I do wish The Observer knew what a profit isJuly 22, 2012 Tim WorstallTimmy Elsewhere15 CommentsGrr. previousA note to ReutersnextUntrue numbers about milk 15 thoughts on “I do wish The Observer knew what a profit is” SadButMadLad July 22, 2012 at 12:41 pm But sometimes it depends on the pleasure factor. You could earn £50/hr but hate it or you could do something which you really enjoy at £25/hr. If both cover your cost of living then it would be valid to take the cheaper job. Grumpy Old Man July 22, 2012 at 12:50 pm Tenses in a sentence should agree. …knew what a profit was. Richard Allan July 22, 2012 at 1:34 pm Grumpy, you’re wrong I’m afraid. The English subjunctive works thus: “The English subjunctive also occurs in counterfactual dependent clauses, using a form of the verb that in the indicative would indicate a time of action prior to the one implied by the subjunctive. It is called the past subjunctive when referring counterfactually to the present, and is called the pluperfect subjunctive when referring counterfactually to the past. It occurs in that clauses following the main-clause verb “wish” (“I wish that she were here now”[)]” Shinsei67 July 22, 2012 at 1:40 pm I thought much the same watching TV’s “Bank of Dave”, which seemed to be very popular with everyone from right to left as way of improving on existing banking system. Claiming that High St banks only give you 2% return on your savings he went off to show how easy it was to make 2%. So he spent a day day-trading on FTSE and NASDAQ and made 5% to show how easy it was, and therefore how banks must be ripping us all off. He then showed how in his first quarter of lending out £25,000 per week to pretty much every Tom, Dick and Harry who owned a florists or cafe in Burnley he had made £10k “profit”. However he wasn’t paying himself for any his time spent driving round county making loan decisions nor any cost of capital for personally underwriting all loans. I know it’s only a TV programme but naive populism isn’t going to help popular understanding of business or restructuring the banking system. Can TV only explain business through the likes of Dave and Alan Sugar ? Shinsei67 July 22, 2012 at 1:42 pm Am always surprised The Observer give Victoria Cohen such support seeing as she often lauds the online poker business as a wonderful way to make money whilst avoiding paying any nasty income tax. Tim Almond July 22, 2012 at 5:16 pm Shinsei67, Can TV only explain business through the likes of Dave and Alan Sugar ? Dragon’s Den is quite good IMO (there’s certain things done to make it more “TV like”, but in terms of what a business investor wants to know, it’s quite sound). It’s also real people investing their money in real businesses (I used Magic Whiteboard on a project and it was very good). Philip Walker July 22, 2012 at 6:10 pm Look on the bright side: we now have something to point back to when Polly tells the world that it’s easy to make money being a banker. One of their own, brightest and best, tried it was lucky to come away with his shirt… Shinsei67 July 22, 2012 at 6:55 pm @Tim Almond Thanks. Evan Davies also very good on R4’s Bottom Line. Though rather too keen to let CEO’s get away with claiming they run open door management with flat structures, staff are their greatest resource, only mistakes they ever make are not being bold enough etc. PaulB July 22, 2012 at 8:45 pm I suppose that the Observer was paying the writers for their time. On the other hand, they took the profits off them and gave them to charity. So for the writers, it was just another day working for the man. Incidentally, Coren hasn’t won a world poker championship, but she is a very good player. Arnald July 23, 2012 at 12:45 am Evan Davies is a corporate mofo, much more than Peston, but uncomparable to the steph flan only PaulB could be bothered to getv V Coren’s name right. Shows what a pile of shit I havve to trawl through to see what idiots sount like. As it is, Coren would wipe you off the table in most intellctual debates, whilst fleecing your egoistic pretences. Arnald July 23, 2012 at 12:47 am again i have to apologise that i am typing on a keyboard where most of the buttons are made of lego. especialy vvvvvvvvvvvv me again July 23, 2012 at 9:25 am I am confused by the Forbes article as the definition of Profit appears to flit between Return on Capital and surplus after Labour Costs are figured. Dinero July 23, 2012 at 1:41 pm Two activites can have different profits. Tim is saying only the higher is profit. Then what does he call the lower. Are they not both profits, but of different sizes. Surreptitious Evil July 23, 2012 at 3:40 pm Two activites can have different profits. Tim is saying only the higher is profit. No, he’s not. What he is saying is that giving up your normal job to run a low paying business is a comparative loss. Your time is a resource input to the business and should be costed at what you could make if you weren’t running the business (or at the value to you of the leisure time you are forgoing.) The Observer piece does neither. Victoria Coren (and, Arnald, you might note that Tim also got her name right) is apparently far better off than me. On the other hand, I bill significantly more than £168 per day for my professional time – even when I am working PAYE for HMG (and my fixed costs are low and marginal ones generally negligible.) And she was making more than double what Rayner was. MrPotarto July 23, 2012 at 7:45 pm If she was really demonstrating how to become a professional poker player, she would have started with more than 100 quid. To point out that when she plays with more money she makes more money seems a bit fatuous. The Observer gave six people some money and asked them to use their initiative and make it grow. Five of them used their skills and did so. One of them tried something he knew nothing about and lost almost all of it. To me this article says a lot about the possibilities for people to strike out on their own. Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.