[jacquesm]

Even that isn't right: if the original balance was $100k the loss can never be larger than that. You still have 25K in the bank so the loss is $75k, any other interpretation should not be labelled a loss, at best they are misguided expectations.

[danaris]

The 150k is a "loss" in the same way that the movie industry "lost" $500 million (or whatever it is that they claimed) to piracy: revenue that they think they should have gotten, but didn't.

[jerryjappinen]

I agree it's up to interpretation, but in this scenario, the seller has shipped a set number of goods that the customers have paid for. The revenue has been generated but not moved successfully through a service provider to the final destination.

So it's not just an estimate. The money is not imaginary, it has already been collected from the customers.

[jacquesm]

It actually got refunded (see title, and update by OP).

[jacquesm]

Precisely.