<<<<Any suggestions why this inconsistent numbers were released if they should have been pure fiction?>>>>
For you FAMH history buffs: after I pointed out (and other people began hassling the company) that there was no way FAMH and Monas could claim the company made .06 EPS for the 3rd quarter, Ira switched his story.
He began to say the company actually made .03 EPS for the 3rd Quarter -- that was the party line from then on. .03 + 03 + .03 = .09 for the first three quarters. Very consistent.
Then, even after admitting they had increased the number of shares greatly in the fourth quarter (though still not, IMHO, releasing the real number), Monas claimed the company made .0185 in the last quarter... to total up to .1085. If "all the new shares" were not taken into account, then the earnings would have come close to .03 for the last quarter.
You can see this (if you really want to dig through the company's tripe) if you care to subtract the "unaudited first half" '97 figures that were posted here (a Brad job, as I recall -- one of his wonderful "research" posts will contain it, I am sure) from the "final" profits/revenues Monas stated for 1997.
What you will find is that the figures are amazingly and impossibly consistent. The company appeared to take in almost exactly the same amount of revenue, quarter to quarter, and make exactly the same profits each quarter as well. I pointed this out a long time ago, and don't really feel like digging through all that junk again.
This tells me that Ira was not promoting the actual financials; he was merely pulling numbers out of thin air that sounded good.
If you don't believe me, recall his prediction that FAMH would make ".09 EPS" for the fourth quarter, which is traditionally the slowest for employment agencies. That sounded great, and some people bit at it... including myself, I might add.
I'd expect a loss for 1997 as well when the real figures come out, given that their expenses definitely increased from the previous year (all those office openings, stock promotions, etc.), with no proof at all (so far) that FAMH increased gross profit margins from one year to the next.
The better question is this: how could anyone believe that a money-losing company in 1996 underwent a money-sucking expansion strategy in 1997... and immediately turned a huge profit? |
