Would it not seem a bit silly to have a cap raise and they pay a large dividend? I mean why do the cap raise in the first place?
If you are selling a critical component into buildings, potential purchasers need confidence you will be around to deliver. This tilts the scales towards being well capitalised and could be a key factor in a capital raise then a high div payout.
If the level of capitalisation/debt has little or no impact on sales then lower/no dividends and a progressive repayment of borrowings over several years could work - assuming any high importance capital projects can still be done.
Whether the $16m odd ebit is down from either the original often touted $25m or a ‘restated’ $21m the announcement is a bit of a disaster eh
This bit is a bit of a worry “New information has identified that approximately $4m of the significant inventory write-offs taken in FY18 were related to that year’s production process and should have been included in the assessment of cost of goods sold in FY18 normalised earnings.........but it didn’t impact F18 GAAP reported earnings”. Must think about what that really means
“ At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.”
Patterson really needs to go. The board also needs to ask "what the F are they doing". FBU gave them an out and they did not take it. That was in my opinion very self serving of them. Shareholders need to vote these numpties out at the next available opportunity.
Patterson really needs to go. The board also needs to ask "what the F are they doing". FBU gave them an out and they did not take it. That was in my opinion very self serving of them. Shareholders need to vote these numpties out at the next available opportunity.
They’ll live with the shame (and stigma) for a long time eh
“ At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.”
Patterson really needs to go. The board also needs to ask "what the F are they doing". FBU gave them an out and they did not take it. That was in my opinion very self serving of them. Shareholders need to vote these numpties out at the next available opportunity.
Totally self serving. They're not there to represent shareholders interests and only interested in their own.
Originally Posted by winner69
They’ll live with the shame (and stigma) for a long time eh
That's not enough. We need a shareholder activist like Bruce Sheppard to wear a Viking hat at the annual meeting and really rip these incompetent directors to shreds with a long series damming questions. I would oblige but I fear my blood pressure wouldn't allow it so owning shares is hazardous to my financial health and having to listen to that self serving bunch on incompetent directors at the annual meeting would be very bad for my physical health so probably best I stay well away !
Ecclesiastes 11:2: “Divide your portion to seven, or even to eight, for you do not know what misfortune may occur on the earth.”
Ben Graham - In the short run the market is a voting machine but in the long run the market is a weighing machine
I Capital raise last August .....all those new shares at $1.15
Sold on this -
FY19 EBIT guidance is of at least $25.0 million, with normalised EBIT of $35 million to $40 million expected to be achieved in the next three years.
I suppose the $40m is now a pipe dream as well.
It was always a load of pipedream bull**** and called as such by me and others at the time.
Ecclesiastes 11:2: “Divide your portion to seven, or even to eight, for you do not know what misfortune may occur on the earth.”
Ben Graham - In the short run the market is a voting machine but in the long run the market is a weighing machine
Originally Posted by Balance
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks