I already had trouble wrapping my head around a $3 billion valuation from Zynga back in February. But the latest big number is just inconceivable. SecondShares, which is run by former private equity analysts to determine how much private equity companies would be worth if they went public, pegs the value of this social games company at $5 billion, approximately 75% above its current trading in illiquid secondary markets for private companies.

Several factors are used to determine a private company's valuation, including prices for employee stock options. Of course, private company valuation can be squishy under any circumstances, but fast-moving social media companies with penchant for secrecy make the process more difficult.

Somewhere, someone is buying into a $35 billion valuation for Facebook, if it were to go public. I'm struggling with this. Let's be realistic. Google, Inc. (GOOG) has a market cap of $137 billion. Apple, Inc. (AAPL) comes in at almost $210 billion. Does Facebook really have 25% of the "goodness" (that hard-to-pin-down quality that translates to value) of Google? 17% of the goodness that is Apple?

That's a hard one to swallow.

Defense firm Oshkosh Corporation (OSK) is wallowing in red ink, after Barron's published a downbeat article on the company over the weekend. After securing a $3 billion, five-year Army contract, the author warns that "Oshkosh may have won the battle but lost the war."

The main thrust of the article appears to be an argument against further price appreciation for OSK, which has "gained 448% over the past 12 months based on a booming military business," according to Barron's. Plus, Tom Harenburg, a longtime investor in the company, adds that profit margins on the Army deal "are meager."

Michael Moe knows how to make headlines: Talk about Twitter and predictably people will bite (I'm proof of that). He led the team at NeXt Up Research that calculated the value of the micro blogging service and arrived at $526 million to $674 million -- half what Twitter is generally believed to be worth.

Really?

The team estimates that Twitter will generate revenues of $114 million to $134 million in 2013. In 2014, Twitter is expected to post revenues of $126 million to $148 million. This is far more conservative than the valuation implied by the company's most recent round of venture capital investment, which puts the company's worth at more than $1 billion.

Bright and early on this fine Wednesday morning, JPMorgan downgraded Tyson Foods (TSN) to Neutral from Overweight. The brokerage gave four reasons for the downgrade: valuation, recent rises in corn and hog prices, a looming supply increase from competitor Sanderson Farms (SAFM), and uncertainty from Pilgrim's Pride.

All of these reasons are perfectly valid for the downgrade, but I want to focus on the valuation aspect of the downgrade. Technically, TSN faces overhead resistance in the $14 region, which is significant as the shares are currently ascending through the upper $12 region. The $14 level spurned the shares earlier this year, sending them into a steady decline back to support at the $11 region.

In the most recent edition of Barron's, fund manager Scott Black touted shares of Cal-Maine Foods (NASDAQ: CALM), the country's largest egg producer, as a stock worth buying. The company generates a return on equity of over 30%, and Black said that at just over 5x earnings, the stock is extraordinarily cheap. When the market revalues Cal-Maine at "just eight times [next year's estimated] earnings, you've got a $38.50 stock." Shares of CALM, which closed Friday at $22.90, were up to $24.86 by Wednesday morning.

I'm familiar with Cal-Maine, having been introduced to the company more than a year ago when it was the focus of a presentation at the Boston College Investment Club. Last summer, I spoke with the company's CFO, Tim Dawson, who gave me a much better understanding of the egg business. Though I came away convinced that Cal-Maine is in very capable hands, I believed then -- as I still do now -- that the stock is not a buy. Here's why.

It's been "shock and awe" for the financial system over the past few months. Even seemingly invincible companies like GE (NYSE: GE) and Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) have not been immune. As a result, there has been a tremendous deflation of equity values across the globe.

Unfortunately, the game has also changed for your business. It's much more difficult to get debt or equity financing, and it may even be impossible, at least for now. Customers are having difficulties paying invoices. And, as for finding new customers, this is particularly tough.

So, in light of everything, what is the value of your business? Well, keep in mind that, for the most part, the value of a business is dependent on its cash flow. So long as this remains strong and long-lasting, you are likely to weather the storm. If anything, you could be in a nice position to capitalize on the situation, such as by buying companies, hiring employees and in making new investments.

But this is the rare exception. In fact, even some of the growth darlings are having issues. For example, the data service, VCExperts.com, has recently launched a new offering – called the Valuation Ticker – that provides valuations of venture-backed companies. Essentially, the system compares private companies to public indexes, such as the NASDAQ and S&P 500. Here's a look at a sample, with valuations over the last ten months:

• Facebook: $12.4B (12/31/2007), $6.9B (10/31/08) -- 44%
• Slide: $545.2M (12/31/07), $376.6M (10/31/08) -- 31%
• Yardbarker: $18.1M (03/03/2008), $14.2M (10/31/08) -- 22%
• Going: $21.9M (5/07/08), $15.2M (10/31/08) -- 31%

Like just about all other private equity firms, Blackstone Group LP (NYSE: BX) reported a horrible Q3, with losses of $502.5 million, or $0.44 per share. However, the firm was fairly optimistic on the overall value of its sprawling portfolio of companies. That is, the writedown was only about 7%.

