Anza Region Performance

Does anybody share my confusion over the reporting of the ANZA results?

The Directors’ report refers to a “consistently positive performance from Spicers ANZA”. It also states that
“the first half of the financial year 2015 saw a strong performance from our business in ANZA”, and affirms that “the Interim results are negatively skewed by the underperformance of the European business”.

A reading of the section on Anza reveals the following facts:

Spicers Australia, New Zealand and Asia
Revenue down 6 per cent
Underlying EBIT fell
Difficult trading conditions in the core Commercial Print segment
Gross margins under pressure as adverse currency pushed cost of sales higher
Australian business requiring further restructuring - right-sizing logistics operations and property leases, relocating from Scoresby to a new site, sheeting operations closed
New Zealand traditional paper business contracted sharply
Asian business continues to experience marked slow down in demand, hence an impairment charge of $6.3 million
$5.2 million of shareholders money spent on an acquisition to buy $0.28m of profits
Overall result – Anza Region PBIT down 85 percent

Questions:
1. How can a 6% fall in revenue and 85% fall in PBIT be described as a “consistently strong” or “positive” performance?
2. How can the “negative skew” of the Interim results be attributed entirely to Europe when PBIT in Anza is 85% down?
3. Given this performance in the Anza region, should shareholders take comfort from the appointment of the head of this region as the new CEO ?