Issues with Shine's business and accounting, page-4

I think you are spot on regarding the branding. There are pros and cons to rebranding existing businesses, however on balance I think it's a no-brainer and I'm a bit baffled that Shine haven't been doing this. This is a high volume industry with little repeat business. For that reason brand and advertising are very important. People might mock the Erin Brockovich contract but I personally think this is a good idea. She might be getting a lot of money for doing not very much, but what is being purchased here is an endorsement from a household name who is famous for reasons that are extremely relevant to this business. Though it's true that the movie was years ago and she is fading from public consciousness. I still think that this is smart from a brand perspective. But failure to capitalise and build on the Shine brand by not re-branding acquisitions is not so smart. There is a disconnect in strategy here and I think they need to address this.

I've been thinking about a post last week and I think my chief concern at the moment is whether or not the acquisitions are growing operating cash flow. i.e. Will the acquisitions ultimately benefit shareholders, or will the empire exist for the sake of itself?

Here is a simplified view (all figures rounded and some numbers not included):

	Column 1	Column 2	Column 3	Column 4	Column 5
1		2015	2014	2013	2012
2	Receipts from customers	135m	102m	93m	59m
3	Payments to suppliers and employees	-122m	-91m	-84m	-50m
4	Difference	13m	11m	9m	9m
5	Income tax paid	-2m	2m	-3m	-2m
6	Net cash provided by operating activities	10m	11m	5m	7m

So from 2012 to 2015 customer receipts increased by 76m (128% increase), factoring in costs this has resulted in a contribution to cash by 4m (44% increase).

I'm still trying to formulate an opinion on whether I like these numbers....