Gross Profit Quotes

Whereas gross revenue speaks more to a businesses pricing power and scale, net income speaks more to it's efficiency and operations.

All else being constant, Gross Profit is more important than EBITDA.

In the United States the legacy of settler colonialism can be seen in the endless wars of aggression and occupations; the trillions spent on war machinery, military bases, and personnel instead of social services and quality public education; the gross profits of corporations, each of which has greater resources and funds than more than half the countries in the world yet pay minimal taxes and provide few jobs for US citizens; the repression of generation after generation of activists who seek to change the system; the incarceration of the poor, particularly descendants of enslaved Africans; the individualism, carefully inculcated, that on the one hand produces self-blame for personal failure and on the other exalts ruthless dog-eat-dog competition for possible success, even though it rarely results; and high rates of suicide, drug abuse, alcoholism, sexual violence against women and children, homelessness, dropping out of school, and gun violence.

Any investment in sales training is an investment in your own gross profits.

In any economic ecosystem whereby things are measured primarily according to their present gross utility; it becomes tolerable and even profitable to create, sell and buy products and services which cause net future harm even as they provide present gross utility. This is why a permaculture economy is superior to every other economic ecosystem.

He was looking forward to his visit not only for the pleasure of the shrewd dealing which far transcended mere gross profit, but with the sheer happiness of being out of bed and moving once more at free will, even though a little weakly, in the sun and air which men drank and moved in and talked and dealt with one another - a pleasure no small part of which lay in the fact that he had not started yet and was absolutely nothing under heaven to make him start until he wanted to. He did not still feel weak, he was merely luxuriating in that supremely gutful lassitude of convalescence in which time, hurry, doing, did not exist, the accumulating seconds and minutes and hours to which in its well state the body's slave both waking and sleeping, now reversed and time now the lip-server and mendicant to the body's pleasure instead of the body thrall to time's headlong course.

The Lion King? It's just a kid's film. Just a kid's film?!? Yeah, just a kid's film with an IMDB rating of 8.5, 2 Academy Awards and 2 Golden Globes, that's been adapted into THE most successful West-end musical of all time, generating a gross profit of 8 million pounds and counting. "But maybe it's just a kid's film because it doesn't deal with any mature films" said fucking nobody ever. The Lion King is the greatest anthropomorphic assault upon the theme of mortality that Western culture has ever produced. It is so complex that your tiny, shriveled, and scrotum of a brain wouldn't dare to fathom it. So no, it is not just a kid's film, it is Shakespear with fur!

What infinite heart's-ease Must kings neglect, that private men enjoy! And what have kings, that privates have not too, Save ceremony, save general ceremony? And what art thou, thou idle ceremony? What kind of god art thou, that suffer'st more Of mortal griefs than do thy worshippers? What are thy rents? what are thy comings in? O ceremony, show me but thy worth! What is thy soul of adoration? Art thou aught else but place, degree and form, Creating awe and fear in other men? Wherein thou art less happy being fear'd Than they in fearing. What drink'st thou oft, instead of homage sweet, But poison'd flattery? O, be sick, great greatness, And bid thy ceremony give thee cure! Think'st thou the fiery fever will go out With titles blown from adulation? Will it give place to flexure and low bending? Canst thou, when thou command'st the beggar's knee, Command the health of it? No, thou proud dream, That play'st so subtly with a king's repose; I am a king that find thee, and I know 'Tis not the balm, the sceptre and the ball, The sword, the mace, the crown imperial, The intertissued robe of gold and pearl, The farced title running 'fore the king, The throne he sits on, nor the tide of pomp That beats upon the high shore of this world, No, not all these, thrice-gorgeous ceremony, Not all these, laid in bed majestical, Can sleep so soundly as the wretched slave, Who with a body fill'd and vacant mind Gets him to rest, cramm'd with distressful bread; Never sees horrid night, the child of hell, But, like a lackey, from the rise to set Sweats in the eye of Phoebus and all night Sleeps in Elysium; next day after dawn, Doth rise and help Hyperion to his horse, And follows so the ever-running year, With profitable labour, to his grave: And, but for ceremony, such a wretch, Winding up days with toil and nights with sleep, Had the fore-hand and vantage of a king. The slave, a member of the country's peace, Enjoys it; but in gross brain little wots What watch the king keeps to maintain the peace, Whose hours the peasant best advantages.

Astute social commentators had been anticipating this rightward shift since the early 1980s. Bertram Gross predicted, in his book Friendly Fascism, that the United States might arrive at a gentler form of the virulent ultranationalism, antilabor activity, and racism, which coalesced into fascism in Europe in the 1930s. Corporate America would tolerate such a rightward drift, so the argument went, because more government restrictions on personal freedom would enhance business efforts to discipline the labor force and increase corporate profits.

For every five sales you make, another nine customers who had hoped to buy from you will leave your store disappointed and empty-handed. This means your existing store traffic can give you 2.8 times your current sales volume, if you sell only those customers who are ready to buy. The only thing more expensive than hiring a sales trainer is not hiring one. Any investment in sales training is an investment in your own gross profits.

Beware of first-hand ideas!” exclaimed one of the most advanced of them. “First-hand ideas do not really exist. They are but the physical impressions produced by love and fear, and on this gross foundation who could erect a philosophy? Let your ideas be second-hand, and if possible tenth-hand, for then they will be far removed from that disturbing element — direct observation. Do not learn anything about this subject of mine — the French Revolution.Learn instead what I think that Enicharmon thought Urizen thought Gutch thought Ho-Yung thought Chi-Bo-Sing thought Lafcadio Hearn thought Carlyle thought Mirabeau said about the French Revolution. Through the medium of these ten great minds, the blood that was shed at Paris and the windows that were broken at Versailles will be clarified to an idea which you may employ most profitably in your daily lives. But be sure that the intermediates are many and varied, for in history one authority exists to counteract another. Urizen must counteract the scepticism of Ho-Yung and Enicharmon, I must myself counteract the impetuosity of Gutch. You who listen to me are in a better position to judge about the French Revolution than I am. Your descendants will be even in a better position than you, for they will learn what you think I think, and yet another intermediate will be added to the chain. And in time” — his voice rose — “there will come a generation that had got beyond facts, beyond impressions, a generation absolutely colourless, a generation ‘seraphically free From taint of personality,’ which will see the French Revolution not as it happened, nor as they would like it to have happened, but as it would have happened, had it taken place in the days of the Machine.

