Google's Debt Has Increased and 'Cash on Hand' Fell by 22.27% This Past Year
Yesterday: Microsoft Lost Nearly Half of Its 'Cash Reserves' This Past Year
These are the numbers that the corporate media intentionally leaves out. Publishing these sorts of numbers isn't good for Wall Street and the media likes to say that whatever is good for Wall Street is also good for the country. They now tell us that what's good for Intel is GoodForTheCountryâ„¢ even when the exact opposite is true [1, 2, 3, 4].
Debt at Google ("Alphabet") has meanwhile increased by about 500 million dollars to 29,289 million dollars. That's despite mass layoffs. There are already talks of more layoffs and 'heckling'.
Just to be clear, "Cash on Hand" is not actual cash. The term "Cash on Hand" is a misnomer. It is a horrible misnomer that serves to embellish the "debt industry", which also euphemises debt (financial shackles) as "credit".
Also consider "depreciation" (or other misnomers). An old paper explains: "To what extent is depreciation (and other non-cash charges) a source of cash? Holding all else constant, the answer depends on the level of income used for income taxes and dividend payments. "Depreciation is a source of funds" is a common but misleading statement. Taking this idea literally creates the impression that by setting pencil to paper and increasing the depreciation expenses, cash or funds will be generated. It should be understood that depreciation does not provide cash---only sales and external financing can do this. Being a non-cash expense, depreciation is only a means of conserving the outflow of cash from the firm. This is done by reducing the payments for income taxes and dividends.The American Institute of CPAs clarified the relationship between depreciation and cash in its discussion of the cash flow concept in financial literature. "The expression cash flow, or any other similar term, in the literature of investments and security analysis is usually the equivalent of 'funds provided by operations' in the typical funds statement. This concept has a valid factual background. Funds are normally acquired through the earning of revenue. (In some cases a revenue item does not provide funds, as in the case of the amortization of deferred income, and adjustments should be made for such items.) Unlike the out-of-pocket-expenses, such as labor and materials, depreciation and other similar expenses do not represent outlays of funds. Normally, therefore, there will be a balance of available funds that is greater than the amount of net income. The net income of a business does not indicate the full amount of spending power that is generated in a particular period by revenue-earning operations, after providing for all of the current or short-term operating requirements." The addition of depreciation (or other such items) to the amount of net income is merely a short cut technique for arriving at at the amount of funds derived from operations. This adjustment helps to explain some of the things that have happened, such as how a business has been able to modernize its plant or pay off a loan without borrowing more money or issuing more shares of stock. The term "cash flow," however, is a misnomer---it is neither cash nor flow. The net income is, with rare exceptions, computed on an accrual basis, not on a cash basis. Adding back such items as depreciation does not convert the net income to something that can properly be called cash flow or income, since the result still reflects such things as the sales and purchase of goods and services on account, the lag between the acquisition or production of merchandise or products and their appearance on the income statement as a "cost of goods sold" deduction, various accruals of income and expenses, and the amortization of deferred charges or prepaid expenses and deferred credits (that should be and sometimes are involved in the adjustment of net income). To what extent is depreciation (and other non-cash charges) a source of cash? Holding all else constant, the answer depends on the level of income used for income taxes and dividend payments."Depreciation is a source of funds" is a common but misleading statement. Taking this idea literally creates the impression that by setting pencil to paper and increasing the depreciation expenses, cash or funds will be generated. It should be understood that depreciation does not provide cash---only sales and external financing can do this. Being a non-cash expense, depreciation is only a means of conserving the outflow of cash from the firm. This is done by reducing the payments for income taxes and dividends.The American Institute of CPAs clarified the relationship between depreciation and cash in its discussion of the cash flow concept in financial literature. "The expression cash flow, or any other similar term, in the literature of investments and security analysis is usually the equivalent of 'funds provided by operations' in the typical funds statement. This concept has a valid factual background. Funds are normally acquired through the earning of revenue. (In some cases a revenue item does not provide funds, as in the case of the amortization of deferred income, and adjustments should be made for such items.) Unlike the out-of-pocket-expenses, such as labor and materials, depreciation and other similar expenses do not represent outlays of funds. Normally, therefore, there will be a balance of available funds that is greater than the amount of net income. The net income of a business does not indicate the full amount of spending power that is generated in a particular period by revenue-earning operations, after providing for all of the current or short-term operating requirements." The addition of depreciation (or other such items) to the amount of net income is merely a short cut technique for arriving at at the amount of funds derived from operations. This adjustment helps to explain some of the things that have happened, such as how a business has been able to modernize its plant or pay off a loan without borrowing more money or issuing more shares of stock. The term cash flow, however, is a misnomer --- it is neither cash nor flow. The net income is, with rare exceptions, computed on an accrual basis, not on a cash basis. Adding back such items as depreciation does not convert the net income to something that can properly be called cash flow or income, since the result still reflects such things as the sales and purchase of goods and services on account, the lag between the acquisition or production of merchandise or products and their appearance on the income statement as a "cost of goods sold" deduction, various accruals of income and expenses, and the amortization of deferred charges or prepaid expenses and deferred credits (that should be and sometimes are involved in the adjustment of net income). If the purpose is to determine the degree to which depreciation conserves cash then the question arises: Is depreciation 100 percent conserver of cash; if not, to what extent does it conserve cash? If the purpose is to determine the degree to which depreciation conserves cash then the question arises: Is depreciation 100 percent conserver of cash; if not, to what extent does it conserve cash?" â–ˆ