"...led to earnings of 4 cents a share BEFORE special items are EXCLUDED...."
I suspect it's even worse. I'm not going to waste my time digging into the numbers, but anyone remotely familiar with corporate accounting knows that including so-called "special items" ( usually translated as "one-time, non-recurring" are often used to cook the books, as long as the auditors are willing to sign off...which they usually do, unless it's blatantly egregious) could mean that the loss was far greater. It's the TREND LINE that the Times can't escape...