The Government set the stage economically by informing everyone that we were in a depression period, with very pointed allusions to the 1930s. The period just prior to our last 'good' war. ... Boiled down, our objective was to make killing and military life seem like adventurous fun, so for our inspiration we went back to the Thirties as well. It was pure serendipity. Inside one of the Scripter offices there was an old copy of Doc Smith's first LENSMAN space opera. It turned out that audiences in the 1970s were more receptive to the sort of things they scoffed at as juvenilia in the 1930s. Our drugs conditioned them to repeat viewings, simultaneously serving the ends of profit and positive reinforcement. The movie we came up with stroked all the correct psychological triggers. The fact that it grossed more money than any film in history at the time proved how on target our approach was.' 'Oh my God... said Jonathan, his mouth stalling the open position. 'Six months afterward we ripped ourselves off and got secondary reinforcement onto television. We pulled a 40 share. The year after that we phased in the video games, experimenting with non-narcotic hypnosis, using electrical pulses, body capacitance, and keying the pleasure centers of the brain with low voltage shocks. Jesus, Jonathan, can you *see* what we've accomplished? In something under half a decade we've programmed an entire generation of warm bodies to go to war for us and love it. They buy what we tell them to buy. Music, movies, whole lifestyles. And they hate who we tell them to. ... It's simple to make our audiences slaver for blood; that past hasn't changed since the days of the Colosseum. We've conditioned a whole population to live on the rim of Apocalypse and love it. They want to kill the enemy, tear his heart out, go to war so their gas bills will go down! They're all primed for just that sort of denouemment, ti satisfy their need for linear storytelling in the fictions that have become their lives! The system perpetuates itself. Our own guinea pigs pay us money to keep the mechanisms grinding away. If you don't believe that, just check out last year's big hit movies... then try to tell me the target demographic audience isn't waiting for marching orders. ("Incident On A Rainy Night In Beverly Hills")

Many readers are familiar with the spirit and the letter of the definition of “prayer”, as given by Ambrose Bierce in his Devil’s Dictionary. It runs like this, and is extremely easy to comprehend: Prayer: A petition that the laws of nature be suspended in favor of the petitioner; himself confessedly unworthy. Everybody can see the joke that is lodged within this entry: The man who prays is the one who thinks that god has arranged matters all wrong, but who also thinks that he can instruct god how to put them right. Half–buried in the contradiction is the distressing idea that nobody is in charge, or nobody with any moral authority. The call to prayer is self–cancelling. Those of us who don’t take part in it will justify our abstention on the grounds that we do not need, or care, to undergo the futile process of continuous reinforcement. Either our convictions are enough in themselves or they are not: At any rate they do require standing in a crowd and uttering constant and uniform incantations. This is ordered by one religion to take place five times a day, and by other monotheists for almost that number, while all of them set aside at least one whole day for the exclusive praise of the Lord, and Judaism seems to consist in its original constitution of a huge list of prohibitions that must be followed before all else. The tone of the prayers replicates the silliness of the mandate, in that god is enjoined or thanked to do what he was going to do anyway. Thus the Jewish male begins each day by thanking god for not making him into a woman (or a Gentile), while the Jewish woman contents herself with thanking the almighty for creating her “as she is.” Presumably the almighty is pleased to receive this tribute to his power and the approval of those he created. It’s just that, if he is truly almighty, the achievement would seem rather a slight one. Much the same applies to the idea that prayer, instead of making Christianity look foolish, makes it appear convincing. Now, it can be asserted with some confidence, first, that its deity is all–wise and all–powerful and, second, that its congregants stand in desperate need of that deity’s infinite wisdom and power. Just to give some elementary quotations, it is stated in the book of Philippians, 4:6, “Be careful for nothing; but in everything by prayer and supplication and thanksgiving, let your requests be known to God.” Deuteronomy 32:4 proclaims that “he is the rock, his work is perfect,” and Isaiah 64:8 tells us, “Now O Lord, thou art our father; we art clay and thou our potter; and we are all the work of thy hand.” Note, then, that Christianity insists on the absolute dependence of its flock, and then only on the offering of undiluted praise and thanks. A person using prayer time to ask for the world to be set to rights, or to beseech god to bestow a favor upon himself, would in effect be guilty of a profound blasphemy or, at the very least, a pathetic misunderstanding. It is not for the mere human to be presuming that he or she can advise the divine. And this, sad to say, opens religion to the additional charge of corruption. The leaders of the church know perfectly well that prayer is not intended to gratify the devout. So that, every time they accept a donation in return for some petition, they are accepting a gross negation of their faith: a faith that depends on the passive acceptance of the devout and not on their making demands for betterment. Eventually, and after a bitter and schismatic quarrel, practices like the notorious “sale of indulgences” were abandoned. But many a fine basilica or chantry would not be standing today if this awful violation had not turned such a spectacularly good profit. And today it is easy enough to see, at the revival meetings of Protestant fundamentalists, the counting of the checks and bills before the laying on of hands by the preacher has even been completed. Again, the spectacle is a shameless one.

History can only take things in the gross; But could we know them in detail, perchance In balancing the profit and the loss, War's merit it by no means might enhance, To waste so much gold for a little dross, As hath been done, mere conquest to advance. The drying up a single tear has more Of honest fame, than shedding seas of gore.

Consider that the original Star Wars movies—some of the highest-grossing films of all time—required more than forty years to amass $3 billion in revenue. It took Ambien just twenty-four months to amass $4 billion in sales profit, discounting the black market. That’s a large number, and one I can only imagine influences Big Pharma decision-making at all levels.

We reject capitalism because it is abusive. Because it’s a system that argues: as long as the oligarchy is profiting, no atrocity is too grave, no violation too gross. Slavery, genocide, atomic war, swamps drained, forests burned, animals brought to extinction. Nothing is out of bounds and there are always plenty of reasons why it has to be this way… free market, forked tongue.

There is no diffused light on anything international so that a comparatively whole scene may be observed. Light is sharply directed on one spot, leaving not only the greater part in darkness but also denying by implication that the great unlighted field exists. It is no longer profitable, with few exceptions, to ask people what they think, for you will be told what the wish, instead. Perhaps at no other period in the history of the world have people lived in such a dreamy state. People even waste time denouncing their enemies in open warfare for shooting back too hard, or too accurately. There is no attempt to be accurate as to truth, however. The whole idea is to be complimentary to one's self and keep alive the dream. The other man's side commits gross butcheries. One's own side wins smashing victories.

In 1980, the compensation of the average chief executive officer was forty-two times that of the average worker; by the year 2004, the ratio had soared to 280 times that of the average worker (down from an astonishing 531 times at the peak in 2000). Over the past quarter-century, CEO compensation measured in current dollars rose nearly sixteen times over , while the compensation of the average worker slightly more than doubled. Measured in real(1980) dollars, however, the compensation of the average worker rose just 0.3 percent per year, barely enough to maintain his or her standard of living. Yet CEO compensation rose at a rate of 8.5 percent annually, increasing by more than seven times in real terms during the period. The rationale was that these executives had "created wealth" for their shareholders. But were CEOs actually creating value commensurate with this huge increase in compenstion? Certainly the average CEO was not. In real terms, aggregate corporate profits grew at an annual rate of just 2.9 percent, compared to 3.1 percent for our nation's economy, as represented by the Gross Domestic Product. How that somewhat dispiriting lag can drive average CEO compensation to a cool 9.8 million in 2004 is one of the great anomalies of the age.

munitions exports, which stood at just $40 million in 1914, boomed to nearly $1.3 billion in 1916, while the total value for exported manufactured goods rose from $2.4 billion (or 6 percent of the gross national product) in 1914 to $5.5 billion (or 12 percent of GNP) in 1916, almost exclusively because of increased trade with the Allies. While J. P. Morgan, which brokered most of the transactions, led a long list of American firms that reaped enormous profits from this trade, millions of ordinary Americans, from workers to farmers, benefited as well.

