It's not easy to establish the logic used to establish the underlying EBITDA but I think I managed to establish the components of the statutory EBITDA as follows:
They have pared out $0.7m of costs considered to be "one-off" in nature which enabled them to report an underlying EBITDA of $15.2m ($14.5m plus $0.7m). I don't believe that there's a scripted approach to establishing EBITDA except that it's the pre-tax profit before Interest, Income Tax and Depreciation are included. I guess you're discussing what ought to be considered as Depreciation and included after EBITDA and what should not be included as Depreciation and included before EBITDA. It's interesting as Note 20 to the formal accounts (Borrowings) details the Banking Covenants and one is: "Maximum operating leverage ratio of a ratio of 3.0 times (ratio of net debt to EBITDA)"
So it would be in their interest to push the EBITDA number up as high as possible. I'm happy to help some more if this hasn't addressed the issue. Not a fan of these guys so I haven't looked too closely at the accounts.
AHX Price at posting:
94.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)