Chapeau! Not many posters would do as you have done. And thanks for taking the trouble to retrospectively edit.
Printable View
Its turns out the rough and ready, what has the NAV gone up by does sort the wheat out from the chaff. NAV, (which is not NTA to be clear but includes other matters detailed in the accounts) captures absolutely everything in the way of gains for the period. It went up 1 cent after paying 2.6 cents in dividends so their total gain for the half year inclusive of all property revaluations, gain from recognizing deferred tax losses as an asset, absolutely everything is 1 cent plus 2.6 cents = total gain of 3.6 cents for the 6 month period. If we're kind and said they will make 4.4 cents total gain in the second half we get total comprehensive income of 8 cents per share.
By way of comparison:-
Using the same approach in 2018 according to total income reporting (IFRS) SUM made 97 cents per share and in 2017 $1.10 per share.
Hmmmm - watching the underwriters work the market to get rid of stock?
Oca report So many different profit numbers no wonder beagle is confused
The new man will probably add a few more .....maybe a plan to make things hard to understand.
That new CFO was at Jardens the time OCA was floated and seemed to have play a major role in getting it done.
Several years piloting the ship he once floated
[QUOTE=winner69;788540]Oca report So many different profit numbers no wonder beagle is confused
Luckily for us you and Snow Leopard understood them,straight away...
Thanks Winner & Beagle for the responses. I'm trying to understand why OCA's costs are so much higher than other companies who are in arguably the same game as most people are referring to this lack of cost control as the reason why they're not performing well. OCA have one of, if not the highest development margin at the moment (did I read 36%) so they're performing pretty well in this respect.
Based on Winner's research it looks like no ones really making money from providing care services and its just the rest of the business (property revaluation gains) that drive profit. If so, and OCA want to continue onto the 70/30 split it doesn't appear much is going to change.
I think you find in time to come that OCA will be making profits on their care services. But what is confusing is that in time to come care service fees are close to break even. However the profit component will likely be captured in the deferred management fees of the caresuite. That how understand their model.
I wss going to post a picture of a Snow Leopard laughing itself silly but here is todays Calvin & Hobbes instead:
https://assets.amuniversal.com/a7996...33005056a9545d