In early 2014, the global economy’s top five companies’ gross cash holdings—those of Apple, Google, Microsoft, as well as the US telecom giant Verizon and the Korean electronics conglomerate Samsung—came to $387 billion, the equivalent of the 2013 GDP of the United Arab Emirates.78 This capital imbalance puts the fate of the world economy in the hands of the few cash hoarders like Apple and Google, whose profits are mostly kept offshore to avoid paying US tax. “Apple, Google and Facebook are latter-day scrooges,” worries the Financial Times columnist John Plender about a corporate miserliness that is undermining the growth of the world economy.

[...] one may ask why so much stupidity and bad faith are to be found in religious polemics, even among men who are otherwise free from such failings...No blame can be attached to a person for attacking a foreign religion in the name of his own belief, if it is done purely and simply through ignorance; when, however, this is not the case, the person will be guilty of blasphemy, since, by outraging the Divine Truth in an alien form, he is merely profiting by an opportunity to offend God without having to trouble his own conscience. This is the real explanation of the gross and impure zeal displayed by those who, in the name of their religious convictions, devote their lives to making sacred things appear odious, a task they can only accomplish by contemptible methods.

Qui vous le dit, qu’elle (la vie) ne vous attend pas ? Certes, elle continue, mais elle ne vous oblige pas à suivre le rythme. Vous pouvez bien vous mettre un peu entre parenthèses pour vivre ce deuil… accordez-vous le temps. *** Parce que ҫa me fait plaisir. Parce que je sais aussi que l’entourage peut se montrer très discret dans pareille situation, et que de se changer les idées de temps en temps fait du bien. Parce que je sais que vous aimez la montagne et que vous n’iriez pas toute seule. *** Oui. Si vous perdez une jambe, ҫa se voit, les gens sont conciliants. Et encore, pas tous. Mais quand c’est un morceau de votre cœur qui est arraché, ҫa ne se voit pas de l’extérieur, et c’est au moins aussi douloureux… Ce n’est pas de la faute des gens. Ils ne se fient qu’aux apparences. Il faut gratter pour voir ce qu’il y a au fond. Si vous jetez une grosse pierre dans une mare, elle va faire des remous à la surface. Des gros remous d'abord, qui vont gifler les rives, et puis des remous plus petits, qui vont finir par disparaître. Peu à peu, la surface redevient lisse et paisible. Mais la grosse pierre est quand même au fond. La grosse pierre est quand même au fond. *** La vie s’apparente à la mer. Il y a les bruit des vagues, quand elles s’abattent sur la plage, et puis le silence d’après, quand elles se retirent. Deux mouvement qui se croissent et s’entrecoupent sans discontinuer. L’un est rapide, violent, l’autre est doux et lent. Vous aimeriez vous retirer, dans le même silence des vagues, partir discrètement, vous faire oublier de la vie. Mais d’autres vague arrivent et arriveront encore et toujours. Parce que c’est ҫa la vie… C’est le mouvement, c’est le rythme, le fracas parfois, durant la tempête, et le doux clapotis quand tout est calme. Mais le clapotis quand même Un bord de mer n'est jamais silencieux, jamais. La vie non plus, ni la vôtre, ni la mienne. Il y a les grains de sables exposés aux remous et ceux protégés en haut de la plage. Lesquels envier? Ce n'est pas avec le sable d'en haut, sec et lisse, que l'on construit les châteaux de sable, c'est avec celui qui fraye avec les vagues car ses particules sont coalescentes. Vous arriverez à reconstruire votre château, vous le construirez avec des grains qui vous ressemblent, qui ont aussi connu les déferlantes de la vie, parce qu'avec eux, le ciment est solide.. *** « Tu ne sais jamais à quel point tu es fort jusqu’au jour où être fort reste la seule option. » C’est Bob Marley qui a dit ҫa. *** Manon ne referme pas violemment la carte du restaurant. Elle n’éprouve pas le besoin qu’il lui lise le menu pour qu’elle ne voie pas le prix, et elle trouvera égal que chaque bouchée vaille cinq euros. Manon profite de la vie. Elle accepte l’invitation avec simplicité. Elle défend la place des femmes sans être une féministe acharnée et cela ne lui viendrait même pas à l’idée de payer sa part. D’abord, parce qu’elle sait que Paul s’en offusquerait, ensuite, parce qu’elle aime ces petites marques de galanterie, qu’elle regrette de voir disparaître avec l’évolution d’une société en pertes de repères.

Upon the King! Let us our lives, our souls, Our debts, our careful wives, Our children, and our sins, lay on the King! We must bear all. O hard condition, Twin-born with greatness, subject to the breath Of every fool, whose sense no more can feel But his own wringing! What infinite heart's ease Must kings neglect that private men enjoy! And what have kings that privates have not too, Save ceremony- save general ceremony? And what art thou, thou idol Ceremony? What kind of god art thou, that suffer'st more Of mortal griefs than do thy worshippers? What are thy rents? What are thy comings-in? O Ceremony, show me but thy worth! What is thy soul of adoration? Art thou aught else but place, degree, and form, Creating awe and fear in other men? Wherein thou art less happy being fear'd Than they in fearing. What drink'st thou oft, instead of homage sweet, But poison'd flattery? O, be sick, great greatness, And bid thy ceremony give thee cure! Thinks thou the fiery fever will go out With titles blown from adulation? Will it give place to flexure and low bending? Canst thou, when thou command'st the beggar's knee, Command the health of it? No, thou proud dream, That play'st so subtly with a king's repose. I am a king that find thee; and I know 'Tis not the balm, the sceptre, and the ball, The sword, the mace, the crown imperial, The intertissued robe of gold and pearl, The farced tide running fore the king, The throne he sits on, nor the tide of pomp That beats upon the high shore of this world- No, not all these, thrice gorgeous ceremony, Not all these, laid in bed majestical, Can sleep so soundly as the wretched slave Who, with a body fill'd and vacant mind, Gets him to rest, cramm'd with distressful bread; Never sees horrid night, the child of hell; But, like a lackey, from the rise to set Sweats in the eye of Pheebus, and all night Sleeps in Elysium; next day, after dawn, Doth rise and help Hyperion to his horse; And follows so the ever-running year With profitable labour, to his grave. And but for ceremony, such a wretch, Winding up days with toil and nights with sleep, Had the fore-hand and vantage of a king. The slave, a member of the country's peace, Enjoys it; but in gross brain little wots What watch the king keeps to maintain the peace Whose hours the peasant best advantages.

