* Ezekiel peremptorily fired off this memo:
> "Tim Smith" <reply_in_group@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Microsoft operated at a loss in 1998.
>> Wrong. Here's their annual revenue and expenses for several years (in
>> millions). Note revenue was more than expenses every year. Also
>> included is net income (revenue + investment - investment - taxes).
>> Fiscal Year Revenue Expenses Net
>> ----------- ------- -------- -----
>> 1997 11936 7065 3454
>> 1998 15262 8677 4490
>> 1999 19747 19737 7785
>> Did you think if you made up stuff from 10 years ago, no one would be
>> able to check you, or what?
> Absolutely incredible. If anyone still thinks that Roy Schestowitz has the
> slightest clue of what he's writing about then this ought to set the record
> straight. Obviously all these people who talk about how Microsoft is
> collapsing and crumbling have a difficult time explaining why their *profit*
> and net revenues continue to increase at a very solid rate.
What do you make of this, then?
FASB did, however, manage to make firms include a footnote in their
accounts detailing the share options awarded during the year.
Smithers & Co., a research firm in London, calculated the cost of
these footnoted options and concluded that the American companies
granting them overstated their profits by as much as half in the
financial year ending in 1998. In some cases, particularly that of
high-tech firms (which tend to be generous with options), the
disparity is even greater. For instance, Microsoft, the world's
most valuable company, declared a profit of $4.5 billion in 1998;
when the cost of options awarded that year, plus the change in the
value of outstanding options, is deducted, the firm made a loss of
$18 billion, according to Smithers.
>> --Tim Smith
He should change his name to Adam.
In this vale
Of toil and sin
Your head grows bald
But not your chin.
-- Burma Shave