Why do the anals say profit was down? Last year included 15 cents of special items which must be removed to assess the company's actual performance. Both Revenue and Net Profit showed substantial gains!
Read the most recent Headline post by MarketWatch on Yahoo. They say net was down 17%. BUT, then they go on to say net from CONTINUING OPERATIONS was 0.39 vs 0.31. Both years have to be adjusted for one time special items. MarketWatch has adjusted 2006, finally.. but they have not adjusted 2005. Why? Your guess.
The company gets paid 2 bucks for a share that's worth 26 dollars on the stock exchange. (or 19 dollars as of today). Shareholders get screwed for 24 bucks per stock option.
They spent 3,2 million dollars on share repurchase, and at the same time, the number of diluted shares increased. That's 3 million dollars down the drain for a company that barely earned 10 millions this quarter.
I notice that Reuters headlines always look at GAAP earnings, no matter how misleading. Actually, 2nd qtr 05 eps was further boosted by one time reduction in Montana state taxes. Bottom line is that 2nd quarter 05 profit was terrible for reasons I don't understand, but I am very happy with 2nd quarter 06, current quarter, and compared to 2nd qtr '04, it was up about 60% As to wasted money on buyback. ACO started expensing options before they were legally required to.