LUKSK

LUKSK 2026/6AB finansal analiz. Let's parse the data carefully.

Şirket: Lüks Kadife Ticaret ve Sanayii A.Ş. (LUKSK) — BIST'te işlem görüyor. Kadife kumaş üreticisi. Verilen dönem: 2026/6AB — "AB" probably means "Ara dönem" (6 aylık)? Actually 2026/6 might be Q1? In BIST, "2026/6AB" likely means 6-month period? Wait, the data says "Dönem: 2026/6AB (TRY)". In Turkey, financial reporting periods are like 2025/12, 2026/3, 2026/6. "AB" might stand for "Aylık Bildirim"? Or "Ara dönem B"? Let's infer from the data.

Given "Bu Dönem" vs "Geçen Yıl Aynı" — satışlar 277.5 mlr TL vs 269.8 mlr TL. If this were 6-month cumulative (H1), sales would be 277.5 mlr. If it's Q2 alone? The çeyreklik trend mentions "Satışlar: 2025/6=130.9 mlr TL" — that could be the same quarter last year (Q2 2025) sales 130.9? Wait but "Geçen Yıl Aynı" for the income statement shows 269.8 mlr. Let's reconcile.

Maybe the report is for Q2 2026 (3 months) and "Geçen Yıl Aynı" is Q2 2025 = 269.8? But then "2025/6=130.9" doesn't fit. Or maybe "2026/6AB" is 6-month consolidated, with "2025/6=130.9" being a quarterly segment? Hmm.

Let's think: In BIST, "2026/6" could be the second quarter (April-June 2026). "AB" might denote "bağımsız denetimden geçmemiş ara dönem"? Actually "AB" might mean "Ara Dönem Bileşik"? Not sure. But the text provided says: "Önemli: Bu çeyreklik bir ara dönem raporu. Önceki dönem karşılaştırması geçen yılın aynı çeyreği. Bilanço karşılaştırması ise önceki yıl sonuna göre (yani Q1 raporunda 2025/12 ile karşılaştırılır)."

That's a hint: "Bu çeyreklik bir ara dönem raporu" — so this is a quarterly report. "Geçen yılın aynı çeyreği" — so the income statement comparison is with the same quarter last year. "Bilanço karşılaştırması önceki yıl sonuna göre" — balance sheet compared to year-end.

So if this is Q1 2026 report? "Q1 raporunda 2025/12 ile karşılaştırılır" — Q1 report compares with Dec 2025. The balance sheet shows "Önceki Dönem" but the note says previous year-end. So the balance sheet "Önceki Dönem" = 2025/12. Total assets 2323.6 at year-end, now 2320.7.

If this is Q1 2026 (3 months), then sales = 277.5 mlr TL for Q1 2026. Geçen yıl aynı çeyrek = Q1 2025 = 269.8. But the trend says "2025/6=130.9" — hmm, that doesn't fit. Unless the trend data is something else.

Wait, maybe "2026/6AB" means the period ending June 2026, "AB" = "Alışılagelmiş Bildirim"? Actually in BIST, "06.06.2026" could be? Let's not overcomplicate. Let's infer from numbers.

Annual inflation in Turkey is around 30-40% at that time (2025-2026). Sales growth 2.9% nominal — well below inflation. Brüt kâr +72.7% — huge jump. FAVÖK turned positive from negative. Net parasal pozisyon -23.6 vs +1.1. Net loss deepening.

The "çeyreklik trend" says Satışlar: 2025/6=130.9 mlr TL; Net kâr: 2025/6=-11.2 mlr TL. These are labeled "ÇEYREKLİK TREND (varsa)" — maybe these are the prior quarter's figures? Wait, if this is Q1 2026, then previous quarter would be Q4 2025 (2025/12?), not 2025/6. Or "2025/6" could be the same period of the previous year? But that conflicts with "Geçen Yıl Aynı" being 269.8.

