-
i am a relative newbie compared to some of the Tirex diehards posting here.
-
when i joined this club, i remember that there were 100M shares, and i was working hard to get a million. that is a clear memory from very close to 2006. i wanted to own 1% of Tirex at the time . that would have meant a lot to me then .
-
then JT began issuing and issuing and issuing, and had i stayed at a million, with 2.5B out there now, i'd be a nobody.
-
so i don't know anything before 2006 or so.
-
getting back to valuations, i have been following them closely since the dot.com idiocy of the 90s when "eyeballs" mattered more than "revenue". how modern of the those "net people ! how quaint of the rest of us to value revenues more than eyeballs !
-
we saw valuations beyond senseless. then i watched GM during it's decline, when it still had revenues of $100B and was worth exactly $100B ( quite a time before it went bankrupt ) . then i watched GM for a while longer, and in it's final fade, it had revenues still quite close to $100B, but a value of only $10B or $20B. of course, by then it was underwater with tens of billions in debts, and even larger obligations to retirees, health care and the UAW.
-
so a company ( for the 20 years i've been watching ) can easily
be worth :
-
o . . one-tenth of its revenue if it's dying
o . the same as its revenue if it's stagnant
o . . and 10X its revenue if it's high-growth
-
of course you have to factor in sex-appeal, something that cannot be easily quantified, but when it's there it's there. perhaps that's facebook with its absurd valuation, i dunno .
-
fascinating stuff, great to watch . . .
-
snowiegeorgie
-
-
-
