|
Originally Posted by vegabondpilot
(Post 3668141)
Bluedriver, you really should take a breath and think deeper about what we're trying to say. Profit sharing based on net income is really weak. It's not an "accounting gimmick". It's GAAP accounting 101. And, it's how hundreds of growth companies structure their finances.
Don't end up scratching your head in confusion 10 years later when the company prints cash, triples in size, the stock goes parabolic, and not once reports a positive net income. |
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
(Post 3668279)
Dont end up scratching your head when JB pilots get the profit sharing plan BACK that they used to have, when the company was an even younger growth company, and it starts paying good checks AGAIN.
|
Originally Posted by Hugh Betcha
(Post 3668350)
Play nice boys. You're both too smart to let the internet get to you. It's a good conversation, and some of us need to hear different opinions about the details you guys are talking about.
|
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
(Post 3668368)
Don't disagree, but I certainly don't need to hear from him why we can't have back what we already had and how the plan wouldn't pay anything ("because we're a growth company"), yet in actuality it paid quite a lot over several years.
|
Originally Posted by vegabondpilot
(Post 3668420)
I never said that. I said there are better ways to calc profit sharing that are less susceptible to accounting shenanigans than net income. All airline profit sharing language is weak, imo. We could/should do better with this contract.
A question while you're looking for that quote. Is English your primary language? You regularly start arguing points that others haven't made, only to argue with yourself, about something you brought into the conversation. |
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
(Post 3668438)
Can you quote me ever saying "net income" please? I'll wait.
A question while you're looking for that quote. Is English your primary language? You regularly start arguing points that others haven't made, only to argue with yourself, about something you brought into the conversation. Don't confuse your lack of accounting 101 knowledge for my deficiency in English. Lulz. |
Miatas are not sports cars. Change my mind….
|
Originally Posted by vegabondpilot
(Post 3668549)
Ok, my bad. Based on how you were using the term "profit" I assumed you referring to the GAAP definition of Net Income (which is typically synonymous). That also happens to be how UA/DL/B6 calculate profit sharing. Well, more accurately they use the term "pre-tax profit" which they define as Net Income before taxes so they can deduct the profit sharing payment. But, it's based on Net Income.
Don't confuse your lack of accounting 101 knowledge for my deficiency in English. Lulz. Well seeing that in the US and I assume most places “net income” is post tax, what you meant was “gross income” so good job f’ing that up as well. |
Originally Posted by flippedr6
(Post 3668606)
Well seeing that in the US and I assume most places “net income” is post tax, what you meant was “gross income” so good job f’ing that up as well.
The language in the contract(s) is “Pre-Tax Profit” which is a made up term, but they define it as pre-tax (and other adjustments to) Net Income. |
Originally Posted by Tranquility
(Post 3668603)
Miatas are not sports cars. Change my mind….
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:20 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands