That's just it, thier ultimate target market is NOT the technically savvy user, it is 'joe average' business user. That's why they have been, and will make more deals to get their distro pre-installed by PC manufacturers.
Exactly, not much money is to be made from the techie/geek. In order for Red Hat to reach the level some of you believe it will attain, my grandma has to be able to use it... and she will need all the help she can get!
RHAT is down over $10 today by the way. A mere correction, or are people realizing this company does not deserve a market capitalization larger than Toys R Us?
I wonder what the Bizarro Me is doing at this moment? Probably tanning on a tropical island, drinking margaritas and surounded by beautiful women. While I sit at my desk with coffee and my 54 year old secretary outside my office, in exotic Kalamazoo Michigan.
I love the idea that Microsoft can say... "Hey, we can't help it that any of our employees are acting in this manner. We certainly do not condone this sort of thing, and will take the necesary action to see it does not happen again!"
Reminds me of all those Rambo movies, where the US Government disowns a "fringe" group of commandos. "They were acting on their own"
Well yes, but you can convey your feelings without forcing your children away from something commonly had by almost everyone.
I knew kids growing up that were not allowed to watch TV. I thought the majority of them (well, 2 out of 3) were pretty fucked up and caused a lot of trouble in school. I would argue that a majority of their problems came from over-domineering parents. If you are not allowed some freedom at home, you have to exercise it when you are away from your parents... just to vent. And if this is happening at school, it perpetuates itself in not getting an education.
All I was saying, was to let your children know how you feel by offering and encouraging other ways of spending their time... and not simply barring them from what can be considered a meaningless medium. If given ample positive opportunities, children will do the right thing... without you forcing them to your will.
If you tell your chioldren to not do something... that will turn into something they will despise you for, and do anyways. Especially with something as common as watching TV. We are not talking about "don't do drugs" for christ's sake.
As a kid, I enjoyed TV as much as anyone, but my parents got me involved in numerous outside activities that I had a lot more to do than sit around and watch TV. But if I was told that I could not watch it, and I saw other people enjoying TV wherever I went... you bet that I would be over at a friend's house whose parents were more leniant, and lying to may parents about what I was doing.
Egads, how long have we known that positive reinforcement is the way to handle these type of things? Given choices and opportunities, your children will come to realize TV is merely an empty way to pass time when you have nothing else to do... Take it away, and it becomes something they think about constantly.
This is far from a flame... I enjoyed reading your belief. I was brought up Christian, and since "strayed". I would chalk myself up as being agnostic (I just do'nt know!!)
anyways, there is no need for this to go on to the extent of "Kansas", so i just wanted to point out one small point that i question:
Scientists have realized that if the position between the Earth and Sun were not precisely the way it is, if the composition of the atmosphere was even slightly altered, if any one of billions of variables were not as they are, life would not exist on this planet. We recognize this, but we just as quickly then chalk it up to a freak occurance of "nature," the infinitely small chance that one special chemical reaction in a puddle of ooze would produce all living creatures on the earth. In my opinion that's a very shaky assumption on which to base a theory of the creation of the world. From another perspective, however, if God designed this perfect set of enviromental variables and set up the physics just right so that the natural world would work as smoothly as it does, would He not want to follow His own perfect rules to create the world? I believe that He would.
I think the fact that there are billions of other planets and solar systems out there... none of which have shown any traces of life, points to the likelyhood that Earth was that freak where all those billions of variables happened. Maybe there are more, but we have seen no sign that it has happened any where else... and there are literally billions of other places for it to happen. Earth pretty much won the power ball lottery on that one.
Maybe it was in God's plans to have it happen on only one planet. But then, was there ever a reason why it was not done on any others? are those solr systems there merely for our amusement?
I think what I believe that if there is/was a God... he merely set all the possibilities in place, and he/she was very, very patient. Maybe God is/was the "Big Bang" so to speak.
oh well, like I said, I dunno. But I am curious as to why God would only give life to one planet, when there are so many out there. Maybe he is still resting?