As a result, some investors were naturally skeptical – and the stock price of Blackstone continued to slide.

Well, this week, the CEO of Blackstone, Stephen Schwarzman, opined on the matter at a Merrill Lynch investor conference. Basically, he was mostly rosy and thinks there are good valuations in the marketplace. But, paradoxically, he said the Blackstone equity portfolio is in good shape.

And, in general, he has a point. If you take a look at the history of private equity, the best investment periods are in tough times (such as the early 1990s and 2001).

Shares of VMware Inc. (NYSE: VMW) are headed lower today following a downgrade from Merrill Lynch. The brokerage firm cut its rating on the equity from Buy to Neutral due to valuation concerns; VMW has added more than 60% since its October 21 earnings report. Merrill maintains a $31 price target on VMware, which represents a premium of just 1.4% to the stock's closing price on Tuesday.

It's shaping up to be a rough week for VMW. Yesterday, the tech stock sat out a broad-based rally in the equities market, and slumped to a daily loss of nearly 4% as word hit the Street that Intel (NASDAQ: INTC) chopped its VMware stake in half. Specifically, Intel unloaded about 4.75 million of the 9.5 million VMW shares it purchased in July 2007. According to a regulatory filing, half a million shares each were sold to Cisco Systems (NASDAQ: CSCO) and EMC Corp. (NYSE: EMC) -- the latter of which already owns a majority stake in VMW.

With VMW shedding nearly 6% out of the gate this morning, it seems likely that the shares will add on to their year-to-date slump of more than 64%. The stock continues to find resistance from its 10-week and 20-week moving averages, and a reversal of optimism among option traders could accelerate the equity's decline. During the past 10 days, investors on the International Securities Exchange have bought to open nearly two times more calls than puts on VMW.

Elizabeth Harrow is an analyst and financial writer in the research department at Schaeffer's Investment Research. She is featured in the video series Schaeffer's Daily Q&A on SchaeffersResearch.com.

Merrill Lynch analyst Guy Moszkowski had some harsh words this morning for Goldman Sachs Group (NYSE: GS). Rather than a fourth-quarter profit of $2.98 per share, the analyst now expects Goldman to lose 49 cents per share during the quarter. If his prediction comes to pass, it will mark the bank holding company's first-ever quarterly loss as a public company.

While Moszkowski razored his price target on GS from $159 to $100, he maintained his Neutral opinion on the stock. The new target represents a premium of 8.1% to the stock's closing price last Friday. The analyst cites the "stressed" equities market as the primary driver behind his dramatically reduced outlook on Goldman.

In a note to clients, Moszkowski explained that Morgan Stanley's (NYSE: MS) business mix should allow it to weather the choppy market conditions better than Goldman. He trimmed his fourth-quarter earnings forecast on Morgan as well -- dropping his estimate from 72 to 36 cents per share -- but considers the stock a Buy.

The analyst stated, "We still think GS remains in many ways at the forefront of the capital markets industry, but if it can't consistently produce a premium return on equity, it's not going to be able to continue to have the premium valuation multiple that it has enjoyed." As of last Friday's close, Goldman's forward price-to-earnings ratio of 7.63 dwarfed Morgan's ratio of 4.03.

In today's session, MS is up about 5%, compared to Goldman's gain of about 1.2%.

Elizabeth Harrow is an analyst and financial writer in the research department at Schaeffer's Investment Research. She is featured in the video series Schaeffer's Daily Q&A on SchaeffersResearch.com.

On October 3, the shares of Apple Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL) dropped below the $100 mark for the first time since May 2007. In fact, the stock dropped last Friday to a new 52-week low of $85, representing a 19-month nadir for the iPhone parent. Today, this price plunge served as the catalyst for a valuation-based upgrade from Bernstein.

In a note to clients, Bernstein boosted its rating on AAPL from Market Perform to Outperform, and said that its "longer-term growth story remains intact." Analyst A.M. Sacconaghi added, "Investors appear to be valuing Apple on an earnings multiple, rather than on cash flow, which fundamentally undervalues the company given the huge deferred revenue growth associated with the iPhone."

Specifically, the brokerage firm estimates that the iPhone itself could add between $2.25 and $3.40 per share to cash flow above earnings in fiscal 2009.

