- Joined
- 29 December 2008
- Posts
- 247
- Reactions
- 0
persistentone
"The largest part of the difference appears to be due to impairment."
There was a note on impairment on the second CCP ANN today on page 9
-- refer the attachment
http://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics/displayAnnouncement.do?display=pdf&idsId=00954826
Credit Corp Upgrades Guidance
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews/articleid/3239212
Sydney - Wednesday - May 20: (RWE Australian Business News) - Receivables management company Credit Corp Group Ltd (ASX:CCP) today reported continued strong performance over the four months to April.
Further improvements in operational effectiveness mean that the company is on track to deliver the upper end of its net profit guidance issued in February while exceeding the earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and impairment (EBITDA) guidance issued at the same time.
Directors also provided updated full-year guidance to June 30.
In the 10 months to April (year to date) unaudited EBITDA was $79.8m and net profit $9.7m on revenue of $128.3m while basic earnings per share were 22.16c.
Updated full-year 2009 guidance is for EBITDA of $93m-95m, a net profit of $10m-11m and basic EPS of 23-25c.
For the 12 months ended June 30 the company achieved $85.72m EBITDA, a $5.36m net profit and basic EPS of 12.29c.
Directors said the company was on track to achieve a record EBITDA result for the full year despite relatively modest purchased debt ledger (PDL) purchasing, indicating that operational improvement initiatives and overhead reductions implemented over the past year were delivering sustained positive results.
The company continued to maintain its disciplined approach to PDL acquisitions, after increasing its monthly rate of purchasing by 70pc against the first half of the year. The average result for all recent purchases continues to meet Credit Corp's minimum return hurdle.
Further improvements in collection operations remain the key driver of favourable performance.
The returns from older PDLs continue to improve, with the proportion of total revenues collected from PDLs acquired more than two years ago increasing from 21pc in the March 2008 quarter to 43pc for the four months to April 2009.
Despite the increased focus on older PDLs, direct collection staff productivity of $227 per hour was achieved in the period, an increase of 20pc.
In line with the increase in purchasing, the company has grown its collection workforce by 24 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) staff to 406.
The company is on track to grow its collection workforce to 430 FTE by June.
So why would *better than expected revenue* drive impairment expenses higher? Better collection / revenue implies less needs to be impaired?
There is something basic about their business model and how they take impairments that I simply don't understand (yet).