ILLUMINA, INC.  NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) Goodwill Goodwill represents the excess of the Solexa purchase price over the sum of the amounts assigned to assets acquired less liabilities assumed.
The Company believes that the acquisition of Solexa will produce the following significant benefits: ?
Increased Market Presence and Opportunities.
The combination of the Company and Solexa should increase the combined Company’s market presence and opportunities for growth in revenue, earnings and stockholder return.
The Company believes that the Solexa technology is highly complementary to the Company’s own portfolio of products and services and will enhance the Company’s capabilities to service its existing customers, as well as accelerate the development of additional technologies, products and services.
The Company believes that integrating Solexa’s capabilities with the Company’s technologies will better position the Company to address the emerging biomarker research and development and in-vitro and molecular diagnostic markets.
The Company began to recognize revenue from products shipped as a result of this acquisition during the first quarter of 2007.  ?
Operating Efficiencies.
The combination of the Company and Solexa provides the opportunity for potential economies of scale and cost savings.
The Company believes that these primary factors support the amount of goodwill recognized as a result of the purchase price paid for Solexa, in relation to other acquired tangible and intangible assets, including in-process research and development.
The following unaudited pro forma information shows the results of the Company’s operations for the specified reporting periods as though the acquisition had occurred as of the beginning of that period (in thousands, except per share data):
## Table 0 ##
The pro forma results have been prepared for comparative purposes only and are not necessarily indicative of the actual results of operations had the acquisition taken place as of the beginning of the periods presented, or the results that may occur in the future.
The pro forma results exclude the $303.4 million non-cash acquired IPR&D charge recorded upon the closing of the acquisition during the first quarter of 2007.
Investment in Solexa On November 12, 2006, the Company entered into a definitive securities purchase agreement with Solexa in which the Company invested approximately $50 million in Solexa in exchange for 5,154,639 newly issued shares of Solexa common stock in conjunction with the merger of the two companies.
This investment was valued at $67.8 million as of December 31, 2006, which represented a market value of $13.15 per share of Solexa common stock.
This investment was eliminated as part of the Company’s purchase accounting upon the closing of the merger on January 26, 2007.
MetLife, Inc.  Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued) The following table presents the types of and certain other information about ABS held by the Company at:
## Table 1 ##
(1) Based on rating agency designations, without adjustment for the revised NAIC methodology which became effective December 31, 2009.
(2) Based on rating agency designations and equivalent ratings of the NAIC, with the exception of non-agency RMBS backed by sub-prime mortgage loans held by the Company’s domestic insurance subsidiaries.
Non-agency RMBS backed by sub-prime mortgage loans held by the Company’s domestic insurance subsidiaries at December 31, 2009 are included based on final ratings from the revised NAIC rating methodology which became effective December 31, 2009 (which may not correspond to rating agency designations).
The following tables present the Company’s holdings of ABS supported by sub-prime mortgage loans by rating agency designations and by vintage year at:
## Table 2 ##
The rating distribution of the Company’s ABS supported by sub-prime mortgage loans at December 31, 2009 using NAIC ratings are as follows: 69.1% NAIC 1, 4.2% NAIC 2, 12.2% NAIC 3, 6.2% NAIC 4, 8.3% NAIC 5 and 0% NAIC 6.
MetLife, Inc.  Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued)
## Table 3 ##
10.
Closed Block On April 7, 2000, (the “Demutualization Date”), MLIC converted from a mutual life insurance company to a stock life insurance company and became a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.
The conversion was pursuant to an order by the New York Superintendent of Insurance (the “Superintendent”) approving MLIC’s plan of reorganization, as amended (the “Plan”).
On the Demutualization Date, MLIC established a closed block for the benefit of holders of certain individual life insurance policies of MLIC.
Assets have been allocated to the closed block in an amount that has been determined to produce cash flows which, together with anticipated revenues from the policies included in the closed block, are reasonably expected to be sufficient to support obligations and liabilities relating to these policies, including, but not limited to, provisions for the payment of claims and certain expenses and taxes, and to provide for the continuation of policyholder dividend scales in effect for 1999, if the experience underlying such dividend scales continues, and for appropriate adjustments in such scales if the experience changes.
At least annually, the Company compares actual and projected experience against the experience assumed in the then-current dividend scales.
Dividend scales are adjusted periodically to give effect to changes in experience.
