On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:50:09 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:Chink
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian,
liberal personality.” — Altie
Newly accepted Wordle solutions according to Fox News:
Lefty
Pinko
Commy
Liars
Slant
Libel
Faker
Lenin
Fidel
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian, liberal personality.” — Altie
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian, liberal personality.” — Altie
On 1/31/2022 6:00 PM, Johnny RSFCootball wrote:
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:50:09 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian, >> liberal personality.” — Altie
Newly accepted Wordle solutions according to Fox News:
LeftyChink
Pinko
Commy
Liars
Slant
Libel
Faker
Lenin
Fidel
Alien
Wussy
Whore
Slick
Willy
Labor
Smart
Mensa
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
--
“I usually skip over your posts because of your disguistng, contrarian, liberal personality.” — Altie
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 2:50:09 PM UTC-8, xyzzy wrote:
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
yes...but the fad will be over by the end of February.
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1miller1970@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:50:09 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
Counter argument:
https://twitter.com/nbashaw/status/1488280915226685440?s=21
If you keep it, you have to execute on the conversion to an
ongoing business, and that isn't always as easy as it seems it
might be.
Going through the dot-com boom-bust cycle, I saw cases of people
winning by selling for cash early and lots losing most everything by
waiting. Of course there were the few big winners.
I took a bird-in-hand and ended up in a much better position
than if I had gone low-cash heavy-stock. It made it so I could
retire in style. Of course if I'd won, I might have been one
of dem dere billionaires...
One guy owned a common-word domain name and refused a seven-figure
offer for it. Later he sold it for $150K.
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:50:09 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
Counter argument:
https://twitter.com/nbashaw/status/1488280915226685440?s=21
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:50:09 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
Counter argument:
https://twitter.com/nbashaw/status/1488280915226685440?s=21
If you keep it, you have to execute on the conversion to an
ongoing business, and that isn't always as easy as it seems it
might be.
Going through the dot-com boom-bust cycle, I saw cases of people
winning by selling for cash early and lots losing most everything by waiting. Of course there were the few big winners.
I took a bird-in-hand and ended up in a much better position
than if I had gone low-cash heavy-stock. It made it so I could
retire in style. Of course if I'd won, I might have been one
of dem dere billionaires...
One guy owned a common-word domain name and refused a seven-figure
offer for it. Later he sold it for $150K.
--
Be patient. God isn't finished with me yet. -- unknown
On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 6:18:46 AM UTC-6, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:50:09 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
Counter argument:
https://twitter.com/nbashaw/status/1488280915226685440?s=21
If you keep it, you have to execute on the conversion to an
ongoing business, and that isn't always as easy as it seems it
might be.
Going through the dot-com boom-bust cycle, I saw cases of people
winning by selling for cash early and lots losing most everything by
waiting. Of course there were the few big winners.
I took a bird-in-hand and ended up in a much better position
than if I had gone low-cash heavy-stock. It made it so I could
retire in style. Of course if I'd won, I might have been one
of dem dere billionaires...
One guy owned a common-word domain name and refused a seven-figure
offer for it. Later he sold it for $150K.
If the revenue generated by their games is as much as claimed in the
tweet, low seven figures doesn’t sound like a major risk. I’m sure
the initial Wordle buzz will fade, but there will be a core group that
play it regularly for a long time.
:o}~ <<<<Oh look!!! An idolatrous image of the prophet!!! Surelywe must now avenge this blasphemy by burning down the world!!!
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 6:18:46 AM UTC-6, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:50:09 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
Counter argument:
https://twitter.com/nbashaw/status/1488280915226685440?s=21
If you keep it, you have to execute on the conversion to an
ongoing business, and that isn't always as easy as it seems it
might be.
Going through the dot-com boom-bust cycle, I saw cases of people
winning by selling for cash early and lots losing most everything by
waiting. Of course there were the few big winners.
I took a bird-in-hand and ended up in a much better position
than if I had gone low-cash heavy-stock. It made it so I could
retire in style. Of course if I'd won, I might have been one
of dem dere billionaires...
One guy owned a common-word domain name and refused a seven-figure
offer for it. Later he sold it for $150K.
If the revenue generated by their games is as much as claimed in the tweet, low seven figures doesn’t sound like a major risk. I’m sureI'm a junior partner in a solitaire site that at one time had millions
the initial Wordle buzz will fade, but there will be a core group that play it regularly for a long time.
of monthly page views. I am glad we didn't get seduced by the idea
of making it a full-time thing, we would have gotten killed. As it was,
we donated the proceeds to charity and got some good feeling. Meanwhile,
it survives 20 years later as a small afterthought, basically supporting itself with some ad revenue and still generating some money for charity.
--
:o}~ <<<<Oh look!!! An idolatrous image of the prophet!!! Surelywe must now avenge this blasphemy by burning down the world!!!
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:If you have everused an open source program called "astrogrep" I wrote that in 1998 in a few hours to remember how visual basic worked. Put it on source forge a few years later and it gets like a half million downloads a year now. I haven't worked on it
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:50:09 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
Counter argument:
https://twitter.com/nbashaw/status/1488280915226685440?s=21
If you keep it, you have to execute on the conversion to an
ongoing business, and that isn't always as easy as it seems it
might be.
Going through the dot-com boom-bust cycle, I saw cases of people
winning by selling for cash early and lots losing most everything by waiting. Of course there were the few big winners.
I took a bird-in-hand and ended up in a much better position
than if I had gone low-cash heavy-stock. It made it so I could
retire in style. Of course if I'd won, I might have been one
of dem dere billionaires...
