It’s relevant in that it’s entirely misleading. If profits are low they aren’t actually able to just “coast along” making less revenue.
Crowdstrike posted a GAAP Net Loss of 20 million for 2025. So a 30-50M cost savings is the difference in continuing on at all or not. There’s more to it than that, obviously.
Your point is (probably) valid once you fix your words which is what I assume you mean by saying it’s not relevant. But, instead of telling people their rebuttal is irrelevant you should try to adjust your own words to convey your message more accurately.
The quarterly profit motive where CEOs are incentivized through bonus structures to focus on short term profit goals leads to situations where the companies product or service is substandard and they make bad long term decisions that affect the lives of many including their own employees when they over hire and then can no longer afford to pay them.
Might be worth mentioning how much money the company spent in stock buybacks, and how much the executives were compensated in previous years. It’s a shame.
Yes, but I dont think that’s relevant. Whether gross or net, they are still ruining lives to achieve a pointless profit motive.
Edit: relevant, not irrelevant
It’s relevant in that it’s entirely misleading. If profits are low they aren’t actually able to just “coast along” making less revenue.
Crowdstrike posted a GAAP Net Loss of 20 million for 2025. So a 30-50M cost savings is the difference in continuing on at all or not. There’s more to it than that, obviously.
Your point is (probably) valid once you fix your words which is what I assume you mean by saying it’s not relevant. But, instead of telling people their rebuttal is irrelevant you should try to adjust your own words to convey your message more accurately.
The quarterly profit motive where CEOs are incentivized through bonus structures to focus on short term profit goals leads to situations where the companies product or service is substandard and they make bad long term decisions that affect the lives of many including their own employees when they over hire and then can no longer afford to pay them.
Might be worth mentioning how much money the company spent in stock buybacks, and how much the executives were compensated in previous years. It’s a shame.