Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Stock Farmer who wrote (43693)	6/20/2001 5:29:47 PM
From: EnricoPalazzo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

UF, no no no... The TOTAL price the market is paying for ALL earnings is the sum of market caps. The total earnings is the sum of profits minus losses. Period. That is the only definition of aggregate PE that stands an unbiased test of logic. John, this is just bizarre. Aside from the fact that I have no idea why it matters what the "total market" costs (Me, I buy stocks, not markets), you seem to be forgetting the rather important fact of limited liability. Companies that are losing money absolutely are not worth some positive multiple of their earnings--that would give them a negative net worth, whereas limited liability ensures that a company is worth at least zero. Let's say that there's some "natural" PE (call it K) that is proper for all profitable companies. (Note: you seem to favor this view; I don't). Let's also say that there are 20 companies, 10 of which are making $2 per year, and 10 of which are losing $1 per year. The value of the 10 profitable firms, in aggregate, will be 20*K. The value of the ten unprofitable firms, in aggregate, will be at least 0. So the total value of the market is at least 20K, and the total profits are $10, so the P/E would be at least 2K, which is twice what the "natural" P/E should be of any firm, even though the market isn't overvalued (the unprofitable firms are all selling at 0!). I'm not making any statement as to whether or not the market is overvalued, but your assertion that your way of determining the valueof the market is "the only definition of aggregate PE that stands an unbiased test of logic" is odd.