In message , at 11:56:16 on Sat, 25
May 2019, JNugent remarked:
On 24/05/2019 21:11, Roland Perry wrote:

JNugent remarked:

How Uber allocates their turnover is not relevant to the question of
what their turnover is.
It is if the main way they "allocate" the funds is by sending 75% to
the drivers (on a booking agency basis) and keeping 25% commission.

How?

They are still turning the money over, no matter how it is sliced up
after receipt.

It goes through their bank account. It is all part of the turnover.
That's what turnover *means*. They could pay the drivers 99% of the
turnover, but it's still turnover.

If you look at a company like TheTrainline, the turnover they quote is
just the commission from the Train Operators (and some fixed transaction
fees from customers) [in the region of £150 million], not the total of
all the fares people buy [in the region of £2 billion].

If it were otherwise, any small enterprise on the verge of the
compulsory VAT registration turnover quantum could, by sleight of hand,
deduct the amounts they are liable to pay out for wages (that's the
biggy), business rates, fuel duties and VAT, national insurance, etc,
and claim not to be turning over enough to be forced to register.

You are fatally confusing gross profit margin with turnover.

Any business which pays out more than it previously did in wages or
overheads reduces profitability, but turnover only vchanges if
turnover changes.
The only overhead that the Uber that's paying 75% to drivers (and
the drivers paying all their costs like renting and insuring
vehicles, paying themselves a wage etc) has, is running its booking
platform.

The amount of their overheads isn't important. The principle *is*.

If they want to avoid VAT liability on turnover, they need to let the
drivers collect the fares (like a real private hire operation) and
avoid making it part of their revenue.

I don't think credit card companies include the total value of things
purchased with their cards in their turnover. But they do collect the
money from buyers, deduct a commission, they pay the balance to
vendors. And like no doubt Uber, they don't pay the whole amount out and
then send an invoice asking for the commission back whenever the trader
feels like it.
--
Roland Perry

On 26/05/2019 18:21, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:56:16 on Sat, 25
May 2019, JNugent remarked:
On 24/05/2019 21:11, Roland Perry wrote:

JNugent remarked:

How Uber allocates their turnover is not relevant to the question of
what their turnover is.
Â*It is if the main way they "allocate" the funds is by sending 75% to
theÂ* drivers (on a booking agency basis) and keeping 25% commission.

How?

They are still turning the money over, no matter how it is sliced up
after receipt.

It goes through their bank account. It is all part of the turnover.
That's what turnover *means*. They could pay the drivers 99% of the
turnover, but it's still turnover.

If you look at a company like TheTrainline, the turnover they quote is
just the commission from the Train Operators (and some fixed transaction
fees from customers) [in the region of £150 million], not the total of
all the fares people buy [in the region of £2 billion].

If it were otherwise, any small enterprise on the verge of the
compulsory VAT registration turnover quantum could, by sleight of
hand, deduct the amounts they are liable to pay out for wages (that's
the biggy), business rates, fuel duties and VAT, national insurance,
etc, and claim not to be turning over enough to be forced to register.

You are fatally confusing gross profit margin with turnover.

That is exactly what I am not doing.

Turnover is turnover. Profit, whether gross or net, is something other
than turnover and somewhat less in size.

Profit is not the deciding factor when it comes to VAT registration.
Only turnover counts.

Any business which pays out more than it previously did in wages or
overheads reduces profitability, but turnover only vchanges if
turnover changes.

Â*The only overhead that the Uber that's paying 75% to drivers (and
theÂ* drivers paying all their costs like renting and insuring
vehicles,Â* paying themselves a wage etc) has, is running its booking
platform.

The amount of their overheads isn't important. The principle *is*.

If they want to avoid VAT liability on turnover, they need to let the
drivers collect the fares (like a real private hire operation) and
avoid making it part of their revenue.

I don't think credit card companies include the total value of things
purchased with their cards in their turnover. But they do collect the
money from buyers, deduct a commission, they pay the balance to
vendors. And like no doubt Uber, they don't pay the whole amount out and
then send an invoice asking for the commission back whenever the trader
feels like it.

I don't now about you, but I pay money to my credit card issuers.

They don't pay money to me.

They pay out money *for* me, but really, it's about as bad an analogy as
you could have chosen. The relationship structure is completely
different from that of Uber. In order to get it to look similar, you'd
have to posit the credit card issuer getting my income paid into their
bank account instead of mine and then letting me have some, but not all,
of it.

