InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 374
Posts 16912
Boards Moderated 4
Alias Born 03/07/2014

Re: JWMN post# 10219

Thursday, 06/26/2014 2:39:12 PM

Thursday, June 26, 2014 2:39:12 PM

Post# of 106834
"an additional 322K negative."? Uh, no. You don't understand cost of sales and expenses. The "revenue" is "top line" and comes with a cost of sales, a "cost". The gross "revenues" applied after cost of sales was 322,572 - 94,446 = 228,126. Thus, 228,126 is the very most they could have put into their pocket essentially. But, they had a tremendous growth in SG&A costs, and since that included marketing, one would assume a portion of that large expense increase would be due to these "revenues".

If your expenses outgrow any revenue, in order to gain that revenue, then you didn't "gain" anything. There can be no inference made IMO, that the loss would have been greater had the revenues not been booked- that's not how accounting 101 works.

If one were to back-out the revenue, the cost of revenue, and assume that a portion of the very large SG&A (sale/marketing, general and administrative costs, at least a portion were due to booking that revenue), then there may have been no difference in the loss, in fact, it even might have been smaller for all one knows.