This is the same lady that told us over a year ago that price increases wouldn't impact Americans

[murox]

Now, read the other parts of the article, Murox the Moron:

"AWS is one of Amazon’s most capital-intensive offerings, consuming more than half of their capital expenditure budget, and yielding only $18.5 billion in operating income."

What does that mean? It means that AWS brings in a lot of revenue, but the profit margins are squeezed since it 1) is "Amazon's most capital intensive . . . consuming more than half of their capital expenditure budget" and 2) yields only $18.5 billion in income.

Basic math shows you that $62 billion in revenue while earning $18.5 billion in income means its expenditures are $43.5 billion.

Compare that with advertising which brings in revenue of $31.5 billion with nowhere near the same expenditures as AWS, which means it is extremely profitable.

So tell us, Murox the Moron, how is AWS the only profitable division (like you tried perpetuating) if advertising profits tens of billions?

DOH!

What are the advertising division's expenditures, tubby? I know you don't understand balance sheets, but both of those numbers are necessary for you to make a statement like "advertising profits tens of billions."

But you said advertising profits billions more than AWS, and you're using year old data. My cited source (above) said AWS was the only profitable division.

 

[riflearm2]

What are the advertising division's expenditures, tubby? I know you don't understand balance sheets, but both of those numbers are necessary for you to make a statement like "advertising profits tens of billions."

But you said advertising profits billions more than AWS, and you're using year old data. My cited source (above) said AWS was the only profitable division.

I don't know if you really are just a stupid person or if it's just that you lack wisdom. They are related but separate. Perhaps it is both.

Now, this statement was before the ad revenue from Amazon's NFL advertising from televising games this fall. If multiple publications are already saying that the advertising division is "probably" and "almost certainly" more profitable than AWS BEFORE the NFL advertising money kicked in, what do you think the comparison is like now, Middle Class Murox?

"Amazon’s next big thing appears to be its ad business, and it is probably a bigger cash cow than its cloud computing arm AWS."

How big is Amazon's ad business? Hint: Probably a bigger cash cow than AWS

Amazon's next big thing appears to be its ad business, and it is probably a bigger cash cow than its cloud computing arm AWS

www.medianama.com

Doh!

One of your many problems is that you post random baseless tweets from bogus sources. You did it with the guy attempting to give info on European electricity costs, and he completely butchered basic math making you look dumber than usual. Now, you're doing it with some random tweet that is completely incorrect. What you (and your source) fail to understand is that advertising used to be housed under "AWS" and was recently separated. It appears, but I can't confirm, that your poorly informed source is still putting advertising under the AWS division.

But here, enjoy this:



So tell us again how AWS is the only profitable division, moron.