GBATHAT, please man WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???????
You think I'm confusing something here. LOL, that sure is funny. Be sure I DO KNOW what I'm talking about. Just for you once again because it seems you didn't understand me.
Somebody here spoke about a "rule of thumb" of a valuation of 10 times the revenues. So far ok? All I did was to point out that this is pure dreamland thinking. Ok? Nothing more. Why are you getting so hectic about it? There are almost NO companies out there which has a price/sales ratio of 10 ok?
We didn't talk about PE's, we didn't talk about earnings ratios, we didn't talk about anything YOU mentioned in YOUR post. You completely missed my point. Is my english that bad or why is it that some here just don't understand the most simple things?
I said not even AAPL has a revenue/market cap ratio of 10. You come back to me and tell me AAPL has a PE of 50. Funny isn't it? I was never saying one word about the PE of AAPL, I was talking about the "price/sales" ratio which is the same as revenue/market cap ok? Which part don't you understand in this paragraph?
I guess it's better to NOT explain to me the different valuation models and how one get's a certain one as I know this stuff quiet a bit ok? Trust me, I had to do with this stuff an awful lot in the past.
You ask me who is using sales/market cap anyway? LOL, very good question. Some people use it and it wasn't the first time that somebody brought that strange valuation "rule of thumb" up on this board. This time it was MTNCabin in his post #563 where he stated this:
Taking the math one step further: Using the rule of thumb of market cap equals 10 time revenues, a market cap of $70million equates to annual revenues of $7million.
So who was using it? And why do I bring this up anyway? Answer is this guy used it in his posting and all I did was to clear some misunderstandings which are common here from where ever they emerge. Who knows that. I don't think that was unjustified or anything else. Did you get that? I just responded to this posting.
So now I hope you got my point, read this posting carefully please and you will realize that everything I said was proper and I didn't confuse anything as you pointed out so "nicely".
Not here to stirr up the pot ok. All I wanted to do is pointing out some serious misunderstandings and that is all. I just hate it if you tell me that I do not know what I'm talking about (as you wanted to tell me) when in fact I do know this stuff.
AAPL price/sales is still under 7 and we shouldn't talk about any PE ratios before XXIS is even trading officially with SWARM. I think that is more real don't you think? First show me one cent of revenues, then show me one single cent on net income which will last long enough, and then let us start talking about the PE of AAPL in comparison ok......
Best to you and please read my postings more carefully before critisizing or posting back some wrong facts. The fact that I sometimes damper you enthusiasm with some reality facts doesn't mean that it's wrong even if you don't like it ok?
So please be double sure you got my point and understand what I was talking about before you respond to me again if ever. Thx a lot. Cheers.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
