Photon sees 45% drop in profits after Geekversity debacle
Photon has suffered a 45% drop in profits thanks in part to the poor performance of its internet company Geekdom and now ditched get-rich-on-the-internet operation Geekversity, the company revealed to the market today.
Documents lodged with the ASX reveal that Photon’s profits after tax returned to shareholders for the last six months of 2009 were just under $2.9m, 44.96% down on the same period a year before. Revenue was down by nearly 10% to $300m.
Photon’s media release instead used a different calculation, pointing to EBITDA profits being $37.3m, down 7% on the same period a year before, when one-off costs such as the divestment of Geekversity are excluded.
Photon is the largest media and marketing company on the ASX and owns a string of well known Australian agencies.
I heard a whisper that there is more than just an ‘arising noise from unhappy customers’ and that there is a class action underway.
Really? I heard there were two…
Quote: “best of breed” agencies………..Give me a break! Check out slide 8 of words and terms not to use in a presentation by Steve Jobs. Maybe Photon should consider a clearer tagline.
http://bit.ly/Steve_Jobs
“Photon is the largest media and marketing company on the ASX and owns a string of well known Australian agencies.”
Current PGA stock price provides a market cap in the region os $180m.
STW’s stock price currently gives it a market cap of circa $300m.
Surely that makes PGA number 2?
what about this extra liablity not mentioned by them yet – isn’t that weird :http://www.smh.com.au/business.....-n1vu.html
They wouldn’t need to mention of it’s likely to be thrown out.
The article suggests a weakness in the case; she was to be paid if they made more than 6m a year for four years after the agreement was inked in 2006. She’s also arguing that geekdom and geekversity were to be considered part of imega.
Having just posted a 5.5m loss on that business I’d be pretty sure they’re confident of not having to pay out.
Just going from what is in the article but seems pretty obvious.