Forum Moderators: open
This is the first quarter of
GAAP profitability in the Company's history. This compares to a net loss
of ($11.1) million, which includes an asset impairment charge of $4.1
million, or ($0.12) per share for the fourth quarter 2001, and a net
loss of ($0.5) million or ($0.00) per share for the third quarter 2002.
I had all but written Looksmart off as a real competitor in the search market and am really surprised to see them turning a profit.
Another press release states Looksmart is adding two bankers to the board [shareholder.com]...not typically the types you'd think of on a search company.
I am glad to see them turning a profit, not only because I like the traffic I get from Looksmart through MSN at the rate I am paying, but also because it is important to see a search company maintaining profitability. My business is based on searching, and if no companies can do this profitably, eventually I would be out of business.
So why haven't they switched?
Revenues from the licensing portion of our agreement with Microsoft accounted for substantially all of our licensing revenues in the quarter ended September 30, 2002.......Also, Microsoft accounted for more than half of our total paid clicks and listings revenues in the quarter ended September 30, 2002.
sec.gov [sec.gov]
It's dirty money. Like drug money.
This is bad news as other "entities" will see this and dollar signs as well, copy, - all the expense of you and me.
There can't be many like you. If I hate any SE it's Looksmart. They are simply the lowest of the low.... no ethics, morality or integrity.
One day they will meet their just deserts, and I for one will be delighted.
>> It's dirty money. Like drug money. <<
Absolutely right. Ill gotten gains. I hope they choke on 'em.
THey may have made a profit but they have always been an incredibly insignificant factor in my traffic. And without MSN, not even a blip on my radar screen.
As long as former SEO turned "PPC Consultants" are around, incoming site owners will be sold on them. My free listing runs out December, 2003. No renewal here.
Does anyone have info on that $18 million class action lawsuit filed last year against the Rosenburgs of the search world?
They get none of this from me, or the companies I work for.
Look$mart may have found a few dollars in forcing their clients to switch to those fraudulantly tracked Small Business listings - but they will find themselves on the unemployment line as soon as MSN decides to cut out the middle man.
Without MSN listings, Look$mart is complete garbage...worthless.
I know... that sort of behaviour is no more than you would expect from them. Nothing is too low.
It does seem from reading this thread though that a truth is always a truth. The nature of L$ is very widely known, and WON'T be forgotten.
Im keeping my fingers cross.
As if it needs to be said again...Do you work for them or something?
Once upon a time their FAQ said the $199 charge is the only fee a webmaster would have to pay to be in the directory, once accepted.
$199 and no renewal fees, I was sold.
Of course, they also said they could change the rules anytime they want.
You can't have it both ways.
"You pay us this money and we'll give you a widget you can keep forever but the rules of purchase say we can come and take our widget back anytime we want."
=?
LookSmart is in complete self-denial that they betrayed webmasters. Complete self denial.
If LookSmart is convinced they did nothing wrong then they can hold a "LookSmart Vote of Confidence" poll with webmasters. Hey, they did nothing wrong, so they should be confident of the potential results.
They succeeded in building up their directory and gaining some respect on the internet and then cashed in on it out of greed. If they had started with this current ppc business model years ago when they started they would have failed magnificently. Look at all the ppc wannabe engines there are.
No, they set webmasters up and then ambushed us.
Some argue they had to make a profit. Well, holy Toledo why didn't the hotshot punk execs realize in the beginning that their old business model wasn't going to make a profit. In otherwords, they should have seen that when they started.
When they switched to ppc they admitted to the world they were stupid.
I don't want to do business with a stupid, backstabing directory that just doesn't give me enough traffic to make or break my business.
Amen
They would stand to make a good deal more money...even if they were getting 50%, that's above the 50% of .15 as it stands now...
Yes and no. The small biz listings are $0.15/click but when it comes to the big business bulk programs they charge $0.25 give or take little. MSN would still make more if they just syndicated OV results but there average CPC for the paid clicks is definitely higher than $0.15.
For some of the listings presumably deemed "essential to relevance" they put an affiliate link in the listing if a program exists. Those listings seem to get pretty good placement in the results.:)
It's not out of the question to have a proposal from LookSmart and one of their resellers on the the table for the same bulk listing account at the same time. It's wild.
Yes I remember that. Hmmm... so it's OK to do what you want because you want to make a profit? Think I'll go and rob a bank or mug an old lady then.
What they did was low and dispicable in EVERY sense. They even followed this outrage up with a series of insulting emails telling us we had been 'upgraded'. Back to the old lady... I'll add insult to injury by telling her its for her own good as I steal her purse.
Just remember - dogs don't change their spots.
