IBJNews

Brightpoint shares slide after it lowers forecast on loss of customer

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Shares of Brightpoint Inc. fell more than 8 percent in Wednesday morning trading after the Indianapolis-based provider of logistics for wireless devices lowered the top end of its annual earnings guidance.

The loss of a major customer caused Brightpoint to lower its earnings range by 4 cents, forecasting a profit of between $1.07 and $1.13 a share for 2012.

Despite the lowering of its 2012 earnings guidance, the range is still higher than 2011 earnings. Full-year earnings per share were 71 cents, up substantially from 43 cents per share in 2010.

A spokeswoman for Brightpoint said the company isn’t identifying the customer.

The customer’s transition to a competitor is expected to begin in April and continue through the end of the year, Brightpoint said Tuesday upon announcing the earnings revision.

Brightpoint said it handled 6.8 million wireless devices last year on behalf of the unnamed customer. Overall, it handled 30.7 million devices in the fourth quarter and 112.2 million in 2011, both record numbers for the company.

Brightpoint expects the number of devices it handles to decline even before the unnamed customer begins pulling its business in the spring. The company projects the number of units it will handle in the first quarter of 2012 to fall by 15 percent to 20 percent compared with the previous quarter, which is a “higher-than-normal” seasonal decline, the company said.

The price of Brightpoint shares fell 86 cents, to $9.14, during mid-morning trading on Wednesday.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT