« Internet trends 2005: Mary Meeker gets Yahoo wrong | Main | Mark Mahaney downgrades Monster Worldwide »

Tuesday, January 04, 2005

GuruNet launches Answers.com

GuruNet (ticker: GRU) announced the release of Answers.com, a Web site that provides information and answers in response to searches, rather than links to other Web sites.

GuruNet still offers a downloadable software product that allows users to click on words in documents to view related information. GuruNetplans to generate revenues from ads placed alongside its topic entries, rather than from the subscription fees it previously charged for the use of its premium service.

Answers.com has a clean interface and good presentation of material. Its integration with a desktop client makes it a handy research tool. But the barriers to entry don't look high. Wikipedia, a user-generated encyclopedia, has greater breadth and depth of coverage and a search function that also allows users to search for names, places and people like Answers.com.

According to the company's most recent 10-Q, GuruNet reported revenue of $53,163, cost of revenue of $157,854, and a loss of $2,168,527 in its September 2004 quarter. Over the last nine months, the company's cash flows from operating activities were negative $3,092,838. In the last few trading days GuruNet's stock has risen from about $6 to its close last night of $8.90, giving the company an enterprise value of $41 million.

Trend: Search engines are becoming answer engines. MSN Search already offers search of its Encarta encyclopedia.

Search engines will race to add access to useful content (eg. Google's recent library initiative) and to acquire proprietary content themselves.

GRU chart below.

Posted by David Jackson on January 4, 2005 at 12:31 AM in Sub-sector: Search, ticker: GRU | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference GuruNet launches Answers.com:

» GuruNet, the Next Google or the Next Mamma.com? from Trader Mike
Here's an interesting stock/company that literally just popped up on my radar -- GuruNet (GRU). The 75% gain it had last week allowed it to get past the price filter in my scanning software. (Maybe Kirk caused that 35% move... [Read More]

Tracked on February 5, 2005 08:09 PM


Actually answers.com is using Wikopedia as one of it's sources. Take a look at the guy who designed the mouse and is pretty bitter because we generally using far weaker tools than he prototyped in 1968, whose project broke up in part because of internal conflicts, in part because of protest against Vietnam and went to Xerox Parc and developed the altos which Steve Jobs saw except he didn't see the need for the objects (including links) and networking...


Incidently I might some suggestions to the readers of this blog. Go to Wikipedia. Look up the financial and economic entries. If key words aren't there, define them, maybe dig up some good links.

You are using a system called the Internet which exists because thousands of people engaged in open collaborative effort, if it wasn't for them you'd be using AOL, being able to email to compuserve but not share resources and being somewhat jealous of the more powerful, but tech heavy bbs anarchy which would stil be a fraction of today's net.

To get some sense of the issues facing Wikipedia:


If nothing else look at the difference between an open source blog system and those built by the private market. Note comments are titled, threaded and can be linked to.

This is one features (diaries are another) that allows democratization of the "broadcast" model still implicit in most commercial blogs that assumes the blogger is the center and the various dialogues forming from comments are less important.

However if you look at the wikipedia critique you will see that many of the comments are at least as interesting and certainly develop many aspects of the subject.

- David Bennett

Posted by: David Bennett | January 4, 2005 01:25 PM

If you search through some webmaster forums you'll find that sites that use wikipedia get their pages displaying the info banned by google and their google ads don't work.

here's one thread:

From my view answers.com seems to lack original content entirely. How they get so much traffic with copied content is bizarre to me. Anyone have an explanation for this? Maybe I should just make a wikipedia mirror site and puts ads all over the place...

Posted by: internet directory | March 30, 2005 02:55 AM

Post a comment