Of course, neither Nike nor MSFT by itself is representative. I seem to
recall that Nike has not been doing nearly as well lately, but I don't
follow the business press.
Doug Henwood wrote:
> Jim Devine wrote:
>
> >But given the over-all rate of profit (determined largely by the
> >state of class relations, which determines the profit share of
> >output, along with the overall output/capital ratio), the
> >above-average profit rates of the old US Steel or the new MS (or
> >Nike) correspond to the below-average profit rates of smaller and
> >weaker businesses. That of course, is Doug's emphasis.
>
> Microsoft's latest sales figures were $23 billion, with profits
> before interest, taxes, and depreciation of $13 billion (nice margin,
> eh)? Nike's figures were $9 billion and $1.1 billion, respectively
> (not so nice a margin). So: 1) MSFT is, or was, in a class by itself,
> and 2) even so, its sales, at least half of which are probably
> outside the U.S., are 0.26% of GDP. I think the representativeness
> question is real serious. And NKE is a piker, profit-wise.
>
> Doug
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
