Joe, Jerome & all,
first of all congrats on this little gem. Back in spring I did an analysis of the capital equipement spending (when everyone else was slowing !)- and found the necessary top-line growth in sales to be approx. $2 million. Back then I argued that MASK will need sales of about $12.5 million to make this investment accretive. You can find this here: Message 4659301
Well, not only did they easily make that, they are growing even faster than I thought they could. Look at sales growth. Sales from Q1/97 to Q1/98 grew approx. 12%. Sales from Q2/98 to Q2/99 (now) grew more than 22%. That's solid top line growth not bean counting. This is music to my ears - really.
So the company must be gaining market share as well. Back last year
Last calendar Year (97)
MASK $43,6 8.6%
PLAB $197 38.6%
DPMI $268,7 52,8%
Last quarter annualized
MASK $237.8 43,1% (mean of last 2 quarters)
DPMI $257,4 46,7% (mean of last 2 quarters)
MASK $56 10,2%
both, MASK & DPMI were experiencing exceptionally weak recent quarter sales, so if I took just last quarter's numbers the effect would have been even more significat
Jerome, if You want an analysis of the impact of the ETEC machines, go to my postings from spring (MAY) and look to SEC-Edgar database . Look to the following items (Assets: Production Equipment/Machines, Long term debt) also look to profit & loss statement regarding depreciation and to statement of cashflows.
Back then my analysis was that MASK had (back then) approx. $5 million cash, $7 million receivables. Cash flow was (data from Year 1997) about $8 million annually.
Now You see some $6 million longterm debt. With the added top-line impact of the investment ($20 million machinery) they should have improved the cashflow to more than $11 million annually.
See this. Half year's cashflow and no net effect of the investment on the balance sheet would be visible. Great timing - tapping the suppliers when no one buys is very schrewd, too.
best regards
CROSSY
Now imagine, as I said back |