In early 2014, the global economy’s top five companies’ gross cash holdings—those of Apple, Google, Microsoft, as well as the US telecom giant Verizon and the Korean electronics conglomerate Samsung—came to $387 billion, the equivalent of the 2013 GDP of the United Arab Emirates.78 This capital imbalance puts the fate of the world economy in the hands of the few cash hoarders like Apple and Google, whose profits are mostly kept offshore to avoid paying US tax. “Apple, Google and Facebook are latter-day scrooges,” worries the Financial Times columnist John Plender about a corporate miserliness that is undermining the growth of the world economy.79 “So what does it all mean?” Michael Moritz rhetorically asks about a data factory economy that is immensely profitable for a tiny handful of Silicon Valley companies. What does the personal revolution mean for everyone else, to those who aren’t part of what he calls the “extreme minority” inside the Silicon Valley bubble? “It means that life is very tough for almost everyone in America,” the chairman of Sequoia Capital, whom even Tom Perkins couldn’t accuse of being a progressive radical, says. “It means life is very tough if you’re poor. It means life is very tough if you’re middle class. It means you have to have the right education to go and work at Google or Apple.

Success comes with an inevitable problem: market saturation. New products initially grow just by adding more customers—to grow a network, add more nodes. Eventually this stops working because nearly everyone in the target market has joined the network, and there are not enough potential customers left. From here, the focus has to shift from adding new customers to layering on more services and revenue opportunities with existing ones. eBay had this problem in its early years, and had to figure its way out. My colleague at a16z, Jeff Jordan, experienced this himself, and would often write and speak about his first month as the general manager of eBay’s US business. It was in 2000, and for the first time ever, eBay’s US business failed to grow on a month-over-month basis. This was critical for eBay because nearly all the revenue and profit for the company came from the US unit—without growth in the United States, the entire business would stagnate. Something had to be done quickly. It’s tempting to just optimize the core business. After all, increasing a big revenue base even a little bit often looks more appealing than starting at zero. Bolder bets are risky. Yet because of the dynamics of market saturation, a product’s growth tends to slow down and not speed up. There’s no way around maintaining a high growth rate besides continuing to innovate. Jeff shared what the team did to find the next phase of growth for the company: eBay.com at the time enabled the community to buy and sell solely through online auctions. But auctions intimidated many prospective users who expressed preference for the ease and simplicity of fixed price formats. Interestingly, our research suggested that our online auction users were biased towards men, who relished the competitive aspect of the auction. So the first major innovation we pursued was to implement the (revolutionary!) concept of offering items for a fixed price on ebay.com, which we termed “buy-it-now.” Buy-it-now was surprisingly controversial to many in both the eBay community and in eBay headquarters. But we swallowed hard, took the risk and launched the feature . . . and it paid off big. These days, the buy-it-now format represents over $40 billion of annual Gross Merchandise Volume for eBay, 62% of their total.65

Nous souhaitons de toutes nos forces que les révolutions, les guerres et les insurrections coloniales viennent anéantir cette civilisation occidentale dont vous défendez jusqu’en Orient la vermine et nous appelons cette destruction comme l’état de choses le moins inacceptable pour l’esprit. (...) Nous saisissons cette occasion pour nous désolidariser publiquement de tout ce qui est français, en paroles et en actions. Nous déclarons trouver la trahison et tout ce qui, d’une façon ou d’une autre, peut nuire à la sûreté de l’Etat beaucoup plus conciliable avec la poésie que la vente de « grosses quantités de lard » pour le compte d’une nation de porcs et de chiens. C’est une singulière méconnaissance des facultés propres et des possibilités de l’esprit qui fait périodiquement rechercher leur salut à des goujats de votre espèce dans une tradition catholique ou gréco-romaine. Le salut pour nous n’est nulle part. Nous tenons Rimbaud pour un homme qui a désespéré de son salut et dont l’oeuvre et la vie sont de purs témoignages de perdition. Catholicisme, classicisme gréco-romain, nous vous abandonnons à vos bondieuseries infâmes. Qu’elles vous profitent de toutes manières ; engraissez encore, crevez sous l’admiration et le respect de vos concitoyens. Ecrivez, priez et bavez ; nous réclamons le déshonneur de vous avoir traité une fois pour toutes de cuistre et de canaille.

Gross profit margin is often used to make comparisons between companies within an industry. For

I liked to point out that Medtronic, which makes all varieties of medical devices—from surgical tools to pacemakers—is so able to charge sky-high prices that it enjoys nearly double the gross profit margin of Apple, considered to be the jewel of American high-tech companies.

Medtronic’s overall cost of making its products was about 25 percent of what it sells them for, yielding an unusually high gross profit margin of about 75 percent.

Low-end disruption has occurred several times in retailing.16 For example, full-service department stores had a business model that enabled them to turn inventories three times per year. They needed to earn 40 percent gross margins to make money within their cost structure. They therefore earned 40 percent three times each year, for a 120 percent annual return on capital invested in inventory (ROCII). In the 1960s, discount retailers such as Wal-Mart and Kmart attacked the low end of the department stores’ market—nationally branded hard goods such as paint, hardware, kitchen utensils, toys, and sporting goods—that were so familiar in use that they could sell themselves. Customers in this tier of the market were overserved by department stores, in that they did not need well-trained floor sales-people to help them get what they needed. The discounters’ business model enabled them to make money at gross margins of about 23 percent, on average. Their stocking policies and operating processes enabled them to turn inventories more than five times annually, so that they also earned about 120 percent annual ROCII. The discounters did not accept lower levels of profitability—their business model simply earned acceptable profit through a different formula.17

Gross profit margin demonstrates competitive advantage: it is the purest expression of customer valuation of a product, clearly implying the premium buyers assign to a seller for having fashioned raw materials into a finished item and branding it.

sustained high gross profit margins relative to industry peers tends to indicate durable competitive advantage. Zeroing

Another doctrine that might have been profitable to consider at this conference is the New Birth. To say that Constantine was “hazy” on what it meant to truly be a Christian would be a gross understatement. Even though he professed to be a Christian, he deferred his baptism until just before the day of his death under the delusion that the waters of baptism purged the sins of the soul. Apparently he wanted to have his sins all in before receiving baptism.     The reign of Constantine did more to damage and destroy the Christian Church from within than any persecution ever did from without.

Our measures of economic success, from corporate profits to gross national product (GNP), specifically ignore the human component of the economy. That’s how an environmental disaster and its resulting cancer rates can still be considered a net positive to the economy. They require more spending on cleanup and chemo, so it’s good for business as we currently define it. In less morbid examples, from corporate layoffs to tax law, we have set in place an economic system whose growth works against our own prosperity. We have lost track of the purpose of the economy.

