Why on earth would Yahoo’s stock price 20 months ago be relevant to its value today? The day before the MS offer, when presumably the stock reflected the most up-to-date information, MS’s offer was a 62% (if I remember correctly) premium. Nothing to write home about?

You don’t think that the threat of regulatory action, the deal not being consummated, value-reducing action by Google, or any number of other things could explain the bid prices over the last three months? You think it can only be that the deal wasn’t really worth it? On what basis?

Why does Yahoo’s price drop mean nothing of substance? If that’s true, why did it happen? And, I presume, you are borrowing as much money as you can to buy Yahoo stock while it is artificially depressed, right?–knowing what you know and the rest of the market doesn’t.

Can you tell me what Microsoft data, industry knowledge or other information leads you to the conclusion that there was no “really solid reason” for the deal? I do actually have all of the above, and I disagree. Of course, I think we’ll get along fine without Yahoo!, as well: It’s a market, after all–no reason to think Microsoft was somehow getting all of the available rents (it did offer $45 billion dollars in return for Yahoo!, you’ll recall). But that hardly means the deal was a bad idea–I’d love to know why you think that.

Yes, you’re the only one. Congrats.