertising, content and product promotion that is or will be interactive. This includes TV, net appliances, radio, and with time, perhaps even outdoor advertising. The latter can happen. The question is should it? Personally, I like to see fewer obstructions to viewing the environment.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:34 AM EST
Post # of 68111


Q: MBXB DW, your vision has built CMGI into a formidable organization. Is there a
continuity or succession plan in place in the event of a catastrophe to yourself or other key personnel? Do you fly to meetings/conferences separately?

A: My vision is only part of the vision that propels what we do. The collective vision of many made possible by the nature of our business model is what really drives CMGI. We have about 4,000 employees in CMGI and our wholly-owned companies, who are distributed widely and located mostly on the East and West coasts.

We try not to be dependent on any one individual, and I believe our business model makes that possible, as we are a relatively disaggregated set of businesses, driven by the corporate development needs of our existing and future business units. If a key person in one of our businesses needs to be replaced, that replacement may come from within one or more of the businesses, but the other units continue business as usual.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:34 AM EST
Post # of 68114


Q: mcnulty: David, thanks for affording shareholders a channel to the top guy.
re: SEC Classification... Val Brickates, of Bridge News, in a January 21
article, wrote: "In actuality, CMGI`s real attraction to AlvaVista was that
by acquiring it, CMGi came up with a brilliant quick fix to its nagging
mutual funds problem. SEC regulations mandate that CMGi, because most of its
holdings were non-operational, would have to declare itself a mutual fund
unless it got itself some direct operations, and quickly. Fortunately for
CMGi, that issue will finally be put to rest if and when CMGi spins out of
its monster-sized @Ventures funds into a privately traded entity. Which will
allow it to spend time on what it does best - marketing."

Is Brickates` assessment accurate with regard to the purpose underlying your
exploration (and I emphasize `exploration` - I`m hopeful but I know it may
not happen) of spinning off @Ventures? Does "mutual fund reclassification"
remain an issue?

A: The threat of being classified as a mutual fund due to the 40 Act played little to no bearing in the decision to acquire Altavista. We acquired it because we thought it had the best search engine in the world around which a major worldwide portal could be built. It ran in 12 languages - now over 30. Over 50% of its traffic came from outside the US, hence it could assist in our international development. It had a great management team, and it had nearly as much revenue and page views as its comparables. The immediate solution to our 40 Act issue was a nice side benefit, but we would have solved it through the IPO`s of Engage and NaviSite (and others, if necessary)

The 40 Act issue is no longer relevant for CMGI. It is hard for me to imagine it ever becoming an issue again.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:34 AM EST
Post # of 68112


Q: djames: Regarding B2B... Does CMGI or Chemdex have any thoughts regarding building an internet based B2B company that links distributors and manufacturers of disposible hospital supplies, with hospital procurement departments? Seems there would be large support from IMO`s PPO`s HMO`s and hospital administrators (Not to mention government heath care options) to reduce
costs of medical supplies. Seems like it would be a gigantic market, but I
never hear anything regarding efforts in this area.

A: In all likelihood, this would fall in Chemdex`s domain, but I`ll have to check. As you may know, Chemdex announced in the Fall the acquisition of Promedix, which focuses on surgical supplies, presumably including disposables. I agree that it is a large market.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:35 AM EST
Post # of 68115


Q: Losharic: Part of the Internet growth segment is in Hand Held (like cell
phones) or Internet Appliance Devices. Personally, I have a very difficult
time envisioning the use of these devices, unless some form of voice /
speech recognition is involved. So, the questions are:
1. How do you envision the proliferation of Internet Appliances?
2. What, if anything, is CMGI planming to do in making these devices "User
Friendly"? (This question relates to the future strategy of CMGI network of
Technology Companies)
3. On a broader scale, how the advertising could be employed to work on
these devices? (For example, the Qualcomm is in the process of implementing
Global Positioning Technology for Cell Phones, to enable future advertisers
to target users via their specific location.)
4. I can not see myself, listening to advertising on my cell phone, without
turning it off. Is it an opportunity for future of Internet or is it a
"smoke"?

A: First of all, speaker independent speech recognition will play a key role in the mass market adoption of network appliances. In the meantime, they are proliferating as version upgrades to our favorite appliances - phones, PDA`s, pagers, etc.

CMGI is adopting it`s portal content to be repurposable for appliances. Soon MyWay will be available to many millions of users of such devices, and I expect Altavista will follow suit. Engage can be used to more efficiently deliver just the content a user wants to see, and there is more we are doing that I cannot talk about.

In the future, you will not have to listen to advertising on your cell phone if you do not want to (though you may want to in order to make a call for free), but instead you will view the ads on the screen that comes with the phone. Eventually, these will be even more appealing than banners are today. ;o)

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:35 AM EST
Post # of 68115


Q: sandy_c: This noble experiment of Q & A I`m sure has been useful internally
to CMGI in some unexpected ways and of course greatly appreciated by
readers. Have you been able to get some attention (or interest) in getting
more threaded or robust Computer-Aided Communication tools and features into
the Altavista/RB product mix? Maybe a new business along these lines can
emerge guided by CMGI? The follow-up question: What have you gleaned from
this Q&A experiment at the meta level so far?

A: This is useful, and I plan to continue doing it, but probably not as frequently as I have been. First of all, the number of questions have subsided, as was to be expected as we get the ones out of the way that were on everyone`s mind.

Yes, we are building tools to automate/facilitate this and other such processes.

There are many items gleaned from the "meta level" of this communications forum:

1) It provides better understanding of what`s on people`s minds.

2) It reveals some good ideas.

3) From a marketing communications standpoint, it reveals what people understand and don`t understand about what CMGI is trying to accomplish.

4) From an investor relations standpoint, it engenders favorable PR by leveraging the Internet for one of it`s best longsuits - interactive, asynchronous communications.

5) It provides an informal, non-scientific, and probably statistically significant poll of investor sentiment.

6) McNulty is funny. So is Phileo.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:36 AM EST
Post # of 68115


Q: redelman: Numerous questions:

1. With the rollup of CMGI`s ad properties into Engage I have a question
about how to view the different areas of the net ad industry.
-Are ad-serving and ad sales functions destined to be viewed by customers as
commodity services?
-Would it be fair to say that Engage may generate increasing returns by
achieving customer `lock on`, where a company becomes a customer`s sole or
dominant provider of a service?
2. In December and January three public companies you are Chairperson of
doubled and tripled in stock price. When this happens do CMGI execs stop for
a minute to celebrate with a round of high fives? I know a few shareholders
here in San Diego who are pretty giddy about the whole thing. :-) :-) :-)
It was awesome. Thanks. Richie

A: 1) Perhaps, but the the players are differentiated, which commodities are not. e.g. Engage scales. I not sure I understand the second part of this question, but the more a company uses Engage, the richer it`s knowledge base of its customers becomes. This creates a certain "lock on" effect, if that is what you were alluding to.

2) We celebrate, too, but there`s a lot of work to do, so we don`t get complacent.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:36 AM EST
Post # of 68115


Q: RubyBlue: I have recently noticed TV ads for ALTA, MTHR, OneCore, and LCOS. As one of the largest pure net companies, are there any plans to promote CMGi`s "creating net value" via TV advertisements?

A: Perhaps someday, but for now, the brands of the subs are more important. We are slowly building the CMGI brand in some subtle (and some not so subtle ways). CMGI Solutions will provide a nice launch pad for us to build on our overall brand.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:35 AM EST
Post # of 68115


Q: NoGuano: Is Engage involved in "Experiential Marketing"?

From Business Week 1/24/00, Dot.Com Marketers Need to Kick the TV Habit, By
Ellen Neuborne
"Experiential marketing is one of the latest buzzwords of the selling
business. Billed as more that just a message or a product positioning,
experiential marketing is a method of creating an experience for the
consumer so moving that a bond is created between shop and shopper. Walt
Disney, Starbucks, Hard Rock CafÃ(c) -- these are examples of companies that
have bought into this theme. Their marketing messages push not simply a
product, but a consumer experience. And as a result, you`ll rarely see these
companies resort to sales, coupons, or other come-ons. In an age when
television is pretty much old hat to most every consumer, experiential
marketing is an effective way to gain shopper attention.
Experiential marketing is, and will continue to be, a critical element for
Internet retailers, says Arthur Gilmore, managing partner of Interbrand, a
brand-marketing consulting firm. "This is the way Internet retailers will
stop creating empty awareness and start creating loyalty and relevance," he
says. "It`s the way they`ll have to go to convince us of their reason for
being here." By leaping into television, Internet retailers have jumped the
gun, he says. "They need to go back and build the platform," he says.
Creating a virtual experience is no easy task, of course. Unlike Starbucks
and Disney, dot.com retailers have no actual stores in which to stage the
feeling of being cool, or the feeling of being a kid again. But Internet
retailers shouldn`t let that stand in their way. Some companies are already
creating experiences in their virtual stores. Wal-Mart.com, for example, has
beefed up the ways in which its online store experience can be personalized.
The site morphs to fit a frequent shopper`s personal needs, for example.
ANIMATED AGENTS. If you always click first on the pet-supplies department,
that area will become more prominent in future log-ins. Book sites such as
Amazon.com and Barnesandnoble.com will make recommendations for reading that
are based on your past buying. These are elements that make a cold computer
seem more friendly, more relevant to the consumer. And it`s the type of
interaction that transforms the act of shopping into a consumer experience.
And Internet retailers could go still further in using their virtual stores
not just to sell but also to create a bond with shoppers. Gilmore rattles
off a list of what-could-bes: animated agents that greet shoppers, replacing
"that impersonal text greeting"; 3-D and other technical trickery to make
the virtual store seem less technical; interactive chat to collect consumer
data and replace dull survey forms. "Giving over information could be a lot
more fun," he says.

A: Yes, I detailed how this is being done in the first post of this session.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:36 AM EST
Post # of 68118


Q: hao_shen: Do you think the iWon.com portal model will work? How that will affect AltaVista`?

A: It does work for some portion of the Internet audience. Each portal will need to provide some form of this. What others have done better is provide a good search engine with a complete portal set of services. That`s harder.

David


(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 11:37 AM EST
Post # of 68118


Q: manfmnantucket: When CMGI`s name was changed from "College Marketing Group" to CMGI, I thought it was neat to name a company after its stock symbol... however, I always get the question "what does CMGI stand for" [the initials] and then have to launch into a paragraph I`d rather skip. Do you have the same
experience? Have you given any thought to perhaps renaming the company
again, to something more descriptive? AC suggested "General Internet".

A: I`d like to see a better name for the company someday, but sorry, I don`t like General Internet. It`s too smokestack. For the time being, the meaningless four letter acronym seems to be working wonders.

David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 1:28 PM EST
Post # of 68164


By the by, there are some more questions to be answered from this last round which I hope to get to in the next few days. Thanks, ZBeach and all who posted questions.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

[investor_007]

By: dwether
Reply To: None Monday, 7 Feb 2000 at 2:13 PM EST
Post # of 68191


I do not use anyone to assist me in any of my responses to the questions unless it is to confirm a financial piece of information or some other such metric.

Regards,
David

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)