It is not subjective, it depends on what buyer intend to have that determine the potential value of the company.

1. If the company business is profitable, then the value of company come from ability to generate profit and cashflow for the future.
2. If the company business is no profitable, then value could come from asset the company owned. Asset can be ranged from hard asset owned like land, properties, to concession license, networking etc.

It will be the same eventually.

Tech company generally is being valued differently as their potential profit come from future instead of now.
Their future profit may exponential rise in the future, that's where investors place their bet/valuation on them.

No company even tech company can survive with forever no profit/cashflow generated.
If the tech fail to turn the business into profitable model, its value eventually will crash as well.
See how many dotcom company went burst in the dotcom bubble, value from sky high to virtually nothing in just matter in few years time.

Yup, you value different due to Walmart or Coca Cola company won't register a 100% profit rise next year in a matured business.

But FB, twitter or tech company can make a loss or little profit today, but making billions in the coming few years time, profit rise 100%, 200% in short period of time, when their business finally turn into profitable model, so that's where the difference in valuation method.

While a sunset industry company may make billion today, but due to poor future visibility, its valuation won't fetch high as well.

So it is all about future profitability that dictate the valuation (set aside another model of asset based valuation first).

In layman term, how many years of the company profit that enable you to recoup the money invested.

Eg. you buy a company 1 mil, the company generate 100K every year, then you need 10 years to recoup your invested 1 mil, aka PE 10 times.

The PE term of "Price" is your money invested.