You could make it work mathematically: the added 50% would need to be based on the initial price and not a modification on the adjusted price.
It's most logically interpreted as: x * 1.5 * 0.5 = 0.75x
But we could see it as: x - (x/2) + (x/2) = x
I'm equally fun at parties.
What grinds my gears with all the people (whether Denuvo officials or elsewhere) that claim that it has no effect on performance: they only focus on average FPS. Never a consideration for FPS lows or FPS time spent on frames that took more than N milliseconds. Definitely not any look at loading times.
I'm willing to believe a good implementation of Denuvo has a negligible impact on average FPS. I think every time I saw anyone test loading times though, it had a clear and consistent negative impact. I've never seen anyone check FPS lows (or similar) but with the way Denuvo works I expect it's similar.
Performance is more than average framerate and they hide behind a veil of pretending that it is the totality of all performance metrics.
I cannot be 100% certain but I'm confident I was using it not long after the 1.0 release. That'd put me at 2004. 19 years!
Although I did briefly switch over to Chrome when it was new and fast. Then switched back when Firefox had a major optimization pass.