Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JohnNephew" data-source="post: 2760149" data-attributes="member: 2171">Thanks, everyone, for coming to my defense.  Yer makin' me blush.No, but it would help if you read the SEC documents of Hasbro, if you want to say anything useful about them.If you did, then you would find for example that in the Form 10-K405 (annual report: <a href="http://ccbn.10kwizard.com/xml/download.php?repo=tenk&ipage=1370318&format=PDF" target="_blank">http://ccbn.10kwizard.com/xml/download.php?repo=tenk&ipage=1370318&format=PDF</a>) for the year 2000 -- the year that D&D 3rd Edition was launched, an event that was probably the biggest and most successful product launch in the history of the roleplaying game industry -- the term "Dungeons and Dragons" is found exactly once in the 286 page PDF document.Given that the biggest product launch in the history of roleplaying didn't even get a mention in Hasbro's annual report for the year 2000 (the single mention of D&D is this sentence: "WIZARDS OF THE COAST trading card and roleplaying games include the popular MAGIC: THE GATHERING, DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS, POKEMON and MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL SHOWDOWN."), I think that my point, which you seem to be disputing, stands: D&D RPG's financial performance is pretty much not material in the big picture of Hasbro's finances, as it does not even warrant mention in their reports to shareholders.I'd love for you to bring your expertise to bear on Hasbro's financial reports and enlighten us all as to what they tell you about the performance of D&D over time.You quibbled with my phrasing, and then agreed with my point, as though it were a different point.  Specifically, you said:This was my point. GAAP earnings sometimes provide a deceptive view of how a company is doing, particularly for companies such as REITs (Real Estate Investment Trusts, for those who don't know all these abbreviations) that may have a lot of depreciation in their financials.  Investors in REITS prefer to look at FFO (funds from operations), which is similar to but not the same as cash flow.  In some industries people tend to look at EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization).  I'm not simply talking about cash flow, but a more general "how is the health of the business" question (which is harder question to answer for any company in any industry).To repeat my original observation: "In some industries, profit is a very unreliable measure of the performance of a company (for example, REITs, where depreciation and amortization have a huge impact on the P&L sheet and distort reported and taxable earnings)."I'm sorry I didn't phrase this with the technical precision required to avert confusion at your "high level" of expertise.  I should perhaps have said: "In some industries, profit as measured by earnings calculated under generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) is a very unreliable indicator of the performance of a company.  For example, Real Estate Investment Trusts have GAAP earnings that are strongly influenced by the certain financial characteristics of their industry, such as the depreciation of real property; such depreciation appears on the profit and loss portion of their financial statements, affecting GAAP earnings, but does not actually indicate cash expenditures.  Consequently, a REIT that shows an operating loss or very small profit in its GAAP earnings could in fact be a very healthy business."I can come up with lots of other examples of industries and specific companies where GAAP earnings may provide a misleading impression of fiscal health (painting either too rosy or too gloomy a picture). Of course, as you say, you can too.  (So I'm not sure why you needed to make a big deal out of intentionally misreading the example I offhandedly gave...)  Having some personal business experience in the game industry, I am especially familiar with the ways that true financial statements and claims in our field may be subject to misinterpretation by people who hear a given statement but don't have the raw numbers behind it (which, in this field, tends to be everyone except the individual making the statements or claims).</blockquote>

Verification