Your numbers paint a better picture than mine did.
First the 446, 000 does not have the 2.385 million included in it, they need to be added together to get the total shortfall from operations.
That would be a 2,831,000 shortfall
That means that 5,169,000 of the 8 million dollar investment in jumpstart equipment came from operating cash flow.
A number higher than in my example.
15% sales growth at 36% margin adds over 2.2 million dollars in gross profit for the year, which would give the company over 7.3 million in cash flow to cover the bulk of this years jump start.
700 thousand to cover the shortfall on jumpstart, 2,6 million in lease payments and 400 thousand for increased sga costs for the year and they still will only have spent 3.7 of the 8 million dollars next year.
That means they would have enough cash to survive another year if sales do not increase.If they increase 15% again the addition to gross profit would be enough to handle the annual lease payments and another increase in the sga, leaving only the 700 thousand shortage for the jumpstart to come out of the loan money.
This all comes down to continued sales increase.This is why fat mickey has been twisting himself into such a knot trying to claim that the company is not getting the sales increases that it has been getting.
Well I will give netpro points for consistency?
In disagreeing with a statement he does not even understand he shows the board his true genius.
If you do not understand the statement how do you know whether you agree or disagree with it?
The plan is to increase sales in the same way they have in the last few years.
The sale leaseback agreement has the same effect of taking out a loan.
The company showed positive cash flow of between 4 and 5 million dollars last year.That of course did not include the 8 million spent on jumpstart. With a 15% growth in sales for the year the company will show over 6 million in positive cash flow and it will be even higher if growth is over 20%.
That means that the company will need to come up with 2.6 million in lease payments and less than 2 million for jumpstart for a total of 4.6 million needed.
Since the company received 8 million in the sale leaseback they will have 3.4 million either left over or available to spend on other items during the year.
The one thing you will be able to point to in the numbers for this quarter is that reported profit will drop. That will be because they will not get a benefit in the change in the value of the options this year. The gross and operational profit will of course be improving.
2 years in a row reporting a profit!!!!!!!
No wonder you want to change the subject !!!!!! ROFLMAO
What will they be celebrating?
They will be celebrating USAT reporting it's second annual profit in a row of course!
At a meeting room in the Malvern Holiday Inn , no doubt.
Yes real gooooood facts.
They are only increasing sales 7% hooonest.
Let me string 3 quarters together and try to pass it off as a full year of change.
Yes yu two reeel gud at math and almost as gud at facts. ROFLMAO
What a pair of putzes.
The continue growth in e-ports has helped the networks activity continue to grow.
After all you know as well as I do that on a quarter to quarter basis the transactional and lease revenue continued to grow, showing more use of the payment network. That after all is the part of the revenue that the e-ports would have an affect on, right?
Did you finally figure out the nature of the cash flow and decide to switch your tack once again?
I am waiting for your next post which I am pretty sure will be about coke wanting money back wah wah!!! HAHAHAHAHA.
Gee could it be that they mentioned that they planned to continue spending the same amount as lat year on jumpstart and that they just did a sale leaseback agreement for one year worth of jumpstart equipment.
But no I am sure you are right they are going to stop the program. ROFLMAO
Thank you for finally agreeing with me.!!!!!
cash flow from operation 4.8 million ,overall negative cash flow 2.4 million (mainly due to the fact that the 8 million for jump start had to come out of cash flow.
Since a third party has bought this years supply of Jumpstart equipment USAT will not have to come up with that 8 million, but instead will need to come up with only 2.6.The rest gets deferred to the second and third year of the lease.
So lets see without any change in numbers negative cash flow 2.4+2.6(lease payments)=5 million for this year.
Oh but wait a minute sing the jumpstart equipment has been rolled into a lease 8 million does not have to be paid for it this year the way it was last year.While you might be able to hide an expense by calling it an investment it still needs to be paid for and the cash movement comes out of cash flow.
The fact remains that if the company did not issues stock to pay for the 8 million dollars of equipment last year the money had to move through the cash flow section of the 10Q as either cash or debt.
5 million - 8 million=-3 million
So while the lease gets to show up as an expense since they only need come up with 2.6 million instead of 8 million allowing them to show a positive cash flow of 3 million without any change and I am expecting some nice sales increases.
Isn't accounting fun?
All of a sudden you are going to bank on the income statement!!!!!!! ROFLMAO
This great company showed a profit on last years income statement and will be showing a much bigger one this year.I am so glad that you have become a wholehearted supporter of the income statement as a way to measure a companies performance.