Let's re-read: "Dönem: 2026/6AB (TRY)". Could be "2026/6" — June 2026, i.e., the first half of 2026? In Turkish reporting, periods are "2026/3" for Q1, "2026/6" for H1, "2026/9" for Q3, "2026/12" for annual. "AB" might be a suffix indicating "ara dönem bağımsız denetimden geçmemiş"? But then the income statement is cumulative for 6 months: 277.5 mlr sales. "Geçen Yıl Aynı" = H1 2025 = 269.8 mlr. That fits: 6-month cumulative. The quarterly trend note: "Satışlar: 2025/6=130.9 mlr TL" — wait, 2025/6 could mean the second quarter of 2025 alone (Q2 2025), i.e., April-June 2025. But if this is H1 2026 cumulative, the "same period last year" is H1 2025 = 269.8, while Q2 2025 alone might be 130.9? Let's check: H1 2025 = 269.8, Q1 2025 = ? If Q2 2025 = 130.9, then Q1 2025 = 138.9. But the income statement comparison "Geçen Yıl Aynı" is H1 2025 = 269.8. That would make sense. The "çeyreklik trend" provides Q2 2025 figures? Actually it says "2025/6=130.9" — in BIST notation, 2025/6 is the 6-month period, not Q2. Hmm.

Let's think of BIST terminology: "2026/6AB" — maybe "6" is the month (June) and "AB" is "Ara dönem B" — not standard. Sometimes "2026/6A" and "2026/6B" for "6 aylık" vs "9 aylık"? No.

Let me consider the possibility that this is a Q1 2026 consolidated report (3 months). In Turkey, first quarter report is "2026/3" not "2026/6". "2026/6AB" likely is the second quarter (Q2) 2026 report. Why "AB"? Actually, in some data sources, "2026/6AB" means "2026 June, A-consolidated B-?" Not important.

Let's check the balance sheet comparison: "Önceki Dönem" for Q2 report is "previous year end" (2025/12). The note says: "Bilanço karşılaştırması ise önceki yıl sonuna göre (yani Q1 raporunda 2025/12 ile karşılaştırılır)." Wait, the note says "yani Q1 raporunda 2025/12 ile karşılaştırılır" — this suggests the report at hand is Q1? Because they explain that for a Q1 report, the balance sheet compares with 2025/12. But the period label says "2026/6AB". Actually "6AB" might be "6 aylık" (6-month) but they say "çeyreklik bir ara dönem raporu" — quarterly. Hmm.

Let's not get stuck. The key is to analyze the given numbers, interpret them correctly. The instruction says: "Önemli: Bu çeyreklik bir ara dönem raporu. Önceki dönem karşılaştırması geçen yılın aynı çeyreği. Bilanço karşılaştırması ise önceki yıl sonuna göre."

So the income statement compares with "geçen yılın aynı çeyreği" (same quarter last year). The balance sheet compares with "önceki yıl sonu" (previous year-end). So the period is likely Q2 2026? Wait, "geçen yılın aynı çeyreği" for Q2 2026 would be Q2 2025. But "Geçen Yıl Aynı" satışlar = 269.8 mlr. And the trend "2025/6=130.9" — if "2025/6" means the 6-month period of 2025, that would be H1 2025 = 130.9? No, because "Geçen Yıl Aynı" for a quarterly report would be 269.8.

Let's search memory: LUKSK's actual financials? Lüks Kadife is a small-cap textile company. In 2023, annual sales were around 1.5 billion TRY? No, given these figures are in "mlr" (milyar), 277.5 billion TRY — that's huge, much larger than the actual company. This is likely a fictional/example dataset, or the company went through hyperinflation adjustments? Actually in TAS 29, balance sheet and income statement items are restated to the reporting date's purchasing power. So nominal TRY values can be enormous. LUKSK's actual market cap is around 1-2 billion TRY, not 2320 billion. This is clearly a hypothetical or restated dataset. So we treat the provided numbers as given.

Thus: This is a quarterly report. Which quarter? "2026/6AB" — perhaps Q2 2026 (period ending June 2026). The income statement is for Q2 2026 alone? If it's a quarterly report, "Bu Dönem" is the quarter (April-June 2026) sales = 277.5 mlr. "Geçen Yıl Aynı" = Q2 2025 sales = 269.8 mlr. But then the "Çeyreklik Trend" says "Satışlar: 2025/6=130.9 mlr TL" — that would be the previous quarter? Wait, if "2025/6" is notation for Q2 2025 (year/month), then 269.8 would be the same quarter, and 130.9 would be the prior quarter (Q1 2025). But the label "2025/6" usually means June 2025, not Q2. In BIST, periods are labeled by the last day: 2025/6 = 6-month period ending June 30, 2025 (i.e., H1 2025). So the trend "2025/6" might mean H1 2025 sales = 130.9? But that contradicts "Geçen Yıl Aynı" = 269.8.

Let's try another interpretation: The report is for the 6-month period January-June 2026 (H1 2026). "Bu Dönem" = H1 2026 = 277.5 mlr. "Geçen Yıl Aynı" = H1 2025 = 269.8 mlr. That makes sense: +2.9%. The "Çeyreklik Trend" gives "2025/6=130.9" — maybe that's Q2 2025 alone (i.e., the second quarter of 2025), which in the "6-month cumulative" comparison is not directly visible. But then the note "Bu çeyreklik bir ara dönem raporu" contradicts "6-month". Unless "çeyreklik" is loosely used for "ara dönem" (interim period, which can be quarterly or half-yearly). The note says "Bilanço karşılaştırması ise önceki yıl sonuna göre (yani Q1 raporunda 2025/12 ile karşılaştırılır)." This sentence specifically says "Q1 raporunda" — meaning if it were a Q1 report. But our report is "2026/6AB", so likely not Q1. Hmm.

Let's re-read the user prompt (translated): "Önemli: Bu çeyreklik bir ara dönem raporu. Önceki dönem karşılaştırması geçen yılın aynı çeyreği. Bilanço karşılaştırması ise önceki yıl sonuna göre (yani Q1 raporunda 2025/12 ile karşılaştırılır)." — This seems like a generic instruction from the user to clarify the comparison bases. They explicitly state: "This is a quarterly interim report. Income statement comparison is with the same quarter of the previous year. Balance sheet comparison is with the previous year-end." So we must treat it as a quarterly report. The period label "2026/6AB" might be the format of the data source where "6" is the month and "AB" is something else. But for our analysis, we'll call it "2026 ikinci çeyrek" or "2026/6 dönemi" — but careful: The balance sheet comparison "Önceki Dönem" is 2025/12 (year-end). So "Bu Dönem" balance sheet is as of June 30, 2026 (if period ends June). If it's Q2 2026, balance sheet date is 30.06.2026, compared to 31.12.2025. That's consistent: "Önceki Dönem" in balance sheet = previous year-end.

Income statement: "Bu Dönem" = Q2 2026 (April-June) if quarterly. "Geçen Yıl Aynı" = Q2 2025. Then sales 277.5 vs 269.8, +2.9%. The trend "2025/6=130.9" would then be the first quarter of 2025? Actually if "2025/6" means June 2025, the cumulated H1 2025 sales would be 130.9, which contradicts the Q2 2025 sales of 269.8. Unless 2025/6 represents a different segment.

Let's check net profit: "Bu Dönem" net kâr = -32.3 mlr. "Geçen Yıl Aynı" = -20.1 mlr. Trend: "2025/6=-11.2 mlr". If "Geçen Yıl Aynı" (Q2 2025) net loss = -20.1, and "2025/6" = something else? If 2025/6 were H1 2025 net loss = -11.2, then Q2 2025 alone would be -20.1, implying Q1 2025 was +8.9 profit. Possible.

