3 ms·

Neither is Amazon: http://www.investopedia.com/stock-analysis/031414/amazon-never-makes-money-no-one-cares-amzn-aapl-wag-azo.aspx http://www.investopedia.com/s

• juvoni 11y ago
  Thats done on purpose. They have a choice in the matter, purposefully investing towards a future they can see.
• SilasX 11y ago
  Please stop spreading this. "Reinvesting enormous profits in yourself" breaks sharply from the common understanding of what "not making a profit" means, even if technically correct. Half the accounting industry basically exists to document how much taxable profit you made "even when spending all the money that comes through".
  • pessimizer 11y ago
    "This" is an observation that Amazon makes no profit, and is obvious to everyone. What you're spreading is Amazon P.R. about how no profit is profit, and you have the burden of proof. http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/jeff-bezos-amazon-and-the-lack-of-profits http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/jeff-bezos-amazon-and-t... http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/franklin-foer-confuses-amazons-subsidies-from-the-govvernment-with-profits http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/franklin-foer-confuses-...
    • jvagner 11y ago
      "Profits are independent of investment decisions, at least if a company is not engaged in accounting fraud." Right or wrong, for good or worse, this author is being deliberately obtuse on this matter. Amazon generates profits and re-uses them before they're on the books as profits. It's a tactical decision, and the letter of the accounting law doesn't contravene their strategic decision. If you don't like it, don't buy their stock. They've been at this game for a very long time.. so, it's no surprise.
      • npizzolato 11y ago
        As someone ignorant of accounting law, it's not obvious to me why he's being obtuse, and just saying he is doesn't add anything to the conversation. In the other article, he goes on to say "The people who say that this is due to the fact that they are investing in building up their business are showing their ignorance. Reinvesting and profits are two separate issues. Profits reflect the difference between revenues and costs on current business operations. These can all be used for investment in expansion (as opposed to being paid out as dividends and share buybacks), but they should still show up as profits. Amazon doesn't show profits or at least not much. This means that it costs them as much to run their business as they are getting from customers in revenue. That is not viable as a long-term model even if they are always expanding." Both statements seem like reasonable statements to me (who is, again, ignorant of the law). Is he wrong? Could you expand on why he's wrong?
      • mattmanser 11y ago
        You're misinterpreting marketing as profit. If they are practically giving away kindles or Amazon prime, that's a legitimate marketing cost, not profit spent tactically. There's no guarantee their revenues will stay after they stop spending that money.