One guy owned a common-word domain name and refused a seven-figure
offer for it. Later he sold it for $150K.
--
Be patient. God isn't finished with me yet. -- unknown
On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 8:06:26 AM UTC-6, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 6:18:46 AM UTC-6, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:I'm a junior partner in a solitaire site that at one time had millions
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:50:09 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
Counter argument:
https://twitter.com/nbashaw/status/1488280915226685440?s=21
If you keep it, you have to execute on the conversion to an
ongoing business, and that isn't always as easy as it seems it
might be.
Going through the dot-com boom-bust cycle, I saw cases of people
winning by selling for cash early and lots losing most everything by
waiting. Of course there were the few big winners.
I took a bird-in-hand and ended up in a much better position
than if I had gone low-cash heavy-stock. It made it so I could
retire in style. Of course if I'd won, I might have been one
of dem dere billionaires...
One guy owned a common-word domain name and refused a seven-figure
offer for it. Later he sold it for $150K.
If the revenue generated by their games is as much as claimed in the
tweet, low seven figures doesn’t sound like a major risk. I’m sure
the initial Wordle buzz will fade, but there will be a core group that
play it regularly for a long time.
of monthly page views. I am glad we didn't get seduced by the idea
of making it a full-time thing, we would have gotten killed. As it was,
we donated the proceeds to charity and got some good feeling. Meanwhile,
it survives 20 years later as a small afterthought, basically supporting
itself with some ad revenue and still generating some money for charity.
Apparently the NYT is already doing well with online gaming. This
isn’t some young upstart company trying a new venture. I don’t
think they’re taking a huge risk here.
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 8:06:26 AM UTC-6, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 6:18:46 AM UTC-6, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:I'm a junior partner in a solitaire site that at one time had millions
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:50:09 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
Counter argument:
https://twitter.com/nbashaw/status/1488280915226685440?s=21
If you keep it, you have to execute on the conversion to an
ongoing business, and that isn't always as easy as it seems it
might be.
Going through the dot-com boom-bust cycle, I saw cases of people
winning by selling for cash early and lots losing most everything by >> >> waiting. Of course there were the few big winners.
I took a bird-in-hand and ended up in a much better position
than if I had gone low-cash heavy-stock. It made it so I could
retire in style. Of course if I'd won, I might have been one
of dem dere billionaires...
One guy owned a common-word domain name and refused a seven-figure
offer for it. Later he sold it for $150K.
If the revenue generated by their games is as much as claimed in the
tweet, low seven figures doesn’t sound like a major risk. I’m sure >> > the initial Wordle buzz will fade, but there will be a core group that >> > play it regularly for a long time.
of monthly page views. I am glad we didn't get seduced by the idea
of making it a full-time thing, we would have gotten killed. As it was, >> we donated the proceeds to charity and got some good feeling. Meanwhile, >> it survives 20 years later as a small afterthought, basically supporting >> itself with some ad revenue and still generating some money for charity. >>
Apparently the NYT is already doing well with online gaming. ThisI didn't think they were. I was talking about the Wordle guys building
isn’t some young upstart company trying a new venture. I don’t
think they’re taking a huge risk here.
and running a business. The logic of the buy makes sense.
--
Experience is what allows you to recognize a mistake the second
time you make it. -- unknown
On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 6:50:08 PM UTC-6, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 8:06:26 AM UTC-6, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 6:18:46 AM UTC-6, Con Reeder, unhyphenated American wrote:I'm a junior partner in a solitaire site that at one time had millions >> of monthly page views. I am glad we didn't get seduced by the idea
On 2022-02-01, Johnny RSFCootball <1jay1mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:50:09 PM UTC-6, xyzzy wrote:
NYT buys Wordlw for “low seven figures”
Good on the dude for cashing out but talk about dumn money.
Counter argument:
https://twitter.com/nbashaw/status/1488280915226685440?s=21
If you keep it, you have to execute on the conversion to an
ongoing business, and that isn't always as easy as it seems it
might be.
Going through the dot-com boom-bust cycle, I saw cases of people
winning by selling for cash early and lots losing most everything by >> >> waiting. Of course there were the few big winners.
I took a bird-in-hand and ended up in a much better position
than if I had gone low-cash heavy-stock. It made it so I could
retire in style. Of course if I'd won, I might have been one
of dem dere billionaires...
One guy owned a common-word domain name and refused a seven-figure >> >> offer for it. Later he sold it for $150K.
If the revenue generated by their games is as much as claimed in the >> > tweet, low seven figures doesn’t sound like a major risk. I’m sure
the initial Wordle buzz will fade, but there will be a core group that
play it regularly for a long time.
of making it a full-time thing, we would have gotten killed. As it was, >> we donated the proceeds to charity and got some good feeling. Meanwhile,
it survives 20 years later as a small afterthought, basically supporting
itself with some ad revenue and still generating some money for charity.
Apparently the NYT is already doing well with online gaming. This isn’t some young upstart company trying a new venture. I don’tI didn't think they were. I was talking about the Wordle guys building
think they’re taking a huge risk here.
and running a business. The logic of the buy makes sense.
--Wordle effect?
Experience is what allows you to recognize a mistake the second
time you make it. -- unknown
https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-york-times-tops-10-million-subscriptions-as-profit-soars-11643816086?mod=flipboard
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 403 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 42:24:04 |
| Calls: | 8,407 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 13,171 |
| Messages: | 5,904,944 |