Got to admit, the name of the web site is NOT "Inappropriate". Seems they really didn't know what they were doing.

Related Quotes PASA 0 +0 delayed 20 mins - disclaimer

Wednesday December 27, 1:45 pm Eastern Time

Quepasa.com board approves liquidation plan

(UPDATE: Adds background, analyst comment)

PHOENIX, Dec 27 (Reuters) - Quepasa.com Inc. (NasdaqNM:PASA - news), a Web site targeting U.S. Hispanics, joined the long list of dot.com casualties this year on Wednesday by saying it planned to liquidate the company and sell its businesses.

Under the plan, the proceeds will be distributed to shareholders, the company said. The plan is subject to shareholder approval in three to four months.

Quepasa.com is one of several Hispanic Web companies that have come on hard times.

``The sale of our assets is the best way to maximize value and provide liquidity to our shareholders.'' said Gary Trujillo, Quepasa.com's chairman and chief executive.

Quepasa.com, of Phoenix, said it will take a one-time restructuring charge of about $880,000 in the current fourth quarter for work force reductions. In November, Quepasa.com slashed its work force from 58 to 20 after posting a loss of $7.9 million, or 45 cents a share, for the third quarter ended Sept. 30. On Wednesday, it said it would further cut its work force through the liquidation process.

A company spokesperson wasn't immediately available to provide additional information regarding new work force cuts during the liquidation plan.

In a statement, the company said principal assets for sale include the quepasa.com website business, RealEstateEspanol.com, Etrato.com and Credito.com, and all other furniture, fixtures and equipment.

Quepasa.com said it will continue to operate its websites as it completes the liquidation.

Quepasa.com last week received a delisting notice from the Nasdaq Stock Market. Quepasa shares last stood at 13 cents. The stock had hit a 52-week low of six cents on Dec. 20 after trading at a 52-week high of $14.06 on Dec. 27, 1999.

Nasdaq halted trading in the company's shares Wednesday morning. Nasdaq changed the trading halt status to ``additional information requested'' from the company. Trading will remain halted until the company has fully satisfied Nasdaq's request for additional information, the exchange said.

Miami Beach-based Yupi.com earlier this month said it would lay off 90 workers, or 50 percent of its U.S. staff, due to a slowdown in online advertising revenues.

Yupi, launched in 1997, was one of Latin America's first Internet companies, starting as a consumer-oriented portal and changing earlier this year to a business-to-business portal.

New York-based portal StarMedia Network, Brazilian online retailer Submarino.com and Argentine Web companies El Sitio, Salud and SportsYa.com recently announced job cuts.

Analysts said that Quepasa.com was distinctive because it was targeting the U.S. Hispanic market, whereas others were targeting Latin America.

``It was a great idea. But like so many good ideas, execution and followthrough were the tough part,'' said one analyst.

-- Anonymous, December 27, 2000

Answers

Contrbuted your find to fuckedcompany.com.

Didn't give you credit of course.

-- Anonymous, December 27, 2000

The Web in 2001: Paying Customers

-- Anonymous, December 28, 2000

Belly up suckers

-- Anonymous, December 28, 2000

Interesting links, especially Doc's. I had a feeling that people weren't responding to click-through ads (I usually don't), but that confirmed it. This doesn't bode well for the future of a (mostly-)"free" Web.

BUT ... on the other hand, these Web site maintainers are going to find that, unless they have some REALLY outstanding, one-of-a-kind content, the net result of charging a fee will be to reduce their traffic to near-zero. From Joe Average's viewpoint, he'll be nickel'd and dime'd to death if he has to pay even a minimal fee for each site that he wants to access. So, what'll happen is, he'll pick a few sites that he really likes and forget the rest.

Maybe this is a good thing; the Web has become overloaded from all the traffic. Us poor folks who have to depend on dial-up connections have a time getting on line at certain hours of the day. :)

Shoot, I can tell when the kids get home from school. After 3 PM, my access starts getting slower ... and SLOWER ... and S L O W E R .. . it doesn't slack up until after 10-11PM on weeknights.

We run the Clark Howard (consumer advocate) show on WYDE, and he said something the other day that was interesting. Many e-commerce sites basically ran at a net loss last Christmas. This year, they tried to raise their prices to more realistic levels ... only to see their traffic (and sales) drop.