In message , at 22:53:38 on Sun, 26
May 2019, JNugent remarked:
On 26/05/2019 18:21, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:56:16 on Sat, 25
May 2019, JNugent remarked:
On 24/05/2019 21:11, Roland Perry wrote:

JNugent remarked:

How Uber allocates their turnover is not relevant to the question
of what their turnover is.
*It is if the main way they "allocate" the funds is by sending 75%
to the* drivers (on a booking agency basis) and keeping 25% commission.

How?

They are still turning the money over, no matter how it is sliced up
after receipt.

It goes through their bank account. It is all part of the turnover.
That's what turnover *means*. They could pay the drivers 99% of the
turnover, but it's still turnover.
If you look at a company like TheTrainline, the turnover they quote
is just the commission from the Train Operators (and some fixed
transaction fees from customers) [in the region of £150 million], not
the total of all the fares people buy [in the region of £2 billion].

If it were otherwise, any small enterprise on the verge of the
compulsory VAT registration turnover quantum could, by sleight of
hand, deduct the amounts they are liable to pay out for wages (that's
the biggy), business rates, fuel duties and VAT, national insurance,
etc, and claim not to be turning over enough to be forced to register.
You are fatally confusing gross profit margin with turnover.

That is exactly what I am not doing.

Turnover is turnover. Profit, whether gross or net, is something other
than turnover and somewhat less in size.

Profit is not the deciding factor when it comes to VAT registration.
Only turnover counts.

The turnover for someone like Uber or TheTrainline being the commission
element, not including the money that passes straight through to the
drivers and Train Companies respectively.

Any business which pays out more than it previously did in wages
or overheads reduces profitability, but turnover only vchanges if
turnover changes.

*The only overhead that the Uber that's paying 75% to drivers (and
the* drivers paying all their costs like renting and insuring
vehicles,* paying themselves a wage etc) has, is running its booking


The amount of their overheads isn't important. The principle *is*.

If they want to avoid VAT liability on turnover, they need to let
the drivers collect the fares (like a real private hire operation)
and avoid making it part of their revenue.

I don't think credit card companies include the total value of things
purchased with their cards in their turnover. But they do collect the
money from buyers, deduct a commission, they pay the balance to
vendors. And like no doubt Uber, they don't pay the whole amount out
and then send an invoice asking for the commission back whenever the
trader feels like it.

I don't now about you, but I pay money to my credit card issuers.

That's what I wrote. They collect the money you pay to them, and channel
it through to the merchants.

They don't pay money to me.

I didn't suggest they did. They pay money to merchants. But that's money
from you to the merchant, and isn't part of the card issuer's turnover.

They pay out money *for* me,

Just like Uber pays money *for* the passengers, to the drivers (well,
that's the accounting model we are exploring).

but really, it's about as bad an analogy as you could have chosen. The
relationship structure is completely different from that of Uber. In
order to get it to look similar, you'd have to posit the credit card
issuer getting my income paid into their bank account instead of mine
and then letting me have some, but not all, of it.

I's not about the flow at your end, but at the driver's end.

Yes, the card issuer pays money it has derived from you, into the
merchant's bank account, while deducting a small commission (my
financial model here is that they don't pay it all up front, and then
expect the merchant to pay them back the commission later).
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 22:53:38 on Sun, 26
May 2019, JNugent remarked:
On 26/05/2019 18:21, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:56:16 on Sat, 25
May 2019, JNugent remarked:
On 24/05/2019 21:11, Roland Perry wrote:

JNugent remarked:

How Uber allocates their turnover is not relevant to the question
of what their turnover is.
Â*It is if the main way they "allocate" the funds is by sending 75%
to theÂ* drivers (on a booking agency basis) and keeping 25% commission.

How?

They are still turning the money over, no matter how it is sliced up
after receipt.

It goes through their bank account. It is all part of the turnover.
That's what turnover *means*. They could pay the drivers 99% of the
turnover, but it's still turnover.
If you look at a company like TheTrainline, the turnover they quote
is just the commission from the Train Operators (and some fixed
transaction fees from customers) [in the region of £150 million], not
the total of all the fares people buy [in the region of £2 billion].

If it were otherwise, any small enterprise on the verge of the
compulsory VAT registration turnover quantum could, by sleight of
hand, deduct the amounts they are liable to pay out for wages (that's
the biggy), business rates, fuel duties and VAT, national insurance,
etc, and claim not to be turning over enough to be forced to register.
You are fatally confusing gross profit margin with turnover.

