No problems on the SAMR info, a bit more depth would have been nice, but at this stage they are within the guidelines given. I think the analysts had greater concerns that they were struggling to get on top off. As for the randoms maybe some do, I don't know. I can remember a random who dropped by a while back and said Synlait were cutting shifts and laying people off, turned out to be true and few downgrades followed, I guess the info you flick off may be just the info that bites back.
As for the forward demand, I think the following goes part to the confusion that seemed to come across and why A2m should update. I must say if people listen to the call Sm1 were certainly very guarded.
Nick Mar: So just to be clear, you already had an update from a2 for that part of the August to December, but then your model was already telling you a different number to that and you had to revise it down or the a2 model came down towards another load than what you'd already previously had? It just doesn't add up if you already had 12 months' data and you're saying that you've taken too optimistic a view previously and had to revise that down for a period you already had a forecast from a2 from? Grant Watson: Yeah, I'm not quite sure where you going that, Nick. We had a view of demand that we were working to for the a2 business, let's just say for the entire calendar year. Late January we got an indicative update that was firmed up in mid-Feb. We reran the numbers and effectively that related to a reduction in demand for the second half of this financial year, and the first half of next financial year
A2M Price at posting:
$5.77 Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)