I guess the best one can do is assume that it follows the pattern of the recent past.
So I take that to mean revenue in H2 FY17 to be 10% to 20% less than that of H1 FY17. Now if costs have gone up relative to pcp's, then clearly NPAT will be something else again. "I guess the best one can do is assume that it follows the pattern of the recent past.
So I take that to mean revenue in H2 FY17 to be 10% to 20% less than that of H1 FY17. Now if costs have gone up relative to pcp's, then clearly NPAT will be something else again."
But if you take the announcement at face value then the funny thing is that current half NPAT is not really down that much; in fact, it is up (!) if one strips out whatever additional costs they are said to have incurred.
If "comparable turnover" equates to FY2016 Revenue, then JH2017 Revenue will be $380,000 down on JH2016.
But based on their indication of Pre-Tax Profit to be $2.6m for FY2017, compared to $2.75m for FY2016, it suggests that JH2017 Pre-Tax Profit will be just $310,000 lower than pcp.
For reference, relevant half-yearly financials, taking guidance at face value, below:
(Note that June half-years are seasonally weaker than December halves, by around 20% on average at the NPAT level. So JH2016 being up on DH2015 is the exception.)
What is increasingly clear is that business for ASW was particularly buoyant during the course of calendar 2016; therefore those earnings should not be used as the earnings base from which future growth is modeled.
