Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Confused - Income vs. Revenue

  1. #1
    Regular Member EM87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    987

    Post imported post

    I thought that revenue was the total amount of incoming money. I also thought that MCL 28.425o (which defines a bar) used revenue in its terminology. I just looked online and saw that they use the word 'income', which I read is something like revenue minus costs.(?) Wouldn't that be profit?

    What's the difference? In laymen's terms, please.
    "You'll be walking along.. OC.. and you'll feel GREAT. You'll feel FREEEEE like 1776 kind of Free." -cscitney87

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    EM87 wrote:
    I thought that revenue was the total amount of incoming money. I also thought that MCL 28.425o (which defines a bar) used revenue in its terminology. I just looked online and saw that they use the word 'income', which I read is something like revenue minus costs.(?) Wouldn't that be profit?

    What's the difference? In laymen's terms, please.
    Income is not really used in terms of moneys that a business deals with. It's used more for individuals taking in moneys.

    Revenue is total gross moneys taken in.
    Profit is gross revenue minus costs. (also referred to as "net revenue")

    Income, when used in terms of a business, is generally used in a way that's synonymous with revenue (ie Income = Revenue), but not always. Sometimes it is used to mean Profit. That's why I say it shouldn't be used in business sense.

  3. #3
    Regular Member EM87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    987

    Post imported post

    So in terms of the law, are we talking profit or are we talking revenue? Because if a restaurant marks up the price of alcohol quite a bit but not on food, they could make more profit off of the alcohol than the food, even though the food is actually bringing in more money.
    "You'll be walking along.. OC.. and you'll feel GREAT. You'll feel FREEEEE like 1776 kind of Free." -cscitney87

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    EM87 wrote:
    So in terms of the law, are we talking profit or are we talking revenue? Because if a restaurant marks up the price of alcohol quite a bit but not on food, they could make more profit off of the alcohol than the food, even though the food is actually bringing in more money.
    The law requires that the "where the primary source of income of the business is the sale of alcoholic liquor by the glass and consumed on the premises. "

    Meaning that whatever they sell the most of.

    Note that this doesn't mean greater than 50% necessarily. If they make 40% on Alcohol, 25% on, say, cover (cost of entry), and 35% on food, the primary source of income is still alcohol, and thus is a CEZ in terms of the CPL.

    Also note that this rule only matters for CPLs and carrying concealed. If you don't have a CPL then you can't carry there since they have a liquor license, period. If you're carrying openly it doesn't matter how much they make on booze since you're carrying openly, period.

  5. #5
    Regular Member EM87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    987

    Post imported post

    This is still what I'm trying to make sense of. By "Whatever they sell the most of", you mean incoming money total, right?

    You said, "Sometimes it is used to mean Profit. That's why I say it shouldn't be used in business sense." This is why I'm still confused.
    "You'll be walking along.. OC.. and you'll feel GREAT. You'll feel FREEEEE like 1776 kind of Free." -cscitney87

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    EM87 wrote:
    This is still what I'm trying to make sense of. By "Whatever they sell the most of", you mean incoming money total, right?

    You said, "Sometimes it is used to mean Profit. That's why I say it shouldn't be used in business sense." This is why I'm still confused.
    This is up for interpretation - should you get charged for violation, such a thing would get debated in court during a formal hearing.

    I take it to mean gross revenue. The prosecutor will likely argue whichever is in his/her favor at that time.

  7. #7
    Regular Member EM87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    987

    Post imported post

    Well that seems pretty dumb. Another law with a gray area.

    At least if I have it in writing from the restaurant in question that they determine themselves to be a restaurant and not a bar, that should help if it ever goes to court.
    "You'll be walking along.. OC.. and you'll feel GREAT. You'll feel FREEEEE like 1776 kind of Free." -cscitney87

  8. #8
    Regular Member EM87's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    987

    Post imported post

    And oh, ZZZ, thanks for the help!
    "You'll be walking along.. OC.. and you'll feel GREAT. You'll feel FREEEEE like 1776 kind of Free." -cscitney87

  9. #9
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    Post imported post

    EM87 wrote:
    This is still what I'm trying to make sense of. By "Whatever they sell the most of", you mean incoming money total, right?

    You said, "Sometimes it is used to mean Profit. That's why I say it shouldn't be used in business sense." This is why I'm still confused.
    What ZZZ says.

    Example: May not reflect an actual business.

    Aplace has food sales, alcohol sales and other (Gift-shop, think cracker barrel, hooters.).

    Food sales is 40%
    Liquor is 42%
    Other is 18%

    Then the majority of income is from liquor, but is not 51% of the total. So this is a no conceal establishment because the majority is liquor sales.

    I talked with the sponsor of this law change and brought up this gray area issue and they wanted it to remain vague.

    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  10. #10
    Regular Member SlowDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redford, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    Because we all know. Vague laws mean revenue in the forms of citations/fines handed out because we the people can't understand the laws. ON PURPOSE!!!!
    Only two have offered their lives for you. A Soldier and Jesus....

  11. #11
    Regular Member Decoligny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Rosamond, California, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    Let's throw another bone into the dogpile.

    Is it gross sales?

    Let's say the business has $200,000 in alcohol sales and $100,000 in food sales in a year.

    Let's also say that the alcohol cost the business $150,000 and the food cost the business $30,000 in a year.

    Is the revenue figure $200,000 alcohol v $100,000 food? (Straight Sales)

    Or is the revenue figure $50,000 alcohol and $70,000 food? (Profit)

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361

    Post imported post

    Decoligny wrote:
    Let's throw another bone into the dogpile.

    Is it gross sales?

    Let's say the business has $200,000 in alcohol sales and $100,000 in food sales in a year.

    Let's also say that the alcohol cost the business $150,000 and the food cost the business $30,000 in a year.

    Is the revenue figure $200,000 alcohol v $100,000 food? (Straight Sales)

    Or is the revenue figure $50,000 alcohol and $70,000 food? (Profit)

    Per 28.425o (1)(d)

    "...primary source of income...."

    This is why--as mentioned previously--you should not rely on a 51% rule.

    40% Alcohol, 35% Food, 25% Merchandise, means that the establishments primary source of income is the 40% Alcohol.

    Edit: Spelling


  13. #13
    Regular Member SlowDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redford, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    I would have to disagree with this. The law doesn't say sole majority of income in one fashion over all others taken in by the business. So if 40% is alcohol then 60% is other. So all other income should be what makes the rule for CC.

    I know this is probably wrong in "law makers" eyes but it is what it is.
    Only two have offered their lives for you. A Soldier and Jesus....

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361

    Post imported post

    You have a very valid point...

    But, I suspect, the intent the other members here were conveying--mine also--that the 51% rule is a slippery slope. As I mentioned previously:

    "...primary source of income...."

    This is why--as mentioned previously--you should not rely on a 51% rule.

    All we know for now, as law, is the "...primary source of income...." within Section 5o.



  15. #15
    Regular Member SlowDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redford, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    I agree....but at 40% alcohol and 60% "OTHER" then other should and I emphasize should be the deciding factor in a sensible society.....which leaves a lot of Michigan out.:what:
    Only two have offered their lives for you. A Soldier and Jesus....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •