ok well this thread would have been pointless if i didnt interfere it would have just been about people bashing tamils.
at least i brought on a new perspective although limited in defense i must admit.
May-12-2009 02:59
DigiNut
You kids get off my lawn!
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Toronto, Self-proclaimed Centre of the Universe
quote:
Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit
i dunno but 1.5 billion dollar losses relative to 107 billion dollars in revenue is peanuts
That's $1.5 billion net losses, Einstein.
quote:
Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit
they never issue new shares thats why, buffet doesnt want people buying in. They don't require more equity thats why their market capital is low.
Do you understand that corporations don't actually control the market cap... that it's just the number of shares outstanding times the share price? In other words, it's the most accurate measurement available of the market value of a company.
Issuing more shares would not give Buffet more equity, even if he did require it... ugh, this discussion is getting more inane with each post!
___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here
May-12-2009 03:00
Nrg2Nfinit
ItaloDiscoAddict
Registered: Sep 2001
Location: Ottawa
quote:
Originally posted by MarkT
I'm quite aware.
bringing up share price is a poor argument for evaluating a company's financial health.
ever think that they just don't want volume trading of their stock?
yes i mentioned this below
May-12-2009 03:00
DigiNut
You kids get off my lawn!
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Toronto, Self-proclaimed Centre of the Universe
quote:
Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit
if i didnt interfere it would have just been about people bashing tamils.
How many times do we need to tell you that this is about the LTTE, and not Tamils? I mean here you are telling me I'm not keeping it civil, but you've been beaten over the head with this point three or four times now and you still don't get it. What are we supposed to think?
___________________
My party schedule:
2009-02-21 - DJ Attention @ I'm So Popular
2009-06-18 - DJ Annoying @ People Need To Know Where I'll Be
2012-11-32 - DJ Insufferable ɸ Or At Least the Stalkers I Complain About
2048-06-66 - Spastic & Whocares ¶ Although I'm Actually Flattered
9999-45-81 - Tweaker Gimp ☼ I Probably Won't Even Go To This But I Have To Make Sure I Fill Up All The Available Space Here
May-12-2009 03:01
VDub
Scoundrel
Registered: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
quote:
Originally posted by El K Dee
Not like I care or it matters...
It was just my assumption...
___________________
quote:
Originally posted by chinamon
chinamon is INCH MOAN.
LOL so fitting.
May-12-2009 03:02
LKD
Omni-peasant
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Its June 18th, 2005, I'm at the Skybar
quote:
Originally posted by VDub
Not like I care or it matters...
Originally posted by DigiNut
That's $1.5 billion net losses, Einstein.
Do you understand that corporations don't actually control the market cap... that it's just the number of shares outstanding times the share price? In other words, it's the most accurate measurement available of the market value of a company.
obviously, but if they only issue limited shares the market cap will be lower !
1 billion shares at 50 dollars each or 1000 shares at 90,000 each.
ill let you do the math on this one pythagarous
quote:
Issuing more shares would not give Buffet more equity, even if he did require it... ugh, this discussion is getting more inane with each post!
why not?
you issue more shares you have to declare it on the balance sheet. thus the shareholders equity is increased no?