That is exactly what I am not doing.

Turnover is turnover. Profit, whether gross or net, is something other
than turnover and somewhat less in size.

Profit is not the deciding factor when it comes to VAT registration.
Only turnover counts.

The turnover for someone like Uber or TheTrainline being the commission
element, not including the money that passes straight through to the
drivers and Train Companies respectively.

Yes, Uber refers to Gross Bookings and Revenue. The latter slipped to about
21.3% of the former in Q4 2018.

"Compared to the entire fiscal year of 2017, Uber’s gross bookings
increased 45 percent, to $50 billion in 2018. That resulted in a GAAP
revenue increase of 43 percent, from 2017 to $11.3 billion. Losses also
improved (decreased) from $2.2 billion in adjusted EBITDA losses in 2017 to
$1.8 billion in 2018. "

https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/15/uber-reports-3b-in-q4-revenue-rising-operating-losses/

In message , at 15:51:29 on Tue, 28 May
2019, Recliner remarked:

The turnover for someone like Uber or TheTrainline being the commission
element, not including the money that passes straight through to the
drivers and Train Companies respectively.

Yes, Uber refers to Gross Bookings and Revenue. The latter slipped to about
21.3% of the former in Q4 2018.

"Compared to the entire fiscal year of 2017, Uber’s gross bookings
increased 45 percent, to $50 billion in 2018. That resulted in a GAAP
revenue increase of 43 percent, from 2017 to $11.3 billion. Losses also
improved (decreased) from $2.2 billion in adjusted EBITDA losses in 2017 to
$1.8 billion in 2018. "

One wonders what they are spending all their revenue on (I suppose the
report might have details).

TheTrainline is doing much better on their approx 8% commission, than
Uber is on their 21%

https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/15/uber-reports-3b-in-q4-revenue-rising-operating-losses/

Several of my tech-savvy friends having nothing but swearwords for the
Oath privacy policy. So for now I'm joining in their embargo of their
site.
--
Roland Perry

On 28/05/2019 17:01, Roland Perry wrote:

Several of my tech-savvy friends having nothing but swearwords for the
Oath privacy policy. So for now I'm joining in their embargo of their site.

Ditto. Won't touch any site they have an interest in. I had quite a few
photos up on Flickr up until that lot took over.

--
Ria in Aberdeen

[Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct]

On Tue, 28 May 2019 19:20:03 +0100, MissRiaElaine
wrote:

On 28/05/2019 17:01, Roland Perry wrote:

Several of my tech-savvy friends having nothing but swearwords for the
Oath privacy policy. So for now I'm joining in their embargo of their site.

Ditto. Won't touch any site they have an interest in. I had quite a few
photos up on Flickr up until that lot took over.


Flickr has passed to SmugMug.

--
jhk

Jarle Hammen Knudsen wrote:
On Tue, 28 May 2019 19:20:03 +0100, MissRiaElaine
wrote:

On 28/05/2019 17:01, Roland Perry wrote:

Several of my tech-savvy friends having nothing but swearwords for the
Oath privacy policy. So for now I'm joining in their embargo of their site.

Ditto. Won't touch any site they have an interest in. I had quite a few
photos up on Flickr up until that lot took over.


Flickr has passed to SmugMug.


Very bumpily…

On 28/05/2019 15:08, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 22:53:38 on Sun, 26
May 2019, JNugent remarked:
On 26/05/2019 18:21, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:56:16 on Sat, 25
May 2019, JNugent remarked:
On 24/05/2019 21:11, Roland Perry wrote:

JNugent remarked:

How Uber allocates their turnover is not relevant to the question
ofÂ* what their turnover is.
Â*It is if the main way they "allocate" the funds is by sending 75%
toÂ* theÂ* drivers (on a booking agency basis) and keeping 25%
commission.

How?

They are still turning the money over, no matter how it is sliced up
after receipt.

It goes through their bank account. It is all part of the turnover.
That's what turnover *means*. They could pay the drivers 99% of the
turnover, but it's still turnover.
Â*If you look at a company like TheTrainline, the turnover they quote
isÂ* just the commission from the Train Operators (and some fixed
transactionÂ* fees from customers) [in the region of £150 million],
not the total ofÂ* all the fares people buy [in the region of £2
billion].

