Joseph, sorry the tech gremlin posted before I was finished. Now with 200 sales an additional 100 sales results in growth being SQUEEZED down to 50% and at 300 each 100 additional squeezes it to 33% growth.
Also you say, "James Li's comments notwithstanding, he wasn't clear whether those operating expenses were savings due to no longer having negative margins due to LCOS and/or savings due to SG&A expenses."
Wouldn't the negative margins been caused by expenses, SG&A being greater than sales? What would have caused negative margins if not expenses?
-
Joseph, sorry the tech gremlin posted before I was finished.
Dec 21 13:39 pm
|Rating:
0
0
All Comments by RC Martin »Syntax-Brillian: A Classic Bottom [View article]
Now with 200 sales an additional 100 sales results in growth being SQUEEZED down to 50% and at 300 each 100 additional squeezes it to 33% growth.
Also you say, "James Li's comments notwithstanding, he wasn't clear whether those operating expenses were savings due to no longer having negative margins due to LCOS and/or savings due to SG&A expenses."
Wouldn't the negative margins been caused by expenses, SG&A being greater than sales? What would have caused negative margins if not expenses?