IBJNews

Cummins' stock sinks after worse-than-expected quarter

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Shares in Cummins Inc. slid more than 9 percent Tuesday morning after the Columbus-based engine manufacturer reported weaker-than-expected sales and profit in the third quarter, and lowered its outlook for the rest of the year.

Cummins' profit rose less than 1 percent, to $355 million, or $1.90 a share, compared with $352 million, or $1.86 a share, a year ago.

Excluding one-time items such as tax adjustments, profit rose to $1.94 per share, up from $1.78 a share last year. On that basis, analysts had been expecting earnings of $2.11 a share.

Revenue rose 3.6 percent, to $4.27 billion, missing analyst expections of $4.38 billion.

Cummins said it now expects 2013 revenue to decline 3 percent from 2012 after it previously predicted 2013 revenue would be flat. That implies sales of $16.81 billion this year, below Wall Street's forecast of $17.37 billion.

The mining industry — a key market for Cummins — has been slowing. Revenue from engines fell 1 percent, to $2.5 billion, because of lower demand for mining and light-duty highway engines, the company said.

Sales of power generators dropped 13 percent, to $712 million, while parts sales rose 14 percent, to $1.1 billion.

North American revenue rose 11 percent, but international revenue fell 4 percent because growth in China and Brazil was offset by weak demand in India, Australia, and Europe.

Cummins' stock was down $10.80, or 8 percent, about an hour after the market opened, to $124.11 per share. The stock was up 25 percent this year through Monday's close.


 

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. It is nice and all that the developer grew up here and lives here, but do you think a company that builds and rehabs cottage-style homes has the chops to develop $150 Million of office, retail, and residential? I'm guessing they will quickly be over their skis and begging the city for even more help... This project should occur organically and be developed by those that can handle the size and scope of something like this as several other posters have mentioned.

  2. It amazes me how people with apparently zero knowledge of free markets or capitalism feel the need to read and post on a business journal website. Perhaps the Daily Worker would suit your interests better. It's definitely more sympathetic to your pro government theft views. It's too bad the Star is so awful as I'm sure you would find a much better home there.

  3. In other cities, expensive new construction projects are announced by real estate developers. In Carmel, they are announced by the local mayor. I am so, so glad I don't live in Carmel's taxbase--did you see that Carmel, a small Midwest suburb, has $500 million in debt?? That's unreal! The mayor thinks he's playing with Lego sets and Monopoly money here! Let these projects develop organically without government/taxpayer backing! Also, from a design standpoint, the whole town of Carmel looks comical. Grand, French-style buildings and promenades, sitting next to tire yards. Who do you guys think you are? Just my POV as a recent transplant to Indy.

  4. GeorgeP, you mention "necessities". Where in the announcement did it say anything about basic essentials like groceries? None of the plans and "vision" have basic essentials listed and nothing has been built. Traffic WILL be a nightmare. There is no east/west road capacity. GeorgeP, you also post on www.carmelchatter.com and your posts have repeatedly been proven wrong. You seem to have a fair amount of inside knowledge. Do you work on the third floor of Carmel City Hal?

  5. I don't know about the commuter buses...but it's a huge joke to see these IndyGo buses with just one or two passengers. Absolutely a disgusting waste of TAXPAYER money. Get some cojones and stop funding them. These (all of them) council members work for you. FIRE THEM!

ADVERTISEMENT