In Accounting -> Income Statement, there is a line item "Revenue" which is total revenue for the week (pax, cargo, handling, etc.). There is no corresponding "Cost" (total cost) line item for the week.
Can you elaborate what you mean and why such a line would be needed?
It's showing the cost development over all. For many cases not really helpful, but as a first figure to compare the business development actually a good point of entry. And it's easier to do the maths, if you want to see let's say a cost-income ration as a performance measure (again for accounting reasons not right the perfect number, but better than nothing).
Probably the question is, where to draw the line. EBITDA, EBIT or EBT? Depends on what you want to know. :)
usually, in accounting statements you have
Revenue: A......1000$
B........50$
C......200$
Total Revenue: 1,250$
Cost: D...... 200$
E.......640$
F.........80$
Total Cost: 920$
and after that, all kind of ratios.
Point is to quickly know weekly cost. At least in previous versions, I had a quick glance on total weekly cost and total weekly revenue (e.g. when comparing to previous week), and only after that I dived into "details" to see what line item affected which.
Subtotals for the cost of each section of the income statement would be the best way to implement this I would think (and the most accurate in terms of real accounting practices)
I like having EBITDA now even if in real life I'm very anti-EBITDA (as a replacement for a true cash flow statement). With AS having more straightforward accounting than real life and with no true cash flow statement without making one yourself, I gladly welcome EBITDA as a quick check for cash flows. Thanks martin!