Talk:Dot-com company

Acquisitions List Additions
Could add blo.gs to the list. 24.222.121.193 17:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Amount Network Solutions was Aquired for
On the page Network Solutions, it states that the company was aquired by VeriSign for $21bil, however, on this page it states that it was aquired for only $15billion. I have no way to verify this so can someone clarify this for me? ^_^;; Pritchard 01:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I second the note about 15 bil vs 21 bil. It seems to be The largest acquisition? Is it? 209.10.89.3 14:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Verisign purchased Network Solutions for 21 billion dollars in stock. However, by the time this was completed, the stock was worth 15.3 billion dollars. Link: http://money.cnn.com/2000/03/07/deals/verisign/ Link: http://news.cnet.com/VeriSign-completes-Network-Solutions-acquisition/2100-1023_3-241687.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.139.62 (talk) 20:10, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

'List of well-known dot-bombs' belongs on the article 'Dot.com Bubble'
That's because on the article Dot-com bubble there is a section called: List of companies significant to the bubble with a warning For discussion and a list of dot-com companies outside the scope of the dot-com bubble, see Dot-com company.

This article is meant for Dot.com companies that didn't experience the bubble which effectively ended on March 10th 2000.

I think that section should be moved EconomistBR 04:51, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

This makes complete sense. I second this motion. All in favor say "aye".

I don't feel like modifying right now, though. I'm supposed to be learning finite element analysis.Chadoh (talk) 05:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Kibu.com redirect
Kibu.com has no page of its own, but instead is redirected here. This seems strange to me. The other dot-bombs get their own actual pages. Chadoh (talk) 05:34, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Redirect needed
"dot com business" should redirect to this page.

Against the merger with Dot-com
This entry clearly shows three different definitions for a single term in different contexts. I think that's enough for "pure-play" to warrant its own entry page, if not also a disambiguation page. Certainly should not be merged into the dot-com article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Argantael (talk • contribs) 14:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Digiscents
Digiscents has been labeled as needing a citation for a while. Never heard of it before but here is one article http://www.internetretailer.com/2001/05/31/digiscents-runs-out-of-cents — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrededits (talk • contribs) 14:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Dot-com company. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060716214416/http://www.wired.com:80/news/business/1,46403-0.html to http://www.wired.com/news/business/1,46403-0.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:19, 1 December 2016 (UTC)