Lurker, thanks for agreeing with my questioning. I looked over my numbers about five times since that post, and can't find a hole in them. Can you? Please let me know. I have a healthy skepticism, even about my own work.
In regard to the third quarter financials (which I believe to have just proved bogus), I'm sure someone will ask "But what if the revenues came entirely from permanent placements?" As we both know, there is no way that could be, since: A) most of the permanent placements would have put time in as temps during the quarter, which generates lower margins (about 30 percent, we are told), and B) I can't imagine FAMH kissing off the temp business for a whole quarter, since it generates (Ira said today) 85 percent of the revenues.
In order for it to be totally permanent placement revenue, FAMH would have to have all the temps who got hired as permanent workers switch on the first day of the quarter (so that they didn't generate any temp billings from these workers during the quarter). Then, FAMH would have to refuse any temp business for the rest of the quarter, in order to keep up such impressive margins. They may as well then close the offices for three months.
Somehow, I doubt this happened.
P.S. After reading Post #1436, if anyone has a temp placement/permanent placement breakdown for the third quarter that would generate $1.3 million earnings on $1.7 million in revenue, please let me know. Perhaps I missed a possible workable ratio.
In breathless anticipation,
L.E. |