But the balance sheet: dönen varlıklar 341.6 vs 310.3 (+10.1%), duran varlıklar 1979.0 vs 2013.2 (-1.7%). Total assets 2320.7 vs 2323.6 (-0.1%). These are not quarterly changes; they are cumulative restated? Actually TAS 29 restates balance sheet at reporting date. So a balance sheet as of 30.06.2026 compared to 31.12.2025 — the changes reflect real changes plus restatement effects. Fine.

Given the confusion, I'll adopt the user's note: treat as quarterly report. Specifically, the Dönem "2026/6AB" — I'll refer to it as "2026/6 dönemi (ikinci çeyrek)". Actually if it ends in June, it's Q2. So I'll say "Nisan-Haziran 2026 dönemi" or "2026 ikinci çeyrek". Let's verify: The trend data "Satışlar: 2025/6=130.9 mlr TL" — That could be the previous quarter's sales? If this is Q2 2026, the previous quarter is Q1 2026, not 2025/6. Hmm. Or "2025/6" could mean "the 6th month of 2025" i.e., June 2025 alone (monthly)? Unlikely.

Wait, perhaps "2026/6AB" is not a date but "2026/6 Aylık Bildirim" — i.e., the 6-month interim report (H1 2026). And the user's note "Bu çeyreklik bir ara dönem raporu" might be a mistake? But they wrote "çeyreklik" (quarterly) explicitly. Let's look at the Turkish: "Bu çeyreklik bir ara dönem raporu." That is unambiguous: quarterly interim report.

Let's reconsider: Could "2026/6AB" mean "2026/6 Ara Dönem B" where B = "Bilanço"? No.

Actually, in some platforms (e.g., investing.com), periods are labeled as "2026 Q2" or "2026/6". The "AB" might be "Aylık Bülten"? Not relevant.

I'll proceed with the quarterly interpretation but without being too specific about "Q2" if uncertain. I'll say "Bu ara dönem" and refer to "geçen yılın aynı dönemi". The numbers themselves drive the analysis.

Key numbers:

• Sales: 277.5 mlr TRY, +2.9% YoY.
• Gross profit: 74.6 mlr, +72.7% YoY. Gross margin = 74.6 / 277.5 = 26.9%. Last year same quarter: 43.2 / 269.8 = 16.0%. Huge margin improvement.
• FAVÖK: 5.0 mlr vs -1.4 mlr. FAVÖK margin = 1.8%. Positive swing.
• Net parasal pozisyon: -23.6 mlr vs +1.1 mlr. This is the loss/gain from monetary position under TAS 29. This quarter's negative 23.6 mlr is a massive monetary loss.
• Net dönem kârı: -32.3 mlr vs -20.1 mlr. Loss deepened by 60.7%.
• Balance sheet: Total assets 2320.7 mlr; Equity 1721.8 mlr; Net debt 69.5 mlr. Net debt/FAVÖK? Annualized FAVÖK? If this is a quarterly FAVÖK of 5.0, annualized ~20 mlr (but seasonal). Net debt/FAVÖK ~3.5x on annualized, but if H1? Actually if FAVÖK is quarterly, annualized x4 = 20 mlr, net debt/FAVÖK = 3.5. If FAVÖK is cumulative H1 = 5.0, annualized maybe 10 mlr, ratio = 6.9. Hmm. We need to be careful. The user labeled it "FAVÖK" in a quarterly income statement. I'll treat as quarterly FAVÖK = 5.0 mlr. Annualized FAVÖK ~20 mlr. Net debt/FAVÖK ~3.5x — high but not catastrophic. However, given negative net income, interest coverage might be weak.

But wait, net debt is only 69.5 mlr while equity is 1721.8 mlr. Leverage is low: debt/equity ~4%. But net debt increased 9.7% from 63.3 mlr.

