Originally posted by redscho
The increase in salaries and benefits might be attributed to.
1) additional employees.
2) increased medical insurance.
I doubt if very much of it went to individual salary increases. That is the trouble with some of Mr. Holland's revelations . . . he does not do a very good job of explaining the variances from year to year.
Red S. AMA 951
Leader Member/CD
Red
It's not helping to make the case when Mr. Holland states in reference to the Schedules of Operating Expenses, on page 150:
"You will notice that salaries and fringe benefits account for approximately half the increase . That increase is primarily cost of living and some merit raises."
kwizard
I do have some questions for you.
First, are you aware that the insurance policy with Royal is not paid on a calender basis, but is paid in the middle of the year? What effect do you think that has? What amount was paid to Royal and what amount from the SIR?
Secondly, why don't you go to the AMA web site? In the Member's Only section is a copy of the 2001 Audit, including the Auditor's notes, which, apparently Mr. Holland will not publish, or, if he does, we will get it all sometime toward the end of 2004.
I could make claims that raise tempers or calm them , like:
Long Term Liabilities increased from $5,776,301 to $9,065,233 in 2001,
or Assets jumped from $15,816,348 to $18,494,710 in 2001.
or imply something by stating that on the Statement of Cash Flows there was an increase to $5,288,209 in 2001 from $3,186,718 in 2000.
If there is going to be discussion of the numbers, let's discuss all of them, and if need be, lets request underlying information from headquarters. I am not trying to imply that anything you are saying is wrong, but, lets make sure the average reader on here understands what you are saying, and that includes me.
JR