People might object to that characterization because it's so "standard". That's how you get these notions that cash flow is "better" than profit -- the language gets tortured so that profit doesn't mean profit any more because the ledger is a fantasy.
In cash method accounting, profit is profit. In accrual accounting, profit is whatever number you pencil in.
To be clear, I'm talking about money in your hands, not someone else's.
Cash accounting in my experience is a much "better" way to cook the books than accrual accounting. You can easily and unintentionally screw yourself if you're collecting cash up front for a product which involves future costs.
The only system I have found to work is accrual combined with customer prepayment (to eliminate credit risk; or just be very good at receivables management, which not everyone is) and aggressive cashflow management. The biggest problems with accrual go away if you don't have to worry about customer payment risk or accidentally running out of cash in the short term.
You can lie to yourself (and others) with numbers with either kind of accounting, but it's harder to accidentally kill yourself with a conservative system.
Profit is an accounting construct. Positive cashflow is real and can sustain a business for a long time.
(Note: cashflow != revenue)