Thu, Dec 25, 2014, 10:21 PM EST - U.S. Markets closed for Christmas

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Move, Inc. Message Board

  • therealtyagent therealtyagent Aug 3, 2006 4:34 PM Flag

    all interest income

    1.7 mil is all interest income... without it they lost money.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • that $1.7 million interest income comes from the elevation partners cash injection. that tells me move doesn't have any good ideas on how to put the money to work, so they are willing to pay 3% dividend to elevation partners (yield on prefer shares) and sit on the money.

      whats the hurry? that money from EP will buy years of jet fuel and pilot fees for the shylocks from webmd, run move into the ground and leap to another "turn-around" company and milk it.

    • Veto Rights are basic in any deal I have ever seen or been involved in, it could be used but it is meaningless. You are not putting together a deal that you brand would object to in the first place.

      Google's advertising links are everywhere and are not confined or restricted from competitors sites. I am more than aware of the politics but they do not apply here this is not like broker reciprocity. Maybe if you said the suitor was Cendant there would be an issue but not a Yahoo or MSN.

      It would not matter if Move was aquired by ebay, yahoo, goog, or msn, none of these sites are going to block REALTOR.com advertsing links any more than they are doing today. You need to see the big picture. Apple can be found all over msn news sites, pages etc. yet they are competitors. Same for Sony and msn. I use these two examples as they are just quick and simple to lay down here.

      The ad control issues could be large and difficult but it has not been in the past, today and will not be tomorrow.

      I don't know what you mean about all the problems. I have never seen any issue stopping the aquisition of MOVE by a larger entity. I believe NAR would welcome it.

      You are kidding about the issues for the serious players right? The lawsuits over Taffeen and Wolff were open ended and a black hole for move costing millions of dollars in profit every quarter until Q4 2005 and Q1 2006. These were serious issues that had to be endlessly funded. The major class action lawsuit just got mopped up middle to end of last year for good, so I think you are a little off on your assumptions.

      Q2 2006 was the first quarter the company was not involved in any pending legal issues. Now with that being resolved they need to show there is a business here and one with potential. God this company was dead less than 24 months ago. Who the heck would pick up this mess so quickly without some performance track record? It had never made a penny before Long and his team arrived. Now it is looking real and dynamic. That is why the smart money is on 2007 for an aquisition when Move is in full swing and growing rapidly. At this time as I keep repeating it will be a crown jewel for someone.

    • Nyctribe,

      Print out my last post and stick it in a folder someplace where you will be able to find it at a later date.

      When you look back and finally comprehend what I said, everything will become clear. It's all right there in front of you. Sometimes the answer hides in plain sight.

    • There simply is no issue. The relationship still has 40+ years left before renewal, a stupidly long enough term that it means nothing. It is not a negative to any company at all it is so far out.

      REALTOR.com is doing better every quarter. With a 27% growth and the largest agent sign up in any quarter for the last 10 quarters is good enough for me. This also indicates, contrary to naysayers, that the reason agents/brokers are using the services is they are delivering value to them. The Brand name is nice and important but that is not the driver; it is the internet advertising services that Move has wrapped around the brand. There has been close to 2 billion dollars to get where they are, and I agree tons of it wasted, but it is what was used to get where they are.

      The mistake is the totally underestimated costs and time that needs to go into developing a property like this and it cannot just be duplicated over night or even in a couple of years. And lets not delve into the politics of the business.

      The industry (or competitors) had their chance while Move was weak and they blew it. They are now going to turn into the 800 pound gorilla in the space and I do not think they can be stopped. They are setting themselves up very well, properly, for long term growth. It is a real organization that would impress any of the other much bigger portals on the internet today.

      Simply put NAR is an agreeable party to logic and to supporting its members if the right relationship came along - ebay, goog, yahoo I do not see any barriers that would stop any of these companies from happily aquiring Move. But Move must be solid and I have no doubt that by early next year they will have everyones serious attention.

    • There simply is no issue. The relationship still has 40+ years left before renewal, a stupidly long enough term that it means nothing. It is not a negative to any company at all it is so far out.

      REALTOR.com is doing better every quarter (27% growth is good enough for me) that goes by as a result of the services. The Brand name is nice and important but that is not the driver it is the internet advertising services that Move has wrapped around the brand. There has been close to 2 billion dollars to get where they are, and I agree tons of it wasted, but it is what was used to get where they are.

