for 31 March 1999. Updated every WEEKDAY.

I read your article on banner
ads today. Later, in an
attempt to read the Fish, I
mistakenly pointed my browser
to www.thesuck.net/gish, which
of course does not exist.

So when exactly did you
people add banner ads (and
links to Hotbot) to your 404
Not Found page? I mean,
there's nothing wrong with
it, really ... it's just that
you must have done it pretty
recently. I don't remember
seeing the ads when I got
your 404 last week, and for
you to add those ads and then
run a column about ads ...
well, interesting timing.

Whatever.

<mcclure111@earthlink.net>

Ha! Have we got you under our
duplicitous spell or what?

First, we write an article
about e-commerce and excess
cardboard, and yet somehow
trick you into thinking it's
about banner ads.

Also, we perplex you so much
with our tricky rhetoric and
sly marketing practices that
you can no longer type
straight - apparently this
is a regular occurrence.

Finally, we dupe you into
writing a ridiculous letter
to us, thereby fulfilling our
content needs without us
actually paying you! Someone
ought to give us a prize.

Best,

Huck

Huck,

I agree with your assessment
of the new package medium.
However, I feel the real
opportunity lies not only in
the packaging but in the
delivery as well. As people
become more and more reliant
on the Web for their every
purchasing need, the UPS and
FedEx guys will become the
only human faces associated
with the purchasing
experience. I don't know
about you, but I'm more
likely to be suckered into an
extra purchase by the
button-nose salesgirl at the
Gap ("Why yes, I would like
some socks to go with these
jeans. Do you have any that
are grossly overpriced? I'll
take two pair!") than by some
overweight guy in a pair of
ill-fitting brown shorts.

If you could put together a
delivery force consisting of
out-of-work actors (an
employment pool already
lacking in any self-respect,
so all ethical issues are
resolved), you could pick a
delivery person to match the
purchase, armed with a spiel
to deliver along with the
goods. Say a guy orders
Stone Cold's (Steve Austin)
biography from Amazon.com.
The book would be delivered
by a big-haired hottie, ready
to push more merchandise.
"Wow, I, like, really dig
your TransAm. You know
Carparts.com has the biggest
selection of fuzzy dice in
the world?"

Another twist on this is to
make an end run around the
FedEx and UPS hammerlock on
the delivery of
e-commerce-related goods.
Other companies have delivery
networks in place. You could
charge Domino's big bucks for
the right to deliver your
products. They in turn could
use whatever means they
wanted to push their product.
They could call the customer
directly: "Listen, we're
about to drop off that
Titanic video you ordered
and we're wondering if you
wanted a pizza."

Yes, I think we're on to
something here. Of course, as
with all things tech-related,
your best bet to blaze a new
trail lies with the porn
industry. "Hi, we're about to
drop off that Seymore Butts
video you ordered and we're
wondering if you needed any
Kleenex."

<a-salahm@microsoft.com>

This is a really, really good
idea - in retrospect, it's
sort of amazing Avon has
never thought to
use members of its
sales team to deliver
packages while they're out
there knocking on doors.

But if the kind of
just-in-time e-commerce
delivery Wired wrote about
recently (trucks constantly
circling neighborhoods, ready
to deliver online-initiated
orders in less than an hour)
comes to pass, I'm sure
someone will implement the
scheme you describe.

Best,

Huck

Hi Huck:

I actually read your analysis
of business-as-usual on the
Net. OK, I give. Is porn no
longer making money on the
Net? Am I too late to
saturate the market? If so,
how will I sponser my race
car?

Since this is my first visit
to your site, what are you
about?

Thanx for taking the time to
respond.

<murdoggy@earthlink.net>

As I understand it, there are
people making money off Web
porn; however, like most
sectors of the e-commerce
economy, only a few are
making a significant amount
from it. In any case, I was
writing more from a
speculator's perspective -
i.e., not what I can create
myself, but what I can invest
in while the stock prices are
still reasonable and poised
to go up, up, up. That, of
course, has nothing to do
with whether or not sites are
actually making money.

Re: What Suck's about,
well, as you probably
discovered with some measure
of disappointment, it's not
about porn. It's about a lot
of different crap, really.
The best thing to do is just
keep coming back every day
for a while. You'll catch on
soon enough.

Best,

Huck

Oh, St. Huck!

Not only does distribumania
and the "death of distance"
(Frances Cairncross, The
Economist) rely on
ecologically irresponsible
prices for transportation and
tons of packaging waste, it
also entails costs and damage
through the very gateway
itself: the PC. The
production of a PC consumes
19 tons of resources and
energy, which equals
two-thirds of the material
needed to produce one
automobile - without the
electronics (survey conducted
by Oekom, 1997). Of course,
cars have a lot less user
value, as they can't deliver
Filler.

