Lexmark Q3 Profit Plunges; Revenue Declines 3%; Reveals 1,650 Job Cuts

[OhioChick]

Source: RTT News

10/23/2007 6:43:13 AM Lexmark International Inc. (LXK) reported third quarter GAAP net income of $45.2 million or $0.48 per share, versus $85.6 million or $0.85 per share in the prior year quarter.

Non-GAAP earnings for the quarter was $57 million or $0.60 per share, versus $95 million or $0.95 per share in the same period last year.

Third quarter revenue declined 3% to $1.195 billion from $1.234 billion in the last year quarter.

Analysts polled by First Call/Thomson Financial expected the company to report earnings for the quarter of $0.13 per share on $1.19 billion revenue.

The company also announced a restructuring plan, including closure of one of its inkjet supplies manufacturing facilities in Mexico. The company expects these restructuring actions to impact about 1,650 positions by the end of 2008. The company said it estimates these actions to result in pretax costs of about $20 million in 2007 and $70 million in 2008.


Read more: http://www.rttnews.com/sp/Quickfactsnew.asp?date=10/23/2007&item=38

[Rabrrrrrr]

1. Jackasses - so their profit was only 57 million instead of the 95 last year.

So it's time to get rid of the lower people....


I could see if they were in financial difficulty (and maybe they are - perhaps this isn't reporting the entire financial picture of Lexmark). But to start restructuring and getting rid of people just because profits were smaller is ridiculous.

[happygoluckytoyou]

2. LEXMARK...GM...Countrywide... try not to land under the 3 of clubs when this all falls

cheap manufacturing jobs are being exported to mexico (1970)... but the upper-middle-class guy says--- why should i care

union manufacturing jobs are being exported to japan (1980)... but the upper-middle-class guy says--- why should i care

lower white collar jobs are being compressed with corp takeovers (1990) but the upper-middle-class guy says--- why should i care

mid-level white collar jobs are being sent to india (2000) but the upper-middle-class guys says--- why should i care

ceo-s are bailing out on corporations taking all of the profits with them--- but the upper-middle-class guy says--- why should i care



upper-middle-class guy walking through his neighborhood, gets mugged by unemployeed people--- pollution fills the pacific--- son of upper-middle-class guy loses fortune in housing market crash as banks and loan companies throw money at the problem--- wife of upper-middle-class guy can't breathe because of global warming and pollution--- country falls into the toilet and is mistaken for shit...oops, no mistake... why should any of us care

we who have little, have little to lose... those who think they are rich dont understand who is carrying them...

[OhioChick]

3. Nicely Put. n/t

[Crowman1979]

4. It can be a combination of several factors...

1. Everyone either owns a printer or just uses the one at work, school or the library, 2. People would rather buy one used or fix an old one or 3. Everyone is tired of buying electronic gadgets because thery do not have the money to purchase one.

[Orrin_73]

5. Lexmark = crappy printers

Lexmark printers suck. I bought one a few years ago in total I was able to print some 100 pages before a small part broke. I called lexmark and was told to buy a new one because they did not deliver parts.

[CatholicEdHead]

6. Yep, they suck royally

I bought two low-end ones in 03-04. The ink gelled during the summer heat. I went to a HP low-end 3740 and the ink kept working through and after the summer.

[alcibiades_mystery]

7. I bought a Lexmark printer once...

ONCE.

[melm00se]

8. Lexmark

shot themselves in the foot with their chip in the toner cartridges that makes refilling them much more difficult.

In addition Lexmark hasn't figured out how to successfully play in the consumer market which is a staggeringly low margin segment

While there will be job losses in Lexington, the majority of the job loss will be in Mexico:

The bulk of the rest are being shifted from Mexico to lower cost sites.

the jobs went to Mexico because it was cheaper and they are leaving Mexico for somewhere cheaper still.