>>This is absurd. Your statement assumes that the company would not have had any additional product to fill the gap left by WCW over the last year.<<
They didn't have one in Q1 1997 when they only did $12 million. Or in 1996 when they only did $7. Great selling games don't grow on trees. I'll grant you they would have done more than $6 million without WCW, but it would likely be a lot closer to $6 million than to $48. To treat $48 million as an ongoing revenue stream is just burying your head in the sand and denying reality. It's gone, it's in the bank, forget about it.
P.S. Any portfolio that's short the internet sector has shown losses YTD, you clown. Every holding in the SL10 had >100% volatility in 1997, I think, so let's not get too excited about every 10% move. If you're that interested in my current holdings, check out the threads I've started on SI this month, including IMKE and KLB, both up over 100%, and then show me where YOUR picks were posted. For a nonimal fee of $426/year, you can subscribe to my newsletter. |
