Huntingdon Life Sciences released its first quarter 2003 results which were generally positive, although Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty was desperately trying to spin the results as showing the company in dire financial straits (remember, according to SHAC, HLS has been on the verge of failing for several years now).
This is how SHAC tried to spin HLS’ financial results,
HLS released its earnings and expenditures for the first three months of
the year, revealing again that it made a loss. Even more damaging for
Huntingdon was having to admit that this loss is direct result from the
loss of customers.
What is really damaging is SHAC’s inability to actually read for comprehension.
First, HLS did report a small net loss of $0.4 million on net revenues of $31.9 million. Should shareholders be worried that companies deserted SHAC in the first quarter leading to this loss? Hardly.
Revenues in the first quarter 2003 were up 22.2 percent over HLS’ first quarter 2002 revenues of $26.1 million. Similarly, the loss of $0.4 million this quarter compares nicely with HLS first quarter 2002 loss of $3.3 million. Hmmm . . . HLS did $5.8 million more business this quarter, and saw its losses shrink dramatically to last year but “this loss is direct result from the loss of customers”?
The loss, by the way, was not due to a loss of customers, but rather one time charges including a $0.5 million charge resulting from non-cash foreign exchange remeasurement loss, and $2.6 million in expenses related to its merger/offer and some additional foreign exchange remeasurements. As anyone with half a brain (i.e. not SHAC) could see right there in the HLS press release,
Excluding those Other Expenses, Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (“EBITDA”) was $3.7 million for the first quarter of 2003, or 11.7% of revenues, compared with $2.1 million, or 8.0% of revenues, for the same period in the prior year.
Yeah, SHAC activists are really killing the company, aren’t they? And what of the “lost customers” that SHAC refers to? They seem to be misunderstanding this paragraph which seems pretty clear and not open to a whole lot of misinterpretation (emphasis added),
Brian Cass, LSR’s President and Managing Director said “First quarter results continued the strong performance we?ve been building for the past year. The revenue trend has remained positive and we?re delighted with the growth exhibited over last year. New order signings for the quarter were some 10% ahead of revenues and roughly flat with last year. After an exceptionally strong market in 2002, we have built a considerable volume of booked on work. This will be of particular value as we, and our competitors, have seen some softening in demand recently with uncertainty in customers? development programs; such variations are a regular phenomenon and we remain confident of the long term potential of our market.“
HLS says its new orders for the first quarter are about what it had last year, but it suspects some softening might occur later in the year. After SHAC gets done with this, it becomes Huntingdon lost money this quarter because it lost customers. These idiots cannot even read straightforward financial reports correctly, but people actually consider them a credible source for information about animal research?
Source:
LSR Announces First Quarter 2003 Results Huntingdon Life Sciences, Press Release, May 12, 2003.