<dh_@gmx.net>

Any chance you can give a
more detailed citing on that
survey? I'm interested in
learning more, but I don't
know what Oekom, 1997 is.

Also, while cars would
probably be too small, I
think Filler would look great
on the side of a bus.

Huck

Huck,

From the start, I've been
extremely skeptical of the
so-called phenomenon of
e-commerce. Say goodbye to
human interaction. But I
guess the crazies who hoard
shitty copies of Monica's
Story and Beanie Babies on
the Web are best kept away
from society.

I work in the CPG industry
(consumer packaged goods, to
the layman), and
unfortunately a hot trend is
to create virtual
supermarkets where you get to
shop for your groceries
online and then have them
delivered to your lazy ass
sitting at home. If you think
fast-food drive throughs wreak
havoc on orders, just wait
till this wonderful idea
becomes reality.

Things like FREEPC.com and
selling your Hollywood
Portfolio on eBay are beyond
my level of rational
comprehension. As are the
stock prices and market caps
of these "companies."

More and more, I feel like
I'm living in a big monopoly
game. I've got about US$400K
in a Monopoly Money
portfolio. What do you think
that'll fetch on eBay? I
could possibly throw in my
hotel on St. Charles Place.

Frank Yodermier
<Tony.Bonanno@infores.com>

I was surprised at the
Hollywood Portfolio sales,
because I don't quite
understand what the value of
them is other than prestige
amongst other HSX
enthusiasts. In the end, that
market seems pretty small. A
less recent but more
interesting take on the
phenomenon actually mirrors
your St. Charles Place
hypothetical. I'm not sure
how it panned out, but in the
early days of the online
game site Heat.net,
site creators were
talking about how they were
going to create some sort of
market where people could
sell - for real money - the
various tools, weapons, and
other gaming pieces players
had "grown" on the site.
This, of course, makes more
sense than the HSX portfolios
because there's an actual
utility to the product -
better tools give you
advantages over opponents and
help you achieve better
results in the game. Don't
know if an actual market has
developed, however.

Best,

Huck

Dear Sainted One:

The Net is a pretty good
place to buy books, and
impulse purchases of books is
a good thing. In my case, it
actually encourages the
purchase of fairly serious
books: I read articles, think
I'd like to know more, but
have never really gotten
around to tracking down the
original source and don't
know if even a good bookstore
would carry it. Now I just
click. The resulting pile
provides a good opportunity
for the cat to knock things
down. But they do get read.
Mostly. Often on airplanes.
But they do eventually get
read.

It's also an unbelievably
good way to buy rare,
scholarly, used, and
out-of-print books. Put a
request into several
different search engines,
typically run by the
e-bookstores, and back comes
a list of people offering the
book, at a range of prices
and conditions. For an
academic, it's heaven.

But it's not a very
profitable business. How much
can the middleman make in the
sale of used trees? Not much.
Check the stock prices for
Federal Express (FDX) and its
revenue stream; compare to
similar delivery services -
out in the real world, nobody
thinks enough stuff is really
going to be delivered to
matter all that much. The
stock is at an all-time high,
but it's up maybe 60 percent
from when all this e-commerce
stuff started. This is God's
(or the market's; choose your
faith) way of telling you
what is a bubble and what
isn't.

Yes, there really is money to
be made here. And, in fact,
when we get the bugs worked
out and start delivering
music and books as bits and
not trees, there will still
be money to be made. And
probably the bulk of the
money will be made by a few
large, sophisticated, and
highly trusted venues. Which
is why Amazon does need to
keep its name in front of us,
and why it so stupidly
sacrificed the public's faith
for a few co-op dollars. But
whatever. It's not going to
support the current pricing.
Again, just look at the
pricing now happening in the
used-book market; true
universal frictionless
competition drives prices
down.

So relax. You're not missing
any important boats. When it
all comes tumbling down, a
serious smartass can always
make a living.

PS You may want to take
this forecast with a grain of
salt. I am, after all, the
guy who correctly diagnosed
that Dell had a winning formula
back in 1983 and was talked
out of buying the stock by
someone who - I sincerely
hope - is roasting merrily
in purgatory right now.

Alan Kornheiser
<askornheiser@prodigy.net>

I agree that the Web
revolutionizes book
purchasing, of both new and
used titles, and I use it
regularly for such purposes.
But while this piece, like
most everything I write, was
mostly written "for
entertainment purposes only,"
I do think books are perhaps
not the best commodity on
which to judge the overall
efficacy of e-commerce.

