Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Superdave!!!!

That sucks, guess we'll be back at having all our eggs in one basket come then.



Not that i"m happy as a taxpayer to have something like that "seemingly" go to waste, but there's an accounting principle at work here...that's why I was having some fun with superdave. By strict accounitng principles, if it seems like that station isn't going to generate much in the way of future revenues.....an acct. has no problem ditching it, the sooner the better. There's a name for those past costs. Now whether or not we should be looking at something like that station in terms of strict accounting standards, I dunno......well beyond me.
 
Youre forgetting one glaring fact: Its the government, so the accounting principles you are talking about dont apply. If this was a private company's space station we could talk about the present value of its future cash flows, netted against the cost to put it in space, etc. and decide if its profitable. Governments arent bothered by concepts like "profitability".
 
I just got a little boner over seeing a "sunk" cost being mentioned by someone who doesn't understand the principle..:whatever:



Youre forgetting one glaring fact: Its the government, so the accounting principles you are talking about dont apply. If this was a private company's space station we could talk about the present value of its future cash flows, netted against the cost to put it in space, etc. and decide if its profitable. Governments arent bothered by concepts like "profitability".
 
Why the hell do they have to trash it by sending it plumetting in the pacific in a huge fireball? I would think that 100 billion dollars went towards some pretty sophisticated equiptment that could possible be reused?
 
Top Bottom