Sometimes it's just not about the bottom line: Current Account plc announces its annual results for 2003. We are pleased to say that on an underlying adjusted constant currency basis excluding all exceptional and extraordinary items and making a few other little tweaks, profits are up 50 per cent.
We feel this is the relevant figures for investors seeking maximum visibility of our earnings trend. It also provides a clear base offering clarity for assessing progress going forward.
Among the charges taken in fiscal 2003 was a once-off very exceptional restructuring provision from the sale of our loss-making US subsidiary which, we have to admit, was a dog from day one. We feel this disposal allows management to concentrate more fully on core competencies.
Similarly, we have excluded the cost of the fleet of Beemers for our board (most of whom we plan to chuck out when we take the company private next year), the exorbitant cost of that conference in Los Angeles and the small fortune we lost on those dotcom shares.
On an unadjusted basis, including exceptional items, once-off costs and not taking any account of the most unfair hit from the rising euro - in other words at the bottom line - profits collapsed by 20 per cent.
However, we feel this does not reflect the underlying performance of your company.
Too early to get excited about tax overshoot
Don't get too excited about the the big overshoot in tax revenue for the first two months of the year. Together with spending running below target, this turned a €127 million deficit in the first two months of 2003 into a €430 million surplus in the same period this year.
This time last year, taxes were way behind schedule and market seers were beating their chests and warning of a big shortfall. In the event, there was a significant pick-up in later months and the Exchequer finances came in almost exactly on schedule.
This time the early buoyancy is due entirely to a surge in capital gains tax and a rise in stamp duty, with other taxes on schedule.
It is far too early to say that this will lead to a big undershoot for the year. However, it could yet come right for Charlie McCreevy, as whatever the precise outturn this year, the outlook is for somewhat easier budgets in the run-up to the next election.
That's provided the economy continues to pick up, of course - and assuming Charlie McCreevy is still Minister for Finance!
O'Reilly's bonanza
So what will Sir Anthony O'Reilly do with the €55 million or so he will pocket following the re-flotation of Eircom this month. Even when the €25 million he put up in 2001 is taken into account he is still sitting on a handy €30 million.
One possibility is that he might try and interest his friends at Valentia in trying to repeat the Eircom trick at Waterford Wedgwood. The eponymous crystal and tableware group is languishing at 26p and, assuming a small premium, could probably be snapped up for less than €300 million.
But given that it lacks the pristine balance sheet and strong cash flow that made Eircom so attractive, one has to suspect that Providence Private Equity and Soros Equity will says thanks, but no thanks.
But it might also be premature to write off Sir Anthony and his legendary powers of persuasion. But gearing over 100 per cent and negative cash flow make it a hard sell.
Barristers lose the plot
There was an unusual level of interest being displayed in the horse racing page of The Irish Times at the Moriarty Tribunal on Wednesday by barristers and lawyers waiting for proceedings to begin.
On Monday, financier Dermot Desmond had let loose a few of his views in relation to the tribunal's never-ending examination of the 1995 mobile phone licence competition (in which he won the jackpot).
Among the views expressed by the financier was one that the tribunal had "lost the plot" and needed to be brought back on track and back to its terms of reference.
On Wednesday, as Mr Desmond's associate, Michael Walsh, waited to get into the witness box, there was much examination of the list for the 4.30 at Downpatrick, where a horse called Lost the Plot was scheduled to run. Was this an omen and should the horse be backed?
The nag came sixth and, with the benefit of hindsight, was obviously not associated with Mr Desmond, given the miserable promised return, a mere nine to one, which compares poorly with his return from that more famous nag, Esat Digifone.
