Ann: May 18 Sydney RIU Conference Presentation, page-17

I don't enjoy being the lone voice of dissent here, but I think there needs to be an alternative opinion presented to offset the relentless ramping from some quarters.
Quotes from the presentation in bold. My opinion under:
1. All In Sustaining Costs providing one of the lowest cost operations in Australia.
Hera's low AISC is solely because of the credits for producing base metals [and a little silver] from the mine. I think some people think that AMI is fabulously efficient or Hera is extremely well endowed with gold. But neither is the case. For the first three quarters of FY18, the AISC averaged out to be $428 oz but this includes a biproduct metals credit of $1243 oz.
Just as a hypothetical, if AMI made no base metals shipments in the first three quarters of this FY, then the AISC for the gold extraction would have been $1671 and AMI would be losing money hand over fist.
Why does this matter? Every quarterly report from AMI there is a footnote saying that the AISC can and will vary depending on the timing of their concentrate shipments. Sometime in the future a train load of concentrate is going to go out late for some reason and the AISC will blow out considerably.
2. Strong cash flow reducing debt from $118M to $8M since January 2016.
The main component of this 'cash flow' was the $89.3M raised in the recent Capital Raising and the Share Purchase Plan. Strip that out, and the cash flow from mining operations does not look all that strong. Who or what is really being mined here?
3. Glencore has been repaid.
Well yes, but now AMI owes up to $115M to Investec. This loan has to be repaid over the next two years or so. Good luck with getting enough cash flow from both the mines to accomplish that.