Q: In the globe today there was a somewhat negative article about GSY and cash flow.
No need to reprint the entire article, I am sure you have read it with your morning coffee.
What is your take on this should investors be concerned
A portion below
At the behest of the Ontario Securities Commission, which was looking over the company's filings as part of a "continuous disclosure review," goeasy moved a couple of line items out of one portion of the cash-flow statement and into another. As the company noted in a news release, the change had no impact on the company's net income, earnings per share, cash position or balance sheet.
The change in the company's operating cash flow - a measure of cash the company generates in the ordinary course of business - was massive, however.
The company had told shareholders that it had $153-million in operating cash flow (OCF) in 2016; the reclassification turned the number to negative $21-million. For 2017, $179-million in OCF became negative $89-million. Over two years, that's a swing of $445-million (OCF figures are rounded).
And yet, the markets shrugged. The stock has not moved. Analysts covering the company did not put out notes. This was not "material," the word for what a reasonable investor would find important, a couple of analysts told me via email.
I think there's something wrong here, though, when a primary measure of how a company generates cash from its business can swing that much, and no one seems to care. Are we looking at the wrong things - or do financial statements that are compliant with generally accepted accounting principles - GAAP - not matter?
No need to reprint the entire article, I am sure you have read it with your morning coffee.
What is your take on this should investors be concerned
A portion below
At the behest of the Ontario Securities Commission, which was looking over the company's filings as part of a "continuous disclosure review," goeasy moved a couple of line items out of one portion of the cash-flow statement and into another. As the company noted in a news release, the change had no impact on the company's net income, earnings per share, cash position or balance sheet.
The change in the company's operating cash flow - a measure of cash the company generates in the ordinary course of business - was massive, however.
The company had told shareholders that it had $153-million in operating cash flow (OCF) in 2016; the reclassification turned the number to negative $21-million. For 2017, $179-million in OCF became negative $89-million. Over two years, that's a swing of $445-million (OCF figures are rounded).
And yet, the markets shrugged. The stock has not moved. Analysts covering the company did not put out notes. This was not "material," the word for what a reasonable investor would find important, a couple of analysts told me via email.
I think there's something wrong here, though, when a primary measure of how a company generates cash from its business can swing that much, and no one seems to care. Are we looking at the wrong things - or do financial statements that are compliant with generally accepted accounting principles - GAAP - not matter?
