It looks like Greenberg is in bed with the
shorts. He savaged WFMI a year ago as well, although he
retracted it at the end of the year by admitting he had
been wrong--after the damage to their stock was
already done.

He is missing the point of what WFMI
is doing as well (or perhaps he and other shorts are
really concerned that without the drag of the dot com
business WFMI will continue to show strong growth and he'd
better do what he can to undermine the company's
strategy). WFMI has found a way to insulate its core retail
business from the impact of its dot com business. This
allows the core retail business not to have its EPS
impacted by the dot com business and it allows the dot com
business to make aggressive investments for growth without
being handicapped by the core retail business. For an
interesting contrast look at the first page of the Money and
Investment section of today's WallStreet Journal. This
article explores the problems that Staples and other B&M
retailers are having with their dot coms hurting their
earnings growth. Staples wants to have their earnings
estimates in First Call stated without the dot com losses.
First Call doesn't want to do it. WFMI has found the
answer that Staples and other companies are seeking.
Instead of slamming WFMI, Greenberg should be praising
the company for coming up with a brilliant solution
to the problem they struggled with in 1999 and
Staples and others are still struggling with today--how
to promote an e-commerce business without destroying
the market capitalization of the B&M business. WFMI
has found the solution. I believe it is foolish to
believe that WFMI will ever again put themselves in a
position where the dot com business will hurt the core
retail business. If the shorts are counting on this I
believe they will be sorely disappointed (as they appear
to be right now with WFMI escaping the dot com
earnings trap they were in last year).