The $100 contained inside the box wouldn’t be the box’s “worth”, it would be part of the box’s worth. It would be $100 PLUS whatever somebody is willing to pay for the box itself.

The $100 inside the cardboard box is Twitter’s physical assets. But the current physical assets owned by Twitter are only part of the equation, there is still an inherent worth in owning the company itself, and possible income in the future.

That doesn’t make the box’s worth $100 or $0, it makes the box’s worth “At least $100”.

But how do you define the value of a $100 bill? Is it worth one hotdog, 100 hotdogs or as many hotdogs as someone is willing to trade for it?

Not if somebody actually buys the box of dirt for $1 million. If the price sticker of $1 million doesn’t inherently assign it its value, then neither does the $20 price sticker on the meal.

You could say what makes the meal worth $20 is the fact that somebody is willing to actually pay the $20, but then the box of dirt also has somebody willing to pay $1 million dollars for it.

So if “worth” isn’t equal to the price tag, or what people are willing to pay for it, then what are you basing the worth on?

That doesn't make much sense.

Suppose I have a trinket that everyone knows you are willing to pay $100 for.

If I offer it to someone else, they should be willing to pay me something pretty close to $100. Because if I sell it to them for $99, then they can sell it to you for $100.

And in fact as soon as Elon announced he wanted to buy Twitter, the stock price shot up. Other people wanted to buy it for nearly the same price, in order to sell it to Elon.

All the possible sale prices for an asset would be infinite, how do you average infinity?