IBJNews

Emmis ends profitable year despite quarterly loss

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Emmis Communications Corp. posted a big loss in its latest quarter, but reported a profit for the entire fiscal year largely due to the repurchase of company preferred stock.

Executives of the Indianapolis-based media company addressed fiscal fourth quarter and annual results for the fiscal year ended Feb. 29 in a Thursday morning conference call.

Emmis lost $18.2 million in the fourth quarter, or 47 cents a share, compared with $17.3 million, or 46 cents a share, for the same period in 2011.

Quarterly revenue fell 11.5 percent, to $50.9 million. Overall radio revenue for the quarter fell 14.8 percent while publishing revenue dipped 3.3 percent.

For the year, Emmis reported a profit of $79.5 million, or 58 cents per share, compared with a loss of $25.3 million, or 67 cents per share, in fiscal 2011.

Profit was helped by Emmis' repurchase of $61.9 million in stock from preferred shareholders and a $26.9 million operating profit mostly due to the sale of its portion of Merlin Media LLC to a private equity firm for $120 million.

Emmis CEO Jeff Smulyan was upbeat during the conference call about the company’s future.

“This company has really weathered what we think is the worst—we know is the worst—downturn in media,” he said. “I couldn’t be prouder of what our people have done to get us through this.”

In April, Emmis inked two deals involving a radio station in New York that will bring the company $92.5 million. The news sent Emmis stock soaring 21.5 percent, to $1.05 cents per share. It was the first time Emmis shares had traded above $1 since July.

Company shares were trading at $1.27 each late Thursday morning, down 5 cents from their opening price.

 
 

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. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT