That paying $1.6 billion for a business with essentially no revenue stream might lead to difficulties? It's not like we've ever seen anything like that before - especially not involving the internet.
Update: Okay, "essentially no" is probably too strong a descriptor. "Tenuous and difficult to expand" is more like it. Plus, no matter how bad YouTube's revenue model is, at least it's not as bad as this.
People close to the company's finances say most of the retailer's earnings came in the form of one-time so-called "tenant improvement" payments from landlords of $2 million to $7 million per store.