However, following the stock's recent free-fall down the charts, Bernstein was forced to trim its price target on AAPL from $175 to $135. Credit Suisse followed suit, slashing its price target on the equity from $200 to $135. Despite today's gain of about 7% amid a massive rally in U.S. stocks, Apple shares could be vulnerable to more price-target cuts during the near term. Thomson Financial pegs the average 12-month price target at $176.33, a lofty premium of 82% to Friday's close at $96.80.

Elizabeth Harrow is an analyst and financial writer in the research department at Schaeffer's Investment Research. She is featured in the video series Schaeffer's Daily Q&A on SchaeffersResearch.com.

Let's say you want to sell or buy a business. Or, suppose you want to gift a piece of your business to your family. Maybe you want to raise capital?

Well, you'll need to determine the value of your business.

So, to get some perspective on the topic, I spoke to Scott Gabehart. He has valued over 700 businesses since 1991 and has written several books on the topic, such as The Business Valuation Book (with CD-ROM).

According to him, there are several approaches to getting a valuation:

Do-It-Yourself: Yes, the valuation process can be extremely complex. But Gabehart has an easy system that will provide a rough estimate.

First, you will need to calculate your company's adjusted cash flow (ACF). This is:

Net income
+ Your salary
+ Your perks (personal travel, discretionary expenses)
+ Depreciation
+ Interest expense

After all, it's common for owners to use their business to pay for personal expenses. Thus, it's important to factor our certain items (for example, depreciation is a non-cash expense).

Large-company stock prices have tumbled 13% in three months. Small-company stocks have done worse. The ratio of share prices to company earnings ("P/E") is the lowest it has been in more than a decade. But is it low enough to make the broad market cheap?

That depends on how you measure. Over the past 135 years, stocks have carried an average P/E of 15.1, based on trailing 12-month earnings. (I'm using data provided on the websites of Yale economist Robert Schiller and Standard & Poor's.) As of the close of trading Thursday, the S&P 500 index, which more or less tracks the stock performance of America's 500 largest companies, had a P/E ratio of 16.6. Viewed like that, stocks look a smidgen pricier than average.

Remove special charges for things like bad loan write-downs from the past year's earnings, and the result is a more alluring P/E of 14.9. Whether that's a fairer number or not is a matter of opinion. But if we were able to apply the same tactic to 135 years of corporate accounting, we'd surely end up with a lower historical P/E, too. That suggests again that stocks are pricier than average, but not worrisomely so.

I had the chance to talk with four different British portfolio managers this past Friday, review the 2007 year and discuss the outlook for 2008. Funny, the four conversations ended up circling back to Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL). Two of the managers mentioned my article for BloggingStocks from November 24. I wrote that the this could be the last time to buy the shares under $175. The stock closed at a new 52-week closing high on Friday at $194.30, almost $20 higher than the November 24 price. Yet, with all this action and performance, recently and all year, the stock is still a buy.

My friends the Brits are very bullish on Apple, and are aware of the price targets out there by the various analysts, including mine at $225. These four managers, by the way, manage $16 billion in the U.S. markets collectively. One has done the "internal modeling," and has a $290-$300 price target by year end 2008, and another has a $375 price target by mid-year 2009. All managers have sworn to me that they drank nothing harder than English tea during our conversations!!

Friday's news that the Israeli generic drug maker Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (NASDAQ: TEVA), has received tentative approval from U.S. health regulators to market its generic version of GlaxoSmithKline Plc's (NYSE: GSK) Requip (Ropinirole HCl) tablets is just more proof that for investors, generics are the way to go. The tablets treat idiopathic Parkinson's disease and primary restless leg syndrome. The brand product had annual sales of approximately $455 million in the United States.

The bigger fundamental question has to do with the future of "big pharma"? Certainly companies like Merck and Co. (NYSE: MRK) and GlaxoSmithKline aren't going away anytime soon. The question is over the long run, with drug's continuously coming off patent, where is the growth going to come from? Generic makers like Teva (the world's largest generic firm) keep waiting for drugs to come off-patent, get approval to market a generic version, and immediately take significant market share away from the big pharma company. (Check out Zack Miller's analysis of this and other generic trends.) According to a report published by PriceWaterhouseCooper, by 2020 the pharmaceutical market is anticipated to more than double to US$1.3 trillion, but with weak pipelines, and soaring R&D costs, as well as higher legal costs, the big-pharma industry is at a crossroads.

Until we hear of a real long-term growth plan for big pharma, it seems like the best way to play the surging growth in he pharmaceutical market is to buy the generics.

Aaron Katsman is the lead Portfolio Manager and Managing Director of America Israel Investment Associates, LLC. and Senior Editor of IsraelNewsletter.com. Disclosure: Writer owns stock and is long TEVA. He has no position in any other stock mentioned as of 12/2/07.