There is a difference, Eddie, between price and value.
There are myriad ways to determine what a company is "worth" - probably dozens.
But look at the thread title - "worth" is being put forth as total shares x share price. That's what I was referring to.
I'm specifically addressing those who look at a stock price and attempt to say whether that price is too high or too low - overpriced or underpriced as it were.
My overall philosophy contains a bit of a paradox: I believe in a free, efficient market everything is fairly priced by definition
. Extrapolating, one ends up with a "random walk" view, given that at any given moment a stock is exactly as likely to go up as it is to go down in price.
And yet, even if all available information on a company is known to the public - much more a reality today than a few decades ago, one may intuit that certain information that others are ignoring is, in fact, significant. And I think one can profit from intuitions and insights into where a company is and where it is going.
Think about the day it was announced that Steve Jobs was returning to Apple. Ideally, the public found out about that at the same time via press release. But some opined that it was too late for Apple to right a sinking ship. Others, myself included, were ready to buy on a vision of Jobs turning that ship around. And those in the latter camp profited bigly.
I think my point of view was shaped in the 1980's by reading "One Up On Wall Street" by Peter Lynch, which I highly recommend.