Ben. I like the sound of that, but a couple of points. You may be understanding the value. Only because you wouldn't use the straight industry multiple. That typically applies to mature companies. It does provide a nice baseline but Growth companies tend to use a different factor. Then you apply the fact that there is no debt or they are absorbing no historical costs. And the reason you use a growth p/e is because you need to factor in the economics of share supply and demand as a factor to the gradient. It levels off after a couple of earning periods... or at least that is how I model it

You know what I would LOVE to see is an updated pro forma. That one for 2009 must be a little off by now. Lol. Gas prices lower, operation costs different, revenue model changed. All in our favor and to think that PF had this company with a first year profit of 18million.