Grading Guzman
Debate about the performance of private companies is healthy and a sign of maturity. But it relies on access to data.
One of the most frustrating things for journalists and analysts about covering privately held companies in Australia is the difficulty in getting hard financial data on them.
Regulatory filings (which are freely accessible in comparable markets offshore, but unnecessarily costly in Australia) can offer some nuggets of gold, but they are often out of date or incomplete and don’t provide much insight into how a company is really faring. They are also prone to misinterpretation.
There are other external data points an observer can use to try and get a read on a company — Glassdoor reviews, net promoter scores, other industry metrics — but there’s no substitute for cold hard financial data. Arguably, the lack of access to this in Australia creates a void in the coverage and understanding of key companies driving the economy forward.
One exception to this is Guzman y Gomez, which refreshingly shared detailed financial performance last year in a business update. That update, which even included forward guidance, showed a fast-growing business that took in $759 million in revenue last financial year and was a confident step towards preparing for life as a public company.
