RE:RE:RE:RE:https://www.iam-media.com/in-house-operations/blackberry-patframloeg wrote: Just seems like an extremely low multiple for asset(s) that generate or were generating $250m per yr and possibly would have/should have increased with the FB win in court . Why sell them if you could generate the same amount in 1.5-2yrs. Doesn't make sense but again there are many details missing to analyse properly.
It's an average. Point is that G&M doesn't know more than anyone else, at that time anyways. It was just quick figuring on their part with nothing else to go on. Same boat we're in. If anything the $450m should be a minimum but if there were other bidders as has been mentioned then it should be higher in the world of supply and demand. How high? Only a select people would know and they ain't telling.