I would not consider RHAT as a wise long-term investment, more so at this price. Especially if it is a large portion of the money you have saved.
Many younger investors would be better served to sell a good portion of their RHAT holdings and invest in a well-established, quality growth company(ies).
I could certainly see RHAT close the year at $100 a share... however I am not so sure this is a great company to have your retirement money in.
I would not discourage people from selling a good portion of their holdings in RHAT (but still keeping some ownership), and investing in a few more established companies.
The chances that RHAT does not make it (in the long run) are very high, no matter how novel their idea is.
You do not need to buy into a company when they are running their first taco stand on the corner to make very good money in the stock market.
There are numerous, 100+ year companies out there which are growing at high rates that I would consider as better places for a young investor to hold most of his money in.
If you are not happy with E-Trade, transferring your account out of there is a much simpler (and more smart) than trying to close your account.
Go to a brokerage firm, and establish a relationship with a full-service broker (the extra money you pay in commisions is worth it). From there, all you need to do is sign a few forms, and your new broker will handle everything else. There is no cost for doing this either. Now, your account (in whole) will be at the new brokerage, and you are free to do what you want with it.
hopefully, this is a catalyst that will spur a lot of people to invest regularly.
If anyone wants more info., or wants help, e-mail me: robbins@rickjames.sapien.net
If you are not happy with E-Trade, transferring your account out of there is a much simpler (and more smart) than trying to close your account.
Go to a brokerage firm, and establish a relationship with a full-service broker (the extra money you pay in commisions is worth it). From there, all you need to do is sign a few forms, and your new broker will handle everything else. There is no cost for doing this either. Now, your account (in whole) will be at the new brokerage, and you are free to do what you want with it. hopefully, this is a catalyst that will spur a lot of people to invest regularly.
If anyone wants more info., or wants help, e-mail me: robbins@rickjames.sapien.net
For those of you who have recently opened accounts at E-Trade and are generally unsatisfied with their service, it is a very simple process to transfer your account out of there.
Once this whole debacle is sorted out, you would be well-served to call a full-service brokerage firm and have your account transferred over to a broker who you can deal with personally in the future.
The transfer will cost you no money (although to be honest, I have never dealt with E-Trade... they may have a small fee). All you have to do is sign a few forms, and your new broker handles everything.
... and if you want your new broker to be a fellow slashdotter, e-mail me:)
Bob Young holds 9.1 million shares, making his share worth around $400 million.
The largest share holder of the company (22.5%) is actually Frank Batten Jr. (chairman of Lexmark Communications) who holds 15 million shares for a value of around $660 million
You will probably be able to get the shares that you initially requested. E-Trade is probably holding a number of shares for this, and will make things right.
Obviously, they were very poorly equipped to handle something like this. I wish RHAT had chosen to go about this in a diferent manner. An initial private placement or issuing options (the right to be at a certain price) seems like it would have been easier for all parties concerned.
I am pretty positive that E-Trade has held on to a number of shares and is going to sort through this hole mess. In the future, do not do any of your *real* investing through an on-line broker. Pay the extra commision and establish a relationship with a full-service broker.
Yes, everyone admires the captain who goes down with his sinking ship (not that I think RHAT is on though!), but after that initial thought, the people who jumped ship go on living their .
If someone believes in the company, they should not feel bad by selling their shares initially and then buying them back when the price settles down. They still have a voice in the company, while hopefully having realized a nice profit for themselves.
To be honest, I am not so sure why they did not just do an initial private placement, or issue options (right to buy at a certain price) to you guys. This would have been easier for all parties involved in my opinion. It sounds like Redhat let a lot of people down... that is not necesarily E-Trade's fault. Afterall, they are an on-line, discount brokerage house... they are far from the best choice to handle something like this (or any investments in my opinion)!
However, if it was the SEC... they might have a point.:)
Were you able to get the shares from the other broker at the offering price somehow?
Is this another on-line broker?
I hope one thing that people learn through this is to not invest on-line.... make sure that you are able to "talk" with someone when it comes to serious investing. If that money is important to you, you will pay the extra commision and develop a relationship with a full-servive broker.
