3 ms·

> Starbucks in 2019: Made $26.5 billion dollars Hold on a minute, that's Starbucks' revenue, not profit. You haven't accounted for any non-labour expense. Fr

> Starbucks in 2019: Made $26.5 billion dollars Hold on a minute, that's Starbucks' revenue, not profit. You haven't accounted for any non-labour expense. From its financial data (https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SBUX/financials?p=SBUX https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SBUX/financials?p=SBUX) (Yahoo link for convenience), that $26.5b revenue is directly offset by $19b in cost-of-goods-sold (including some salaries already paid). Other overhead and depreciation accounts for another $3.5bn, and interest expenses contribute $235m. The net pre-tax profit for Starbucks is $3.9bn, and if that were distributed equally among all employees (from your figure) it would result in about $11,200/worker over and above their existing salary. That's closer to the break-even-wage-rate that Starbucks could conceivably offer, if it's intended to have zero return on capital (about $19bn in current assets for FY2019). And that figure is volatile; if you repeat for this fiscal year you'd calculate about $3200/worker.

pydry 6y ago
It's net revenue, not "revenue", and that accounts for salaries. Arguably depreciation ought to be included in that number, but not capital investment. When Amazon made zero gross profit for a decade (or was it two?) it wasn't because they weren't making profits.
- Majromax 6y ago
  > It's net revenue, not "revenue", Check the financial statements again. The $26.5b figure you cite is gross revenue, of which $24.4b is operating revenue. From that revenue you deduct the $19b cost of goods sold (including salaries) to find $7.5b of operating profit, and from that you deduct depreciation and administration expenses. New investment does not show up as an expense on a financial statement, since it builds capital -- at the accounting level it's a transformation of one asset (cash) to another (land/equipment/etc).

pydry 6y ago

It's net revenue, not "revenue", and that accounts for salaries. Arguably depreciation ought to be included in that number, but not capital investment. When Amazon made zero gross profit for a decade (or was it two?) it wasn't because they weren't making profits.

Majromax 6y ago
> It's net revenue, not "revenue", Check the financial statements again. The $26.5b figure you cite is gross revenue, of which $24.4b is operating revenue. From that revenue you deduct the $19b cost of goods sold (including salaries) to find $7.5b of operating profit, and from that you deduct depreciation and administration expenses. New investment does not show up as an expense on a financial statement, since it builds capital -- at the accounting level it's a transformation of one asset (cash) to another (land/equipment/etc).