Originally posted by madamswer
"Not fantastic, didn't make it to $11m which was top end of guidance and pretty much confirmed they are expecting a loss 2nd half."
It is not only a "not fantastic" update, but it is almost meaningless without any additional qualifying commentary.
For example, what were the main drivers of that $10.5m figure?
What was the sales growth in the half?
The like-for-like sales performance?
The Gross Margin?
Admin expenses?
Lower depreciation?
For all we know, they might have achieved their revised guidance figure by simply deferring a whole lot of expenditure, for which they would then need to play catch-up in subsequent financial periods.
And its not as if this kind of information would be considered commercially sensitive in the context of the current takeover bid, because in a little over a month's time, we will get to see all these relevant details, anyway, when the company will present a full set of its audited financial statements for the half-year.
So why not, as an act of transparency, provide some clarity around that $10.5m figure?
This company's management treats the owners of the business with utter contempt.
Originally posted by madamswer
"Not fantastic, didn't make it to $11m which was top end of guidance and pretty much confirmed they are expecting a loss 2nd half."
It is not only a "not fantastic" update, but it is almost meaningless without any additional qualifying commentary.
For example, what were the main drivers of that $10.5m figure?
What was the sales growth in the half?
The like-for-like sales performance?
The Gross Margin?
Admin expenses?
Lower depreciation?
For all we know, they might have achieved their revised guidance figure by simply deferring a whole lot of expenditure, for which they would then need to play catch-up in subsequent financial periods.
And its not as if this kind of information would be considered commercially sensitive in the context of the current takeover bid, because in a little over a month's time, we will get to see all these relevant details, anyway, when the company will present a full set of its audited financial statements for the half-year.
So why not, as an act of transparency, provide some clarity around that $10.5m figure?
This company's management treats the owners of the business with utter contempt.
Looks as if the Takeover merchants are reading your Posts, Madamswer. The Australian 15/1/19 ... "Allensford says The Reject Shop's trading update is incomplete and demands it disclose to shareholders the makeup of its sales performance over the critical holiday period."