What's your angle, gone from devil's advocate to unreasonable dawnramper?
Clearly 1st Qtr had a lot of capex, 2nd Qtr had a $15M capex plus some costs that may or may not be one-offs, so throwing around those cash burns is pointless. Also no point second guessing how much more repairs may cost more than guided, less any costs recovered from contractors etc. Simply guess work. It's fair to assume opex will be $25M, plus $5M interest, add in corp costs and extras for full steady state production and they spend~$35M a Qtr. The DFS had ungeared opex @ $20M/qtr, which everyone agrees is unders, so ~$30M 'opex' per qtr opex is a harsh 50% lift on DFS... not too generous then.
DFS Revenue running at $200M avg first 3 years, $120M zircon revenue, so 10% higher Zir price (~US$1675) adds A$12Mpa, 20% higher (~US$1850) adds $24Mpa, 66.5c AUD adds another $12M across the board compared to 70c. With Zircon currently US $2000/t but likely to fall not unreasonable assumptions. An extra $36Mpa = $9M per qtr at full production, ~$7M at 75%, which goes a long ay to covering the extra $10M Qtrly opex, delivering close to DFS operating margins.
We know STA have more cash to spend and less coming in than planned this next 6 months, nobody missed it between the CR and share price smashing I'm sure. If they get to 100% nameplate by end CY23 they will be making sufficient fee cash to cover opex and repay int + debts unless min sand prices completely tank. If they get stuck at 75% in trouble, 90% will still repay debts but NPV takes a hit etc. Unless you have something meaningful to add about what and when production tops out, maybe give the kicking a rest hey? It's simply a waiting game now...
GLTAH
Expand
(20min delay)