What part of the quarter can be described as "great"?
22 replies (most recent on top)
It is easy to read. If it was good there would be raises.
@j0 they charged customers a tariff tax. i know because I paid it
In Xerox world one plus one equal 3.
Things are bad, but that really means good.
Negatives convert to positives.
@he because MG thinks ITAAS is a new thing and customers leaving in droves. Lots of good people being chopped for standing their ground
People hate IT folks, people hate AI. It's not hard to see.
@hw We really should spell it StartePoo
@ds there is nothing creative happening here. They are just saying what they want to say. Nobody is calling them out because nobody really cares at this point.
@cz (CY) They would only need to be rebated to the customer if the customer paid. Many companies absorbed those tariffs rather than pass on. Honestly, don't know Xerox's position on that.
@ds another variable is Starteepo's plan.
@dq Yup, you nailed it on the head. The ITsavvy number going down is the weirdest part.
I guess they aren't going to save the company after all.
@cz I think that's a good question, but the question before that is: did Xerox actually pass those tariff costs onto customers? Many large companies did what they could to absorb them in the short term.
@dr To piggyback off of Dear friends..
I am in the same boat. We hear the numbers and see the metrics and some of you that are financially savy, you see the ship sinking and some of the "creative" number crunching, how does Wall Street not see this and call them out?
All these "creative" numbers, is this ethical?
Dear friends I’m trying to understand something here- and to caveat this I know didley swuat about financials, but I am somewhat street smart so I do deserve a tiny bit of credit. This is where I’m stumped royally and truly - every turn, every metric, every report, whatever you wanna call it, is a negative. Nothing appears to show any positivity - everything appears to be sugarcoated. My question - and some of you may know the downfall of sears - does anyone have any experience to say whether XRX is showing similar traits to sears? Understood iits a different sector, time, etc / but arithmetic is arithmetic- I was just curious if a comparison is fair or unfair - and ultimately if it is a fair comparison - I assume it is investable Xrx will go down the same path.
how did IT revenue actually go down? not encouraging
And next quarter will be worse because the imaginary "growth" blurb will be gone.
@a2 Extraordinary items don't count. The tariff was $80m cuz we are so desperate for cash. Awful quarter as usual.
@cy And, is Xerox planning to rebate any of the money to the consumer for the higher prices they paid for their toner and printers due to the tariffs?
If Xerox is distributing rebates back to the end user who bears the brunt of the tariffs, that is not a gift.
If Xerox charged more to cover the tariffs and is pocketing the money on the back end, then yes it's a pass through gift picked from the pockets of the customer, held by Uncle Sam and given to Xerox. Money was taken out of one person's pocket, and put in someone else's.
Theft is a better word.
@a3 Let's be clear. The tariffs were an unlawful tax that should NOT have been removed from companies. The money paid in those taxes was on sales. As such, that tariff money (refund) cannot be counted as 'a gift' or not earned, simply because it wasn't and it was earned. It is, however, not forecast to repeat unless the Govt. puts them on again and they are once again challenged in the courts.
Without the Tariff refund, which they discounted for cash now, then there are precious few tangible "synergies" to claim from the Lexmark and ITSavvy integrations. The decision to take the tariff refund and pocket it at a discount to redeem debt that then reduces the credit rating seems like a very desperate decision. If Q3 and Q4 turn out to be flat without the benefit of this windfall, then the reinvention strategy is dead and Xerox needs to consider finances based upon a going concern basis.
Good catch, that's sharper than my number. I used the headline $105M, but if they only actually got $80M after selling the receivables at a discount, your math checks out — and it means the quarter didn't just barely beat expectations, it missed them once you strip out the one-time boost. Same bottom line either way: that 38 cents wasn't real profit.
It was 80 million. They were entitles to 105 in a few months, but the pawn shop took 25 million.
There are ~131 million shares, divided by 80 million dollars, is about 61 cents a share profit per share.
Subtract the 61 cent gift from the Supreme Court, from the 38 cent "profit" they reported and you have a 23 cent per share loss, which is actually HIGHER than the street was looking for.
Happy to walk through it. EPS beat was real — 38 cents vs. an expected 8-cent loss, and margin expanded 690 bps, both genuine operational wins. But a good chunk of that profit jump came from a one-time $105M tariff item that won't repeat, and the 22% revenue growth is mostly the Lexmark acquisition — pro forma, revenue actually declined 6.5%. So yes, a good quarter on profitability. Just worth knowing which parts are recurring before we start handing out gold stars.