Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2001.


Subject: ICG's Collapse... a GREAT story!
Here's what is means 2 me...


Hi Dan (Mr. Zadder) and Rob (Mr. Fixmer),

I've just begun receiving your magazine and I was absolutely overjoyed
with your article entitled "ICG's Collapse" dated June 4th. I just read it
yesterday as every three weeks or so I try to get caught up in my
So I apologize for my "delayed" response.

But here's why I was so pleased with this incredibly well-organized and
"pertinent" article and why it is very significant for me.

Well.. here goes... <grin>

If I recall correctly, there was a very influential Schwabb & Schwabb stock
analyst who used his clout to affirm that a "market correction"
(meant to be
induced by virtue of his comments, I suppose) was in order
so the Bull pulled
back and the Bear showed up driving down the markets
as everyone was
"programmed" (in my view by the Old Economy Cynics) for
this "inevitable"

And sure enough it became a self-fulfilling prophecy to the relief of Old World
Economic Cynics confirming them in their view that there is
UNDER THE SUN (if you believe every single word in Sacred
Scripture) as
"over simplistic" as that is. At least, that is "my" read.

Why I welcome your article is that it confirms my view that today we have TWO
DISTINCT economies with very different dynamics: there is the
Old World
Economy and New World Economy of the dot-coms and there exists
a divide
between the two such that never shall the twain meet. <grin>

A lot of people like the older generation, those 40+ years old and Old Economy
Cynics would like to believe that in the wake of the Bear Market
it is "business as
usual" as there is nothing special about the so-called
"New World Economy". They
are smug in their long time notion that out
there in the world of business, the law of
the jungle continues to reign
supreme and the struggle for survival means the
application of "force
and power" as the keystones to success because invariably
there is NO
easy road to success and for that reason you are obliged by "the
of things" to "scratch and crawl" your way to the top of the heap to be
King of the Hill.

The truth is that what they believe this to be true because of the rules by which
they have "habitually" played the game.

And my point is this: those rules often allowed for "crooked" activity when needed.

In fact, I'm of the opinion that the Dow Jones blue chip stock that get a 15% return
on revenue have always done so "by hook and by crook" the
hard way and an
"outstanding" example is your story. Is it the exception?
I think it's typical of blue
chip stocks though perhaps NOT to the same
"godforsaken" degree.

The GOOD NEWS is that the Nasdaq dot-com companies can get 15% return
quarterly "hands-down without trying" by being "dynamic", "open", "transparent",
and "fast moving" creating "synergy" in their wake for
themselves and their
"stakeholders", that Midas touch that people knew
existed "in theory" if the
planets were properly aligned. (Ha! Ha!).

How do they do it? By having TOTAL CONFIDENCE in their employees and by
paying them TOP DOLLAR so they don't have to look elsewhere and more
importantly treating them as THEIR MOST VALUED CUSTOMERS. With their
"winning" employees working in an environment where everything is DESIGNED
to promote a "winning outcome" it's FULL SPEED ahead and
just an easy matter
of "FOLLOW THROUGH" (i.e. execution of the game plan).

I sense we are seeing a titanic struggle on the stock market between the Dow
Jones old way of doing business and the new dynamic way of
that of the Nasdaq:
one being "power" oriented putting its organizational
leaders first, and the other
"service" oriented putting everyone in the
company "on par" with everyone else
in terms of "status" and "say",
perhaps NOT pay, but at least all employees tend
to have some equity
in the company. This is a more futuristic, egalitarian approach
comparison to what has been: the privileged at the top run the bottom rung like
Eskimos driving their dog sleds.

For me, the problems inherent in ICG's collapse are "classical problems" of a
bygone era when a "hierarchical", power-oriented way of doing
business was
the "norm". With the fall of the Berlin Wall in November
of 1989 and the taking
off of the Net subsequently that is no longer
the case. We are into a new period
that of POST-Modernism in a big
way thanks to the potential linkages and synergy
of the Internet
that allows for unprecedented optimism and a real stabilization
and democratization of the global economy based of co-operation and
collaberation (more than competition) creating a more civilized,
gentler age
that humanity has never known, so I believe.

What is REVOLUTIONARY is the understanding today that the employee is king,
NOT the manager: managers are there to promote their employee,
themselves and by so doing increase their own sphere of activity
and influence
inside and outside the company in a world where EVERYONE

Creating a "sanitized" work environment that acknowledges and recognizes
"the regular employee" as the companys most valued customer creates the
invincible magic of "synergy" that makes a company shine and WORK FUN:
this does NOT go unnoticed by the OUTSIDE stakeholders.

For that reason, I argue that the Dow Jones blue chip companies are in trouble
because there is a NEW "modus operendi" afoot and they have
to get in step in
order to be a player in the game. Drop the ball as
they have been doing and they
will be sidelined. "Jack be nimble and
Jack be quick" is what it is all about rather
than paying people
"kickbacks" and "politicing" under the benches. They have
have to be
on the field playing ball where everybody can see them so everybody
can judge their game. That is currently NOT the case given how underwriting has
done and how businesses/products have been promoted
using "uncontested"
hype thanks to a well "greased" media machine.
(Obviously, the media is a guilty
party in promoting blue chip stocks
that everyone "automatically" is "lead" to believe
to be sound at
least "superficially" when investors should be encouraged to "look
under the hood". How can some "institutional investors" be so blind? My point that
I want to make very clear is that the "old way" of
doing business has always been
DIRTY, DIRTY, DIRTY - at least in
my view.)

For that reason, I believe that the Nasdaq stocks are "seriously" undervalued
while the Dow Jones stocks are perhaps for the most
part "over valued" by
institutional investors and senior citizens.

Or maybe, just maybe, I'm just a pie-in-the-sky idealist who has NOT learned to be
a cynic. (Ha! Ha!)

In any case, the article was amazingly well put together, well written, a VERY
ENJOYABLE READ that covered all the bases and left me "aghast".
investigative reporting! If only newspapers did "some" good
reporting, they'd be rolling in the doo-re-me, I think.
Too often we want to
see NO evil yet its staying us in the face - day
after day. (Ha! Ha!) So nothing
changes for the better and everything
stagnates as the waters are damned
so to speak NOT to mention the
"unpleasant smell" one gets from such
bad/stagnant water.

Once again, let me say how grateful and impressed I was with the extensive
coverage of your BOLD article: a much needed breath of
fresh air and RELIEF
that such
incongruousness will NOT go unnoticed, but will be reported on by a
bodes very well for your
excellent publication in my view.

CONGRATS to you all!

I really appreciated and admire the decision to go ahead and publish this
well-crafted, well-documented article. It will surely have investors thinking
about where they should put their money. As far as I'm concerned,
it's NOT
surprising that so-called "ethical" stocks are doing better
than expected. Or
am I just dreaming and out of touch with the crude
reality of the market
place? (Ha! Ha!)


Thx a million.

I wish you all - much-deserved - continued success in your personal and
professional lives.

Best wishes to you and yours,

President of K+:
P.S.: About, may I recommend this suite of
Microsoft® Office compatible applications that you can work with
line anywhere anytime:

Originally, I believe it was free. It's now available as a $49 "annual"
subscription service.

The part of the suite that has to be downloaded is only 10 MB and the
service comes with FREE "online" storage space.

To update the suite just requires only a click of the mouse:
to buy!

I think it's pretty cool.