Some public pension plans are responding to the continued disappointing returns. The California Public Sector Retirement System (CalPERS) is often regarded as a thought leader among other pension funds, and with over $300 billion in assets it is one of the largest institutional investors in the world. In September 2014 it announced (CalPERS 2014) the elimination of hedge funds from its portfolio, concluding that the cost of investing wasn't justified by the returns. One interesting disclosure was that in the most recent fiscal year through June 2014, CalPERS had paid $135 million in fees on a $4 billion portfolio that earned 7.1%. The approximately $280 million in investment returns ($4 billion × 7.1%) means that for every $2 in returns, it paid away a third dollar in fees. Of the gross returns (i.e., before fees), two-thirds went to CalPERS and one-third to the hedge fund managers. When you consider that it's possible to invest in equity index funds for less than 0.1%, this division of investment profits between the provider of capital and the managers must have appeared as absurd to CalPERS as it does to everyone else.

Gross profit is calculated by subtracting the cost of goods sold from revenues. It is an useful measurement because it shows how efficiently the company manufactures its products. It is necessary to understand that gross profit only includes the costs that are directly associated with either producing or purchasing a product or providing a service.

gross profit margin, which is useful for making side-by-side comparisons among a subject company’s current manufacturing efficiency, its past manufacturing efficiency, and that of its competitors.

indication that it is benefiting from some type of competitive advantage. Gross profit margin is calculated by the following formula. GROSS PROFIT MARGIN = GROSS PROFIT/REVENUES

Since The Great Recession, the global financial crash of 2008-09, the debt-fuelled post-recession recovery has been the weakest in the post-war era (since the end of World War Two). Whereas total outstanding credit in the US after the Wall Street Crash grew from 160% to 260% of GDP between 1929 and 1932, the figure rose from 365% in 2008 to 540% in 2010. (And this does not include derivatives, whose nominal outstanding value is at least four times GDP).[34] A long depression and rising right-wing populism have followed, including the stunning ascendency of property tycoon and TV celebrity demagogue Donald Trump as the President of the US in 2016.[35] The British public’s vote in June 2016 to leave the EU delivered another shock of global significance. A chronic drift towards trade wars and protectionism is accelerating and in January 2018, US Defence Secretary Jim Mattis said that “great power competition, not terrorism, is now the primary focus of US national security”, putting Russia, China and – yes – Europe in the crosshairs of the world’s long-time dominant economic and military power. Adding to this age of anxiety is the accelerating automation revolution. What should be an emancipatory and utopian development only generates insecurity at the prospect of unprecedented mass unemployment. It can be no coincidence that all these crises are converging at exactly the same time. They cannot be explained away by cynical and shallow generalisations about ‘human nature’. In the course of this investigation we will see that in fact all of these crises have a common root cause: the decaying nature of capitalism and its tendency towards breakdown. Indeed, average Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth rates in the world’s richest countries have fallen in every decade since the 1960s and are clearly closing in on zero. Rates of profit, manufacturing costs and commodity prices are also trending towards zero. Drawing on Henryk Grossman’s vital clarification of Karl Marx’s methodology, we shall see that capitalism is heading inexorably towards a final, insurmountable breakdown that is destined to strike much earlier than a zero rate of profit. Indeed, we shall also see that the next, imminent economic crash will result in worldwide hyperinflation. We will also show that the economic crisis is intensifying competition between nation-states, forcing them into a situation which threatens the most destructive world war to date.

be successful over the long term, the company has to have and maintain: (1) steady gross margins that it protects; (2) a healthy balance sheet, as reflected in the current, cash-to-debt, and debt-to-equity ratios, among other measures; and (3) a sound business model governing how the company delivers value to customers and earns a profit in the process.

was clear to me that laptop hinges were in commodity land,” he said. “Reell does some things exceptionally well. Competing in a commodity business is not one of them.” The company needed enough gross profit to cover the cost of developing the technological innovations that were its trademark and an essential element of its business model. Commodity products have low gross profit margins by definition. The gross profit that laptop hinges were generating at that point simply wasn’t sufficient to keep Reell healthy.

What the socialist barbarians destroy is private ownership of the means of production, the profit motive, private saving and capital accumulation, competition, and the price system.

Review all of your numbers (quarterly revenue, profit, gross margin, and any other relevant key numbers) and your Rocks (company and leadership teams on the Rock Sheet) from the previous quarter to confirm which ones were achieved and which were not. I highly recommend simply stating “done” or “not done” for each. This will give you a clear, black-and-white picture of how you performed. Don’t get caught up in believing you can complete 100 percent of your Rocks every quarter. It’s perfectionist thinking and not realistic. You always want to strive for 80 percent completion or better—that’s enough to be truly great.

from their peak in 2006, and the decline is explained entirely by the evaporation of interesting, intelligent mid-budget films. Studios realized their assumption that they had to make every type of movie for everyone was no longer true. So they focused on the types of movies that delivered the biggest and most consistent profits to their publicly traded parent corporations. Increasingly, that meant movies that appealed to audiences in Russia, Brazil, and China. These consumers weren’t likely to understand the cultural subtleties of an American drama or to consider people talking or even running for their lives to be adequate bang for their buck on an expensive night out. They expected spectacle, particularly if they were paying premiums for an IMAX or 3D screen, and they wanted stories that made sense to a villager in China, a resident of Rio de Janeiro, or a teenager in Kansas City. Transformers, in other words. And The Avengers. And Jurassic World and Fast and Furious and Star Wars. With the exception of 1997’s Titanic, which made a spectacle out of the sinking of a cruise ship and Leonardo DiCaprio’s eyes, the forty-eight highest-grossing Hollywood films overseas are all visual-effects-heavy action-adventure films or family animation.

There are in the body politic, economic and social, many and grave evils and there is urgent necessity for the sternest war upon them... I hail as a benefactor every writer or speaker, every man who, on the platform or in book, magazine or newspaper, with merciless severity makes such attack, provided always that he in his turn remembers that the attack is of use only if it is absolutely truthful. The liar is no whit better than the thief, and if his mendacity takes the form of slander he may be worse than most thieves. It puts a premium upon knavery untruthfully to attack an honest man, or even with hysterical exaggeration to assail a bad man with untruth... “...The effort to make financial or political profit out of their destruction of character can only result in public calamity. Gross and reckless assaults on character, whether on the stump or in newspaper or magazine or book, create a morbid and vicious public sentiment, and at the same time act as a profound deterrent to able men of normal sensitiveness and tend to prevent them from entering the public service at any price.

A standardized way to appreciate the impact is by looking at gross domestic product (GDP)—a general measure of a country’s profit output, or economic health. Viewed this way, things look even more bleak, described in figure 16B. Insufficient sleep robs most nations of more than 2 percent of their GDP—amounting to the entire cost of each country’s military. It’s almost as much as each country invests in education. Just think, if we eliminated the national sleep debt, we could almost double the GDP percentage that is devoted to the education of our children. One more way that abundant sleep makes financial sense, and should itself be incentivized at the national level.

Carry individual items as opposed to whole lines. We wouldn’t try to carry a whole line of spices, or bag candy, or vitamins. Each SKU (a single size of a single flavor of a single item) had to justify itself, as opposed to riding piggyback into the stores just so we had a “complete” line. Depth of assortment now was of no interest. As soon as Fair Trade ended in 1978, we began to get rid of the hundred brands of Scotch, seventy brands of bourbon, and fifty brands of gin. And slowly (it was like pulling teeth) we dismantled the broad assortment of California boutique wines. No fixtures. By 1982, the store would have most of its merchandise displayed in stacks with very little shelving. This implied a lower SKU count: a high-SKU store needs lots of shelves. The average supermarket carries about 27,000 SKUs in 30,000 square feet of sales area, or roughly one SKU per square foot. Trader Joe’s, by 1988, carried one SKU per five square feet! Price-Costco, one of my heroes, carried about one SKU per twenty square feet. As much as possible I wanted products to be displayed in the same cartons in which they were shipped by the manufacturers. This was already a key element in our wine merchandising. Each SKU would stand on its own two feet as a profit center. We would earn a gross profit on each SKU that was justified by the cost of handling that item. There would be no “loss leaders.” Above all we would not carry any item unless we could be outstanding in terms of price (and make a profit at that price per #7) or uniqueness. By the end of 1977, we increased the size of the buying staff, adding one very key person, Doug Rauch, whom we hired out of the wholesale health food trade. Leroy, Frank Kono, Bob Berning, and Doug rolled out Five Year Plan ’77, which for purposes of this history I call Mac the Knife. Back in those days we had no idea how sharp that knife would become! We just wanted to survive deregulation. Everything now depended on buying. So here we go into the next chapter, Intensive Buying.

Your most unhappy customers are your greatest source of learning.

We reject capitalism because it is abusive. Because it’s a system that argues: as long as the oligarchy is profiting, no atrocity is too grave, no violation too gross. Slavery, genocide, atomic war, swamps drained, forests burned, animals brought to extinction. Nothing is out of bounds and there are always plenty of reasons why it has to be this way…free market, forked tongue.

Surely America’s moral sense had been deadened by gross materialism, as Yankee merchants sought to profit from Europe’s misery.

This is approached as a business and as such money and the issues of money must always be accounted for and respected. The big money issues to track are: 1. Gross closed income—How much money did we make? 2. Budget—How much money did we spend? 3. Net income—How much money did we earn as profit? 4. Agent compensation—How much do I (the agent) personally get to take home?

La plus grosse campagne de sensibilisation à la santé mentale au Canada est une publicité à peine déguisée pour une compagnie privée qui empoche des profits grâce au système carcéral, au détriment de la santé mentale des détenu·es. Tant que la psychothérapie ne sera pas couverte publiquement et accessible universellement, les décideur·euses auront de ce sang sur les mains. Tant qu’un revenu minimal ne sera pas garanti à tous les membres de notre population, iels auront de ce sang sur les mains. Tant que le système d’éducation ne sera pas repensé pour contribuer à déstigmatiser réellement ces maladies et ces troubles, iels auront de ce sang sur les mains. Gaétan Barrette a de ce sang sur les mains ; tout comme Philippe Couillard et François Legault, pour ne nommer qu’eux. Ça aura pris une pandémie mondiale pour que ce dernier refinance quelque peu le secteur. La fatigue, celle qui envahit nos corps la nuit, le jour, peu importe, quand nous restons figé·es dans nos lits, elle est politique.

The Queen and I attended many of the sales calls in person, to explain these complexities. I traveled to Boston to meet with some of the top U.S. fund managers, including the managers of two of the largest emerging markets mutual funds in the world, Rob Citrone, portfolio manager at Fidelity Investments, and Mark Siegel, vice president and head of emerging markets at Putnam Investment Management. Both of them, as well as dozens of other fund managers, gave BIDS a big thumbs down. The trade was too complicated, and the fees we were charging were too large. The BIDS deal ended a failure, although it probably would have been worse if Scarecrow had been involved throughout. On the one hand, we were only able to sell $21 million of BIDS in total, mostly because we couldn’t pique the interest of U.S. investors. On the other hand, we were able to charge such an enormous fee on the BIDS we actually sold that the group still grossed half a million dollars in profits.

Economics and P&L What are the per-unit economics of the device? That is, what is the expected gross profit and contribution profit per unit? What is the rationale for the price point you have chosen for the product? How much will we have to invest up front to build this product in terms of people, technology, inventory, warehouse space, and so on? For this section of the PR/FAQ, ideally one or more members of your finance team will work with you to understand and capture these costs so you can include a simplified table of the per-unit economics and a mini P&L in the document. A resourceful entrepreneur or product manager can do this work themselves if they do not have a finance manager or team. For new products, the up-front investment is a major consideration. In the case of Melinda, there is a requirement for 77 people to work on the hardware and software, for an annualized cost of roughly $15 million. This means that the product idea needs to have the potential to earn well in excess of $15 million per year in gross profit to be worth building. The consumer questions and economic analysis both have an effect on the product price point, and that price point, in turn, has an effect on the size of the total addressable market. Price is a key variable in the authoring of your PR/FAQ. There may be special assumptions or considerations that have informed your calculation of the price point—perhaps making it relatively low or unexpectedly high—that need to be called out and explained. Some of the best new product proposals set a not-to-exceed price point because it forces the team to innovate within that constraint and face the tough trade-offs early on. The problem(s) associated with achieving that price point should be fully explained and explored in the FAQ.

learned about our fixed and variable costs, the better I could forecast our "nut," the amount of gross profit we'd need each month to stay in business. My little dog fell

a startup has to reach its cash flow break-even point. That occurs when the venture’s sales volume generates enough gross profit to cover all of its tax payments, marketing expenses, fixed costs, and new investments (e.g., additional equipment and inventory required to support the next wave of expansion).

