It would seem to me that comparing the figures from 2006 with...

It would seem to me that comparing the figures from 2006 with 2012 is like comparing apples and well, rocks.

If the 2006 figure is before capex what they haven't done is factored in the initial outwards cashflow to build the plant.

If they have, as is suggested, factored in the capex in 2012, essentially you are comparing two different things despite them being called the same thing.

Not including the capex in the 2006 figure would seem to be an extremely unusual thing to do and not something we ever contemplated in a situation such as this when I did finance at uni.

If we had the figures used for these calculations and the necessary capex figures a calculation could be done that would make these figures comparable.

Is it just me, or does the DFS as released seem like a bit of a rushed effort? Its lack of detail just seems to me like they put it together in a hurry to avoid disappointing the market again. Maybe I'm imagining it, but maybe not??

Cheers

KC