re: lets put the complete quote out there Your post is your...

re: lets put the complete quote out there Your post is your obstinate 'childish' way of an apology, I take it? A grovel. Yet, still containing a lie. (I have NEVER ever had GOOGLE buying Looksmart, I'm afraid. You show me where.)

< maybe you could explain how NEWS can buy a controlling interest in LOOK and NOT own it???? >

NWS have a "controlling stakes" in a number of businesses that continue to operate as/under their origional entity.

Try Star TV & Direct TV, for starters. It's no big 'deal'.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=newscorp+a+controlling+interest+in&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

< i know........you will have to find an answer somewhere and cut n paste it. >

I just have, a link to Google results. But ........ Grow up smuggs, if you ever want to be treated serious, OK?

< months ago you had Google buying LOOK >

As I have said ..... That's a Lie!! Now you prove it correct, OK?

< Lets assume NEWS buy LOOK...... >

Now you are becoming condescending. But ..... ok, let's go through the scenario ....

< for how much???? $5 per share???? $3.50 per share??? >

I have 'pencilled in' a 'deal' of around $6.00pps with LOOK's SP @ around the $4.50cps level, at the time. A 60% premium, is what I figure. The market will ALMOST immediately, "double" that 'buy-in' price (to, $12.00pps) and NWS's (let's say 60%) "stake", THEN, also doubles!!

NWS themselves (ultimately) bring some 100M potential "users" to the Looksmart 'table' and if that 'basic' $1.00 revenues, to ONE user applies, (as per Q1 results), Looksmart's profitabilty, is well, almost gauranteed, instantly!!

< then NEWS own it............the fanciful talk of LOOK being worth $30 is as they said in the Castle ..... dreaming!!! >

No, newscorp then "own" just 60% of "it". The other 40% is 'owned' by existing Looksmart shareholders. And on current exchange rates, @ US$12.00pps, will then see LOK here in OZ, trading around the, $15.00 - $16.00pps, mark.

< LOOK is worth $4.15 DOWN from $5.75 a few weeks ago. >

I have answered why this is so, above. But it has taken an almost "doubling" of "short" activity in the US, to achieve this. And contrary to your complete lack of understanding, YES, Institutions have been accumulating, and plenty!! They now "own" some 46.4% of the Co!!!

So, following NW'S entry, (and say, with/at) 60% of the Co, The Insto's will then "effectively" hold, 18.56%, so it's clear to then see, that only *20% (approx.) of all issued shares of the Co, will then be available for retail, should it happen. And that, will certainly be ... exciting!!

< Yep......NEWS is forcing it down to take a position in it. >

And why wouldn't they, with the above scenario now, potentially, becoming a reality? I figure that the SP got 'away' on them, when pursuing more stock. They have (of course), reigned the SP in nicely, of late.

< Rupert does not need losses. He wants sites with upside....like Myspace >

Yes, and he knows that "content" is a winner!! Looksmart increased their "users" by 30%, Q1 over Q4 -2004. UP from 9M to 12M ..... And that's with very little 'fanfare' or, promotion. And had revenues of $10.5M, or, (as I have previously stated), a dollar for each 'user', per month!!

Yes, I'd agree with you on that one. He knows that Looksmart only needs "users", for upside! And he and his "content consortium" partners, will provided LOOK with them in the ...... 100'S OF MILLIONS .....

And Rupert (well, NWS) will 'bank' 60% of LOOK's profits, forever and a day!!

Now about that apology, you 'ef' head!!

*ps; I have advised LOOK to make an "all script" purchase ( a merge?) with INCX, & for it to occur before the NWS "move", so, an approx. 10M odd, more shares, could then come into play. Newscorp will find the Local.com technology and it's partly established position in both the US and the UK as "accretive" to the 'total' picture.

I DON'T EXPECT YOU TO EVER UNDERSTAND ALL THAT, THOUGH.