However, losses have accelerated in recent months as Red Hat has ramped up its sales push. For the three-month period ended May 31, the company reported a net loss of $2.1 million on $2.8 million in sales. Based on the 66.8 million shares outstanding after the offering, Red Hat has an estimated market value of about $2.96 billion. Frank Batten Jr., chairman of privately held media company Landmark Communications Inc., is the company's main shareholder with a 22.5% stake. The 15 million shares he owns are currently worth about $663.8 million. The company's co-founders, current Chief Executive Robert Young and Chief Technology Officer Marc Ewing, each own about 9.1 million shares, now valued at around $402.7 million.
This certainly made quick millionaires of the guys in charge. What blows me away however is that a company with 2.8 million in revenues, now has a value of around 3 billion dollars!!
Do you think RHAT is over-valued... I know I would cetrainly hold off buying any right now!
While I would love it if I had contributed to Linux, and I had the opportunity to watch my "seeds" grow and change with the times... I think a great deal of *real* satisfaction can be taken from watchig "cash" grow. For many people, cash does not merely reproduce more of itself, it reproduces opportunities for those who might not have had many.
There are a lot of people who have invested cash, watched it grow, and then used that money to benefit society... I am sure they have taken a great amount of satisfaction in that, and they should.
The advantage of reproducing cash is that you have the power to decide what it is used for (minus taxes). In the right hands, this is a wonderful thing
That is also true... 90% of the paid experts that manage these mutual funds can not even beat the market averages over a significant period of time.
There are numerous reasons for this, but I do not want to go into them (unless someone challenges me, never can resist that), as it is way past the time for me to go home now!
Slashdot Mirror
That's just it, thier ultimate target market is NOT the technically savvy user, it is 'joe average' business
user. That's why they have been, and will make more deals to get their distro pre-installed by PC
manufacturers.
Exactly, not much money is to be made from the techie/geek. In order for Red Hat to reach the level some of you believe it will attain, my grandma has to be able to use it... and she will need all the help she can get!
I would personally sell half of it.... Take a profit, and if it does go back down, buy more.
You could buy your own piece of the company for $70.
:)
Go to the shareholder's meeting, and voice your concern
RHAT is down over $10 today by the way.
A mere correction, or are people realizing this company does not deserve a market capitalization larger than Toys R Us?
I always knew Bizzaro World existed.
I wonder what the Bizarro Me is doing at this moment? Probably tanning on a tropical island, drinking margaritas and surounded by beautiful women. While I sit at my desk with coffee and my 54 year old secretary outside my office, in exotic Kalamazoo Michigan.
That Bastard!
I love the idea that Microsoft can say... "Hey, we can't help it that any of our employees are acting in this manner. We certainly do not condone this sort of thing, and will take the necesary action to see it does not happen again!"
Reminds me of all those Rambo movies, where the US Government disowns a "fringe" group of commandos.
"They were acting on their own"
But what can you do?
Well yes, but you can convey your feelings without forcing your children away from something commonly had by almost everyone.
I knew kids growing up that were not allowed to watch TV. I thought the majority of them (well, 2 out of 3) were pretty fucked up and caused a lot of trouble in school. I would argue that a majority of their problems came from over-domineering parents. If you are not allowed some freedom at home, you have to exercise it when you are away from your parents... just to vent. And if this is happening at school, it perpetuates itself in not getting an education.
All I was saying, was to let your children know how you feel by offering and encouraging other ways of spending their time... and not simply barring them from what can be considered a meaningless medium. If given ample positive opportunities, children will do the right thing... without you forcing them to your will.
If you tell your chioldren to not do something... that will turn into something they will despise you for, and do anyways. Especially with something as common as watching TV. We are not talking about "don't do drugs" for christ's sake.
As a kid, I enjoyed TV as much as anyone, but my parents got me involved in numerous outside activities that I had a lot more to do than sit around and watch TV. But if I was told that I could not watch it, and I saw other people enjoying TV wherever I went... you bet that I would be over at a friend's house whose parents were more leniant, and lying to may parents about what I was doing.
