Scenarios first Numbers second, page-13

Add a new CFO to my wish list...............one that truly believes in transparent segment reporting....which will be vital to shareholders in the merged entity and just for a general just clean it all up of the balance sheet and financials that just reeks of mediocre care......It looks super untidy

I'm doing more numbers as I speak... trying to dig through.......as I do this one slide came to mind ...........


Please help me out anyone in the know.... after a deeper look at these numbers below regarding Average Margin Range i just cant see how they are comparing apples with apples interms of there components to their margin equations.

Wouldn't installation costs of a fence which is a variable and dynamic cost (and yes other things Eko) go towards the product manufacturing or cost of sales category? I believe they are going towards not Employment? Thereby boosting the average margin  when used in comparison.

My feeling is this  Ave Margin  number seems to exclusively include only product manufacturing (materials etc)

Have a look at employment costs of FFT

2017 Employee Costs AMBIGUOUS to say the least ...... 2017 numbers Q1 2,529, Q2 2,862, Q3 436, Q4, 1023, Q1 2018 1,670.........no consistency. The 27TH OF APRIL FFT statement indicates a big chunk of employee costs were Aura A1 -2 related ....but apparently it has stopped. I have to admit the extent of my FFT  knowledge is hurting me.... maybe employee costs are effected by perimeter fencing installation and as they win orders they use subbies on as per needs basis, therefore a rising employee costs could in fact be a good thing ....but this is a problem for forecasting  as Core staff/ Product Development Staff/ Subbies as all possess different tenures.

Can anyone enlighten me?


This appears to be a misrepresentation of the facts.  It doesn't effect the bottom line or bank balance but still indicates that they are a long way from best practice awards in corporate governance.