The huge issue: Net parasal pozisyon -23.6 mlr. Under TAS 29, monetary assets (cash, receivables, payables) lose purchasing power during high inflation. A net monetary liability position gains; a net monetary asset position loses. Here, the company has a net monetary asset position? Actually "net parasal pozisyon" in income statement is the "net monetary position gain/loss" arising from indexation. Negative -23.6 means the company held net monetary assets during the period, losing value due to inflation, OR because of the restatement mechanics? Let's recall: In TAS 29, non-monetary items are restated; monetary items are not. The resulting "net monetary position" is recognized in P&L. If a company has net monetary assets, it loses purchasing power; if net monetary liabilities, it gains. So the -23.6 mlr loss implies net monetary assets. However, the balance sheet shows net debt (financial debt - cash) of 69.5 mlr, meaning financial debt exceeds cash. But operational monetary liabilities (trade payables, taxes, etc.) might exceed operational monetary assets? Actually net monetary position includes all monetary items, not just debt. The company may have large receivables and low payables, resulting in a net monetary asset position despite financial debt. This is plausible for a textile manufacturer with high receivables.

This monetary loss is the primary driver of the net loss: Operating-wise, FAVÖK positive 5.0 mlr, but monetary loss -23.6 mlr, plus depreciation/amortization, interest, taxes -> net loss -32.3.

Also compare to last year: Net parasal pozisyon +1.1 mlr gain, so last year's net loss -20.1 was less bad. This year's additional monetary loss of -24.7 mlr explains the deepening of the loss.

Sales growth: +2.9% nominal. Inflation likely ~30%+ (2026? In Turkey, annual inflation in 2025 was ~39%, 2026 maybe ~25-30%). So real sales declined massively (-20%+ real). Gross margin expansion is dramatic: from 16.0% to 26.9%. Why? Could be inventory revaluation gains? Under TAS 29, cost of sales restated? Actually the gross profit might include gains from restatement of inventories sold. Or the company's product mix/pricing power. But with such a huge jump, one must question sustainability. Also, "brüt kâr" 74.6 while FAVÖK only 5.0 — operating expenses (genel yönetim, pazarlama, araştırma) must be huge: ~69.6 mlr. That's striking: gross margin 26.9%, but operating expenses eat almost all of it. FAVÖK margin 1.8%. That suggests cost structure issues, or perhaps the FAVÖK is after heavy amortization/depreciation? No, FAVÖK excludes depreciation. So operating expenses (excluding D&A) are ~69.6 mlr. That's 25% of sales. Extremely high for a textile company. Could be due to impairment, provisions, or restatement effects.

Balance sheet: Total assets 2320.7 mlr; Duran varlıklar 1979.0 mlr (85% of assets). This is a fixed-asset-heavy structure — likely land, buildings, machinery. Dönen varlıklar only 341.6 mlr. Özkaynak 1721.8 mlr — equity ratio 74%. Very strong capitalization. Net debt 69.5 mlr — modest. But the company is generating losses, which erode equity. Equity decreased from 1759.1 to 1721.8 (-2.1%). If losses continue, equity could erode further.

Çeyreklik trend: Satışlar 2025/6=130.9 mlr TL, Net kâr 2025/6=-11.2 mlr TL. If these are the prior quarter's figures, then Q1 2026 (or Q1 2025) had sales 130.9 and net loss -11.2. Let's see: If current quarter sales 277.5 and previous quarter 130.9, that's a 112% sequential increase — but wait, the current period 2026/6AB might be a 6-month cumulative, and "Çeyreklik trend" provides Q2 2025? Hmm.

Actually, perhaps the report is H1 2026, and "Çeyreklik trend" gives the Q2 2025 quarterly data? But "2025/6=130.9" — in BIST, "2025/6" is the 6-month period, not Q2. Let's check historical: LUKSK 2025/6 (first half) sales should be around 269.8 (if "Geçen Yıl Aynı" is H1 2025). But the trend says 130.9. So 130.9 cannot be H1 2025. It might be Q2 2025 alone? If Q2 2025 = 130.9 and H1 2025 = 269.8, then Q1 2025 = 138.9. But then "Geçen Yıl Aynı" for a Q2 2026 report should be Q2 2025 = 130.9, not 269.8. So that contradicts.

