according to the tea leaves....., page-13

re: chart for madmacs updated and repost..
I think only text appropriate here shan't post a chart



_This may help people
___________________________________________
Around the Traps ... with THE FERRET
07:50, Friday, 7 May 2004


Sydney - Friday - May 7:(RWE)
*****************************



It is (was?) a good stock but we could never really understand
the love affair some investors had with LEIGHTON (LEI) over the years,
paying a high p/e for the stock and accepting a relatively low yield.
To them Wal King and his executives walked on water.
But they were drowning yesterday after the shock nine-month
profit fall from $117.3 million to $77 million.
The shares plunged $2.31 (or almost 23 per cent) to $7.90 as
wave after wave of selling forced the shares to close near the day's
low.
Turnover of more than 9.2 million shares was a measure of the
market's disenchantment with the stock now.
The second highest turnover in the past 12 months was only a
bit over 2 million shares.
The company had an EPS of 28.3c in the nine months under review
(down from 43.3c last year).
However, Leighton expects full-year profit to be about the same as last year's at $140 million, which resulted in EPS of 51.7c.
To get there, it seems Leighton will need to have a cracker of a final quarter, requiring $63 million to reach the $140 million.
In the previous year it only needed $23 million in the final quarter, so the rise for the quarter will have to be of the order of 170 per cent.
If Leighton makes its target for the year it means that at even yesterday's depleted share price levels the stock is a prospective p/e of more than 15 times.
The market may not want to pay 15 times for a stock which is no longer a good growth story.

*****
While we're putting the boot in, we also did not like the way
Leighton announced the news.
For a start, the headline read "Spencer Street Station, Hilton
Hotel impact solid Leighton result".
Ignoring the fact that this uses the noun "impact" as a verb, it was NOT a solid result was it?
And, being a construction group, what else could affect it except - duh! - construction projects?
But that's not all ... it said "Leighton Holdings Ltd announced operating profit before tax (unaudited) for the nine months to 31 March 2004 of $120 million and operating profit after tax (unaudited) of $77
million."
Ignoring the incorrect use of the past tense in "announced", what is missing from this opening paragraph?
A comparison figure ... what it earned in the previous corresponding period.
Everyone needs that number and with Leighton yesterday you had to go looking for it.
*****