profitable

The arbitrage is what makes it happen because that's what makes it profitable.

Twitter's costs are mostly fixed, so if it can generate $3B in revenue, it will be profitable.

We are proudly profitable, not dependent on investor funding, and have been consistently growing our top line.

We are a self-funded and highly profitable recruiting tech startup combining powerful software with world class service.

Shallow content is cheaper and easier to make, and when you're just counting eyeballs it's often seemingly just as profitable.

Interns are very, very profitable for them, because they work insane hours and do everything they are told without question.

If supply weren't artificially restricted, it would be profitable to expand the housing stock instead of completely displacing existing residents.

Mining with computers or GPUs has stopped to be in any way profitable years ago.

We've built a profitable business with only two full-time team members -- the founders.

We are a profitable startup experiencing massive growth, with hundreds of thousands of players a day across iOS, Android, BlackBerry and Facebook.

Note that the scheme already made money based on the demand pricing of electricity, the 'green' aspect simply made it more profitable.

Silicon Valley uses P/E when calculating valuation/revenue, because startups are rarely profitable.

Hence, if you're looking at every company to determine if it is profitable or not, you probably come away with a very misleading, "The world is doomed" view of the economy.

The vast majority of content producers who rely on ad revenue make the same estimations about risk, and try to stay away from the edges of the "risk envelope" for profitable content, with obvious implications for diversity and quality.

I don't think there's much to cheer about when the reason many of these sharing companies are so profitable is because they basically eliminate using employees for their "unskilled"(read: job markets with an excess of employable people) labor.