To: t_skoz
Loss Widens at XM Satellite Radio XM Satellite's loss shrinks
I must be missing something.
6 posted on
02/10/2005 1:36:47 PM PST by
granite
(WHY ARE WE IN IRAQ?)
To: granite
7 posted on
02/10/2005 1:38:17 PM PST by
RushCrush
(If it takes a bloodbath, let's get it over with. No more appeasement. - Reagan)
To: granite
“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics.”
Mark Twain
10 posted on
02/10/2005 1:42:51 PM PST by
B-bone
To: granite
The per-share loss calculations, however, fell to 93 cents in the latest period from $1.12 a year ago because of an increase in the number of shares outstanding. The loss was smaller than the $1.02 per share that analysts polled by Thomson First Call had been expecting.The loss is distributed over a wider number of outstanding shares as compared to last year. So the total loss is greater, but the per share loss is lower.
12 posted on
02/10/2005 1:45:26 PM PST by
kaboom
To: granite
Simple really. A widening loss is the same as a shrinking loss, only different.
18 posted on
02/10/2005 2:04:53 PM PST by
ladtx
( "Remember your regiment and follow your officers." Captain Charles May, 2d Dragoons, 9 May 1846)
To: granite
In the article it details it all.
The loss widened in as much XM is still not making money. The loss shrunk in that they're losing less.
Just like how the Democrats play word games.
37 posted on
02/10/2005 4:04:25 PM PST by
Bogey78O
(Hillary Clinton + Fertility pills + Scott Peterson + rowboat = Success)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson