No book of products, so we used numbers of the books. That doesn't make any sense in semantics: volume versus identity. That is, investigate the historic numbers by the book, so that volume has identity. Instead of "under some number" we have "within such volume" for reference. Numbers stop, volume flows, interpretation lead to disaster.
Two is more than one, like realization of gain. There is the machine on the machine; respectively, real and virtual, as how one is said before the other. That is like predication, so we know any speculation of the immediate imaginary numbers.
"Come together. Right now. Over me."
...it's not any game, anymore. It looked like Big Banks did not want real microeconomies on the west side, yet there are so many mobiles. It is harder to move offices that are big. It is also harder for those Manhattan offices to thumbnail loans on the west side, especially under deficit spenditures. I could have easily said two billion was there and over here was two billion, like there was some lateral connection, follow the money, and point out the blamed. Football? Hot potato? One News channel said its up, the other said its down.
Either we have big banks with small content or we now have Big Content providers. SacBee decided its content, online, is worth new subscription fees. I had in mind, as I wrote this above, that archaic printer of market numbers on newspaper material. How renewable was the material? Every single day, that was the disaster.
Maybe someone thought ahead about the material for yearbooks, and the many small businesses that produced them.