Indeed, in the end it is performance per share that counts. Since Sesa doens't dillute its share count, the per share calculation doesn't change anything material, in this case. Also, share count is a financial/accounting measure. Our first, dirty look is motivated by finding out if a company is economically able to grow (double) revenue and earnings. (In reality we look at bit deeper: incremental EBIT, Operating Income after Tax, Residual Earnings, etc...) But you are correct: a per share count is the right reflex.
Hey Peter,
Indeed, in the end it is performance per share that counts. Since Sesa doens't dillute its share count, the per share calculation doesn't change anything material, in this case. Also, share count is a financial/accounting measure. Our first, dirty look is motivated by finding out if a company is economically able to grow (double) revenue and earnings. (In reality we look at bit deeper: incremental EBIT, Operating Income after Tax, Residual Earnings, etc...) But you are correct: a per share count is the right reflex.
How do you not talk about the share count when you talk about earnings (or EBITDA) growth? Clearly share count is critical.