Sskillz, you are correct to point out that CPSS benefited from a reversal of the contingent liability provision in Q4. However, to be consistent, one should also back out the previous provisions too given the reason for it:
Provision for Contingent Liabilities
During the nine months ended September 30, 2013, we recognized $9.7 million in contingent liability expenses to either record or increase the amounts we believe we may incur related to various pending litigation. The amount was allocated in part to a long running case we refer to as the Stanwich litigation, and also to more recent matters including two California class action suits where we are the defendant, and a governmental inquiry, in which the United States Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has informally proposed that the we refrain from certain allegedly unfair trade practices, and make restitutionary payments into a consumer relief fund.
---------------------------
On a non-GAAP basis, backing out the full year provision and then taxing it at 43% rate, I get the TTM adjusted earnings of 0.81.
I think the FY estimate range seems fair. Attaching a 10x multiple to that is a decent price target. You may not like the business model, but I think its a good bet for the stock to hit the 10s later this year....so I'm still long and holding for that. Risk-reward not as good as it was in the 6s (obviously) but still like the potential gains on the table.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
