Talk:Earnings per share
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|The content of Diluted earnings per share was merged into Earnings per share. That page now redirects here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see ; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. (8 Mar 2015)|
I was looking for HEADLINE EARNINGS/(LOSS) and EARNINGS PER SHARE. I don't know the cpy right accociation, so you may please decide what you can put up on Wiki....
I need to find the formula to count the Weighted Average number of shares.
- If there were 10000 shares at start of year and 5000 issued on 11th day of a non leap year then the weighted average would be (10000*10+15000*355)/365. Is that enough of a clue? Do you have other things happening to the shares besides a share issue? crandles 13:36, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm with Paul, you need to define WANofS somewhere. I realize now it is basically Number Of Shares (thx Yunus), the weighted average bit makes you think it's something more complicated.
Could somebody please tell me about, "what is expected from a EPS value?" Greater value indicate what? And a lesser value indicate what? How to tell by looking at EPS value that company is going well? (In terms of shares , investment) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bantipadam02 (talk • contribs) 23:10, 29 March 2010 (UTC) I searched on "Diluted Earnings" and was brought to this page outlining the definition of EPS. There is little mention or clarification of what the dilutive effect means or why there are two ways to consider EPS (non diluted vs diluted). The search term for this page should at least be cleaned up so that 'diluted earnings' doesn't drop someone to this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 01:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
- Support I agree; Diluted is a subset of this article. Further both are likely to be relevant to readers. Ignorant people come to Wikipedia to be educated. The readers know nothing about the topic that is being discussed, we should presume. Therefore, (a) If they are not familiar with Diluted EPS then they are probably not familiar with EPS, and vice versa, and they would need to know about both to properly understand either one. And (b) understanding Diluted EPS would help one understand EPS, and vice versa. Reading about both together would have more impact on their knowledge then reading them separately. Reading about both gives a fully context, which is what an encyclopedia is all about. The whole, with the context, is bigger, more informative than the parts, so to speak. --Bruce Hall (talk) 06:07, 12 July 2012 (UTC)