3 ms·
The article is critically flawed. This author is merely regurgitating another blog post [0], and wrongly, conflating profits with revenues. The original post
by caminante 8y ago
The article is critically flawed.
This author is merely regurgitating another blog post [0], and wrongly, conflating profits with revenues. The original post didn't make the same representations.
[0] https://www.oag.com/blog/billion-dollar-route https://www.oag.com/blog/billion-dollar-route
- disillusioned 8y agoIn fairness, only the headline uses "profit", and was conceivably changed by an editor. The Forbes article refers to it appropriately as revenue throughout.
- ksec 8y agoDoes makes $1 billion implies it has a profits or $1B, or could it also mean $1 billion revenue. I had a little thoughts about this the when commenting on Reddit revenue post, someone said make $1 billion means $1 billion profits. But I often sees Financial Newspaper refer Making x amount of money being revenue.
- caminante 8y agoMake (without context) is ambiguous because you don't know what's made.
- caminante 8y agoSee the "Revenue Per Hour" paragraph. The author uses earnings (not earned revenue), which implies income or profits.
- c3534l 8y agoThat difference makes the article rather uninteresting. It's clear that the highest grossing flights are just the ones which are the most common and most costly. In that kind of situation, airlines might even be competing as loss leaders: strategically operating at unprofitable levels in order to win market share and make up the difference on other flights travelers take. That is, there's a good chance in my mind that not only are these route not the most profitable, they could be the least profitable.