4 ms·
True, but the article gives also zero proof that anything disreputable has been going on in terms of accounting. While maybe not as straightforward, it does als
by thesumofall 7y ago
True, but the article gives also zero proof that anything disreputable has been going on in terms of accounting. While maybe not as straightforward, it does also not sound illogical to spread development costs across the early sales phase of an aircraft.
- hurricanetc 7y agoThe author tosses around some strong and unfounded accusations but my takeaway was that this accounting practice is ethical but risky. Case in point... Boeing isn't manufacturing or selling the 737-MAX as of this moment. If their accounting practices rely on them selling planes to recoup costs and they aren't currently even manufacturing the planes I think it is fair to ask what the financial health of the company really truly is.
- AndrewBissell 7y agoStoller writes: > The problem is that accounting for these costs have been pushed into the future based on anticipated sales, which is risky but manageable IF you can build safe aircraft airliners want to buy. Boeing's accounting methods are perfectly fine (arguably even preferable) if they are able to sell the planes whose costs they are spreading into the future. The question (and the risk to shareholders) is whether they cut so many corners to juice financial results that that will prove not to be the case.