Perhaps it's not beside the point at all. P/E normalizes the price based on one frame of mind, which I suppose is whether you can make money off it. Making money implies a time window and some sort of zero sum bucket of money (where P goes out and E comes in). But a more objective (perspective invariant) normalizer might send an entirely different message, particularly one that includes the extent the company is leveraged.
Regardless, from the little I know about it (2 friends who work there and a slew of interviews a decade ago), they have/had very little tolerance for constituents setting their own agenda. My interactions with Google were drastically different. They seemed willing to entertain literally _any_ idea (the overwhelming majority of which are selected against immediately, of course). I chalked this up to their sources of money, which is a type/kind of liquidity. If you have more ways of making money (selling products to rich hipsters vs. advertising to anyone), you'll be more willing to let the constituents try out their own pet project, build their own sub-org. On 03/15/2017 06:05 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote: > It's beside the point, but Apple has a low stock price. PE < 17. -- ☣ glen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
