It can be negative but it is not called negative profit it would simply be called a loss.
Company A and Company B do not combine their P&L report.
There was a big discussion on whether or not 'negative profit' is a correct term. There's actually a correct time to use 'negative profit', it's when a company is expected to lose a certain amount of money, and they actually lose less. The difference is 'negative profit'.
There was a big discussion on whether or not 'negative profit' is a correct term. There's actually a correct time to use 'negative profit', it's when a company is expected to lose a certain amount of money, and they actually lose less. The difference is 'negative profit'.
Whatever. The last time this came up on AI I happen to run into our CFO in the hall and I asked him. After about a 30 minute lesson on balance sheets, fixed assets, long term debt, shareholder expenses and P&L reports, he said 'negative profits' is ridiculous, so that's what I'm going with since he has more than 25 years experience in corporate accounting.
I'm going to get dinged but Apple should seriously consider Wozniaks suggestion and have Apple offer Android cell phones. If Apple buys, HTC...they get contracts, licenses, etc. as well. HTC is considered by the Industry the best Android phone worldwide. Image it would shake the very foundation of Samsungs plastic phone.
It's funny, every time this metric is mentioned there has to be a handful of dumb-asses coming here to proclaim that "you can't have more than 100% of something". Ok then, what if you have something, say a company that grows 150%? Or you can't have any company grow more than 100% either? It all depends on what you compare.
You know, it's not rocket science. The industry as a whole made X amount of money. Apple & Samsung combined made more than X. That is all.
It's like having a company with multiple divisions, some which are profitable, some which are not. Should the company then only report the profit from profitable divisions because the losses from the others "aren't profits"? LOL! SEC would have a field day with that one!
No, it's a completely idiotic way of observing who makes money in the computing world. More fool you for not seeing it.
Comments
Yeah! Great idea. They should license iOS Samsung too.
No need. Samsung already copies it. Why pay for licensing fees?
No. Because others are contributing negative profits. It all adds to 100% as it should.
If it adds up to 100%, why is it 106%?
There was a big discussion on whether or not 'negative profit' is a correct term. There's actually a correct time to use 'negative profit', it's when a company is expected to lose a certain amount of money, and they actually lose less. The difference is 'negative profit'.
Whatever. The last time this came up on AI I happen to run into our CFO in the hall and I asked him. After about a 30 minute lesson on balance sheets, fixed assets, long term debt, shareholder expenses and P&L reports, he said 'negative profits' is ridiculous, so that's what I'm going with since he has more than 25 years experience in corporate accounting.
Do you actually believe that you can have more than 100% of any entity? And, can you tell me what negative profit is?
There is not more than 100% of any entity at any point in time. You can't create more matter than there is!
What's the source for that average? Does that included taxes? I spent $22K for my car.
Can't believe so many new posters have sprung up on AI. It's really very nice.
These posts give me a sense of deja vu from when Apple and Samsung took 103% of all profits.
Apple and Samsung together account for more than 100 percent of industry profits"
Because they gave 110% effort, right?
rolleyes
Oh for the day to hear a sportsman on tv say "I gave 60%."
I'm going to get dinged but Apple should seriously consider Wozniaks suggestion and have Apple offer Android cell phones. If Apple buys, HTC...they get contracts, licenses, etc. as well. HTC is considered by the Industry the best Android phone worldwide. Image it would shake the very foundation of Samsungs plastic phone.
No.
It's funny, every time this metric is mentioned there has to be a handful of dumb-asses coming here to proclaim that "you can't have more than 100% of something". Ok then, what if you have something, say a company that grows 150%? Or you can't have any company grow more than 100% either? It all depends on what you compare.
You know, it's not rocket science. The industry as a whole made X amount of money. Apple & Samsung combined made more than X. That is all.
It's like having a company with multiple divisions, some which are profitable, some which are not. Should the company then only report the profit from profitable divisions because the losses from the others "aren't profits"? LOL! SEC would have a field day with that one!
No, it's a completely idiotic way of observing who makes money in the computing world. More fool you for not seeing it.
news flash: appleinsider 'writers' pen 214% of the internet blogosphere's stupidest headlines!!!
Well done!!!