where do we stand, page-4

Hawley, kudos for taking the time for working that all out but the figures you used to work out the non-feedstock cost are flawed.

The $A89m for 6 months ending June 2008 already incorporate NFL's share of the profit from the Darwin plant of $A3.6m plus net profits from the sale of refined glycerine.

*For the 6 months ended 30/6/08 the Singapore plant is projected to produce 339,411,000 litres of biodiesel and 32,318 tonnes of pharmceutical grade glycerine. To produce these quantities they project the consumption of 341,110 tonnes of feedstock (using 90% palm olein & 10% soybean oil) and 35,265 tonnes of methanol.

Sale price of biodiesel is US$0.71/litre and glycerine is US$466.80/tonne at an exchange rate of $0.75

Cost of palm olein is A$660/tonne, cost of soybean oil is A$813.33/tonne and methanol is A$535.20/tonne.

So revenue of biodiesel = A$321,309,080 and revenue of glycerine = A$20,114,723. Total revenue of $341,423,803. The prospectus states revenue of $340,161,000.

Input costs made up of palm olein = A$202,619,340, soybean oil = A$27,743,499, and methanol = A$18,873,828. Total input costs = A$249,236,667.

The prospectus states total costs (exc depreciation, interest & tax) of $246,690,000. This includes $6.9m for head office and miscellaneous costs and fixed costs of $9.4m.

This is not good, the prospectus forecasts or their stated assumptions are incorrect.

EBITDA (excluding share of Darwin's profits) by my calculations using the prospectus assumptions = A$75,852,136

EBITDA (excluding share of Darwin's profits) using the prospectus forecast on p49 = A$93.471,000

* Based upon section 6 of the prospectus, pages 51, 52 & 53.