I'm having to re-think this whole e-commerce thing. I had thought that they'd have such lower costs that they'd be able to run the WalMarts and K-Marts out of business. I'm no longer so sure about that.

For one thing, people are impatient. I'll go to Barnes and Noble and buy a book, willingly paying a few bucks more, so that I can have it NOW. If I'd order it through Amazon, I'd have to wait.

For another, most people like dealing with a human, face to face, especially when there's a problem to be resolved. If I buy something from K-Mart, I can take it back that afternoon if it doesn't work. If I've ordered it from Joe's E-mporium online, when it shows up broken, I have to wait ANOTHER week or two to get it fixed (assuming, of course, that Joe hasn't skipped town -- a not-unheard-of thing in e-business, unfortunately).

I'm just not sure where this is headed.

I do believe that the most likely to succeed will be "hybrid" approaches -- someone like a Barnes and Noble will be more successful than an Amazon, because you get the best of both worlds: you can order the book online at www.barnesandnoble.com, but there's still a local store that I could go to if there was a question.

But if I'm right about that, then so much for the entrepeneurial e-pioneers. That's a little sad. Unfortunately, the current state of e-business stocks does little to convince me that I'm wrong.

-- Anonymous, December 29, 2000

One of the things I've found to be a drawback to online shopping is the shipping charges. Often, one doesn't have a choice of shipping options and the rates in many instances are simply outrageous. Of course, when I lived in NYC, it was much easier to not HAVE to shop online; I had a plethora of choices right there within a subway-ride of my home. Here, well .......... every chain is represented, but you don't get the "boutiques" of NYC (or any city, really). LV is kind of a collection of suburbs, over-laden with strip malls and several regular malls containing all the usual suspects. (I've found maybe two or three "boutique-type" stores and at least one consignment shop that has some interesting stuff, but not like NYC would.) Then there's the shopping at the major hotel/casinos if one wants to shop at places that would normally be found on say Fifth Avenue or Rodeo Drive (LOL -- would LOVE to, but there's that LV Salary Thing.....).

I'd like to go out on a limb (LOL) and say that quite possibly, the only companies that are going to "do well" on the Web are the click and mortars (e.g., Kmart, B&N) -- where you can purchase online (possibly at a deeper discount than in the store) and return to the store if need be. The other "do-well-on-the-Web" companies should be those that were traditionally mail-order catalogues (lots of womens' clothing in that category). In that scenario, their customers were paying the S&H charges anyway, and ordering on the web can be much easier than dialing an 800 number.

Barring that, I can only see online shopping being "big" in places like small towns that might not have access to the larger stores. And then you have to take into account Internet access -- face it, if you want to "shop online" using a dial-up service ..... I did it, but it was a pain in the butt.

I have to wonder if the recent slate of dot-com failures isn't going to scare off potential VC and/or investors from new start-ups, even if they do somehow find that "Internet Niche" that seems to be necessary.

-- Anonymous, December 29, 2000

Trish,

See? We DO agree on some things. :)

Well said. I agree that the traditional Sears-Roebuck and Montgomery Wards type-thingie (which was big news for our great-grandparents -- people in the sticks could buy Nice Stuff by mail order!) will work on line. Shoot, I already pay some of my bills online, too, and my one gripe about my credit union is that it doesn't offer automatic balancing online (grumble, grumble).

I don't think anyone would argue that the Web _itself_ doesn't have a bright future. But like my friend George Smith implied a couple of years ago, finding out how to make the darn thing *PAY* for itself is the trick ... :)

Uh, oh. I feel a Split Personality Moment coming on .. . .. arrgggh ... *eeeek** .. .. .. %$##$%!! .. ..

POP! I shall now answer one of my own posts.

So, what'll happen is, he'll pick a few sites that he really likes and forget the rest.

No, Stephen, what will happen is, if the rest of the Web starts charging for every little access or service, he will just stay on AOL and never leave.

(The very thought makes me itch, but there you go.)

(Should've seen that one. It's really obvious.)

(My first online service provider was Prodigy. I stayed online for hours at a time -- for $15 a month![g])

-- Anonymous, December 29, 2000

Patricia….

Down here in Orange County, the venture capital center of the U.S., the words ‘dot com’ come out as ‘road kill’.

-- Anonymous, December 30, 2000