And even though Amazon's
future may be bright, I think
its stock is priced too high
for me to make much of a
killing off it; I'd probably
be able to afford 50 shares
or so. Thus, I'm looking for
the Next Big Thing, before it
gets too big. If I find it,
I'll be sure to pass it along
to you.

Best,

Huck

St. Huck,

Here's an observation along
the same lines of your recent
article. The credit card
population, comprised of
those who obviously already
have a spending problem, is
the target of an advertising
campaign via - of all
things - their credit card
bill. Hell, we've already
spent money, why not spend
more? It's sick.

I loved the article. Keep up
the good work!

Jennifer Monk
<jennifer.monk@worldspan.com>

Back in 1996, I tried to
convince the Web development
company I was then working
for that we should pitch Visa
on creating a personalizable
portal site - the ads and
content people got would be
based on their purchases. As
usual, no one listened to me.

Bitter and broke,

Huck

I was reading your Follow the
Money column and it reminded
me of the other night when I
was trying to explain one of
the reasons Paul Verhoeven's
Starship Troopers sucked so
bad. (This in addition to the
acting, the directing, the
screenwriting, the unbridled
joy in Fascism, and the
horrific thought that someone
gave the director of
Showgirls more money.) The
news broadcasts in ST are
obviously supposed to be
similar to the comic ones in
RoboCop (also directed by
Verhoeven), but since we've
all given up thinking the
media is honest, accurate, or
driven by anything other than
greed, it just doesn't seem
sarcastic any more. We all
assume the media is heavily
censored and biased. When we
see someone trying to parody
it, we roll our eyes and say,
"Yeah, that's how they
getcha," and go back to Nick
at Nite. Mind you, I do spend
my free time reading Suck and
not protesting or changing
the world or some shit, so
maybe you shouldn't listen to
me.

Yer loyal pal,

Morgan
<lumpenprole@yahoo.com>

What was that you said? I
kind of tuned out after the
Showgirls slight.

Huck

You know, the whole Amazon
cross-marketing idea you have
there is a pretty damn good
one, and if I were you, I'd
try selling Amazon on it before
someone else does. Capitalism
may be wasteful and annoying,
but why not actually be rich
instead of whining about all
the people who are?

All you need is a good
contact in the Amazon
marketing department,
preferably a senior VP or
whatnot and a couple of
minutes to talk it over. I'd
say make him sign a
confidentiality agreement
that states if Amazon does it,
it owes you money, but since
you've already "leaked" it on
Suck, you probably shot that
out the window.



Good luck making your money
for nothing!

<andrewh@dgpr.com>

"Leaked"? Andrew, I've been
pissing away million-dollar
ideas on Suck for over three
years now, all because I'm
too lazy to write a business
plan. But I still cherish the
notion that one day Bill
Gross will rescue me from all
this.

Turning whine into fodder,

Huck

It may not be that simple.
For years, I have been
wondering why people pay
money to companies to wear
their logo (Nike, Tommy
Hilfiger, Fubu, etc.). As an
entrepreneur, I announced
several years ago that I
would gladly wear the
T-shirts and other clothing
items of any company that
sent them to me free. Well,
no one has beaten a path to
my door. And, as for my plan
to get Coca-Cola to buy me a
car if I have it painted with
its corporate logo, nothing
doing either. I would gladly
drive a car with all kinds of
ads on it, if it were given
to me free. After all, I only
use it outdoors, guaranteeing
maximum exposure. I'm not
sure I have a real point, but
if you would like to
advertise yours, I'm sure we
could come to some kind of
agreement. This space
available for advertisements,

Mathieu Weill
<Matweill@aol.com>

If you promise to sing the
Suck jingle nonstop while
wearing your Suck T-shirt, we
might give you one free. No
guarantees, though; you've
got to have the right look
and the right voice.

Huck

Actually, Huck, I think most
of us who signed up for a
free PC are planning to
reformat the thing's disks in
direct violation of the
agreement and turn it into a
Web server for our shapely if
unlikely girlfriends'
softcore exhibitionism sites,
with a "we ripped off FREEPC"
banner and everything.

Given that possession is
nine-tenths of the law, I
say: Always take something
for nothing if you can screw
them out of their upside.

<just_majick@hotmail.com>

Do you think it's that easy
or are there ways they're
able to prevent, or at least
discourage, you from doing
that?

In any case, please send me
the URL when you get those
pix of your girlfriend up.

Huck