Note that “profit” in this context is defined as gross profit—that is, revenue per unit minus all variable costs directly incurred in producing and delivering the unit

A customer’s lifetime value (LTV) equals the discounted present value of the gross profit earned over the life of a typical customer’s relationship with the venture.

where a = accumulated future value, p = principal or present value, r = rate of return in percentage terms, and n = number of compounding periods. All too often, management teams focus on the r variable in this equation. They seek instant gratification, with high profit margins and high growth in reported earnings per share (EPS) in the near term, as opposed to initiatives that would lead to a much more valuable business many years down the line. This causes many management teams to pass on investments that would create long-term value but would cause “accounting numbers” to look bad in the short term. Pressure from analysts can inadvertently incentivize companies to make as much money as possible off their present customers to report good quarterly numbers, instead of offering a fair price that creates enduring goodwill and a long-term win–win relationship for all stakeholders. The businesses that buy commodities and sell brands and have strong pricing power (typically depicted by high gross margins) should always remember that possessing pricing power is like having access to a large amount of credit. You may have it in abundance, but you must use it sparingly. Having pricing power doesn’t mean you exercise it right away. Consumer surplus is a great strategy, especially for subscription-based business models in which management should primarily focus on habit formation and making renewals a no-brainer. Most businesses fail to appreciate this delicate trade-off between high short-term profitability and the longevity accorded to the business through disciplined pricing and offering great customer value. The few businesses that do understand this trade-off always display “pain today, gain tomorrow” thinking in their daily decisions.

fundamental analysts focus their attention on company finances and economic data about industries for which the stocks trade (also known as industries). They are concerned with factors like corporate earnings reports, profit margins, unemployment rates, and gross domestic product (GDP) growth rates. They examine these economic factors to determine how they will affect the demand and supply of a particular stock.

A whaleman was not paid a wage but a “lay,” which was a share of the outcome of the voyage, calculated after the ship had arrived home. First, the oil was gauged, and then it was valued, according to the prevailing market. After that, the costs of the voyage, plus the owners’ half of the profits, were subtracted from the gross amount, and the remainder shared out according to the whalemen’s lays.

In addition to the annual LLC franchise fee of $800, the state of California hits LLCs with a fee based on their gross receipts. This fee has nothing to do with whether your company is profitable or not. It is only based on revenue generated, so you can lose money and still owe the fee.

Our film had also received rave reviews and many “pull quotes” that could be used for marketing. Nick Digilio of WGN Radio, who also happened to be a longtime Phantasm fan, gave us a sensational quote in which he called Bubba Ho-tep “an important piece of American cinema.” And in David Hunter’s review of our film in the Hollywood Reporter, he celebrated our star’s work by writing, “Bruce Campbell in a performance for the ages.” It all looked quite promising, and then Shultz mentioned just one more item—we would need some money to launch this endeavor. The roughed-up budget for this independent Bubba Ho-tep theatrical release came in at about a hundred and thirty thousand dollars. Yikes! But Dave Shultz firmly believed that if luck was with us, we could easily gross multiples of that number and actually turn a profit. For me it was an extremely tough decision. I had made a huge investment from my savings to pay for the production costs of Bubba Ho-tep. My dad in loyal fashion had also kicked in a chunk of change. With his background in financial planning he had always taught me that the best investments are when you invest in yourself and the principles you believe in.

Productivity (is) Process Driven

To make the business model for your new coffee shop work then you will need to achieve around 75% gross margin overall. To achieve this in a typical coffee shop with a typical sales mix of 65% drinks and 35% food, the drinks profit should be around 85% and the food profit around 70%.

You run the engineering analysis department at an architectural firm, and in the past your staff’s salaries have been included in COS. Now the finance folks are moving all those costs out of COS. It’s perfectly reasonable—even though your department has a lot to do with completing an architectural design, a case can be made that it isn’t directly related to any particular job. So does the change matter? You bet. You and your staff are no longer part of what’s often called “above the line.” That means you’re going to show up differently on the corporate radar screen. If your company focuses on gross profit, for instance, management will be monitoring COS carefully. It will try to ensure that departments affecting COS have everything they need to hit their targets. Once you’re outside of COS—“below the line”—the level of attention may be significantly lower.

The “line” generally refers to gross profit. Above that line on the income statement, typically, are sales and COGS or COS. Below the line are operating expenses, interest, and taxes. What’s the difference? Items listed above the line tend to vary more (in the short term) than many of those below the line, and so tend to get more managerial attention.

Product cost goes into cost of goods sold. If product costs go up, gross profit goes down—and gross profit is a key measure for assessing product profitability. Development costs, however, go into R&D, which is included in the operating expense section of the income statement and doesn’t affect gross profit at all.

Specialist mortgage brokers for the self employed and company directors, contractors and CIS workers. We understand how the self employed are paid so we are able to place you with the right lender for your company set up. We can use retained profits and net profits so you don't need to use taxed dividends as income. Use your gross day rate for contract workers or CIS (construction industry scheme) workers.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as an indicator of economic health is, in fact, not a good indicator of a healthy standard of living at all.

profit. At SeniorBridge, which bought Fine Newcombe & Winsby, for instance, fees for aides and for hourly care management have gone up considerably in the years since my family was a client. But the original consultation fee remains $500, a way to introduce prospective families to the services (or to lure them in, depending on your level of cynicism).

People who have seen the latest Greek plan said Athens was proposing new savings in the pension system — the biggest sticking point — which will amount to about 0.4 per cent of gross domestic product this year and just over 1 per cent next year. But this is short of the 1 per cent savings this year and next that Greece’s creditors had demanded. It also relies on higher employer contributions which, alongside proposed tax changes targeting corporate profits, could crimp economic growth, some creditor officials fear. The two sides also remain at loggerheads over rates of valued added tax on electricity and processed food. According to officials who attended the eurogroup meeting, Christine Lagarde, the International Monetary Fund chief, was particularly tough.

What made the movie business unique in the history of corporate capitalism is captured in the screenwriter William Goldman’s maxim, true for many decades: “nobody knows anything.” No other industry pumped out so many products so frequently with so little foreknowledge of whether they would be any good. The only feasible business strategy, it appeared, was to sign up the best creative talent, trust your strongest hunches about what looked likely to appeal to millions of people, and hope you ended up with Back to the Future instead of Ishtar. Over the past few years, however, something big has happened: finally, people in Hollywood do know something. What they know is that branded franchises work. People say they want new ideas and fresh concepts, but in reality they most often go to the multiplex for familiar characters and concepts that remind them of what they already know they like. Big name brands like Marvel, Harry Potter, Fast & Furious, and Despicable Me consistently gross more than $1 billion at the global box office, not only raking in huge profits, but justifying studios’ very existence and the jobs of everyone who works on their glamorous lots. This change has happened slowly over about a decade in Hollywood, making it hard to appreciate its magnitude. But now it is undeniable that the dawn of the franchise film era is the most meaningful revolution in the movie business since the studio system ended, in the 1950s.

