There are a few imprecisions among Steve Kates's claims. Haberler was NOT hired by the League in 1930. He was contacted at the beginning of December 1933, and started working in Geneva on 1 March 1934. He could therefore not have published in 1935 (in spite of having proceeded prodigiously swiftly). By August of that year he had managed to write a first draft of the analysis of theories (50 pages typescript), which he elaborated into a much bigger typescript by June 1936. The final version was published, under much pressure by the League for accelerating the editing (meanwhile Haberler had moved to Harvard and was held up by his new commitments). Moreover, the purpose of the book was not that of dealing with ALL the business cycle theories that had been produced, but only those current at his time. This is explicitly stated. Haberler's statement cited by Kates was pronounced in very similar terms by Aftalion and espeially Mitchell, both in 1913--the only missing term being "complete unanimity", but the substance is the same; Mitchell uses the expression "substantial agreement". The critical target of Haberler, and Mitchell and Aftalion and scores of other writers before them, beginning (at least) from J.-E. Briaune in 1840 and passing from Coquelin, Juglar, Mills, Jevons etc., was the earlier approach to crises, which focused on crises taken in isolation rather than as a succession of related events, which was the 'classical' (and mainstream until the end of the XIX century) approach to economic disturbances. Daniele Besomi