I too had the fond hope that the EPS would be circa $45m x...

I too had the fond hope that the EPS would be circa $45m x 2/400m = 22.5c, but on rereading the November guidance, I noticed footnote 3, which read (3) Earnings before Interest and Taxation and before amortisation of Intangibles relating to the Golding acquisition. Which means I had no idea what EPS might be be for FY19, so I deducted about 25m off my $45m x 2 to get $65m/400m = 16c. It happened to be what one ore more analysts selected 16c, so that was good enough for me. I secretly though it would transpire to be better, I must admit

I had hopped to locate a logical basis for an EPS for FY19, but without any luck. Somebody other than Lucifer may elucidate this matter. One should be able to guesstimate the interest. I hope it transpires to be higher than 16c.

Amortisation of intangibles is a discretionary thing, and that is not a cost that attracts a tax deduction. Consequently, one could ignore it to derive an underlying, or normalised, EPS, and use that times a PER to invent a valuation. So if you took $520+$580 = $1,100m. Take off some interest and then take out 30% tax, you may end up with a number like $1,050 x .7 = $735m NPAT, or an EPS of $735m/400m = 18.4c. If you then apply a PER of 14, you will have an SP valuation of 14 x 18.4c = $2.566.

Maybe somebody will poke through the information and derive a different arithmetic than the foregoing, but I admit to feeling comfortable with $2.56. If we bounce this around between us, we should get a more comfortable set of numbers. I rattled this reply out quickly off the top of my head, so be cautious about agreeing to what I have written too quickly.