To: Pareto who wrote (202 ) 5/1/2000 12:16:00 PM From: Pareto Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 232
A critical note however I didn't like it how they announced the e-outlet charges. Two weeks before earnings they mentioned a special charge. When earnings where released, it showed a pro-forma profit.siliconinvestor.com Well, pro-forma profit excluding special charges. At no place in the press release it was mentioned how much the charge was. I think that it is very bad not to be honest and to hide information to your investors. The charge was 3.4 Million. You had to figure it out yourself, comparing the consolidated figures with the pro-forma figures. It said: "(b) General and administrative expenses for the three months ended March 31, 2000 does not include a non-recurring bad debt charge." It mentions the charge, but it doesn't mention who is the customer or what is the amount. The press release earlier about the special charge did not mention that the launch of the eOutlet was only one month earlier.siliconinvestor.com To my opinion pro-forma results should not be published, they allow management to exclude what ever they like. Sometimes it is "intangibles" or "amortizations", now it is "special charges". But it is still money flowing out of the company, as a result of management decisions and should be recorded in one statement. The management of Appnet was responsible for not obtaining sufficient guarantees from eOutlet. It let the debt rise to 3.4 Million or 8% of the revenue in the first quarter, with the launch only one month before. Without this charge, even the "pro-forma profit" was only 0.1 Million. The quality of information is one of the most important elements in defining the quality of management. This time they get low marks from me. Next time I'm out. Regards, Pareto