These days I am thinking a lot about the stock markets 
and I started to question the “conventional explanation” on many things. First I started to question that a stock market is a capital market, second what about market capitalization; they say it is the worth of a company on the market (valuated by the public). Well I am not 100% sure so I may get it wrong on this, but I started to believe that the stock market actually don’t have any information about the market price of a corporation. First people sell and buy shares and shares are nothing more than a right to a profit from a particular corporation. So if profit is excepted then people are willing to pay more for that right so share prices will rise, if the likelihood of profit is small or there is actually a likelihood of loss, then the price of a share will drop.
It is completely against the marginal theory of value to multiply the number of all shares with a price of one share.
So what do you think about this? It is worth to mention that share prices are dependable on number of the shares offered to sell, number of the sellers (because small number of sellers with larger number of shares will affect the price differently then large number of sellers with small number of shares per capita), number of buyers and number of shares requested to buy. Of course ultimately the decision of those sellers and buyers are affected by profit or loss estimation, long term, short term or medium term strategy, and expectations on future share prices.
So where the hell is here anything about the market price of a corporation when nobody sells or buys a corporation on a stock market, they sell or buy shares. So if I am right about this, then market capitalization is a myth, a buzzword? Something like the new one “toxic debt” wow that’s a good one, the media is full of that word today. I am just a very entry level amateur in linguistic but I believe “toxic debt” is a nonsense combination just as “market capitalization” is.