in accordance with sfas no . 142 , goodwill and other intangible assets , the goodwill is not amortized , but will be subject to a periodic assessment for impairment by applying a fair-value-based test . none of this goodwill is expected to be deductible for tax purposes . the company performs its annual test for impairment of goodwill in may of each year . the company is required to perform a periodic assessment between annual tests in certain circumstances . the company has performed its annual test of goodwill as of may 1 , 2006 and has determined there was no impairment of goodwill during 2006 . the company allocated $ 15.8 million of the purchase price to in-process research and development projects . in-process research and development ( ipr&d ) represents the valuation of acquired , to-be- completed research projects . at the acquisition date , cyvera 2019s ongoing research and development initiatives were primarily involved with the development of its veracode technology and the beadxpress reader . these two projects were approximately 50% ( 50 % ) and 25% ( 25 % ) complete at the date of acquisition , respectively . as of december 31 , 2006 , these two projects were approximately 90% ( 90 % ) and 80% ( 80 % ) complete , respectively . the value assigned to purchased ipr&d was determined by estimating the costs to develop the acquired technology into commercially viable products , estimating the resulting net cash flows from the projects , and discounting the net cash flows to their present value . the revenue projections used to value the ipr&d were , in some cases , reduced based on the probability of developing a new technology , and considered the relevant market sizes and growth factors , expected trends in technology , and the nature and expected timing of new product introductions by the company and its competitors . the resulting net cash flows from such projects are based on the company 2019s estimates of cost of sales , operating expenses , and income taxes from such projects . the rates utilized to discount the net cash flows to their present value were based on estimated cost of capital calculations . due to the nature of the forecast and the risks associated with the projected growth and profitability of the developmental projects , discount rates of 30% ( 30 % ) were considered appropriate for the ipr&d . the company believes that these discount rates were commensurate with the projects 2019stage of development and the uncertainties in the economic estimates described above . if these projects are not successfully developed , the sales and profitability of the combined company may be adversely affected in future periods . the company believes that the foregoing assumptions used in the ipr&d analysis were reasonable at the time of the acquisition . no assurance can be given , however , that the underlying assumptions used to estimate expected project sales , development costs or profitability , or the events associated with such projects , will transpire as estimated . at the date of acquisition , the development of these projects had not yet reached technological feasibility , and the research and development in progress had no alternative future uses . accordingly , these costs were charged to expense in the second quarter of 2005 . the following unaudited pro forma information shows the results of the company 2019s operations for the years ended january 1 , 2006 and january 2 , 2005 as though the acquisition had occurred as of the beginning of the periods presented ( in thousands , except per share data ) : year ended january 1 , year ended january 2 .

year ended january 1 2006: revenue: 73501
net loss: -6234
net loss per share basic and diluted: -0.15
year ended january 2 2005: revenue: 50583
net loss: -9965
net loss per share basic and diluted: -0.27

illumina , inc . notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) .

Questions:
what was the change in revenues between 2005 and 2006?
and what is this change as a percentage of those revenues in 2005?
in that same period, what was the change in the net loss?
and what percentage did this change represent in relation to that net loss in 2005?

Answers:
22918
45%
3731
37%