Thanks for the link Winner. I scrambled to my SCT Annual Report collection to find out what those TIN table figures meant. The table is dated 2020. But as far as SCT is concerned that 'Revenue' figure of $225m relates to the FY2019 year. The growth seems to be the increase in revenue from FY2018 to FY2019. This is a little flattering to SCT, because of the timing. During FY2018 SCT bought two significant businesses .
1/ Alvey: Materials handling and logistics (acquired 23rd April 2019)
2/ Transbotics: Automated guided vehicles, (acquired 31st May 2018)
The Scott balance date is 31st August, so both of these acquisitions were only on the books for a few months of the FY2018 year.
From p62 of AR2018
"Had these acquisitions been effected from 1 September 2017 (the first day of FY2018), the revenue from the groups continuing operations would have been approximately $225m..."
And where have we heard that figure before? It corresponds to the actual revenue for FY2019. So the real underlying revenue growth between FY2018 and FY2019 was , drum roll...
A big fat zero!
Where would a no growth company fit on that TIN growth table?
SNOOPY (who did check the figures before publishing)
PS Will SCT issue a press release to telegraph their TIN achievement? Now that really woudl be embarrassing!
Watch out for the most persistent and dangerous version of Covid-19: B.S.24/7
Well, yes, they are a far off second and just when they rank companies according to revenue. No need for them to earn money or - shudder - be profitable.
Making money is such an old fashioned concept, isn't it? Maybe they should instead of revenue rank them according to destruction of shareholder value. This would be at least honest.
Given that WYN and CBL earned the ultimate price in that category already in previous years and don't qualify anymore for the competition, Scott must be notching up, maybe they are even already a winner?
----
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)
That TIN report is ego driven with motivation to show how important the tech sector is to the NZ economy, esp the export sector - like touting huge numbers and huge growth. blah blah
Politicians fall over backwards and say NZ must give tech heaps of support to grow exports --- maybe even double them to $20 billion in a few years
Reality is tech export sales as a % of GDP has been in decline for years
“ At the top of every bubble, everyone is convinced it's not yet a bubble.”
Well, yes, they are a far off second and just when they rank companies according to revenue. No need for them to earn money or - shudder - be profitable.
Making money is such an old fashioned concept, isn't it? Maybe they should instead of revenue rank them according to destruction of shareholder value. This would be at least honest.
Given that WYN and CBL earned the ultimate price in that category already in previous years and don't qualify anymore for the competition, Scott must be notching up, maybe they are even already a winner?
Good to see people call it as is, not weasel words & platitudes
Agreed, although being the resident "Scott's Grinch" I should point out:
1/ The Contract Assets in the China division at EOFY2020 were only $1.780m, well down on the $2.487m of the previous year (AR2020 p42). $1.780m is not much of a project portfolio and that balance may be mainly made up of service contracts. It could very well be that the China division had 'nothing to do', project wise, until today's "Little Swan" appliance line project announcement.
2/ The Alvey division in Europe is Scott's largest division in terms of 'Contract Assets' at EOFY2020. If the only new work they have is the carton handling, sortation and palletising system for Alliance’s Lorneville plant in New Zealand, they will be making serious losses.
So while positive, I would hesitate to call today's announcement 'good news'. It signals 'lower losses', not profits.
SNOOPY
Last edited by Snoopy; 18-12-2020 at 12:00 PM.
Watch out for the most persistent and dangerous version of Covid-19: B.S.24/7
So while positive, I would hesitate to call today's announcement 'good news'. It signals 'lower losses', not profits.
SNOOPY
Over the past two years, the SCT share price is down 10% whereas the NZX is up over 45%. Perhaps the SCT SP deterioration had been relatively overdone?
Over the past two years, the SCT share price is down 10% whereas the NZX is up over 45%. Perhaps the SCT SP deterioration had been relatively overdone?
I hope so as I have accumulated a couple of parcels at $2.20 and $1.65 over the last twelve months. Today's movement puts me 'back in the black' on those purchases. However, I should point out that by revenue, only 10% of Scott's business is done in New Zealand (AR2020 p11). So I wouldn't expect the SCT share price to correlate with the NZX.
SNOOPY
Watch out for the most persistent and dangerous version of Covid-19: B.S.24/7
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by winner69
Bookmarks