Comments on: Debunking the Business.com Myth: It wasn’t 7.5 Million http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/10/debunking_the_businesscom_myth_it_wasnt_75_million/ Nerds are for Dorks Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:14:48 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Adedeji Olowe http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/10/debunking_the_businesscom_myth_it_wasnt_75_million/comment-page-1/#comment-31181 Adedeji Olowe Wed, 11 Oct 2006 18:14:04 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=3525#comment-31181 this is the dumbest attempt I have ever seen at disputing a myth. If the domain was sold for $7.5M in stock, then that was the price. However, if the value of the instrument of exchange falls, that is another story entirely. this is the dumbest attempt I have ever seen at disputing a myth. If the domain was sold for $7.5M in stock, then that was the price. However, if the value of the instrument of exchange falls, that is another story entirely.

]]> By: Anony Moose http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/10/debunking_the_businesscom_myth_it_wasnt_75_million/comment-page-1/#comment-31180 Anony Moose Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:37:06 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=3525#comment-31180 Beating a dead horse... The deal was for $7.5 million worth of stock. The fact that the stock was eventually sold for $2 million is irrelevant to the original purchase price. Beating a dead horse…

The deal was for $7.5 million worth of stock. The fact that the stock was eventually sold for $2 million is irrelevant to the original purchase price.

]]> By: Jacob Williams http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/10/debunking_the_businesscom_myth_it_wasnt_75_million/comment-page-1/#comment-31179 Jacob Williams Wed, 11 Oct 2006 16:26:43 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=3525#comment-31179 Yep.. no myth busted. A deal worth 7.5 million dollars was made. They might have been required to hold the stock for a period under the contract. I wonder which figures were used for tax purposes. Yep.. no myth busted. A deal worth 7.5 million dollars was made. They might have been required to hold the stock for a period under the contract. I wonder which figures were used for tax purposes.

]]> By: Jan http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/10/debunking_the_businesscom_myth_it_wasnt_75_million/comment-page-1/#comment-31178 Jan Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:44:32 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=3525#comment-31178 what josh said...... what josh said……

]]> By: Josh http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/10/debunking_the_businesscom_myth_it_wasnt_75_million/comment-page-1/#comment-31177 Josh Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:36:34 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=3525#comment-31177 This is stupid: the price of the domain was $7.5M in stock. That the stock declined four years later to $2M is irrelevant. If the stock had increased to $15M by 2004, would you say that he had sold it in 2000 for $15M? Of course not. This is stupid: the price of the domain was $7.5M in stock. That the stock declined four years later to $2M is irrelevant. If the stock had increased to $15M by 2004, would you say that he had sold it in 2000 for $15M? Of course not.

]]> By: ozz http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/10/debunking_the_businesscom_myth_it_wasnt_75_million/comment-page-1/#comment-31176 ozz Wed, 11 Oct 2006 13:44:13 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=3525#comment-31176 heh @ 100M morons, how much did u buy this forevergeek.com for? hell! 2 million is still bloody impressive for a domain name i 'd say, like Marco said heh @ 100M morons, how much did u buy this forevergeek.com for?
hell! 2 million is still bloody impressive for a domain name i ‘d say, like Marco said

]]> By: Rowan Lewis http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/10/debunking_the_businesscom_myth_it_wasnt_75_million/comment-page-1/#comment-31175 Rowan Lewis Wed, 11 Oct 2006 11:52:34 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=3525#comment-31175 No! I'm not going to stop using the 100,000,000 number! Its great, show exactly the information needed to make out lives easier: MySpace has 100,000,000 morons. No! I’m not going to stop using the 100,000,000 number! Its great, show exactly the information needed to make out lives easier: MySpace has 100,000,000 morons.

]]> By: Marco (Griffith) Jardim http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/10/debunking_the_businesscom_myth_it_wasnt_75_million/comment-page-1/#comment-31174 Marco (Griffith) Jardim Wed, 11 Oct 2006 10:47:30 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=3525#comment-31174 Even though it is much smaller than the value that was spread. 2 million dollars is still bloody impressive for a simple domain name. Even though it is much smaller than the value that was spread. 2 million dollars is still bloody impressive for a simple domain name.

]]>