Ann: Update on Strategic Process, page-18

There was a progress payment due to EBTEC, which was to come from a debt drawdown. You might ask "What progress?" but the agreement was for the drawdown to occur on a date rather than the achievement of a milestone. Kallium was also basically out of operating funds and needed the cash from the drawdown. My interpretation is that EBTEC was concerned about being sued by Kallium for failing to deliver the guaranteed performance, while Kallium was starved of working capital and staring insolvency in the face. The resulting agreement, as announced, was that EBTEC would give the draw-down to Kallium in return for Kallium waiving their rights under the performance guarantee.

I suspect that it was this desperate, straw-clutching by the drowning board that caused the creditors to move on the company before every last cent was gone without any hope of recovery.