I don't understand why anyone would value their site based on revenue. It's the profit that matters. I read in various places that 12-24 monthly revenue is the rule. Fine. Yet some sites require very little manual labor, marketing and hosting costs and therefore their profit is close to the revenue, say 90% of the revenue, while others may be spending a load on marekting and buying traffic so their profit is around 50% of the revenue. Why do we bother making a pricing rule based revenue when clearly the profit is what matters? Why not just value it this way: - stable profit for the last half a year or year and you hit the 24 times profit mark - less stable profit with uncertain future or new site just showing signs of stable traffic for the last few months and we can come down to 12 month of profit mark. Why bother with revenue when there is so many unknowns under this label? Why not just look at a bottom line?