« Not for the Meek at Heart | Main | Historical P/E Ratio of the S&P 500: 1900-Present »

Comments

CT

Ah, I'm missing something here. Vistors in one month of 2007 compared to the overall value of a company hardly seems like a good comparision. This doesn't account for growth or about 100 other variables. I know you said "For Fun", but come on.

Paul Hickey

CT,

Thanks for commenting. As ridiculous as it sounds, back in the late nineties, 'value per eyeball' was actually a valuation metric for internet stocks that analysts used and often quoted with a straight face. In no way are we saying that a certain stock is overvalued or undervalued based on this metric. We were just having fun with some of the mistakes of the past.

TraderMark

Yeh great point! I mean if you annualize the eyeballs the value per eyeball is dirt cheap! Long eyeballs!

Gosh, are we destined to repeat ourselves this soon? Wasn't it just 7 years ago we went through this? We now have 10s (100s) of mini specialized social networks running amok, doctors, lawyers, car buffs, people whose kids start with the letter D or L... can't wait to see these all go public - then we can be right back to 99. Cripes.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Bespoke

Our View

Bespoke Premium

In The News

Premium Site

  • Morning Lineup
  • Short Interest
  • Upgrades/Downgrades
  • Sector Snapshot
  • Daily ETF Trends
  • Weekly Review
  • Economic Indicators
  • Trade of the Day
  • Bespoke Stock Scores
  • Daily Market Model
  • Daily Strategy
  • Daily Stock Odds
  • Market Studies