Is eBay about to become an ecommerce dinosaur?

[mandy]

Why eBay’s health lies in the balance

Is eBay about to become an ecommerce dinosaur, a company whose glory days ended with the internet’s first decade? Or is it in the middle of an overhaul that will position it – as the company’s executives claim – to move into entirely new markets and continue to expand its 14 per cent share of global ecommerce?

Wall Street stuck to its “glass half empty” view on Friday after the company’s latest annual meeting with analysts. eBay’s shares slipped by more than 4 per cent, leaving them 25 per cent down since the start of the year and erasing $15bn from it stock market value.

eBay executives, on the other hand, outlined plans to squeeze more growth out of their traditional auction business, while extending their reach into some of the internet’s most promising new markets. Below: the case for future growth, and the reason Wall Street is leery...

full article: http://news.ft.com/cms/s/4147ac88-dc75-1...e2340.html

related topics:
eBay's Google Fearing Meg Whines to Analysts that "Only the Paranoid Survive"
http://community.tuliptools.com/index.ph...636.0.html
eBay 1Q Earnings Meet Expectations But Expenses Rise, Stock Falls on News
http://community.tuliptools.com/index.ph...434.0.html

[xppman]

According to the authors quote of 14 per cent share of global ecommerce.

That puts ebay at even less than the previous 25% I've heard and read about.

Wall Street and investors have good reason to be leery of ebay.

In the segment titled THE CASE FOR FUTURE GROWTH.

John Donahoe, president of eBay Marketplaces does just like
Meg or any of her other henchmen who are looking more and more
like top executives of the now defunked Enron and Worldcom. IMO

They blow smoke up the investors a$$es in these presentations.
Quoting erroneous numbers like 105m paypal accounts.

This is simply not true according to ebay's own SEC reports.
Even the mechanisms and criteria they use
to come to these numbers seem flawed and should be look at
as possibly fraudulent and false statements made by
ebay executives to their stockholders,
all in an apparent effort to keep stockholders from bailing on them.

It's one thing for a company to try and keep focus on the positive.
But when they straight out lie or miss quote true numbers
to the people they are trying to get to invest or keep investing?

Something is VERY VERY wrong.

I still do not understand why the SEC the FTC and the US AG's
office have not launched full investigations into eBay's
accounting and reporting practices as well as other areas of possible law violations.

Perhaps it is as many in the US already feel.

Our government officials are corrupt to the point that no one in
any official capacity anymore will stand up, investigate
these mega companies and enforce the laws of the land.

Last time I checked fraud was still fraud and ebay officials
out right lying to investors is fraud.

Hey didn't Martha Stuart end up in a jail cell
just for lying to an investigator on matter concerning
publicly owned stock she had a stake it?

I'll say it again:
Wall Street and investors have good reason to be leery of ebay.

[jezebel]

Perhaps it is as many in the US already feel.

Our government officials are corrupt to the point that no one in
any official capacity anymore will stand up, investigate
these mega companies and enforce the laws of the land.

[amy]

, its [PayPal] user base has jumped to 105m, compared to 73m at Amex.

1) Only 29 million of PayPal's 105 million [cumulative] registered users are active members according to eBay's latest SEC filings. 

2) AMEX users must pay an annual fee.  If they don't pay their membership is cancelled.  Therefore using eBay's definition of an active member, all 73 million AMEX members are active users.

The Reality- AMEX has 73 million active users vs. PayPal's 29 million active users.

[xppman]

Ahhh yes but here is where the smoke blowing comes in.

eBay's "definition" of an active member CHANGES
when it refers to PayPals numbers.

With PayPal ebay is counting ANYONE that sent or received at least
one payment through the PayPal system during the quarter.
Whether registered or not.


Thus the erroneous 105 million count.

Pretty slick accounting / reporting wouldn't you agree? 

To me this is downright disingenuous and fraudulent.