Therefore, the report is likely H1 2026 (6 months), and "Geçen Yıl Aynı" = H1 2025 = 269.8. The "Çeyreklik trend" gives Q2 2025? But why label "2025/6"? In Turkey, some data providers label quarters as "2025/6" meaning Q2 (month 6). Actually, they might use "2025/6" for the second quarter because 6 = end of June. Yes! In BIST, "dönem" is specified by the last month: 2025/3 = Q1, 2025/6 = Q2 (H1? no). Wait, "2025/3" is the first quarter (ending March 31). "2025/6" is the second quarter (ending June 30) — but also the first half. To distinguish, they use "2025/6 dönemi" which can mean either Q2 or H1 depending on the report type. For income statement, a "2025/6" report could be cumulative 6 months, or just Q2. Typically, BIST companies report "Konsolide" for 3-month and 6-month. The comparison statement "Cari Dönem" vs "Geçen Yıl Aynı Dönem" for a 6-month report shows the cumulative 6-month figures.

Given the income statement "Bu Dönem 277.5, Geçen Yıl Aynı 269.8" — if this were Q2 alone, the prior year Q2 would need to be 269.8; but the trend says "2025/6=130.9". If trend "2025/6" represents Q2 2025, then 130.9 ≠ 269.8. If the report is H1 2026, trend might show "Q2 2025 = 130.9"? But then "Geçen Yıl Aynı" for H1 2025 = 269.8 is possible (Q1 2025 + Q2 2025 = 138.9 + 130.9 = 269.8). This fits perfectly! Let's check: H1 2025 sales = 269.8. Q2 2025 sales = 130.9, Q1 2025 sales = 138.9. Sum = 269.8. Yes. So the report is for H1 2026 (6 months cumulative). The "çeyreklik trend" provides Q2 2025 as the "same quarter" reference? Actually it says "ÇEYREKLİK TREND (varsa)" — maybe it's a note provided to help analyze quarterly trend. The values 2025/6=130.9 and -11.2 are for Q2 2025. But wait, the income statement's "Geçen Yıl Aynı" is H1 2025 = 269.8, not Q2. The user's note says "Önceki dönem karşılaştırması geçen yılın aynı çeyreği" — but if this is H1, then it's "geçen yılın aynı dönemi" (same period), not quarter.

Hmm. The user note is probably a generic template warning, but the actual data suggests a 6-month cumulative report. Let's check net profit: H1 2026 net loss = -32.3. H1 2025 net loss = -20.1. Q2 2025 net loss = -11.2. Then Q1 2025 net loss would be -8.9. Fits.

So the "Dönem: 2026/6AB" likely means the report period is 2026/6 (H1 2026). "AB" maybe "Ara dönem B" — anyway.

But the user explicitly says "Bu çeyreklik bir ara dönem raporu." Maybe they mean "çeyreklik" as in "quarterly period" but data is semi-annual? In Turkish, "çeyreklik" can refer to any interim period? No, it means quarterly. Yet "ara dönem" is general.

Given the mismatch, I should be cautious. In my analysis, I'll refer to "2026/6 dönemi" and avoid saying "çeyrek" too definitively. I'll use "dönem" or "6 aylık dönem". The user asked to write analysis with the provided data; I'll use the labels as given: "Bu Dönem" vs "Geçen Yıl Aynı". And for trend, I'll note "Önceki yıl aynı döneme göre" and "çeyreklik trend için verilen 2025/6 rakamları".

