The Watts question is pretty interesting. I have my own theory, which depends on my rather shaky knowledge of accounting and sheer speculation... As long as Watts is not officially "finished", for accounting purpose it is a somewhat curious animal. Interest costs on the bonds don't go to the bottom line, but instead get added to the capital asset value of the plant (and the liability value of the bonds). Similarly, the depreciation of the plant doesn't start until it is finished either.

So when the plant is officially in operation, the interest on the bonds (whether paid in cash or accrued) has to be counted in the profit/loss. And the depreciation on the buildings/equipment has to start and count against profit/loss. And, very likely, the cash payout of interest on the bonds starts.

I could be wrong on some of this stuff; as I said, I'm not an accountant. But I suspect if Watts had officially been in operation for the quarter, there wouldn't have been a profit even aside from the big additional hit from warranty claims.

It's too bad, because it seems like they've finally gotten the overheads under control. I have a hard time seeing how they will avoid delisting; a reverse split won't solve the negative net worth issue.