I don't understand how the SEC could investigate the value of aquisitions. How do you put a price tag on something as complex as a communications system? We arbitrarily assign values to things predicated on what might be derived from them at a future date.
Given what the SEC is attempting to do, they could deem the Mona Lisa or Gainsboro's Blue Boy as nothing more than oil paintings. On the other hand, they could realize the monetary potential of each and assign a value. It is agreed that both the aforementioned paintings are virtually priceless.
There also exists the potential for mega-millions in the cellular telecommunications industry that could rival the value of both of those paintings.
My questions is simply this: How do you put a value on something that potentionally stands to earn billions of dollars? If the 'earning potential' is there, it would seem as if ANY price placed on it would be, at best, an understatement.
At least that is the way I see it!
No man should be considered totally useless....because he can always serve as a bad example.
