OK, one last time. We are talking about comparing the "worth" of a company not the "worth" of a share of stock. Nas indicated he thought one company was worth more than another company simply because the stock price of the first company was higher. That's what I responded to and tried to explain how that was incorrect. On the other hand, if you're talking about what a particular stock is worth, that's up to whatever any particular person feels like paying for that stock. When you talk about what a company is worth, and want to compare that to what a different company is worth, comparing share price is meaningless for the reasons I've previously stated. Market capitalization (share price x number of shares outstanding) is the accepted way the financial community values a company. Try to keep clear in your mind the difference between the worth of a company as a whole and the worth of a particular share of stock. They are two totally differently things. Comparing share price alone between different companies when they very likely have different amounts of shares outstanding is a meaningless comparison.