Egads, how long have we known that positive reinforcement is the way to handle these type of things? Given choices and opportunities, your children will come to realize TV is merely an empty way to pass time when you have nothing else to do... Take it away, and it becomes something they think about constantly.
This is far from a flame... I enjoyed reading your belief. I was brought up Christian, and since "strayed". I would chalk myself up as being agnostic (I just do'nt know!!)
anyways, there is no need for this to go on to the extent of "Kansas", so i just wanted to point out one small point that i question:
Scientists have realized that if the position between the Earth and Sun were not precisely the way it is, if the composition of the atmosphere was even slightly altered, if any one of billions of variables were not as they are, life would not exist on this planet. We recognize this, but we just as quickly then chalk it up to a freak occurance of "nature," the infinitely small chance that one special chemical reaction in a puddle of ooze would produce all living creatures on the earth. In my opinion that's a very shaky assumption on which to base a theory of the creation of the world. From another perspective, however, if God designed this perfect set of enviromental variables and set up the physics just right so that the natural world would work as smoothly as it does, would He not want to follow His own perfect rules to create the world? I believe that He would.
I think the fact that there are billions of other planets and solar systems out there... none of which have shown any traces of life, points to the likelyhood that Earth was that freak where all those billions of variables happened. Maybe there are more, but we have seen no sign that it has happened any where else... and there are literally billions of other places for it to happen. Earth pretty much won the power ball lottery on that one.
Maybe it was in God's plans to have it happen on only one planet. But then, was there ever a reason why it was not done on any others? are those solr systems there merely for our amusement?
I think what I believe that if there is/was a God... he merely set all the possibilities in place, and he/she was very, very patient. Maybe God is/was the "Big Bang" so to speak.
oh well, like I said, I dunno. But I am curious as to why God would only give life to one planet, when there are so many out there. Maybe he is still resting?
This just goes to prove that great ideas and big corporate backers do not always work out. Keep that in mind the next time you invest in a company.
I would not consider RHAT as a wise long-term investment, more so at this price. Especially if it is a large portion of the money you have saved.
Many younger investors would be better served to sell a good portion of their RHAT holdings and invest in a well-established, quality growth company(ies).
I could certainly see RHAT close the year at $100 a share... however I am not so sure this is a great company to have your retirement money in.
I would not discourage people from selling a good portion of their holdings in RHAT (but still keeping some ownership), and investing in a few more established companies.
The chances that RHAT does not make it (in the long run) are very high, no matter how novel their idea is.
You do not need to buy into a company when they are running their first taco stand on the corner to make very good money in the stock market.
There are numerous, 100+ year companies out there which are growing at high rates that I would consider as better places for a young investor to hold most of his money in.
If you are not happy with E-Trade, transferring your account out of there is a much simpler (and more smart) than trying to close your account.
Go to a brokerage firm, and establish a relationship with a full-service broker (the extra money you pay in commisions is worth it). From there, all you need to do is sign a few forms, and your new broker will handle everything else. There is no cost for doing this either. Now, your account (in whole) will be at the new brokerage, and you are free to do what you want with it.
hopefully, this is a catalyst that will spur a lot of people to invest regularly.
If anyone wants more info., or wants help, e-mail me: robbins@rickjames.sapien.net
If you are not happy with E-Trade, transferring your account out of there is a much simpler (and more smart) than trying to close your account.
Go to a brokerage firm, and establish a relationship with a full-service broker (the extra money you pay in commisions is worth it). From there, all you need to do is sign a few forms, and your new broker will handle everything else. There is no cost for doing this either. Now, your account (in whole) will be at the new brokerage, and you are free to do what you want with it.
hopefully, this is a catalyst that will spur a lot of people to invest regularly.
If anyone wants more info., or wants help, e-mail me: robbins@rickjames.sapien.net
For those of you who have recently opened accounts at E-Trade and are generally unsatisfied with their service, it is a very simple process to transfer your account out of there.