I have been talking about the quarterly report all along.The way the company treats the jumpstart program is why they can say that over the last 9 months they have had cash provided by operating activities of 4,817,958 (which does not include investments) while you are busy screaming that the company is still burning cash when looking at the 10q.
If a company does not issue stock and and buys 2 million dollars worth of assets for jump start it might not show up as an expense but the cost still has to come out of the cash or debt portion of the 10q to pay for the investment.
With the lease, instead of over 2 million coming off the books in the quarter it will be between 6 and 7 hundred thousand that will be needed.
Only someone who does not understand basic math would think otherwise.
For this year they planned on spending 8 million dollars for JumpStart. It would have to have been borrowed or come from cash flow, but they would have had to come up with 8 million dollars non the less.
With the lease they only have to come up with 2.6 million instead of 8 million for the year. In addition they got a nice cash payment from the leasing company.
They are not really reducing costs in the long run, but deferring them.
With the leaseback and cash the company received they now have over 2 full years worth of operating time to get the company to cash flow positive including the 8million needed annually for JumpStart before they will need new capital.
Once again as has been said time and time again it comes down to whether the revenue continues to rise in a healthy fashion.
Wow they used stock in 2011 and the beginning of 2012.
Can you find a record of them #$%$ that in the second half of 2012, 2013 or 2014.
If you cannot they have not been using stock to fund the buys for at least 2 years.
That would mean the money in the last few years came from operating capital or new debt, just as I said.
No need for your to worry your myopic little head.
You can scream go team all you want and run history back 20 years if it makes you feel warm and tingly.
I'm just here to make money.
When the opportunity dries up i will move on and never give a second thought to the people that you seem to hate so much in Malvern.
Going on my third run up this year, if I had payed better attention it could have been 6.
While the equipment is put on the balance sheet as an asset it still needs to be paid for.
No it was not paid for by an issuance of stock.
A small part of it came from options that were cashed in, but most came from operational cash and from the line of credit.
The line regarding JumpStart makes no mention of using sale of stock to pay for it.
In addition the quarterly mentions being multiple millions of dollars cash flow positive for the first three quarters despite the fact that they were still cash flow negative because of the need to pay for jumpstart.
As soon as I reread the post and saw the error I knew that one of the crackheads who see people from Malvern and boiler rooms everywhere was going to jump on this and bask in their self perceived perfection.
Aren't you the genius who dares me to buy whenever I say that it looks like a good entry point when the stock drops into the low seventies.
Thank for the support getting a nice run so far for the third time.
You do not seem to understand how this sale leaseback works on a balance sheet. The costs will be dropping this year, but will go up next year.
Lets see the company gets close to 8 million from the leasing company.
The company pays 2.6 million in lease costs this fiscal year.
Instead of 8 million in expenses for this years jump start equipment it has already been paid for by the lease.
8 million - 2.6 million= 5.4 million drop in fixed/jump start costs for the first year
Now the fixed/jump start cost will rise in the second and third year until the end of the lease and after that they will either have to buy, remove or keep paying a lease fee on the equipment.
With a 5.4 million drop in fixed/jump start costs this year and an increase of nearly 8 million dollars in cash on hand it all comes down to whether the sales continue to rise or not.
Evidently in your spastic need to try and prove your genius, even when having trouble with basic math , you seem to have forgotten my first post.
In my first post i pointed out the gross profit change that would occur with both a 15% and a 20% growth in sales and a similar margin to the last quarter.
I pointed out that over the last year sales did in fact increase between 19 and 20%.
I put the 15% out there because the weakest quarter in the last four showed only a 16% growth.Because of this I mentioned both ends of the spectrum based on last years performance.
Notice that there was not a single digit increase in any of the quarters.
Did you really through out the coke question for about the 100th time to try and cover up your math deficiencies?
Please tell me you are joking and not really trying to be serious!
Besides using a metric no one else uses you are not showing the sales increase over the last four quarter, but only 3, which is useless.
If you are showing the sales increase over the last 4 quarters, why are their only three changes in the percentage?
The reason is that you are only showing 3 quarters worth of increases.You need five quarters to show the change in sales over four quarters/ a year.
I realize that it is very hard to get the math on a metric right when you are making it up from scratch!!! ROFLMAO
I stick by my original post, if sales rise over 15%or more this year in comparison to last years comparable quarter I will be happy.