If it were otherwise, any small enterprise on the verge of the
compulsory VAT registration turnover quantum could, by sleight of
hand, deduct the amounts they are liable to pay out for wages
(that's the biggy), business rates, fuel duties and VAT, national
insurance, etc, and claim not to be turning over enough to be forced
to register.
Â*You are fatally confusing gross profit margin with turnover.

That is exactly what I am not doing.

Turnover is turnover. Profit, whether gross or net, is something other
than turnover and somewhat less in size.

Profit is not the deciding factor when it comes to VAT registration.
Only turnover counts.

The turnover for someone like Uber or TheTrainline being the commission
element, not including the money that passes straight through to the
drivers and Train Companies respectively.

If Uber only received a commission or circuit fee from the driver, that
would be correct and I would certainly not argue with your proposition.

But how can that correct be in the circumstance where they also turn
over the whole of the fare collected from the passenger (account-holder)
on the spot?

Any business which pays out more than it previously did in wages
orÂ* overheads reduces profitability, but turnover only vchanges if
turnover changes.

Â*The only overhead that the Uber that's paying 75% to drivers (and
theÂ* drivers paying all their costs like renting and insuring
vehicles,Â* paying themselves a wage etc) has, is running its booking

The amount of their overheads isn't important. The principle *is*.
If they want to avoid VAT liability on turnover, they need to let
theÂ* drivers collect the fares (like a real private hire operation)
andÂ* avoid making it part of their revenue.

I don't think credit card companies include the total value of things
purchased with their cards in their turnover. But they do collect the
money from buyers, deduct a commission, they pay the balance to
vendors. And like no doubt Uber, they don't pay the whole amount out
andÂ* then send an invoice asking for the commission back whenever the
traderÂ* feels like it.

I don't now about you, but I pay money to my credit card issuers.

That's what I wrote. They collect the money you pay to them, and channel
it through to the merchants.

They don't pay money to me.

I didn't suggest they did. They pay money to merchants. But that's money
from you to the merchant, and isn't part of the card issuer's turnover.

Indeed. They are financial trading entities operating as registered /
recognised banks licenced by the state. They lend money (part of their
capital assets) and only the fees and charges they receive are their
turnover.

Does that apply to Uber?

They pay out money *for* me,

Just like Uber pays money *for* the passengers, to the drivers (well,
that's the accounting model we are exploring).

but really, it's about as bad an analogy as you could have chosen. The
relationship structure is completely different from that of Uber. In
order to get it to look similar, you'd have to posit the credit card
issuer getting my income paid into their bank account instead of mine
and then letting me have some, but not all, of it.

I's not about the flow at your end, but at the driver's end.

Yes, the card issuer pays money it has derived from you, into the
merchant's bank account, while deducting a small commission (my
financial model here is that they don't pay it all up front, and then
expect the merchant to pay them back the commission later).

In message , at 02:31:31 on Wed, 29
May 2019, JNugent remarked:

The turnover for someone like Uber or TheTrainline being the
commission element, not including the money that passes straight
through to the drivers and Train Companies respectively.

If Uber only received a commission or circuit fee from the driver, that
would be correct and I would certainly not argue with your proposition.

But how can that correct be in the circumstance where they also turn
over the whole of the fare collected from the passenger
(account-holder) on the spot?

Do they, and send the driver an invoice for their commission later (end
of the month perhaps)?

That would nudge them a bit closer to being perceived by the passenger
as a cab company, rather than a booking agent for the driver.

I don't think credit card companies include the total value of
things purchased with their cards in their turnover. But they do
collect the money from buyers, deduct a commission, they pay the balance to
vendors. And like no doubt Uber, they don't pay the whole amount
out and* then send an invoice asking for the commission back
whenever the trader* feels like it.

I don't now about you, but I pay money to my credit card issuers.
That's what I wrote. They collect the money you pay to them, and
channel it through to the merchants.

They don't pay money to me.

I didn't suggest they did. They pay money to merchants. But that's
money from you to the merchant, and isn't part of the card issuer's
turnover.

Indeed. They are financial trading entities operating as registered /
recognised banks licenced by the state. They lend money (part of their
capital assets) and only the fees and charges they receive are their
turnover.

They lend money to the buyer (at zero interest rate if they pay it off
on demand). They don't lend money to the merchant.

Does that apply to Uber?

And TheTrainline, does the train company get paid for the ticket
straight away, or does TTL have 30day (or whatever) credit with them
all. Whatever the answer, their turnover in their published accounts is
just the commission/fee element.

--
Roland Perry