:)
Once this whole debacle is sorted out, you would be well-served to call a full-service brokerage firm and have your account transferred over to a broker who you can deal with personally in the future.
The transfer will cost you no money (although to be honest, I have never dealt with E-Trade... they may have a small fee). All you have to do is sign a few forms, and your new broker handles everything.
... and if you want your new broker to be a fellow slashdotter, e-mail me
... and I have a bridge to sell you.
Bob Young holds 9.1 million shares, making his share worth around $400 million.
The largest share holder of the company (22.5%) is actually Frank Batten Jr. (chairman of Lexmark Communications) who holds 15 million shares for a value of around $660 million
You will probably be able to get the shares that you initially requested. E-Trade is probably holding a number of shares for this, and will make things right.
Obviously, they were very poorly equipped to handle something like this. I wish RHAT had chosen to go about this in a diferent manner. An initial private placement or issuing options (the right to be at a certain price) seems like it would have been easier for all parties concerned.
I am pretty positive that E-Trade has held on to a number of shares and is going to sort through this hole mess. In the future, do not do any of your *real* investing through an on-line broker. Pay the extra commision and establish a relationship with a full-service broker.
Yes, everyone admires the captain who goes down with his sinking ship (not that I think RHAT is on though!), but after that initial thought, the people who jumped ship go on living their .
If someone believes in the company, they should not feel bad by selling their shares initially and then buying them back when the price settles down.
They still have a voice in the company, while hopefully having realized a nice profit for themselves.
Get off your high-horse.
To be honest, I am not so sure why they did not just do an initial private placement, or issue options (right to buy at a certain price) to you guys. This would have been easier for all parties involved in my opinion. It sounds like Redhat let a lot of people down... that is not necesarily E-Trade's fault. Afterall, they are an on-line, discount brokerage house... they are far from the best choice to handle something like this (or any investments in my opinion)!
However, if it was the SEC... they might have a point. :)
Were you able to get the shares from the other broker at the offering price somehow?
Is this another on-line broker?
I hope one thing that people learn through this is to not invest on-line.... make sure that you are able to "talk" with someone when it comes to serious investing. If that money is important to you, you will pay the extra commision and develop a relationship with a full-servive broker.
This always interestes me:
However, losses have accelerated in recent months as Red Hat has ramped up its
sales push. For the three-month period ended May 31, the company reported a net
loss of $2.1 million on $2.8 million in sales.
Based on the 66.8 million shares outstanding after the offering, Red Hat has
an estimated market value of about $2.96 billion.
Frank Batten Jr., chairman of privately held media company Landmark
Communications Inc., is the company's main shareholder with a 22.5% stake. The
15 million shares he owns are currently worth about $663.8 million.
The company's co-founders, current Chief Executive Robert Young and Chief
Technology Officer Marc Ewing, each own about 9.1 million shares, now valued at
around $402.7 million.
This certainly made quick millionaires of the guys in charge. What blows me away however is that a company with 2.8 million in revenues, now has a value of around 3 billion dollars!!
Do you think RHAT is over-valued... I know I would cetrainly hold off buying any right now!
more wealth on one plastic disc of linux
real wealth is in a linux cd
I think this is a little on the idealistic side.
While I would love it if I had contributed to Linux, and I had the opportunity to watch my "seeds" grow and change with the times... I think a great deal of *real* satisfaction can be taken from watchig "cash" grow. For many people, cash does not merely reproduce more of itself, it reproduces opportunities for those who might not have had many.
There are a lot of people who have invested cash, watched it grow, and then used that money to benefit society... I am sure they have taken a great amount of satisfaction in that, and they should.
The advantage of reproducing cash is that you have the power to decide what it is used for (minus taxes). In the right hands, this is a wonderful thing
That is also true... 90% of the paid experts that manage these mutual funds can not even beat the market averages over a significant period of time.
There are numerous reasons for this, but I do not want to go into them (unless someone challenges me, never can resist that), as it is way past the time for me to go home now!
yeah... when is the MidWest Party!?
we like beer too.