Never take “net profits.” Ever. She won’t ever see a cent (until Barney dies, of course, but that’s another matter)
Related
13 Comments
I guess she’s old enough that it needn’t be creepy that her manipulation is based on her father and stepmother’s sex life.
This is pharma, not Hollywood.
But you’re not as clever as you think you are either. It’s a not-for-profit venture. She’s doing it to help people. She doesn’t expect to make a cent from it.
Also, “not as clever as she thinks she is” is pretty much part of the character.
LYSISTRATA “worked” because *every* woman in the area bought into the deal. I don’t read this strip regularly, but is Barney (a rich capitalist) faithful to and, in practice, restricted to, canoodling only with his own wife, as opposed to all of the amateurs and professionals in (?) London? If not, not much of a threat.
Nonetheless, Pete, the net is what Barney is promising to return to Cynthia, rather than profiting from it. This is what Cynthia is negotiating for.
Bill, I’m not sure how it works if it goes the way you imagine it: Pillsbury sells it to the developing countries, instead of it being given to them by a non-for-profit — the people who most need it now need to pay for it. Surely even Cynthia realizes that this is not at all what she wants, even if she somehow gets all the profits, not just the net. I mean, what’s she going to do with these profits? Reimburse the purchasers? That’s terribly inefficient when she is in the position to cut out the middleman and just give them away to begin with. She negotiates about profits for a while, but then goes nuclear; at that point, the previous discussion is out the window, she renegotiates the deal entirely, presenting it as him now backing their non-for-profit, ie: giving away the kits. There will be no profit to squabble about any longer.
Cynthia has been offered a Hobson’s choice; she can either take the offer (of net profit), or take nothing. Are you suggesting that she should have taken nothing?
A not-for-profit doesn’t have to give away everything, presumably: it can still sell stuff, and pay staff salaries, if it doesn’t make a formal profit distributed as a dividend to shareholders and instead any accidental trading surplus is reabsorbed by the organisation for contingencies and to drive down costs. Charities staffed entirely by volunteers might be able to give away everything for free less various costs like warehousing, insurance and electricity – though presumably a single-family charity can pay those costs directly.
How exactly did Barney think he’d get away with this anyway?
Shrug — yes, he is. He has quite a few character flaws, but his character virtues include tenacious loyalty to his specific family and friends.
“How exactly did Barney think he’d get away with this anyway?”
Normally, all he has to worry about are laws, and he has some of the best lawyers around telling him how to get around them. He didn’t think that in dealing with family there might be other methods to enforce fairness.
narmitaj – This is a concept that my mom – with a masters in taxation and a BBA in accounting can’t understand. She is upset that art museums in NYC charge admission instead of just a voluntary contribution as they should not be allowed to as they are not for profits. I point out to her that places like Colonial Williamsburg charge admission and they are also a nfp. The national of my embroidery guild sells kits and instructions to members and they are a nfp. Our reenactment unit generally “asks for” an honorarium for us to come to cover costs (black powder is not free) – we are a nfp. (We do some events without the honorarium or for a lower one depending on who it is we are doing the event for and also get an annual stipend from the town we represent, as well as free use of our HQ, but we are required to do at least 3 events for them annually plus colorguards, parades, tours of the HQ when they need someone etc.
The idea is that is that nfp is not doing what they are doing to make a profit, as said, but rather to cover expenses and educate, help with medical, religious or other similar matters. The agency that Robert ran was a nfp and was a children’ health agency/school.
And also that there are not dividends or similar distribution to investors.
Comics I Don't Understand 
I guess she’s old enough that it needn’t be creepy that her manipulation is based on her father and stepmother’s sex life.
This is pharma, not Hollywood.
But you’re not as clever as you think you are either. It’s a not-for-profit venture. She’s doing it to help people. She doesn’t expect to make a cent from it.
Also, “not as clever as she thinks she is” is pretty much part of the character.
LYSISTRATA “worked” because *every* woman in the area bought into the deal. I don’t read this strip regularly, but is Barney (a rich capitalist) faithful to and, in practice, restricted to, canoodling only with his own wife, as opposed to all of the amateurs and professionals in (?) London? If not, not much of a threat.
Nonetheless, Pete, the net is what Barney is promising to return to Cynthia, rather than profiting from it. This is what Cynthia is negotiating for.
Bill, I’m not sure how it works if it goes the way you imagine it: Pillsbury sells it to the developing countries, instead of it being given to them by a non-for-profit — the people who most need it now need to pay for it. Surely even Cynthia realizes that this is not at all what she wants, even if she somehow gets all the profits, not just the net. I mean, what’s she going to do with these profits? Reimburse the purchasers? That’s terribly inefficient when she is in the position to cut out the middleman and just give them away to begin with. She negotiates about profits for a while, but then goes nuclear; at that point, the previous discussion is out the window, she renegotiates the deal entirely, presenting it as him now backing their non-for-profit, ie: giving away the kits. There will be no profit to squabble about any longer.
Cynthia has been offered a Hobson’s choice; she can either take the offer (of net profit), or take nothing. Are you suggesting that she should have taken nothing?
A not-for-profit doesn’t have to give away everything, presumably: it can still sell stuff, and pay staff salaries, if it doesn’t make a formal profit distributed as a dividend to shareholders and instead any accidental trading surplus is reabsorbed by the organisation for contingencies and to drive down costs. Charities staffed entirely by volunteers might be able to give away everything for free less various costs like warehousing, insurance and electricity – though presumably a single-family charity can pay those costs directly.
How exactly did Barney think he’d get away with this anyway?
Shrug — yes, he is. He has quite a few character flaws, but his character virtues include tenacious loyalty to his specific family and friends.
“How exactly did Barney think he’d get away with this anyway?”
Normally, all he has to worry about are laws, and he has some of the best lawyers around telling him how to get around them. He didn’t think that in dealing with family there might be other methods to enforce fairness.
narmitaj – This is a concept that my mom – with a masters in taxation and a BBA in accounting can’t understand. She is upset that art museums in NYC charge admission instead of just a voluntary contribution as they should not be allowed to as they are not for profits. I point out to her that places like Colonial Williamsburg charge admission and they are also a nfp. The national of my embroidery guild sells kits and instructions to members and they are a nfp. Our reenactment unit generally “asks for” an honorarium for us to come to cover costs (black powder is not free) – we are a nfp. (We do some events without the honorarium or for a lower one depending on who it is we are doing the event for and also get an annual stipend from the town we represent, as well as free use of our HQ, but we are required to do at least 3 events for them annually plus colorguards, parades, tours of the HQ when they need someone etc.
The idea is that is that nfp is not doing what they are doing to make a profit, as said, but rather to cover expenses and educate, help with medical, religious or other similar matters. The agency that Robert ran was a nfp and was a children’ health agency/school.
And also that there are not dividends or similar distribution to investors.