Jump to content

Talk:Profit (accounting): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:
==Bulk of initial content not useful for general public==
==Bulk of initial content not useful for general public==
The abrupt swinging of content into the form-of-production deep-dive appears to be skewed. As noted by the author of this section, while "Profit is one of the major sources of economic well-being ", economic well-being is not a necessary nor sufficient outcome to warrant a lengthy discourse.
The abrupt swinging of content into the form-of-production deep-dive appears to be skewed. As noted by the author of this section, while "Profit is one of the major sources of economic well-being ", economic well-being is not a necessary nor sufficient outcome to warrant a lengthy discourse.
Profit in the spirit of accounting should be more useful to the general public when anchored upon relevant authoritative publications by institutions or at least an authoritative historical discourse such as that of John Hicks'<ref>{{cite web|title=Example of Hick's concept|url=http://www.accountingin.com/accounting-historians-journal/volume-9-number-1/hicks-on-accounting/}}</ref>. I propose that we either split this into two articles (1:economic well-being 2:accounting profit) or replace the entire section to define and cite sources useful to the general public. Am happy to do that if there's no objections.
Profit in the spirit of accounting should be more useful to the general public when anchored upon relevant authoritative publications by institutions or at least an authoritative historical discourse such as that of John Hicks'<ref>{{cite web|title=Example of Hick's concept|url=http://www.accountingin.com/accounting-historians-journal/volume-9-number-1/hicks-on-accounting/}}</ref>. I propose that we either split this into two articles (1:economic well-being 2:accounting profit) or replace the entire section to define and cite sources useful to the general public. Am happy to do that if there's no objections.--justexamples 16:09, 18 August 2016 (UTC)


==Untitled==
==Untitled==

Revision as of 16:09, 18 August 2016

Bulk of initial content not useful for general public

The abrupt swinging of content into the form-of-production deep-dive appears to be skewed. As noted by the author of this section, while "Profit is one of the major sources of economic well-being ", economic well-being is not a necessary nor sufficient outcome to warrant a lengthy discourse. Profit in the spirit of accounting should be more useful to the general public when anchored upon relevant authoritative publications by institutions or at least an authoritative historical discourse such as that of John Hicks'[1]. I propose that we either split this into two articles (1:economic well-being 2:accounting profit) or replace the entire section to define and cite sources useful to the general public. Am happy to do that if there's no objections.--justexamples 16:09, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Untitled

About the suggested merger with Net Income: Agree that all articles concerning profit/income/earnings need to be more closely synchronized - there's a huge mess of synonymous terminology that's confusing, at least for the uninitiated. Disagree with a merger with net income, though - there are many other proft terms that do not translate directly into 'net income' which should be discussed under profit. One could consider a merge with 'income', but this term is so broad that we would lose usefulness => keep the existing split but synchronize articles more closely - with today's edits hopefully being a first step :-)

Update: Considering that the 'discuss proposed merger' tag has been there for over half a year without any comments I will remove it.

--Hakseng (talk) 04:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Revenue" instead of "price" in definition?

In the 1st sentence of the head, shouldn't the definition of profit be the difference between (total) revenue and (total) cost of producing a good or service (and bringing it to the market), instead of cost vs. price (which is a per-unit, or average, measure)? Using "revenue," "total revenue," etc. would be consistent with the usage in the rest of the article, but "price" isn't consistent. --Jackftwist (talk) 22:51, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "Example of Hick's concept".