Talk:Cash flow statement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Business and economics Portal This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject.
Start	rated as start-Class on the assessment scale
Top	rated as top-importance on the assessment scale

I just manually reverted an edit by 60.53.70.49 on December 7, 2006 that removed the first paragraph. There was no explanation for the removal, and the article looked very strange without an actual definition of a cash flow statement. --Meara 17:03, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Nice catch. I'm a little embarrassed, I have this on my watchlist and didn't notice the oddball change. Good Work. --Hansonc 16:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External link to accountancy math book

I added a link to a free accountancy math book that contains a chapter on the Statement of Cash Flows. Previously, it was "undone" because it was said to be "masquerading as free info". Whereas the site is a commercial site, the external link pointed to an introduction page describing the two books that are freely available -- one book is the accountancy model and the other book is the corresponding examples. I have since "undone" the "undo" but changed the link to the book itself, not the introduction page. 71.197.70.177 06:17, 15 April 2007 (UTC) Tim Riley

This approach is better, but since it's your own publication it's a conflict of interest. Propose adding it and why here, allow others to add it if it is useful. Best regards.--Gregalton 07:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

As you wish. I propose that someone add an external link to the free accountancy math book that I am writing because it has a chapter on the Statement of Cash Flows which is appropriate for this article. The URL to the book is *Cash Flow Statement Mathematically Described. 71.197.70.177 07:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC) Tim Riley

You have been repeating this approach of pasting links throughout wikipedia to your book. Free or not, this is linkspam. Wikipedia is not a linkfarm! You should consider removing most of these links (and signing in to be more transparent).--Gregalton 07:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Why the scolding? I did as you asked. 71.197.70.177 09:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC) Tim Riley

Sorry if that sounded overly harsh. But it seems that you've been doing the same linking in many places, (in my view) contrary to the WP guidelines.--Gregalton 09:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Plus, since the book is not yet published (except by your personal website), it is not really an appropriate source for an encyclopedia. -- Satori Son 23:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The External Link request is not intended to be used as a source of reference. It is a link to useful information not contained in the article, yet. (See the next thread.) Timhowardriley 01:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Request to other editors considering this: please look at the source "notwithstanding" my comments above about linkspam, i.e. consider it without prejudice. I think the user was new and adding this link in good faith. Best--Gregalton 01:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Test bed for LaTeX cash flow formulas

Failed to parse (unknown function\subsection): \subsection{Change In Accounts Receivable} \label{change_in_accounts_receivable} \begin{tabular}{l@{ }l@{ }l} Change In Accounts Receivable = & Accounts Receivable Ending Balance & -- \\ & Accounts Receivable Beginning Balance \end{tabular} \subsection{Cash Received From Customers} \label{cash_received_from_customers} \begin{tabular}{l@{ }l@{ }l} Cash Received From Customers = & Sales Revenues & -- \\ & Change In Accounts Receivable (\ref{change_in_accounts_receivable}) \end{tabular}

Can anyone help get this to work? Timhowardriley 18:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Direct method

The Direct Method contained herein isn't exactly very depicting of the actual direct method. The direct SOCF is the same as the Indirect in every aspect but the operating section really which can be broken up into : Cash Receipts, Payments: (To Suppliers and Operating Expenses). Unless I am incorrect, but this is how i remember it from Intermediate accounting way back. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 136.176.103.28 (talk • contribs) 02:00, 11 May 2007.

I took the other example of the direct method out of the article and put in an example based on international accounting standards. The direct method reports actual cash flow rather than changes over the period in accrual balances (which is reported under the indirect method). Thanks for the prod! --Foggy Morning 16:32, 15 October 2007 (UTC)