Ann: Jervois Annual Report 2022, page-14

Bingo!

Could you kindly adjust your cals to reflect the fact that you erroneously included two payments related to the bond (as I stated earlier) - when only the interest expense should be included (as I did in my calcs)? Thanks in advance. ;-)

As for your other points, I have sorta figured out that you aren't Nostradamus. But, I am sure you would agree that the average realised price of Co across the full year of 2023 is what matters, not today's price.

I find it bizarre that you have no problems using today's price fixed in perpetuity for the remainder of 2023 to draw your conclusions. At the very least, adding a comment to the effect "If Co prices were to average $15 l/b throughout 2023, the company would have a significant funding shortfall & need to raise capital" - would be fairer. Your post reads like it is a fait accompli re: a big shortfall - with your follow up comments re: insto support & actions they should take. If the Board were as certain as you re: Co prices averaging $15 l/b across 2023, do you think they would continue as is? Clearly, they believe prices aren't going to stay this low for an extended period. If they get it wrong - I'm sure they'll act appropriately.

I think the average price of $20 l/b Co I used is fairer. And at this price, we can see that the loss wouldn't be as dramatic as you have made out.

And I think you know as well as I do that the LOM is going to be extended - therefore the D&A figure will be spread out across a longer time period.

I appreciate that you are crunching numbers & adding another angle to these threads, but unless your calcs are 1/ accurate 2/ put into a fairer context that reflects reality - I won't be paying them much heed (I will call you out, though, when you are wrong - like today).