The traditional response if you firmly believe a stock is undervalued by a factor of > 8.6 is to buy as much of it as your finances will bear, then sit on it. I

The traditional response if you firmly believe a stock is undervalued by a factor of > 8.6 is to buy as much of it as your finances will bear, then sit on it. It would be interesting to see whether the author does so. There's also the possibility that BuzzFeed et al. are proportionally overvalued, which seems like it's probably the case in some instances, but the argument you're making if "valuation >> revenue - costs" is that the right hand side of the equation is accelerating in a way that justifies the left hand side.