Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dwight E. Karlsen who wrote (10128)	7/12/1998 10:04:00 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 164684

>>"those fullfillment costs that aren't in cost of sales are in marketing"...very ambiguous, and how convenient...what percent of order fulfillment costs are in marketing, and why are they there in the first place?? << so... they can say that if they didn't have to market they would be "profitable" and all the neophyte investors would lather themselves up again... maybe??? ;-)

To: Dwight E. Karlsen who wrote (10128)	7/13/1998 9:50:00 PM
From: Glenn D. Rudolph	Respond to of 164684

"those fullfillment costs that aren't in cost of sales are in marketing"...very ambiguous, and how convenient...what percent of order fulfillment costs are in marketing, and why are they there in the first place?? Dwight, I felt this was straight forward. The cost of goods sold (the books) is not in marketing. However, all labor to fill orders and maintain the business are expensed into marketing. This makes the marketing expenses inflated and makes the argument that without marketing, they would be profitable appear more likely. Operating costs which is what fulfillment costs and maintenance is, should not be in marketing. The P/L sheet does not even have a line item for costs of operations. They are all thrown into marketing. They have marketing and administrative costs. That is pretty much it. Glenn