GREY:MLKKF - Post by User
Comment by
BrutalTruth2on May 17, 2010 12:13am
588 Views
Post# 17104348
RE: Just to clarify
RE: Just to clarifyI don't understand how they can shift revenue from one period to the next, particularly outside of the fiscal year. If it was based on volumes sold but not yet shipped, then the correct booking of that would be unearned revenue which would sit as a short term liability againt the cash recieved until the product is produced and shipped which would then be counted as revenue in Q1 (or whenever the product is delivered to the purchaser).
Back over a year ago while still in Canada I worked for a company that has about $5-6 billion in revenue a year. In Q4 2008 our controller tried to push through an extra $6M in obsolescence costs as a provision against 2009 obsolescence as our cost of goods sold was favourable against our outlook in Q4 2008 and we were worried about slow moving inventory for 2009. The SOX compliance team raised a big stink about it.
If a company has that difficult of a time shifting 1% of its costs relative to its revenue out of period I find it very hard to believe that another TSX listed company can just shift a third of its revenue out of period and get away with it.
Copper is dropping like a rock tonight while gold is doing awesome yet again so I am going to hold my AUY, and the only Canadian company I currently hold which is AEX while sitting on the sidelines to watch a bottom for copper and ML. I don't know much about AEX except it has a gold mine that is sought after by some French company so a buyout or purchase of the mine seems likely. I wrote more details on the AEX board so go over there if you want to see it. I want to keep my posts on here mostly to ML.