A number reflects a quantitative measure of a quality. Now if...

A number reflects a quantitative measure of a quality.

Now if the quality is imaginary the number will uncouple from the quality.

It becomes “just a number”. Free floating in our consciousness.

So I think GD has got this pretty spot on (imo).

The statement “It is just a number” can only be understood from the perspective of the true essence of the quality being measured.

GD is in best position to do this.

A more practical example.

The BY OBJ revenue number estimate for FY 15/16.

The BY number is based on complicated financial modelling of imaginary bioclocks and a GD special made up word “licence”.

“$12.7m” therefore becomes “just a number”.

We now know actual revenues are about 1.5% of imaginary revenues.

Do BY feel like gooses? Not at all. It is just a number (and everyone knew this all along).

The share price remains at 78% of the starting value of 10c due to what we can call the “tinker bell effect”. Which is precisely why we have speculative markets in the first place.