Actually, let's re-read the user's structural instructions: They have a section "ÇEYREKLİK TREND (varsa)" and then they provide "Satışlar: 2025/6=130.9 mlr TL, Net kâr: 2025/6=-11.2 mlr TL". This suggests that the trend data is a separate piece: perhaps for the current report (H1 2026), the second quarter alone was 130.9? No, that would be for 2025/6 (H1 2025?). Wait, "2025/6" could be Q2 2025. The trend might show the prior-year same quarter (Q2 2025) to help analyze the current quarter. But the income statement "Bu Dönem" is H1 2026, so comparison with "Geçen Yıl Aynı" is H1 2025. The "trend" could be "Q2 2025" to compare with "Q2 2026" if Q2 2026 alone is not available. But we don't have Q2 2026 alone.

Alternatively, "2026/6AB" might actually be Q2 2026 cumulative? No, "6" as month end is H1.

Let's compute implied Q2 2026 figures if we know Q1 2026? We don't have Q1 2026. The trend only gives 2025/6=130.9 for sales and -11.2 for net profit. Those are likely Q2 2025 (or maybe 6-month 2025? but then conflict). I'll interpret the trend as Q2 2025 figures: sales 130.9 mlr, net loss -11.2 mlr.

Thus, the current report 2026/6AB is H1 2026: cumulative sales 277.5 mlr, net loss -32.3. The same period last year (H1 2025): sales 269.8, net loss -20.1. So sales growth +2.9%, loss deepened by 60.7%.

But wait: If H1 2025 sales = 269.8, and Q2 2025 = 130.9, then Q1 2025 = 138.9. So H1 comparison makes sense.

Now, what about H1 2026 vs H1 2025? The balance sheet as of 30.06.2026 vs 31.12.2025 (previous year end). That's consistent.

So I'll frame the analysis as "2026 ilk yarı" (first half). The user said "çeyreklik" — I'll gently write "Bu ara dönem" to be safe, and maybe "6 aylık" based on the period label. Actually, "2026/6AB" – the "6" strongly suggests June, i.e., first half. I'll say "2026/6 dönemi (ilk yarı)" and note "ara dönem raporu". I won't dwell on the quarter terminology.

Now let's analyze deeper.

Sales: 277.5 mlr vs 269.8 mlr, +2.9%. In nominal terms, very weak. Turkey's annual inflation in 2025 was around 39%, and 2026 likely around 30% (assuming). So a 2.9% nominal increase implies a real contraction of roughly 20-25%. This is critical: the company is shrinking in real terms. But the gross profit jumped 72.7%, from 43.2 to 74.6. How can sales be flat while gross profit soars? Gross margin expanded from 16.0% to 26.9%. Possible explanations:

• TAS 29 restatement effects: Cost of sales may include lower restated costs if inventory turnover is slow; the sale of inventories purchased/held during lower-price periods? Actually under TAS 29, cost of sales is restated using the price index at the transaction date; if cost of sales is based on older, lower-cost inventory, restated cost would be relatively lower than current sales, inflating gross profit. This is a common artifact.
• Pricing power: If product prices increased faster than input costs.
• Product mix changed.
• One-off gains, inventory revaluation.

Given the low FAVÖK, the gross profit expansion doesn't translate to operating profitability. Operating expenses (selling, general, administrative) apparently remain extremely high. Let's derive: Brüt kâr 74.6, FAVÖK 5.0, so operating expenses before D&A = 69.6. That's 25.1% of sales. That's massive. For a textile manufacturer, typical opex is 10-15%. So either there are significant provisions for bad debts, impairments, or the company's cost structure is problematic. Without a breakdown, we can say: "Brüt kârlılık anlamlı şekilde iyileşmiş olsa da operasyonel giderlerin brüt kârın %93'ünü silmesi dikkat çekici." Actually, 69.6/74.6 = 93.3%. Yes.

FAVÖK: 5.0 mlr, positive vs -1.4 a year ago. A turnaround, but margin only 1.8%. And net paras