      The mistake is the totally underestimated costs and time that needs to go into developing a property like this and it cannot just be duplicated over night or even in a couple of years. And lets not delve into the politics of the business as an MLS will say one thing but still do the opposite. Most people love to think Move is not in good relationships with some of these data suppliers but it is the opposite. The relationships have never been better or stronger. Move is far more respectful and professional than the Wolff crew ever was and they have garnered respect.

      The industry (or competitors) had their chance while Move was weak and they blew it. They are now going to turn into the 800 pound gorilla in the space and I do not think they can be stopped. They are setting themselves up very well, properly, for long term growth. It is a real organization that would impress any of the other much bigger portals on the internet today.

      Simply put NAR is an agreeable party to logic and to supporting its members if the right relationship came along - ebay, goog, yahoo I do not see any barriers that would stop any of these companies from happily aquiring Move. But Move must be solid and I have no doubt that by early next year they will have everyones attention.

    • With respect, NAR has the ability to veto any acquisition of its site. In turn, NAR has a different set of criteria pertaining to who buys Move - and their site, than you do. Their criteria is "maximum exposure". Move has the license because Move is independent and is able to position itself on Google, Yahoo, AOL, MSN, the Telephone Company sites, the Cable Company sites, etc. Anyone buying Move will have to be capable of doing exactly the same thing. That makes it difficult for Yahoo, AOL, MSN, Google, etc. Why? Because they are direct competitors with each other. And, if one tries to buy Move, the other may just dial up NAR and say - approve that - and you won't get the same exposure on our site that you've been receiving, because we are not going to promote a property owned by a competitor. This happens all the time in business. NAR likes everything the way it is - because it's franchise is positioned the way it wants it to be. However, this may limit acquirers to those that can continue providing this exposure.

      And then, of course, NAR has ad control directly on their property - which does impose some restrictions.

      And don't bother posting it. It's been posted many times over the years.


      And, you're kidding yourself if you think that this is all about all the "problems". All the problems that would concern an acquirer have been off the table for quite some time.

      And frankly, very few of them would ever have scared off a deep pocket suitor. After all, the stockholder suits and the AOL round trip revenue manipulations were settled years back - and those were the most serious ones. Name one remaining one that would've scared off a deep pocket player if they thought they could pick this up for $3 or $4, and flip it out for $8 or $10. Doesn't compute my friend.

      Bottom line - you can't explain why a good deal goes unbought.

    • I've read it, and that's not really the issue.

      The issue goes to the heart of the flaw of MOVE's business model, which is that it is built around Realtor.com and it's affiliation with NAR. Without it they have nothing.

      It's not a matter of them losing it to another company... its a matter of the reason for Realtors using Realtor.com in the first place going away. Pretty simple really.

    • Have you guys ever read the agreement? I have.
      I will post more when I have time. NAR is not an issue of restriction that you guys think it is to a potential suiter. The only reason this company has been targeted for an aqusition is that it was a freak'n mess. It must demonstrate its potential and that it is a well oiled machine and at that time it is a crown jewel to the right company.

    • That's the most intelligent post of the day.

      I'd also add that though the NAR owns Realtor.com, it's the MLS's that feed it (at their discretion) so the NAR really doesn't have ultimate control over it. It's there to serve Realtors not the other way around.

    • When all is said and done - what you hoped would happen - didn't.

      Keep in mind that people have been singing the acquisition line for years. Somthing doesn't quite connect. And this is not a criticism - just an observation.

      It's a good buy - according to you. A lot better now than in will be in a year - or two - or whatever. So why not already, let alone now, or later?

      Google, Yahoo, AOL, Microsoft, and other sites, etc have the bucks, the eyes, the share value, and the rest, but then they've always had that.

      Is it NAR? At the end of the day - this company licenses, but does not own, its crown jewell - realtor.com.

      Because of that, every time you try to quote other share values or PE's you're comparing apples and oranges. Those company's have complete control of their enterprise - Move does not.

      NAR can say no. NAR can and does restrict advertising.

      No one cares about Welcome Wagon. Never have. Never will. Never has made much real money. Not ever.

      Nice growth, and, when they stop over-paying all this compensation out, maybe they can make a few bucks. But it has to stop.

      Because no-one is impressed with .01 or .00 or .02. That's peanuts. Also dilution. A lot of it.

    • View More Messages
 
MOVE
20.950.00(0.00%)Nov 13 4:00 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.