IBJNews

ExactTarget suffers smaller loss on record sales

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Marketing e-mail marketer ExactTarget Inc. suffered a dramatically lower third-quarter loss than a year ago on record-high revenue, the company announced Thursday afternoon.

The Indianapolis-based  company lost $721,000, or 1 cent per share, compared with a net loss of $22.3 million, or $2.55 per share, in the same quarter of 2011.

Revenue rose 35 percent, to $74.7 million, up from $55.1 million in the prior-year quarter. The company has had 47 straight quarters of revenue growth.

ExactTarget said non-U.S. sales of $14 million were 80 percent higher than a year ago.  Meanwhile, recurring subscription revenue of $57.9 million rose 36 percent.

ExactTarget lifted its full-year revenue guidance to the range of $287 million to $288 million, an increase over prior guidance of $277 million to $280 million. The company expects to lose $12 million to $13 million, an improvement over previous predictions.

Shares in ExactTarget fell 2 percent, or 43 cents per share, Thursday, to $20.74.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Poorly written headline
    Is "suffer" the correct term to use when their loss was dramatically lower, down from $22 million? 35% revenue growth is industry leading in a down economy. 47 straight quarters of growth doesn't sound like suffering to me. And their market is rapidly developing. The losses they are "suffering" is due to the strategic investment in infrastructure and people during the past 3-4 years to be a leader in their rapidly developing market. Take out non-cash items (Stock Comp, Depreciation) and operations are generating profit of $16 million profit YTD (compared to a loss of $900k in the same prior period). ET is a home-town company hiring hundreds of hoosiers...apparently this home-town publication didn't take the time to shed proper light on the incredible financial results for the quarter.

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. So as I read this the one question that continues to come to me to ask is. Didn't Indiana only have a couple of exchanges for people to opt into which were very high because we really didn't want to expect the plan. So was this study done during that time and if so then I can understand these numbers. I also understand that we have now opened up for more options for hoosiers to choose from. Please correct if I'm wrong and if I'm not why was this not part of the story so that true overview could be taken away and not just parts of it to continue this negative tone against the ACA. I look forward to the clarity.

  2. It's really very simple. All forms of transportation are subsidized. All of them. Your tax money already goes toward every single form of transportation in the state. It is not a bad thing to put tax money toward mass transit. The state spends over 1,000,000,000 (yes billion) on roadway expansions and maintenance every single year. If you want to cry foul over anything cry foul over the overbuilding of highways which only serve people who can afford their own automobile.

  3. So instead of subsidizing a project with a market-driven scope, you suggest we subsidize a project that is way out of line with anything that can be economically sustainable just so we can have a better-looking skyline?

  4. Downtowner, if Cummins isn't getting expedited permitting and tax breaks to "do what they do", then I'd be happy with letting the market decide. But that isn't the case, is it?

  5. Patty, this commuter line provides a way for workers (willing to work lower wages) to get from Marion county to Hamilton county. These people are running your restaurants, hotels, hospitals, and retail stores. I don't see a lot of residents of Carmel working these jobs.

ADVERTISEMENT