The closed block assets, the cash flows generated by the closed block assets and the anticipated revenues from the policies in the closed block will benefit only the holders of the policies in the closed block.
To the extent that, over time, cash flows from the assets allocated to the closed block and claims and other experience related to the closed block are, in the aggregate, more or less favorable than what was assumed when the closed block was established, total dividends paid to closed block policyholders in the future may be greater than or less than the total dividends that would have been paid to these policyholders if the policyholder dividend scales in effect for 1999 had been continued.
Any cash flows in excess of amounts assumed will be available for distribution over time to closed block policyholders and will not be available to stockholders.
If the closed block has insufficient funds to make guaranteed policy benefit payments, such payments will be made from assets outside of the closed block.
The closed block will continue in effect as long as any policy in the closed block remains inforce.
The expected life of the closed block is over 100 years.
The Company uses the same accounting principles to account for the participating policies included in the closed block as it used prior to the Demutualization Date.
However, the Company establishes a policyholder dividend obligation for earnings that will be paid to policyholders as additional dividends as described below.
The excess of closed block liabilities over closed block assets at the effective date of the demutualization (adjusted to eliminate the impact of related amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income) represents the estimated maximum future earnings from the closed block expected to result from operations attributed to the closed block after income taxes.
Earnings of the closed block are recognized in income over the period the policies and contracts in the closed block remain in-force.
Management believes that over time the actual cumulative earnings of the closed block will approximately equal the expected cumulative earnings due to the effect of dividend changes.
If, over the period the closed block remains in existence, the actual cumulative earnings of the closed block are greater than the expected cumulative earnings of the closed block, the Company will pay the excess of the actual cumulative earnings of the closed block over the expected cumulative earnings to closed block policyholders as additional policyholder dividends unless offset by future unfavorable experience of the closed block and, accordingly, will recognize only the expected cumulative earnings in income with the excess recorded as a policyholder dividend obligation.
If over such period, the actual cumulative earnings of the closed block are less than the expected cumulative earnings of the closed block, the Company will recognize only the actual earnings in income.
However, the Company may change policyholder dividend scales in the future, which would be intended to increase future actual earnings until the actual cumulative earnings equal the expected cumulative earnings.
Recent experience within the closed block, in particular mortality and investment yields, as well as realized and unrealized losses, have resulted in a policyholder dividend obligation of zero at both December 31, 2009 and 2008.
The policyholder dividend obligation of zero and the Company’s decision to revise the expected policyholder dividend scales, which are based upon statutory results, have resulted in a reduction to both actual and expected cumulative earnings of the closed block.
Amortization of the closed block DAC, which resides outside of the closed block, will be based upon actual cumulative earnings rather than expected cumulative earnings of the closed block until such time as the actual cumulative earnings of the closed block exceed the expected cumulative earnings, at which time the policyholder dividend obligation will be reestablished.
Actual cumulative earnings less than expected cumulative earnings will result in future adjustments to DAC and net income of the Company and increase sensitivity of the Company’s net income to movements in closed block results.
The table below contains the carrying value for guarantees included in future policy benefits at:

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td>Year Ended   December 30,   2007</td><td>Year Ended December 31, 2006</td></tr><tr><td>Revenue</td><td>$366,854</td><td>$187,103</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss)</td><td>$17,388</td><td>$-38,957</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss) per share, basic</td><td>$0.32</td><td>$-0.68</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss) per share, diluted</td><td>$0.29</td><td>$-0.68</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2009</td><td colspan="2"> 2008</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Estimated </td><td></td><td> Estimated </td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Fair </td><td>% of</td><td> Fair </td><td> % of </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Value</td><td>Total</td><td> Value</td><td> Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>By collateral type:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Credit card loans</td><td>$7,057</td><td>53.6%</td><td>$5,190</td><td>49.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Student loans</td><td>1,855</td><td>14.1</td><td>1,085</td><td>10.3</td></tr><tr><td>RMBS backed bysub-primemortgage loans</td><td>1,044</td><td>7.9</td><td>1,142</td><td>10.9</td></tr><tr><td>Automobile loans</td><td>963</td><td>7.3</td><td>1,051</td><td>10.0</td></tr><tr><td>Other loans</td><td>2,243</td><td>17.1</td><td>2,055</td><td>19.5</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$13,162</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$10,523</td><td>100.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Portion rated Aaa/AAA -1</td><td>$9,354</td><td>71.1%</td><td>$7,934</td><td>75.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Portion rated NAIC 1 -2</td><td>$11,573</td><td>87.9%</td><td>$9,393</td><td>89.3%</td></tr><tr><td>RMBS backed bysub-primemortgage loans — portion credit enhanced by financial guarantor insurers</td><td></td><td>37.6%</td><td></td><td>37.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Of the 37.6% and 37.2% credit enhanced, the financial guarantor insurers were rated as follows:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>By financial guarantor insurers rated Aa/AA</td><td></td><td>17.2%</td><td></td><td>18.8%</td></tr><tr><td>By financial guarantor insurers rated A</td><td></td><td>7.9%</td><td></td><td>—%</td></tr><tr><td>By financial guarantor insurers rated Baa/BBB</td><td></td><td>—%</td><td></td><td>37.3%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="12"> December 31, 2009</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Aaa</td><td colspan="2">Aa</td><td colspan="2">A</td><td colspan="2">Baa</td><td colspan="2">Below Investment Grade</td><td colspan="2"> Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td>Estimated</td><td> Cost or </td><td>Estimated</td><td> Cost or </td><td>Estimated</td><td> Cost or </td><td>Estimated</td><td> Cost or </td><td>Estimated</td><td> Cost or </td><td> Estimated </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Amortized </td><td>Fair</td><td> Amortized </td><td>Fair</td><td> Amortized </td><td>Fair</td><td> Amortized </td><td>Fair</td><td> Amortized </td><td>Fair</td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Cost</td><td>Value</td><td> Cost</td><td>Value</td><td> Cost</td><td>Value</td><td> Cost</td><td>Value</td><td> Cost</td><td>Value</td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="12"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2003 & Prior</td><td>$57</td><td>$48</td><td>$73</td><td>$58</td><td>$11</td><td>$8</td><td>$7</td><td>$6</td><td>$98</td><td>$56</td><td>$246</td><td>$176</td></tr><tr><td>2004</td><td>99</td><td>68</td><td>316</td><td>222</td><td>39</td><td>27</td><td>24</td><td>15</td><td>31</td><td>15</td><td>509</td><td>347</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td>64</td><td>45</td><td>226</td><td>144</td><td>40</td><td>26</td><td>24</td><td>18</td><td>209</td><td>139</td><td>563</td><td>372</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td>6</td><td>6</td><td>62</td><td>22</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>22</td><td>5</td><td>115</td><td>72</td><td>205</td><td>105</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>78</td><td>28</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>36</td><td>16</td><td>114</td><td>44</td></tr><tr><td>2008</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>2009</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$226</td><td>$167</td><td>$755</td><td>$474</td><td>$90</td><td>$61</td><td>$77</td><td>$44</td><td>$489</td><td>$298</td><td>$1,637</td><td>$1,044</td></tr><tr><td>Ratings Distribution</td><td></td><td>16.0%</td><td></td><td>45.4%</td><td></td><td>5.8%</td><td></td><td>4.2%</td><td></td><td>28.6%</td><td></td><td>100.0%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> December 31, 2008</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Total   Balance   Sheet</td><td> Assumed</td><td>Ceded</td><td> Total, Net of   Reinsurance</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td> Assets:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Premiums and other receivables</td><td>$16,973</td><td>$489</td><td>$11,067</td><td>$5,417</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred policy acquisition costs and value of business acquired</td><td>20,144</td><td>61</td><td>-79</td><td>20,162</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets</td><td>$37,117</td><td>$550</td><td>$10,988</td><td>$25,579</td></tr><tr><td> Liabilities:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Future policy benefits</td><td>$130,555</td><td>$1,761</td><td>$-41</td><td>$128,835</td></tr><tr><td>Policyholder account balances</td><td>142,921</td><td>1,247</td><td>-59</td><td>141,733</td></tr><tr><td>Other policyholder funds</td><td>7,762</td><td>235</td><td>350</td><td>7,177</td></tr><tr><td>Other liabilities</td><td>14,284</td><td>309</td><td>1,096</td><td>12,879</td></tr><tr><td>Total liabilities</td><td>$295,522</td><td>$3,552</td><td>$1,346</td><td>$290,624</td></tr></table>

Question: what was the percentage change in revenue on a pro forma basis between 2006 and 2007?
Answer: 0.96071
Reasoning program: subtract(366854,187103), divide(#0,187103)