''Now you will all probably laugh at me for this but I thought it might be worth me taking you through this,'' Gregg told the Leighton full-year results briefing yesterday when slide No.25 came up.
Headed ''One-off adjustments give a profit of around $600m'', the chart showed that Leighton would have made an underlying profit of $600 million had it not been for a $690 million loss it incurred from the Brisbane Airport Link toll-road project, a $355 million loss on its Victorian desalination project and a $206 million loss from its Middle Eastern operations.
Advertisement: Story continues below
''The performance of the business is quite strong on an underlying basis,'' Gregg explained.
CBD has calculated Leighton would have reported an almost $20 billion profit for the year if it had not factored in costs (such as materials, labour and plant costs) and writedowns.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/nice-profit-shame-about-the-red-ink-20110815-1iutx.html#ixzz1VAImKjvY
I am afraid you are looking like a perfect contrarian indicator...
We've all done it at some point in your trading/investing life.
I don't think so, looking back I did the right thing in selling it.
Fraud and bribery claims against Leighton Holdings have sent shares in the construction giant falling by more than 10 per cent, its biggest one-day loss in more than two years, as former chief executive Wal King denied all allegations of wrongdoing.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/bribe-claims-send-shares-into-slump-20131003-2uxct.html
Such big news and no posts??
LEI lost the Chair and 2 independent directors as they are not happy with the Spanish owner.
Stock down 10%.
I am guessing some righteous fund manager thinks that the Board should be independent so decided to vote with their feet... but what's the actual fundamental implications of such an event?
Apart from a bit of fun boardroom drama, it doesn't sound that meaningful when it comes down to earnings and revenue etc? Are they worried that a Spanish rule would be inferior?
A good pairs candidate to hold for a Monday bounce I think....
Fundamentally nothing terribly new or bad happened. Afterall it was just a newspaper story which the police is already investigating. It's not like they will lose their wheat export monopoly like AWB. They may lose a few government contracts overseas, and there's some words about how it will impact further their cash collection in the Middle East. So on these grounds the 12% fall seems like an over-reaction. But valuation wise it isn't a no-brainer bargain or anything like that either.
Under Australian law, it is an offence to bribe a foreign public official even if a bribe may be seen to be customary, necessary or required in the situation, and even if there is official tolerance of the bribe.
The maximum penalty for an individual is 10 years imprisonment and/or a fine of 10,000 penalty units (that is, $1.1 million). For a body corporate, the maximum penalty is the greater of the following three amounts: 100,000 penalty units ($11 million); 3 times the value of the benefits obtained (if calculable); or 10% of the previous 12 month's turnover of the company concerned.
Companies should be aware that they may be liable for the actions of their employees and agents under anti-foreign bribery laws. This may include circumstances in which the bribery of foreign public officials was encouraged or tolerated or where there was a failure to create and maintain a corporate culture that required compliance with anti-foreign bribery laws.
These penalties reflect the serious nature of bribery and the detrimental effect it has on Australia's trade and reputation, as well as international governance.
The fines at the top of the range (an unlikely outcome, IMO) would be $1.89billion
http://www.dfat.gov.au/issues/measures-against-corruption.html
The fines at the top of the range (an unlikely outcome, IMO) would be $1.89billion
http://www.dfat.gov.au/issues/measures-against-corruption.html
I guess it depends on the definition of "company concerned".
If they take 10% of turnover of LEI holdings that'd be a massive fine. If they take 10% of turnover of the subsidiary the broke the law - probably a lot less.
Either way, the investigation is not completed yet anyway.
Among the most explosive of the company files is a memo written on November 23, 2010, by then acting CEO David Stewart. It says Leighton International managing director David Savage had revealed he and Mr King knew of a $42 million kickback to a firm in Monaco nominated by Iraqi officials who gave Leighton a $750 million oil pipeline contract. "I asked did Wal K approve this? And he said yes," the memo says.
Early days, but there is a trend emerging here with Australian companies paying bribes. If the RBA is doing it then who knows who else is!
If these allegations are true, then look out below...
I do think this is bigger than just losing a few government contracts.
The fines at the top of the range (an unlikely outcome, IMO) would be $1.89billion
http://www.dfat.gov.au/issues/measures-against-corruption.html
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?