net-net

[Baker, John]

        Well, as a business person myself (a business lawyer) of long
standing, my beef is not with the appropriate use of business language,
but its misuse.

        The general meaning of "net-net" is not "absolute bottom line"
or "I am not fooling around."  It means that the number is the result of
two netting processes.  It certainly does not mean that nothing has been
done to fiddle with the number.  Rather, the number has been usefully
manipulated to give it meaning.

        In the human resources context, this may mean that the final
jobs number has been netted to reflect changes in the number of jobs due
to acquisitions and dispositions, then netted again to take out jobs
that were already in existence when Fiorina started.  In that case, it's
jargon, appropriate and useful in context, but needing, at the minimum,
an accurate explanation when used out of context.  Alternatively,
Fiorina may just have meant to obfuscate.  From the little that she
said, we can't really tell.


John Baker


-----Original Message-----
From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Dan Goncharoff
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 1:30 PM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: net-net

Sorry, I don't really understand the judgmental tone. The language of
business is part of the business of life, and has its own shorthand.

"Net-net" is a shorthand promise by the speaker that nothing has been
done
to fiddle with the definition of the number in question in order to
produce
a favorable change

Look again at the transcript. Fiorina says, "net-net, we created jobs".
Business people know what she means by her four-word sentence. But she
has
to translate it for Blitzer: "it means there were more employees working
for Hewlett-Packard the day I left than the day I arrived." That, BTW,
is
not a good translation -- it doesn't deal with employees added through
the
acquisition of companies, and I would expect them to be left out of the
"net-net" number. "Net-net" is a way of saying, "I am not fooling around
with these numbers". What is the context? "Lies, damn lies and
statistics"
comes to mind.

I am not trying to defend her choice to use business shorthand during a
campaign interview. It might not help her get elected. But she used
business
shorthand correctly.

DanG

On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Baker, John <JMB at stradley.com> wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       "Baker, John" <JMB at STRADLEY.COM>
> Subject:      Re: net-net
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
>
>         It sounds more like a $1.98 vocabulary to me.  From this
> example, "Word smart for business" apparently endorses the practice of
> using high-falutin terms that the speaker doesn't understand and that
> have no concrete meaning in context.
>
>        Kudos to Dan for finding this.  I bet the book has a lot more
> examples of the worst kind of business-speak.
>
>
> John Baker
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
Behalf
> Of Dan Goncharoff
> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 12:13 PM
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: net-net
>
> A simpler theory is that Fiorina uses "net-net" as an alternative to
> "bottom
> line" as an intensifier when describing the 'purity' of a number.
>
> Here is a definition from a 1997 book, "Word smart for business:
> cultivating
> a six-figure vocabulary":
>
> The absolute bottom line, or end result. It's even more bottom line
than
> just net.
>
> DanG
>
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Baker, John <JMB at stradley.com>
wrote:
>
> > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> > -----------------------
> > Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> > Poster:       "Baker, John" <JMB at STRADLEY.COM>
> > Subject:      Re: net-net
> >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -------
> >
> >        "Net net" actually does have a meaning.  It is a valuation
> > technique in which current assets are netted to reflect
uncertainties
> in
> > collection (e.g., inventories are valued at liquidation values), and
> > then liabilities are netted against assets.
> >
> >        As described, however, HP's job creation number was merely a
> > "net" number, because there was only one netting process.  There are
> at
> > least two possible explanations for Fiorina's use:
> >
> >                1.      She is using a phrase that sounds impressive
> but
> > is meaningless in context (or, perhaps, sounds more impressive than
is
> > really the case), for obfuscatory purposes.  This, I take it, is
Jon's
> > theory.
> >
> >                2.      There actually was a calculation that
reflected
> > two netting processes, but she does not remember what the other
> netting
> > process was or feels that she would be unable to describe it
> concisely.
> > Based on my experience with CEO spokespersons, this would be my
guess.
> >
> >        There is also something called a "net net net" (or "triple
> net")
> > lease, in which the lessee has to pay the net amounts of three types
> of
> > costs.  I'm not aware of any quadruple nets, however.
> >
> >
> > John Baker
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
> Behalf
> > Of Jonathan Lighter
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 9:42 AM
> > To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> > Subject: net-net
> >
> > CNN yesterday:
> > http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1010/11/sitroom.02.html
> >
> > "FIORINA: I managed Hewlett-Packard through the technology
recession,
> > the
> > worst in 25 years, the dot-com bust. But, net-net, we created jobs.
> >
> > . . .
> >
> > "BLITZER: So, the 30,000 figures who were laid off during -- I guess
> the
> > dot-com bust, if you will, I guess that's true, even though you say
> you
> > created more jobs than you than you had -- were forced to lay off?
Is
> > that
> > what you're saying?
> >
> > "FIORINA: Yes. Net-net, we created jobs.
> >
> > "BLITZER: What does that mean, net-net?
> >
> > "FIORINA: Well, it means there were more employees working for
> > Hewlett-Packard the day I left than the day I arrived."
> >
> > So it means "comparing the later net figure to the earlier."  In
other
> > words, "overall."
> >
> > A vital element overlooked in the transcript is the impatience in
> > Carly's
> > voice when she had to explain the meaning of "net-net" to a veteran
> > journalist.  You mean it isn't obvious??
> >
> > Anyway, if you say "net-net," other *supposedly* intelligent people
> will
> > have to ask you what it means, and that puts you in the vital
> ascendant.
> > Gooooaaaaal!!!
> >
> > JL
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org