Brassmad, can you please present a coherent, fact based argument on why this structure is better for IOT Group (Aust) shareholders, versus the previous agreement, as you claim.
I clearly said there was no info to assess them, not that one was better or worse.
I used the company ANNounced facts:
- IOT Group (Aust) own 70% of IOT US LLC (therefore only own 70% of the US NPAT, under the accounting rules they will consolidate the whole P&L, and have a line backing out minority interests share of profits (backing out the 30%) - this will be seen in the next half yearly. (Google consolidation accounting, minority interests and the AASBs if you don't believe me)
- Corlett is CEO of IOT LLC
No information exists in the public domain on actual or expected IOT US costs, e.g. office rent, warehouse rent, other employee salaries (and bonuses), insurance, entertainment, travel, etc etc. NO info exists in public domain on the COGS for IOT US so gross profit/gross margin isn't known as also No info exists on public domain on whether IOT US buys as legal entity directly from AEE (or from its parent) and NO info exists in public domain on selling price from IOT US to Retailers.
- No information was provided on the commission structure in the previous agreements
NO information has been provided on the working capital funding of IOT US (e.g. has working capital been provide in proportion to the shareholdings?). Though the qtrly showed some money going there. Did the 30% shareholders also provide funds?
Yes, by the very fact of being a shareholder in the US entity (as a founder of Top Tech he has a portion of the 30% according to the ANN and Tobin appears to have some also as a founder of Top tech...but the exact %s aren't disclosed),
So Corlett interests are partly aligned with Net Profit after tax (as his dividends can only flow from that). But you dont know his salary, his KPIs'if any for his salary (the aust KMP don't have rev/profit targets for their cash compensation), as the details hasn't been announced. You don't know the base component, or any bonuses, or what any bonuses are based on (cause it hasn't been provided as far as I can see). You don't know the relative size of salary, bonuses (if any) and dividends (if any) for this year, next year or whenever. per Warnie's post he also got shares in IOT Aust - so his interests are also partly aligned to their NPAT/EPS .
So either you are claiming to have info not in the public domain as bove, or you are just guessing it is much better and claiming it as fact (opinion)? If you can provide me the facts above, I am happy to use my accounting skills to build a model to compare them.....
While there is no issue with your opinion/position on IOT, you seem to try and twist both facts, and other posts, to suit your throwaway comments.
For example, yesterday you called out Warnie on the legal settlement (the addn 950k), but I posted the company NOTE to the accounts from the 2016 Financial Report which shows you only used half of facts in your post and showed Warnie was correct (keep it up Warnie).
You also keep saying overnight his fact based research is not relevant, because it was last year?? I disagree, and find much more value in the research he's posted than in unsubstantiated claims with no evidence
DYOR IMO
IOT Price at posting:
1.7¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
