I am surprised at the lack of commentary on this Ann. It is a...

I am surprised at the lack of commentary on this Ann. It is a pretty good, fair and complete report, and deserves a bouquet for the effort and evident integrity, never mind the pickle it reveals we are in!

I know there are many ways to interpret the content, and hindsight is going to be a beauty here. It LOOKS like they are in control of a difficult situation, but we all know that SH are the last to be saved from the follies that have gone before. Only in one possible scenario does it look like a reasonable SP recovery could occur, but at least that is the one they are gunning for...

I read with some interest the update on the McMahon's legal action (page 7). Previously unrevealed (unless I missed it, or didn't study books closely enough - same thing), is that 2022 saw a payment of $M8 to McMahons, which STA now seek to be repaid. A similar liability remains outstanding. These issues come from the contractor's security of payment act (ie who holds the marbles while the proper fight is had) and should have made it into ASX reporting. Whereas all I remember is 'nothing to see here' style of statements. In the actual reporting now, other disputes are mooted but not quantified, stating any adverse outcomes will be of nominal value. No opinion is offered re McMahons, so we go $M8 up or down on that one, and the Courts will eventually let us know which outcome.

Whilst I just got back from a pleasant 8 day visit to Perth, including exhibiting at Informa's Mineral Sands conference, there is nothing I care to add because it is what it is, and outcome predictions are speculation. If you caught my LinkedIn announcement just before leaving, the surprise take-away of the storm it whipped up is how differently (and well) Thunderbird was set up and how much angst there is 'out there' about how Coburn was done, given the lack of mining experience steering it, along with a fair bit of stc (thrifty purchase practices) embedded in project execution.