SEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6676 posts, RR: 46
Reply 1, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1860 times:
Quoting SkyGazer (Thread starter): They take these numbers off this year's totals to get a "net orders" count. Wouldn't it be more accurate and reflective of yearly orders by adjusting orders in the year that they were first made?
The problem with this approach is that the previous year's (or two) would never be final; this system has the advantage of being able to announce a final total for the year that will stand, and to deal with cancellations/changes when they actually occur. After all, as of Dec. 31, 2006 those orders were legitimately on the books, which has real consequences for the accountants. To change it after the fact also has accounting consequenses, which would be a nightmare if it were continually revisited.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler