http://mathewingram.disqus.com/enSun, 06 Aug 2006 09:02:59 -0000http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/04/60-million-can-you-digg-that/#comment-1294517If the BW article can accomplish anything, I hope it can open discussion as to how web companies are valued once and for all. Personally, I don't think being a web company changes the fact that revenues and profits still come before eyeballs/page views, etc.<br><br>I like using Digg and will be launching a similar site for the small-cap industry in September - but I believe we can all agree on the fact that it isn't worth anywhere near $200M if it can't turn a profit, nor present a viable plan for doing so in the near future.<br><br>If not $200M, then what is the number? Would love to see discussion on how we get to a more realistic number for Digg and all web properties. It would provide a basis for better discussions in the future.<br><br>Best,<br>GeorgeGeorge TsiolisSun, 06 Aug 2006 09:02:59 -0000http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/04/60-million-can-you-digg-that/#comment-1294514That was a pretty good one alright, George. You must have read as many of those e-mail stock pitches as I have :-)Mathew IngramSat, 05 Aug 2006 18:54:15 -0000http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2006/08/04/60-million-can-you-digg-that/#comment-1294511Mat, have a look at my post on <a href="http://paul.kedrosky.com/archives/2006/08/04/you_cant_spend.html" rel="nofollow">Kedrosky</a> that Jason replied to as "priceless"<br><br><br>Best,<br>GeorgeGeorge TsiolisSat, 05 Aug 2006 16:54:53 -0000