The reasons for cooperatives’ success should be obvious by now, but they are worth reiterating: “The major basis for cooperative success…has been superior labor productivity. Studies comparing square-foot output have repeatedly shown higher physical volume of output per hour, and others…show higher quality of product and also economy of material use.”118 Hendrik Thomas concludes from an analysis of Mondragon that “Productivity and profitability are higher for cooperatives than for capitalist firms. It makes little difference whether the Mondragon group is compared with the largest 500 companies, or with small- or medium-scale industries; in both comparisons the Mondragon group is more productive and more profitable.”119 As we have seen, recent research has arrived at the same conclusions. It is a truism by now that worker participation tends to increase productivity and profitability. Research conducted by Henk Thomas and Chris Logan corroborates these conclusions. “A frequent but unfounded criticism,” they observe, “of self-managed firms is that workers prefer to enjoy a high take-home pay rather than to invest in their own enterprises. This has been proven invalid…in the Mondragon case… A comparison of gross investment figures shows that the cooperatives invest on average four times as much as private enterprises.” After a detailed analysis they also conclude that “there can be no doubt that the [Mondragon] cooperatives have been more profitable than capitalist enterprises.”120 Recent data indicate the same thing.121 One particularly successful company, Irizar, which was mentioned earlier, has been awarded prizes for being the most efficient company in its sector; in Spain it has ten competitors, but its market share is 40 percent. The same level of achievement is true of its subsidiaries, for instance in Mexico, where it had a 45 percent market share in 2005, six years after entering the market. An author comments that “the basis for this increased efficiency appears to be linked directly to the organization’s unique participatory and democratic management structure.”122 A major reason for all these successes is Mondragon’s federated structure: the group of cooperatives has its own supply of banking, education, and technical support services. The enormous funds of the central credit union, the Caja Laboral Popular, have likewise been crucial to Mondragon’s expansion. It proves that if cooperatives have access to credit they are perfectly capable of being far more successful than private enterprises.

Costs of production are nothing but the reflection of prior outlays of money for the purpose of bringing in sales revenues and thereby, to the extent that the sales revenues exceed the outlays, earn a profit. But such outlays are simply not present under simple circulation. Smith and Marx have both told us so. They exist only under capitalistic circulation.

It follows that capitalists do not impoverish wage earners, but make it possible for people to be wage earners. For, as I have shown, they are responsible not for the phenomenon of profit, but for the phenomenon of wages. They are responsible for the very existence of wages in the production of products for sale.

objet qui pouvait lui passer sous la main. Elle avait flanqué suffisamment d’hommes à la porte de son auberge au fil des ans pour que chacun sache qu’il valait mieux ne pas la chercher. Fiona fut ravie d’apprendre que Findley avait enfin décidé d’entendre raison et de se marier. Elle exprima son approbation en lui donnant une grosse claque dans le dos avant de serrer Maggy dans ses bras. Beyton, en revanche, lança à Findley un regard apitoyé, l’air de dire : « Profite de ta lune de miel. Ça n’ira pas en s’arrangeant. » Beyton et Fiona n’en crurent pas leurs yeux quand ils apprirent que la jeune femme qui se tenait devant eux était la mère des quatre garçons. Findley leur expliqua brièvement qu’elle ne les avait pas tous enfantés. Ne sachant pas si Malcolm Buchannan avait des hommes postés à Renfrew, il ne se répandit pas en détails. On leur assigna trois chambres. Deux pour les hommes de Findley et les garçons, et la troisième, pour lui et Maggy. Fiona refusa de grimper les deux volées de marches de l’escalier avec plusieurs cuves et l’eau nécessaire pour les remplir, donc il fut convenu que Findley, ses hommes et les garçons se baigneraient dans une salle attenante aux cuisines. Mais d’abord, elle sollicita leur aide pour transporter la baignoire de Maggy à l’étage. Fiona guida le groupe à travers la

Free” has an incredible power that no other pricing does. The Duke behavioral economist Dan Ariely wrote about the power of free in his excellent book Predictably Irrational, describing an experiment in which he offered research subjects the choice of a Lindt chocolate truffle for 15 cents or a Hershey’s Kiss for a mere penny. Nearly three-fourths of the subjects chose the premium truffle rather than the humble Kiss. But when Ariely changed the pricing so that the truffle cost 14 cents and the Kiss was free—the same price differential—more than two-thirds of the subjects chose the inferior (but free) Kisses. The incredible power of free makes it a valuable tool for distribution and virality. It also plays an important role in jump-starting network effects by helping a product achieve the critical mass of users that is required for those effects to kick in. At LinkedIn, we knew that our basic accounts had to be free if we wanted to get to the million users we theorized represented critical mass. Sometimes you can offer a product for free and still be profitable; in the advertising-driven business model, a large enough mass of free users can be valuable even if they never pay for your service. Facebook, for example, doesn’t charge its users a dime, but it is able to generate large amounts of high-gross-margin revenue by selling targeted advertising. But sometimes a product doesn’t lend itself to the advertising model, as is the case with many services used by students and educators. Without third-party revenue, the problem with offering your product to users for free is that you can’t offset your lack of sales by “making it up in volume.

Costs In Maintaining The Primary Amenity, The Golf Course – Fred Layman Fred Layman, aka “The Club Doctor” is a veteran golf course and clubs in transition operations director/consultant. In a series of blogs, he will be speaking about “Keeping your club successful by Giving the Full 360 Degree Experience.” Costs in Maintaining the Primary Amenity, The Golf Course As a multi-sports and golf club consultant, I am often asked, “How much a club should budget to maintain its golf course?”This seems like a never-ending Board of Directors/Owners concern, and that’s understandable. The golf course will consume a significant portion of the cash required to run a club and it is also one of the most visible and member-impacting amenities, so a high level of focus in allowed. Since I began working in the club industry in 1994, I have had the opportunity to interact with leaders of clubs across the country. Typically, the discussions I hear about course maintenance budgets involve benchmarks such as cost per hole or cost per member and a variety of specific characteristics ranging from type of grass to geographic location. To understand the way in which these factors might be used determine how much money a club spends on course maintenance, you can undertake extensive analysis of club industry data. That data reveals that while traditional benchmarks (cost per hole, cost per acre, cost per member, type of grass or geographic location) may represent the actual spending of an individual club, the simple fact that the club up the road is spending more on their course than you are is not enough to justify a decision to beef up the budget. So, how much should you be spending? Contrary to conventional wisdom, industry leaders and myresearch clearly shows that the answer is ultimately not determined by some combination of physical characteristics. The reality is the clubs spend what they can afford. Before you dismiss this idea as random or arbitrary, consider this: The amount a club can afford to spend is eminently quantifiable and can be easily and accurately benchmarked. The proportionality of spending in clubs is highly consistent and represents the foundation of the common club business model. The business model of clubs, defines these proportions as the benchmark. So roughly one-third of a club’s gross profit (don’t think net) is the affordability at the average club. Bottomline: Next time you’re in one of these discussions, remember that your club, like all clubs, is subject to the common industry business model and your budget is driven by your gross profit.

Your business is your primary source of income. You can’t pay your car payment with page views or buy groceries with likes or cover your house payment with gross rating points. In the end, for an owner/operated businesses like yours–if it doesn’t make a profit, it isn’t worth anything.